The former Mbeya Oxenization Project brought a prototype conservation<strong>agriculture</strong> ripper and ripper planter to ARI Uyole from Palabana AgriculturalTraining Institute, Zambia, in 1993. However, farm trials of ripping by ARI Uyolecommenced in 1999. Additional rippers were produced by a Mbeya manufacturer—SEAZ Agricultural Equipment Ltd. Importing small batches of implements wascumbersome.ARI Uyole set zone research and development priorities and chose representativeagroecological zones. Wanging’ombe, with the main agroecological zone, AEZ 3,and Mshewe Ward, AEZ 4f, were included in the priorities.7 <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>agriculture</strong> technology<strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>agriculture</strong> aims to sustain and enhance arable soils. It has threeprinciples: minimal soil disturbance, maintaining permanent vegetative soil cover,and mixing and rotating cash and cover crops.<strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>agriculture</strong> pathwayRidging, tied ridging and ripping were first introduced at Wanging’ombe village tosustain or increase yields, reduce soil erosion and labour during the frequent yearsof reduced rainfall.Introduced conservation <strong>agriculture</strong> mainly used animal power because it was familiarand the basic equipment, harnesses and carts for manure, were available. Approachesfrom 1998–2003 used farmer research groups of 10–18 farming households to conductthe trials and promotions. Each farmer was required to have a test plot in his or herown field. Farmers contributed land, oxen and labour, while researchers supplied aset of implements for each group, improved seeds, fertilizers, herbicides and technicalsupport. The village extension officer provided constant supervision and facilitatedgroup organization. Farmer research group members were guided to evaluate and rankthe various farm tools. They were encouraged to select techniques for scaling up. Fielddays for other villagers and outsiders were conducted before harvest.Project interventions during 2004–2006 chose to use the farmer field schools.These use a common plot and farmers try to analyse conservation <strong>agriculture</strong>technology, such as planting, weed management, pest control, harvesting andstorage. Individual farmers also try to adapt the techniques in their own fields. Avillage committee of village government officials, farmers and extension officerschose farmers to participate in both the research groups and farmer field schoolsusing criteria developed and endorsed by a village meeting.Implements usedIn both Wanging’ombe and Mshewe, conservation <strong>agriculture</strong> using animalpoweredand hand implements was introduced, since 85% of farmers use oxen and65% farm by hand. The animal-drawn implements were the ripper, ripper planterand direct seeder; the hand planting tools were the hand hoe and jab planter. The122 Mkomwa et al.
slasher, machete and billhook (nyengo) were recommended for managing soil cover.The jab planter and direct seeder were initially imported from the Fitarelli companyin Brazil. The Zambia-designed rippers and ripper planters were procured fromSEAZ Agricultural Equipment Ltd.The initial research trial in 1998 compared rainwater capture and storage featuresof ridges, tied ridges, opening planting furrows with the ripper, and leaving the restof the land untilled with conventional mouldboard ploughing. Tilling was startedtwo weeks before the expected rainfall. Planting was done before or at the beginningof rainfall. Weeds were managed using the ridger in ridged plots, tie ridger in tiedridged plots, the contact herbicide Gramoxone in ripped plots and the hand hoe inthe ploughed plots. These treatments were repeated for the second weeding, exceptthe herbicide was replaced with ox cultivation. For the first three years tied ridgesproduced the highest yield, followed by ridges, conventional ploughing and with theripper last. Due to excessive labour needed for ridging and tied ridging, the farmerschose the plough, as evaluated by a pair-ranking matrix.An obvious weakness in the package was spraying contact herbicide in thesefarmer-managed trials. The herbicide was usually procured late and inexperienceduse resulted in killing the crop. Gramoxone was abandoned for first weeding. Thenegative experiences included no money to buy the herbicide when needed, dilutionleading to low effectiveness, and inexperienced use.When similar techniques were evaluated in 2001, under the <strong>Tanzania</strong> AgriculturalResearch Project Phase II and <strong>Sokoine</strong> University of Agriculture (TARP II SUA),ridges were replaced with a ripper planter and it was decided to do away withcontact herbicides to manage weeds. The 12 households of Wanging’ombe villagewere dropped, and five new villages, Kisilo and Mayale in Njombe District andMatai, Nkundi and Sandulula in Sumbawanga District, Rukwa Region, wereselected. Ridges and tied ridges performed better compared with ripping andploughing in years of moderate-to-good rainfall, but poorer compared with rippingwhen rainfall was below moderate. Furthermore, tied ridges needed three timesthe labour of ripping. Maize yield was consistently superior to that from othertreatments (see table 7).Jab planters and direct seeders were used in the latest conservation <strong>agriculture</strong>research and development efforts under Soil Fertility Initiative of MAFS introducedin 2001 and also the MAFS- and FAO-supported Technical Cooperation Projectof the United Republic of <strong>Tanzania</strong> (URT) 3002 initiated in 2004. Under the SoilFertility Initiative, four new villages of Mapogoro and Njelenje in Mbeya District,two new villages of Kanamalenga and Kisilo in Njombe District and one newfarmer group were added in Wanging’ombe village. In addition to conservation<strong>agriculture</strong>, specific themes were cover crops, direct seeding equipment, agroforestryand breaking hardpans. The project for Mbeya District targeted 250 households innine villages, concentrating on direct seeding and cover crops.Jab planters worked best in dry seeding in sandy soils or when soil moisture waslow. They did not clog. The seeds and fertilizer were planted and germinatedalmost perfectly. They performed poorly when soils were too wet or under thick soilcover. In a matrix ranking of the planting methods, farmers preferred the ripper.Mbeya District 123
- Page 6:
ContentsPreface ...................
