Working Guide for Integrated Management of Invasive Species in the Arid and Semi-Arid Zones of Ethiopia
Photo by: J.Duraisamy @ www.ecoport.org
Compiled by: Faith Ryan, USDA Forest Service
June, 2011
Introduction ...... 1 Section 1: People and Capacity Building ...... 2 1.1 Community Participation ...... 2 1.2 Invasive Species Inventory Tools ...... 4 1.3 Information and Coordination Tools ...... 5 1.4 Value of Monitoring and Evaluation ...... 7 Section 2: Practices and Potential Actions ...... 8 2.1 Prevention ...... 8 2.2 Early Detection / Rapid Response ...... 9 2.3 Contain and Control ...... 10 2.4 Utilization of Prosopis juliflora ...... 16 2-5 Rangeland Restoration ...... 24 Section 3: Policy and Other Expected Future Needs ...... 25 3.1 Role of Policy ...... 25 3.2 Contributing to Policy Development ...... 26 3.3 Supporting Policy for Land Tenure in Pastoral Areas ...... 26 3.4 Policy Specific to Aspects of Invasive Species Management – ...... 27 3.5 Future Opportunities ...... 27 Terms Used ...... i Key References ...... ii Annex 1 Further Reading ...... iv Annex 2 – Further Reading...... v
Introduction Mismanagement coupled with disregard of indigenous knowledge makes woody species (‘bush’) encroachment one of the major problems in many pastoral areas of Ethiopia. Introduction of invasive species without a sound knowledge of the plant and the recipient environment has created great rangeland problems in many lowlands of the country. In the dry southern savannahs, where for centuries episodic climatic events and the use of fire regulated vegetation dynamics, the natural balance between grasses and trees has shifted and bush cover has become a major threat to pastoral grazing management. Acacia drepanolobium, A. brevispica and other Acacia spp. are the dominant encroachers of southern Ethiopia, but the introduced Prosopis juliflora is the most frequent plant mentioned as an invader in eastern rangelands (Mengistu 2006).
The native Acacia were previously in balance with other shrub and grass species on the savannah and shrublands of southern Ethiopia (Coppock 1994). On 40 percent of the grazing lands of southern Ethiopia, bush cover exceeded an estimated 40 percent (Coppock, 1994). The resulting Acacia cover is high enough that previous grazing lands are no longer productive for the pastoralist, in a setting which is exacerbated by the Increased drought frequency and intensity, and higher demand for livestock forage. In the case of Prosopis juliflora, a species introduced to Africa, it is generally accepted that it was the ‘wrong species’. While this species does have beneficial properties it forms dense impenetrable thickets by coppices freely including at a very early stage, causing a number of problems such as: loss of access to riverine areas, roads and access routes with thick thorns, loss of pasture and land which could be cultivated, loss of biodiversity notably indigenous trees, and increased health problems for both livestock and people.
This Guide seeks to serve the way forward to integrated management of invasive species, particularly Prosopis juliflora, in the semi-arid and arid zones of Ethiopia. Work already accomplished and its results are summarized and resources available to address challenges are identified. Related tools are provided for building community and development agents’ capacity and for informing policy. This document is to guide integrated management of invasive species from a community to Regional scale. It is also meant to support developing Regional policy and definitive steps towards a National Strategy for Prosopis.
The main sections of this Guide are: People (social and economic considerations, building capacity for success), Practices (four elements of an invasive management strategy plus utilization of Prosopis), and Policy (productive relationships between people, practices and regulation).
It should be noted that many references in this Guide are to Prosopis juliflora1. Still, the tools and ideas can be applied to other invasive species on Ethiopia’s rangelands with one clear exception: the utilization of Prosopis-for community and national benefit in Section 3.4 is strictly for Prosopis only. With all invasive species, the biology, the setting of infestations and at-risk areas, and vectors of spread should be identified before developing management actions.
1 Hereafter referred to as ‘Prosopis’. 1
It is expected that one - two years after the initial version of this Guide an update will be necessary. The update would include approved Regional policies and a National Prosopis Plan which are currently in draft format.
Section 1: People and Capacity Building
1.1 Community Participation Developing an integrated management strategy for invasive species must come from the community on pastoral lands. Participatory Resource Management (PRM) (Flintan and Cullis 2010) and an inventory of invasive species are the recommended starting tools. The outcome of these two tools is to: • identify actions that are realistic for the community to implement and adapt over time; and • prioritize actions that are biologically appropriate to the infestations.
