Rangeland condition and feed resources in Metema District, North ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Appendices Appendix Table 1. Criteria for the scoring of the different factors determining range conditions (Herbaceous vegetation and soil condition) Score Grasses spp composition Basal cover Number of seedlings Litter cover Soil erosion Soil compaction Age distribution 10 91–100% decreaser > 12%, no bare areas > 12%, no bare areas 9 81–90% decreaser – – 8 71–80% decreaser >9% evenly >9% evenly distributed distributed 7 61–70% decreaser >9% occasional >9% occasional bare spots bare spots 6 51–60% decreaser >6% evenly >6% evenly distributed distributed 5 41–50% decreaser >6%, bare spots 4 3 2 1 10–40% decreaser and >30% increaser 10-40% decreaser and 50% increaser 3%, mainly annuals 1–3% 4 seedlings on A4 paper 4 seedlings on A4 paper 3 seedlings on A4 paper 2 seedlings on A4 paper 1 seedling on A4 paper >6%, bare spots >3%, mainly perennials >3%, mainly annuals 1–3% No sign of soil erosion Slight sand mulch Weak-side pedestals Steep-sided pedestals 50% capping Only old >75% capping Only medium Almost 100% capping Only young Source: Baars et al. (1997). 64
Appendix Table 2. Criteria for the scoring of the different factors determining range conditions Parameters Value Total point Descriptions Hedging 3 5 Highly palatable and palatable shrubs share dominance Most hedge able plants are lightly to moderately hedged Few or no decadent plants 2 3 Palatable plants dominant. Hedgeable plants moderately to Heavily hedged Some shrubs decadent due to hedging 1 2 Palatable and less palatable plants dominant Hedge able plants heavily to very heavily hedged Considerable numbers of decadents’ shrubs present Some may be dead due to hedging 0 1 Less palatable and unpalatable shrubs dominant Some normally unhedgeable shrubs are hedged Hedge able shrubs very heavily hedged the crowns often reduced to Canopy cover 3 5 >45% cover 2 4 36–45% cover 1.5 3 26–35% 1 2 15–25% 0 1 1000–2000/ha 3 >2000–3000/ha 2 >3000–4000/ha, 1 >4000/ha Source: Kuchar (1995). 65
Page 1 and 2:
www.ipms-ethiopia.org www.eap.gov.e
Page 3 and 4:
Authors’ affiliations Tesfaye Des
Page 5 and 6:
4.7 Availability of natural pasture
Page 7 and 8:
Table 20. Common and dominant grass
Page 9 and 10:
Abbreviations ADF ADL AEZ ANOVA ANR
Page 11 and 12:
Abstract The study was conducted in
Page 13 and 14:
1 Introduction Ethiopia, with its d
Page 15 and 16:
2 Background 2.1 Livestock resource
Page 17 and 18:
availability of rainfall. Alemayehu
Page 19 and 20:
fauna composition or a transition f
Page 21 and 22:
change. A change in plant compositi
Page 23 and 24:
The four classes of range condition
Page 25 and 26: 2.8 Biomass estimation methods Biom
Page 27 and 28: are the Gumuz people. Until recentl
Page 29 and 30: Enclosures used as benchmark was se
Page 31 and 32: the distribution was assessed as fo
Page 33 and 34: samples for herbaceous species and
Page 35 and 36: The overall educational status of t
Page 37 and 38: Table 6. Mean ± SE land holding an
Page 39 and 40: Table 8. Livestock herd structures
Page 41 and 42: espectively, while 93.6, 4.3 2.1% r
Page 43 and 44: 4.7.2 Crop residues production and
Page 45 and 46: Table 13. Percentages of respondent
Page 47 and 48: than in P. spheslatum and C. ciliar
Page 49 and 50: of the respondents (69.3%) water th
Page 51 and 52: Table 20. Common and dominant grass
Page 53 and 54: owsing height of the animals. Accor
Page 55 and 56: Grazing types Herbaceous species Ca
Page 57 and 58: Table 25. Herbaceous species compos
Page 59 and 60: low density a decade ago, but curre
Page 61 and 62: 2004). Based on the results of this
Page 63 and 64: at the landscape scale; short tempo
Page 65 and 66: Soil compaction also directly restr
Page 67 and 68: Dry matter biomass 18000 16000 1400
Page 69 and 70: i.e. 312,300 ha, about 71% is natur
Page 71 and 72: • Transhumance production system
Page 73 and 74: Beruk Yemane and Tafesse Mesifin, 2
Page 75: van der Westhuizen, HC van Rensburg
Page 79 and 80: Appendix Table 4. Herbaceous specie
Page 81 and 82: Appendix Table 5. Correlation matri
Page 87 and 88: Source: IPMS (2005). Appendix Figur
Page 89 and 90: Appendix Figure 5. Partial view of
Page 91 and 92: Appendix Figure 9. Communal grazing
show all

Rangeland condition and feed resources in Metema District, North ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?