- Page 10:
Full conservation agriculture, howe
- Page 13 and 14:
February 2005, which made possible
- Page 16 and 17:
Table B. Key characteristics of cas
- Page 18:
Overemphasis on field-scale, techni
- Page 26 and 27:
Arumeru DistrictCatherine W. Maguzu
- Page 28 and 29:
8 Gaps and challenges .............
- Page 30 and 31:
Executive summaryA case study of co
- Page 32 and 33:
It has shown increase in yields, re
- Page 34 and 35:
The case study teamThe local team w
- Page 36 and 37:
NgorongoroKageraMaraMonduliArumeruM
- Page 38 and 39:
MarketsThe urban centres are Kikati
- Page 40 and 41:
middle-aged, who migrate to towns t
- Page 42 and 43:
4 Conservation agriculture historyI
- Page 44 and 45:
maize, pigeon pea, and lablab seeds
- Page 46 and 47:
herbicide was completely abandoned
- Page 48 and 49:
Most of the implements, except the
- Page 50 and 51:
6 Adapting and diffusing conservati
- Page 52 and 53:
villages with eight farmers (Mwalle
- Page 54 and 55:
ecognition and enforcement of the b
- Page 56 and 57:
Table 3. Labour for conservation ag
- Page 58 and 59:
Timeliness in irrigating a farm is
- Page 60 and 61:
to rehabilitate his land by constru
- Page 62 and 63:
Land tenureSmall-scale farmers will
- Page 64 and 65:
and handling herbicides should be d
- Page 66 and 67:
Appendix 1Conservation agriculture
- Page 68 and 69:
Organization Activities Methods to
- Page 70 and 71:
Appendix 3Lablab and mucuna seed di
- Page 73:
Karatu DistrictDominick E. Ringo, C
- Page 76 and 77:
10 Benefi ts and effects of conserv
- Page 78 and 79:
Karatu acknowledgementsWe are very
- Page 80 and 81:
Forces driving for adoption of cons
- Page 82 and 83:
Despite the soundness of conservati
- Page 84 and 85:
NgorongoroKageraMaraMonduliArumeruM
- Page 86 and 87:
TemperatureTemperature decreases wi
- Page 88 and 89:
Most of the surface and underground
- Page 90 and 91:
crop does not store well. But when
- Page 92 and 93:
used to attend to AIDS sufferers an
- Page 94 and 95:
Erosion is now considered responsib
- Page 96 and 97: Traditional methods of soil conserv
- Page 98 and 99: Tanzania Association of ForestersAc
- Page 100 and 101: Tanganyika Farmers AssociationAchie
- Page 102 and 103: History of conservation agriculture
- Page 104 and 105: what is feasible is to intercrop, w
- Page 106 and 107: to connect experiences from differe
- Page 108 and 109: mainly cover crop practices were ad
- Page 110 and 111: Alfred’s neighbour Cornel has bee
- Page 112 and 113: study tours, organizing farmer fiel
- Page 114 and 115: Socio-economic and process aspectsW
- Page 116 and 117: abreast of information. Information
- Page 118 and 119: availability of agriculture credit,
- Page 120 and 121: package being introduced should con
- Page 122 and 123: of a planning workshop on conservat
- Page 124 and 125: Organiza tionRIDEP (1980-1984)Natio
- Page 126 and 127: Organiza tionMazingira BoraKaratu (
- Page 128 and 129: Appendix 3 Estates in Karatu Distri
- Page 131 and 132: ContentsAbbreviations .............
- Page 133 and 134: AbbreviationsARIAgricultural Resear
- Page 135 and 136: 1 IntroductionOver 80% of the peopl
- Page 137 and 138: 3 MethodMbeya was selected as a cas
- Page 139 and 140: Table 1. Agricultural characteristi
- Page 141 and 142: Three agricultural officers serve t
- Page 143 and 144: egin until the first rains. Maize y
- Page 145: Table 4. Conservation agriculture r
- Page 149 and 150: Farmers were advised to slash the c
- Page 151 and 152: technical support. Trial treatments
- Page 153 and 154: In the latest FARM Africa project,
- Page 155 and 156: Crop yieldsNineteen farmers in Wang
- Page 157 and 158: Changes in costs and incomeThe aver
- Page 159 and 160: • Farmers proposed that to improv
- Page 161 and 162: 10 Gaps and challengesDespite the s
- Page 163 and 164: 12 Recommendations• While some be
- Page 165 and 166: Appendix 1 Selected farmer profiles
- Page 167 and 168: No. Farmer name M/F Age(yrs)Fam ily
- Page 169 and 170: Appendix 3Intervention detailsIniti
- Page 171 and 172: Conservation agriculture technology
- Page 173 and 174: Land degradation due to soil erosio
- Page 175 and 176: Banana crop with mucuna as a cover
- Page 177 and 178: Types of soil cover: lablab plus ma
- Page 179 and 180: The pigeon pea crop has been left o
- Page 181 and 182: Demonstrating conservation agricult
- Page 183: Transferring crop residue for lives