There are other practices similar to PRM, such as forming a Community Development Committee who lay out the way each issue will be tackled and the responsibilities for each party in a Community Action Plan. Successful methods root all work in the communities on the land. Key actions in developing community participation are to: • understand how the community defines itself and how it operates • understand how the community may or may not view the need for change • understand local context and external (outside of the community)barriers to change • diversify the forms of participation • incorporate flexible approaches to outcomes • identify skills and knowledge needed to address the issues • insist on planning for the future • orient the project towards multiple sectors that can build sustainability
What the leaders of community participation are striving for are a well-rooted sense of community ownership and control. A timely question then, is: can invasive species management proceed without a PRM plan or a CAP, and without an inventory?
This Guide promotes that one should proceed only with community participation, though quite possibly without a plan that follows ‘the book’. Same is true for an inventory; the inventory may be rudimentary at first; having a precise inventory is not necessary but a systematic inventory is needed at the beginning and future improvements to it should be addressed by the community. To proceed without an inventory may result in actions that are not appropriate within the larger picture. After identifying community stakeholders and leaders and describing the problem with an inventory, a simple strategy which recognizes the value of various potential actions on the infested land should
CASE EXAMPLE summarizes the TWO BASIC TOOLS: Before investing in management actions the area to be managed and its stakeholders must still be clearly identified. The next essential step is to map the infested lands and define the intensity of invasion to provide the stakeholders a shared picture of the problem. (Gebru 2008)
be developed. This Guide recommends organizing a strategy of potential actions by three possible desired outcomes:
• lands without any infestation because of the value these lands provide to the community, e.g. farmlands; • lands where the infestation is contained so other outcomes can be realized; and • lands where the infestation is controlled; where cover of the invasive species is reduced and in the future may be eliminated, e.g. key grazing lands.
A potential fourth outcome is lands where Prosopis is managed for utilization. The experience in the Afar Region with Prosopis indicates that management of the species to provide economic incentive to local people is appropriate where the infestation is severe and the community desires to capture that incentive (Gebru 2008). In contrast some communities in Afar have indicated that utilization of Prosopis is only a side benefit of work to eradicate it from some lands. In either case, utilization of Prosopis is presented in Section 3-4.
Working with pastoralist perceptions of invasive species Researchers suggest that people’s perceptions of invasive species are shaped by whether their critical economic needs are met or affected by the species, whether or not the species is physically appealing and by the opinions of powerful and influential individuals in the society. (Mulindo and Sang)
When it is clear from a cost/benefit analysis that CASE EXAMPLE – AFAR REGION specie’s costs are outweighed by its benefits it is likely and PROSOPIS An analysis of the that the community would rationally favor its costs and benefits associated with eradication (Mulindo and Sang). However, Choge and this species showed that this Chikamai (2003) and many others (Steele et al 2009) species is viewed to result in suggest that eradication of Prosopis is not a viable more economic losses than option. Where eradication is not a viable option benefits. FARM-Africa has been because of the extent of the infestation, the nature of successful in helping some the species, and the setting in which the infestation is communities to control spread of found, the community should be empowered with the invasion through utilization, knowledge and capital to minimize the gap between particularly feed production from costs and benefits (Mulindo and Sang). prosopis pod while other In light of changing livelihoods and climate communities prioritized their The natural resource manager may be aided by actions to eradicate Prosopis understanding the pressures under which pastoralist from high-value lands using the communities operate today. This understanding helps wood for charcoal and fuel wood develop realistic management practices and production where food could community commitment to the carry on the practice. assuredly be grown. (Gebru For example, where cultivation is becoming more 2008, Admasu 2008) important in some pastoralist communities (as documented for the Karrayu along the Awash River, Afar Region) changes in these communities also
result in changes from traditional livestock mobility practices and thus possible invasive management practices. (Ayalew in Ege et al 2009) These changes can both provide new opportunities to integrate invasive species management as well as fragment pastoralist community options.
Communities and local governmental and non-governmental agencies are presently observing unprecedented climate variability and extremes. These are also documented by scientific observation (e.g. International Institute for Sustainable Development and International Union for Conservation of Nature). Evidence includes increasing temperatures and drought frequency, as well as unpredictable rains that fall in shorter but more intense episodes.
In sum, cultivation and climate change, along with confinement to an ever shrinking resource base under the pressures of an expanding human and livestock population, impose on pastoralist communities the need for constant self-readjustment to maximize the returns from their land. These adjustments show in the manner of land exploitation that they see fit in view of their crisis. A natural resource practitioner may find in their community changes from traditional range management that had predominantly been communal and mobile to one which encompasses herding practices and crop cultivation carried out mainly in the home neighborhoods within the domain of private enclosures. A process of transformation bears out two important features of pastoralism, namely, change and continuity, a change which is an “assertion of societal continuity in changing or new circumstances” (Salzman 1980, Ayalew in Ege et al 2009). However, the magnitude and rate of current pressures are making many traditional coping strategies ineffective and/or unsustainable, amplifying environmental degradation and food insecurity, and forcing communities to rapidly find new livelihood strategies (SCUK-CARE Ethiopia 2009).
