Land degradation has been identified as a serious problem in Tanzania since the 1920s. Among the factors normally cited as contributing to land degradation are deforestation, overgrazing and inappropriate farming practices. Several attempts by the government to arrest the problem have been based on top-down approaches. Indigenous-based interventions are among the alternative practices adopted by the Soil Conservation and Agroforestry Project in Arumeru District, Tanzania. The main objective of this study was to assess the impact of the indigenous-based interventions on land conservation. More specifically the study intended to assess farmers' perception of land degradation, the adoption rate of indigenous-based interventions, the impact of those interventions, and lastly the sustainability of those interventions. Data for the study were collected through Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) techniques and a questionnaire survey. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 1 ) was used to analyse quantitative data and Content and Structural-Functional Analyses were used for qualitative data. The study found that the rate of land degradation was perceived by respondents to be rather severe. The study also revealed that indigenous-based interventions, which require minimal labour and capital, have been highly adopted by many farmers while labour/capital intensive ones have been taken up by fewer farmers. In general, indigenous-based interventions appear to have eased farm operations and contributed towards increased crop yield, improved soil fertility and increased income. Success in some of the indigenous interventions warrants their wider promotion beyond the project area.
Combined use of lime, animal manure and inorganic fertilisers is effective in replenishing the fertility of degraded acid soils. However, many smallholder farmers lack access to sufficient amounts of these inputs to improve the fertility and reduce the aluminium toxicity of Ferralsols. Organic manures are available but often have low nutrient content, which limits their ability to supply nutrients to soils. In a two-factor field experiment over four seasons on an Anthropic Ferralsol in Southern Province, Rwanda, we assessed (i) the effect of cattle manure on soil properties at a reduced rate affordable to smallholder farmers compared with that of NPK fertiliser applied, with and without lime also at a reduced rate, and (ii) the effect of supplementing grass in a basal cattle diet with legume leaves on manure quality and its effect on soil properties. Manure from cattle fed only the grass Chloris gayana (grass-only manure) and from cattle fed C. gayana supplemented with Acacia angustissima leaves (grass+legume manure) was applied at 5 t dry matter ha-1 (25% of the recommended rate) at the beginning of each growing season. NPK was applied as split doses supplying a total rate of 70 kg N ha-1. Lime was applied annually at a rate of 2.0 t CaO ha-1, which was 25% of the rate required to neutralise total acidity at the site. All amendments were applied only to the soil surrounding the maize plants (planting stations), which is estimated at 25% of the plot area. Maize stover was left on plots after harvest and planting stations were retained over all growing seasons. All treatments altered soil properties at the planting stations. Lime generally increased pH but there was no significant difference between lime plus manure treatments and non-limed manure treatments. Soil organic carbon concentration and cation exchange capacity were higher in manure and NPK treatments than in non-fertilised treatments. The manure treatment increased soil water-holding capacity compared with the NPK and non-fertilised treatments. There was no significant difference in total N, Ca2+, Mg2+ and K+ between the NPK and manure treatments. Micro-dosing animal manure can thus replace mineral fertiliser plus lime for soil fertility replenishment in smallholder farming. Grass+legume manure contained higher concentrations of total N, Ca, Mg, K and Na than grass-only manure, but its effect on soil properties did not differ significantly from that of grass-only manure.
Bamboo is one of the fastest growing and highest yielding renewable resources with multiple uses in the world. Lack of seedlings in sufficient number has generally been a major constraint in establishing more bamboo plantations. This study investigated the efficiency of regenerating Bambusa vulgaris through cuttings at Busogo sector, Musanze district, using vertical and horizontal methods with and without water treatment. The experiment consisted in a RCBD (Randomized Complete Block Design) with 4 replications. The growth and sprouting of the 64 cuttings were monitored for three months and 18 days (105 days). In terms of planting method, horizontal planting method showed best sprouting percentage of 68%. In terms of treatment used, horizontal planting method without using water treatment showed slightly better sprouting percentage of 60%. The results further show that about 87% of sprouts had between 0 and 30 cm height and 98% of sprouts had basal diameter ranging from 0 to 20 mm only 105 days after planting. Indeed, the horizontal planting methods provided highest survival rate of sprouts than the vertical planting method (74%) of planted cuttings. Furthermore, the results show that, 105 days after planting, cuttings with horizontal method were more productive in terms of root development. In terms of planting method using water treatment, the horizontal planting method with water treatment showed highest rooting percentage (44%). Therefore, farmers should be trained and encouraged to use horizontal planting method using water treatment in order to get better results in regenerating bamboo through cuttings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.