1.2 Invasive Species Inventory Tools Perceived barriers to completing inventory of current infestations of invasive species are: a) availability and working knowledge of Geographical Systems Information (GIS); b) collecting field data; and c) storing inventory information so it is consistent and accessible.
Geographic Information System (GIS) GIS is a system that allows us to view, question, understand, track change and share information in ways that reveal important patterns and relationships to the issues of the pastoralists’ livelihood. There is a GIS interactive training website (http://www.ethGIS.colostate.edu ) for delivery of geospatial data, and other resources that focus on the conservation of natural resources in Ethiopia. See Annex 1 for GIS on-line training sources.
Satellite Imagery Satellite imagery, is free and available from the United States Geological Survey at http://edcsns.17.cr.usgs.gov/NewEarthExplorer . Remote sensing and GIS training can help develop skills to work with these images. This includes searching for the best images for the task, using, and storing them. Parameters of image segmentation may vary between inventories, depending on the current level of infestation and need for precision. For example in FARM Africa’s Afar experience (in two Woredas – Gewane and Amibara) mapping from satellite was calibrated with on-the-ground
verification to display where there was greater than 50% canopy of Prosopis in Acacia/Prosopis communities (A. Ahmed).
Electronically Storing an Invasive Species Inventory There is a need to establish a comprehensive and accessible library of invasive species infestations with minimum metadata standards. An effort has begun with the Afar National Regional State Pastoral, Agriculture, and Rural Development Bureau (M. Mohamud).
Another database currently available can upload, store, query and map your data: the International Biological Information System (IBIS) website (http://ibis.colostate.edu ). This database connects your uploaded Global Positioning System inventory points (containing basic vegetation information and/or your plot data) to a pixel on the satellite imagery. IBIS allows creating maps at any scale along with storing all survey data in tabular format. A project manager is designated at the start and they specifically authorize others who can contribute to the project; public viewing is also readily available with some security options.
Social Mapping Lacking any GIS or internet tools natural resource managers have used ‘social mapping’ to begin an invasives inventory. Start with semi-structured interviews at the kebele level. The likely product of this work is the equivalent of a PRM map. In some mapping situations it may be important to know the density of Prosopis. This can be validated on the ground by counting the number of trees in a 10m x 10m plot and multiplying across the infested hectares. This would be important when there are two future information needs: a) to plan for the cost of clearing and b) to closely document the results of management actions such as in applied research or an NGO funded project.
Other Potential Sources of Inventory Information See Annex 1
1.3 Information and Coordination Tools
Technical Working Groups Invasive species management actions are more effective when integrated across boundaries (economic, social, and political) because the species itself will cross these boundaries. Sharing knowledge, experience and support for management actions is critical to effective management action; this has and should continue to be accomplished through Technical Working Groups (TWGs).
These TWGs can and should also aid in informing policy by bringing collective, evidence-based, knowledge to policy makers. To accomplish this, managers have suggested that TWGs be organized by Region; referred to here as a Regional Chapter. Priority Regions for establishing Regional Chapters are: Afar, Somali and SNNPR Regions.
A Regional Chapter would structure its activities to provide for participation given long travel times and members without internet and/or postal service. Rotated quarterly meeting locations and distributed notes from these meetings are two possible tools to keep people updated and involved. Field demonstrations sponsored by each Regional Chapter, with invited community action actors,
local interests and upward level policy makers, would provide first-hand knowledge to build understanding of and support for the issues (Choge et al in Steele et al 2009).
To provide information between Regional Chapters the Regional Chapters should automatically be part of a single National TWG. An annual gathering of the National TWG would again focus on sharing and updating experiences and knowledge between Regions and with other countries. Sharing inventory information with Ethiopia’s neighbors would be especially helpful to inform priorities. A tool to document the outcomes of this event for wider audiences, and for members who could not attend, would be a concise annual bulletin. It could include contacts for further information and this could be shared hard copy and electronically.
Leadership of both Regional Chapter and National Technical Working Groups should be taken up by an entity that can assure oversight for long-term continuity. Managers have recently suggested that an appropriate leader may reside with an Ethiopian Institute for Agricultural Research facility in each Region. Each Chapter may then decide to rotate an annual chair for its group among its members to avoid burnout. Whatever the structure, the leadership and committees should have clearly written responsibilities. This new leadership and oversight arrangement is needed to address past lapses of the TWG, when leadership came from NGOs who were only ephemerally supported to carry out such work. In the future, subgroups for specific species within the Regional TWGs, could be established based on priority and need for efficiency.
Literature Service Centers A common and recurring concern among natural resource management practitioners and community leaders is that current information on invasive species management is lacking. Some work is underway to collect information on invasive species topics (e.g. Afar Regional Government) but collection and dissemination is difficult without regular access to print or electronic media. The Technical Working Group Regional Chapters should work with their Regional Governments to address this topic. A possibility is for each Regional Government to develop a mutually beneficial cooperative agreement with one University or College (which is within their Region and provides natural resource degrees); being the regional repository for all literature and working papers/media on invasive species benefits the educational institution and the cost of a distribution service to the Region’s citizens is recaptured in benefits to the Regional economy.
Cooperative Weed Management Area – a possible tool for adaptation. While distances are great, and communication methods inconsistent, an Ethiopian adaptation of the Cooperative Weed Management Area (CWMA) may be of utility. The purpose of organizing into a local CWMA is to share equipment, expertise, and ideas to reach a common desired outcome. A CWMA is similar to a Technical Working Group Regional Chapter because of the objective of sharing information and increasing awareness. The key difference is that a CWMA is also clearly oriented towards action in the management area: weed management actions that are collaboratively developed and fully integrated with all stakeholder representatives. A CWMA would not be species specific; it would focus on a land area. Prevention action, and coordinated early detection / rapid response for eradication have the greatest achievement potential for CWMAs in Ethiopia. Longer
range outcomes of local applied research and effective influence of policy / regulation would also be supported by the goals the Regional Chapters of the Technical Working Group.
A CWMA is a local organization, centered with a described management area, involving local people who share the same desired outcomes and passion for management of invasive species. There is no ‘rule’ as to the scale of an effective CWMA. The key would be to keep it local so that timely communication is a hallmark, yet large enough to realize benefits of integration between groups of people. No certain number of CWMAs would be needed; they would be organized solely to support local communities that recognize the benefit of coordinated weed management actions. In some areas they may already exist with another name; they should not be redundant of existing organizations.
An agreement as to the purpose and activities of the CWMA is documented by the group. The agreement would identify the structure and responsibilities of a steering committee, as well as a simple strategy for reaching the shared desired outcomes. Annual actions that implement the strategy should be identified. (Idaho Noxious Weed Coordinating Committee 2003) In summary the benefits of a CWMA arise from coordination and sharing.
Plant Identification Plant identification is essential for raising the awareness of an invasive species and its negative effects. This tool is further described in 2.1 Prevention.
When a person is planning or implements invasive species management practice they should be able to verify the target invasive species as well as associate species that are to benefit from the practice. An easy to use field guide to common and locally important species is considered to be currently lacking. Developing these could be the work of University master’s students in cooperation with local Woreda and Pastoral Development offices, the Federal Environmental Protection Agency and the Institute of Biodiversity. Seven volumes of the Flora of Ethiopia and Eritrea have been published (from 1989 to 2004) by the National Herbarium at Addis Ababa University. This great accomplishment however is not field friendly for the natural resource manager.
1.4 Value of Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring helps document, understand, and communicate results from management practices compared to desired outcomes. From these results communities can adjust future management actions. Monitoring of both natural resources and as well as the social and economic aspects is needed. Monitoring details are in applicable sub-sections.
A commonly identified need is for policy that advances the social, economic and ecological aspects of managing invasives. Address this need by consistently monitoring results of invasives management and: a) sharing with peers across communities and b) bringing results together where it can be used to inform policy development.
Section 2: Practices and Potential Actions
2.1 Prevention
Application and Benefits The most effective action in management of invasive species is to prevent them from being introduced and established. This can be practiced throughout Ethiopia. Prevention relies on an array of tools and methods; all practices involve awareness and education. (USFS 2007) Prevention practices should seek to minimize the spread from vectors and pathways; the Case Example identifies these for Prosopis in the Afar Region. Virtually the entire Afar region is at risk for establishment of Prosopis (Evangelista 2010).
Prevention practices typically offer the most cost-effective means to minimize the environmental and economic impacts of invasive species. This point should be emphasized when developing awareness, practices, and policy.
Develop Support Systems Creating awareness of the direct benefits from prevention practices should drive its expansion.
Initial support for prevention practices should be developed by influential community members such as traditional leaders (customary institutions) or religious leaders. In FARM Africa’s experience (southern Afar Region) having these influential people collaborate with other stakeholders early in the process was more effective than mass media messages and communication from NGOs and the government. Where there is no clear land tenure, clan leadership should be supported and utilized.
Work with these traditional leaders to create awareness of the specie’s effects among target groups of people; these are groups who can provide biologically important results, or can benefit themselves, from prevention practices. In the example of the Prosopis species, these target groups may be those who are potential vectors (e.g. those trailing livestock or moving pods) or those who are potential beneficiaries (e.g. irrigation groups, pastoralist communities).
Establish community-based, socially inclusive, invasive species prevention committees responsible to coordinate the prevention work in high risk areas.
Each awareness tool and prevention practice must make sense locally and be related to a benefit to the people. In developing prevention practices include community leaders, local government and extension agents in woredas that do not yet have the invasive species but are at risk due to economic or biological activity.
Possible Actions - What can be done to prevent introduction? The following ideas are just that; they may not be practical or appropriate in all settings. Their main purpose here is to spark other ideas. • Establish practices when harvesting Prosopis to ensure the plant or its seeds do not spread.
• Identify Prosopis-free areas where only livestock with seed-free gut are allowed. Anticipate provisions to meet forage and water needs of livestock being restricted in their movement for approximately three days to achieve a clean gut. This practice would not be practical where Prosopis is common. • Where livestock movement cannot reasonably be restricted, encourage community elders to consider a standing responsibility to patrol, detect and eliminate new plants along identified travel routes. • Develop support to establish local, or portable (Felker 2002), drying and crushing facilities to minimize long-distance highway transport of viable seed. • For awareness, develop a 7 cm by 12 cm card with a picture of Prosopis juliflora, a description of the plant in local languages, how it is spread, and the negative effects of it becoming established. Print on cardstock and distribute as appropriate, especially to communities at risk for introduction. • _Additional ideas_
Monitoring and Follow-up Monitoring should consist of whether awareness materials were provided and prevention actions are consistently taken. A simple informal but systematic survey about the content, distribution and appeal of education materials could be made annually by the lead actors who promoted the materials. Where inconsistent use of prevention actions is found an evaluation should ask influential community leaders what can be done differently so that meaningful prevention actions are adopted. The Regional TWG Chapters and/or local CWMAs could share the ‘what’, ‘how’ and ‘why’ of successes to support follow-up work.
2.2 Early Detection / Rapid Response
Application and Benefits Sometimes considered the “second line of defense” after prevention, early detection and rapid response is a critical component of effective invasive species management. Early detection of new infestations requires coordinated vigilance and response of people in the management area as well as an awareness of invasive species in the surrounding area. (USFS 2007)
Early detection and rapid response (EDRR) eliminates new infestations; this is an action that results in lower cost and less environmental and economic impact than implementing a contain/control/rehabilitate strategy after the species is established.
Develop Support Systems Coordinate within and between communities to identify which areas have a desired outcome of being free of an invasive species. Desired outcomes should be: • based on the reality presented by an inventory of the management area. • identified by the community whose livelihood relies on the land in the management area.
Establish a local committee led by traditional leaders to coordinate (who, where, when) watching for new occurrences of invasive species. Prioritizing is necessary. Prioritizing identifies the species to
watch for and then eradicate, as well as the areas where the EDRR work would be done. CASE EXAMPLE – VECTORS of PROSOPIS in A CDC, CWMA, or its equivalent is a good the AFAR REGION. In the Afar Region the tool for the coordination and cooperation most common vectors and pathways of needed to accomplish early detection / spreading Prosopis seed are: (USFS 2007) rapid response; a Regional TWG Chapter • Import of goods, supplies and services would likely be too large to be effective. • Daily movements of people, vehicles and Possible Actions – What can be done to equipment prevent establishment? • Livestock grazing, trailing, etc. Coordinating with leaders in and adjacent • Wildlife foraging and travel to the management area supports efficient • Prevailing winds and storm events prioritizing of the species and actions. • Water flow in creeks, rivers and canals, Actions to detect and eradicate new and across floodplains during times of infestations are efficient when they take flooding. into account that specie’s vectors (Case Example).
The following ideas are listed here to spark EDRR actions which the community would identify as appropriate. • Focus annual surveys or inspections of areas at greatest risk of introduction; e.g. trails, flooded areas, roadsides. • In areas identified for the desired outcome of no Prosopis: pull seedlings. Cut young Prosopis individuals before they produce pods. Re-cut or dig repeatedly until these individuals die. • With partners, distribute materials designed to create awareness on identification, notification of new infestations, and practical actions to eliminate scattered occurrence of invasive species. • Establish partnerships with volunteers and others to regularly conduct “survey and eliminate action” for new infestations. • _Additional ideas_
Monitoring and Follow-up Monitoring should consist of whether systematic early detection was practiced. If so, how were the results handled – was eradication action needed and taken? If either or both actions were inconsistent the local committee in charge of EDRR should identify what can be done differently. The Regional TWG Chapter can help inform the evaluation and possible solutions. In every case sustainable action must be of benefit to the people who rely on the land for their livelihood.
2.3 Contain and Control
Application and Benefits Contain/control actions are appropriate when the community agrees, based on the inventory, that the infestations are larger than can be eradicated quickly, i.e. within one to three years.
‘Contain’ actions establish an invasive species-free perimeter around infestations to contain the spread and eradicate small outlier infestations. The actions are the same as those for control and eradication; the difference is that they are a priority action for the perimeter of large infestations and at outlier infestations. (USFS 2007)
‘Control’ actions may be to reduce the density of the species in the mid-term, and then on to eradicate the infestation in the long-term. ‘Control’ actions to eradicate may be: • on priority lands for producing food and forage, CASE EXAMPLE - PROSOPIS in the AFAR and • target areas on the periphery SOMALI REGIONS: ERADICATE, CONTAIN or of the existing invasions, MANAGE for USE ? Federal Ministry • at the headwaters of a Departments have stated that choices have to watershed, or be made for eradication, control, and/or • when a community decides to management that will suit local conditions. work towards the center of large infestations. (Steele et al 2009) Because eradication from (USFS 2007, Gebru 2008). some current lands may be difficult if not impossible, management to control and When the community is deciding on utilize Prosopis may be a reasonable choice. contain/control actions they should always (Steele et al 2009, HDRA 2005, Choge and consider the inventory, the biology of the Chikamai 2003) invasive species, and all of the vectors in and adjacent to the management area.
If the control action can provide value from productive use of the plant material (i.e. in the case of Prosopis) then the community should be encouraged to consider the costs and benefits of capturing that value.
Benefits of contain/control actions include: • a spatial buffer from the severely infested lands in which to maximize benefits of low to no invasive species cover; • decreased spread of the invasive species; • an opportunity to use productive soils for growing food or forage; and • for Prosopis, o less likelihood of livestock production loss from feeding solely on pods; o improved access to livestock water points, waterways, and established trails. • __other benefits you’ve noted___
Develop Support Systems
All Species Community support is key. Community leaders in southern Afar Region (H. Seide and A. Moya) indicated to help maintain support for contain/control/eradicate projects the importance of the having the following:
• clear plans for future land use and a good understanding of the agricultural techniques of growing crops; • well defined responsibilities between clans as well as between pastoralists and local government entities; and
Gebru (2008) added that where the invasion is severe and covers large areas it is inevitable that external support s of technology transfer and a supply of resources is needed to sustain the locally mobilized community working on the front line.
Prosopis juliflora To support Prosopis control projects the community needs to have a well-developed understanding that, due to intensive coppicing of Prosopis, these are long-term projects requiring a sustained effort to be successful (H. Seide and A. Moya).
Formal research of other methods of Prosopis eradication should identify and evaluate economic and environmental concerns from the community perspective.
Acacia drepanolobium Acacia drepanolobium is a species native to East Africa, including southern Ethiopia. Our understanding of the ecology of savannah systems and the relationship of woody shrubs with disturbances should indicate choices for best management practices. The following is excerpted from an unpublished document compiled and written by Ato Fayyissa Xaafaa (2011) on the ecology of bush encroachment on the rangelands of the Oromiya Region. He notes that Acacia drepanolobium- produces enormous quantities of seeds that regenerate after favorable rainfall. The young seedling may remain sub-dominant until the grass layer is grazed. Other key points Xaafaa makes are: • Lowland vegetation is historically dominated by grasses in a savannah type community. • The frequency and intensity of disturbances shift the balance of invasive [native] woody species. Disturbance may be drought, grazing, and lack of fire; to name the more common. • Woody species are favored in changes over time when grass land productivity is reduced. • Woody species and loss of grasses can arise if grasses are grazed beyond their capacity to recover between instances of grazing. • Change in the vegetation structure and species composition is part of natural succession is the natural. Soils, climate, competition between plants are all influences in succession. • Grazing animal influences of excessive removal of plant material and trampling also have a great impact on the succession of plant communities. • Droughts may favor tree seedlings more than the grass. • When grazing or fire exclusion alters the balance of tree and grass components, the competitive advantage of trees over grasses may be enhanced (also in Coppock 1994 and Riginos 2009).
To address these relationships between grazing, fire and Acacia drepanolobium, the pastoralist community would be benefit from using a holistic approach that together addresses the sustainability of economic, social and ecological systems. This approach may include use of some tools which we have not yet discovered for managing ecosystem processes. Natural resource practitioners should advocate developing new possibilities that come from increased understanding of the ecosystem processes, including the pastoralists themselves.
Actions – What can be done to contain and control extensive and/or severe infestations?
Prosopis juliflora
Mechanical and cultural methods. Best treatment methods to kill Prosopis vary somewhat and so they are sourced for further information.
• cutting and digging the root to a depth of 30cm (Ethiopia Institute of Agricultural Research) • cutting mature trees and digging the stumps 10-30 cm below the ground level (depending on age of the tree) (Communities working with FARM-Africa in southern Afar Region) • digging stumps 12-20 cm below the ground (Gewane Woreda, Afar Region, working with CARE) • compared to cutting and burning the best kill involved cutting and uprooting the shrub to a depth of 50 cm (Dollo, Somali Region, working with Save the Children, US).
Practitioners in Awash (2011) identified that digging out the central part of the root is key when digging to the identified depths.
In every situation follow-up of pulling seedlings and re-clearing (up-rooting) are required to suppress re-growth.
People need to be careful when clearing Prosopis. As noted by a community member working on a FARM-Africa clearing project this is dangerous work, having lost the sight of one eye from a thorn. He has advised others working clear Prosopis to work from the outside of the infestation, clearing the thorns and smallest stems first, before advancing inward. Prosopis is well-known for its long thorns which result in painful puncture wounds, sometimes accompanied by infection.
Applying fire on a landscape scale to reduce Prosopis is not effective because it does not suppress coppicing. Additionally, seeds banked in the soil remain viable for up to ten years and are prompted to successful sprouting after scarification by fire. In the Shinile Woreda of northern Somali Region (Save the Children, UK) the traditional practice of cutting the individual near, but not at, the ground level and burning the individual stumps had similar results (no growth three months after treatment in December) to cutting below the ground level and burying it with soil. (This needs followup from Redwan – do they sprout the following rainy season?)
Biocontrol. Biological control of Prosopis is practical and low-cost - introducing plant predators from the countries of origin and releasing them on to new growth. The issues with this method are many, wide-reaching, and have been well reported. The plant has two natural enemies – the seed beetles Algarobius bottimeri and Algarobius prosopis. The larvae of these beetles destroy the seeds in the mature pods both on the tree and on the ground. Each larva lives in a single seed and develops into a beetle after 6-10 weeks. This method is sound; it prevents the spread of the plant without actually killing it. This is important and particularly where local people continue to exploit the plant. Damage to seeds/pods will reduce the seed load in the soil, but may also reduce their value for processing into feed/livestock or food/people. (Breithaupt in Steele et al 2009). These two beetles have been introduced In South Africa (Witt 6/1/09 in unpubl. Flintan 2011).
A summary of personal conversations from Witt in 2009 indicates: • a bruchid beetle that feeds on seeds of Prosopis already present in Sudan and Djibouti and will likely move to Kenya and Ethiopia within the next five years. • testing of bio-control agents for destroying/controlling Prosopis. This includes looking at the associations between natural enemies of P. juliflora and P. africana and P. cineria. • studies are also taking place on other potential biocontrol agents, including Coelocephalapion gandolfoi, (which attacks the seeds early in their development); and a gall midge in the genus Asphondylia which galls the flower bud (preventing flower production).
In Ethiopia, projects in weed biological control are at a very infant stage (Tessema 2007). (update- from EIAR?) Biocontrol has the risks of introducing a non-native into the ecosystem. This risk can be managed by thorough testing of each agent before being released.
Acacia drepanolobium Best treatment methods to decrease cover of Acacia drepanolobium are discussed as follows.
After cutting Acacia drepanolobium at knee height, the bark is stripped and the stump is split which prevents resprouting in about 80% of the treated trees. To reduce the chance of most species re- sprouting, large specimens should be cut at knee height in the dry season (December to January) Alemu 2000, S. Wangari). This treatment is more successful in killing the larger diameter stems (e.g. 3 cm diameter at 1 meter high) (B.Negasa).
All practitioners agree that: • variation in sprouting/mortality responses to the cutting practices is found to be related to the diameter of the stem. • re-sprouting of A. drepanolobium is a common problem. • repeat treatment is required for reaching desired outcomes.
The process of cutting and dragging mature woody plants across a site can spread undesirable seeds, so dragging should be discouraged when many seed pods are observed on the cut debris. Where necessary the cut material could be carried. (LaMalfa et al 2008)
Regarding the combination of cutting and fire, the following has been observed or recommended: It may take several seasons after an area has been manually thinned and fenced off before fine fuel loads are sufficient to carry a fire. Fire should be initiated no later than 2 to 3 years after manual thinning has occurred to kill young seedlings and saplings of noxious species that emerge after thinning. (LaMalfa et al 2008). Another approach is to set fire one year after cutting the previous mid February; the sprouts that have developed (depending on size of stem) along with the herbaceous layer (depending on condition of understory) can be sufficient fuel to carry fire that would do significant damage to Acacia drepanolobium (S. Wangari). It has been observed on the Dida Ara Research Center north of Yabello (A. Ebro) that smaller diameter Acacia drepanolobium individuals have sprouted within two months of being cut in December/January. If rest from grazing occurred before cutting the Acacia, fire could be carried through these young sprouts, within several months of cutting before the short rainy season; severe damage to them would occur. Prior to burning, the community may consider not cutting about one-quarter to one-third of pretreatment canopy cover for future use as fuel wood or camel browse or wildlife habitat (LaMalfa et al 2008).
It has been noted that Acacia drepanolobium is useful for charcoal only at diameters greater than 10 cm. though managing for this in thickets is difficult. (S.Wangari)
Monitoring and Follow-up Monitoring should answer two questions:
1) Are the contain/control/eradicate actions being carried out (when, where and how) as planned?
2) Are the desired outcomes being achieved?
The demands of project work can make it difficult to find time to formally monitor and record the findings. When monitoring is skipped some of the future value of the project is lost. Record sufficient information so results are meaningful to others who can benefit. Organize the record so it can be found in the future by someone who may be new to the project.
Identify ‘sufficient information’ from the desired outcomes. The likely monitoring focus for Prosopis and Acacia drepanolobium work is change in canopy cover. Canopy cover data can be gathered with simple line intercept for each type of land (consider soils and slope) in the project by: • marking the tape distance that has Prosopis (or A. drepanolobium) canopy on 100 meter tape; • taking this data on at least three documented (GPS easting/northing/datum) monitoring sites in the land type; • and taking a photograph while standing at the zero end of the tape with the tape, and the horizon or landmark, in the picture. (Reference for this method can be found on pages 64-69 at http://www.blm.gov/nstc/library/pdf/samplveg.pdf )
A full description of setting up a monitoring program that includes another simple method can be found in Riginos and Herrick 2010 (at http://www.mpala.org/Monitoring_Guide.pdf ). One consideration to add to this East Africa rangeland health monitoring handbook would be to photograph each of the four transects based on the cardinal directions (N, S, E, W; each ‘arm of the cross’) from the center point location, and/or use a compass when pacing each transect. This would improve repeatability. Collecting all the data as described would provide the pastoralist and natural resource manager measures of vegetation cover, ground cover, vegetation structure, and plant density. If Prosopis response is the key measure time spent collecting data could be significantly shortened by deciding to count only Prosopis individuals for the plant density measure. ‘Rules’ for counting individuals of a species which coppices should be documented. As Riginos and Herrick state, document any change to (or such things as ‘rules’) the method and consistently apply the change across all monitoring sites for the project.
After monitoring, work with the community leaders to evaluate It is neither the strongest nor the most intelligent of the and adjust the actions as indicated species that survives, but the one most responsive to by the results. Include, as helpful, change. ADAPTED FROM CHARLES DARWIN, NATURALIST AND PIONEER OF EVOLUTIONARY THEORY other actors (e.g. other practitioners and government researchers) in this step.
2.4 Utilization of Prosopis juliflora The focus this strategy should be improved resources of the land and improved pastoralist household and community economy.
Application and Benefits When it becomes clear that specie’s costs are greater than its benefits the community rationally favors its eradication. Many suggest that eradication of Prosopis is not a viable option (earlier Case Example). While the debate about eradication versus utilization continues, on-going efforts should be made to empower communities with knowledge and capital to minimize the gap between costs and benefits of a plant’s management options (Mulindo and Sang). Utilization of Prosopis for commercial or household values requires the community to make decisions about the amount and location of Prosopis on their lands.
A community’s desired outcome of “No Prosopis – eradication” may include capturing the value from a consumptive use (e.g. charcoal and fuelwood) as part of the desired outcome. This was a driver of the production of Prosopis charcoal on the lands of several severely infested woredas (Amibara and Gewane) in the Afar Region (Gebru 2008).
Some uses of Prosopis are non- consumptive (i.e. ground pods in livestock feed, ground seeds as a component of food grade flour for people, honey); these uses can be part of a contain/control strategy. Another sustained use would require managing the number and form of individual Prosopis plants for sustained products from a Prosopis ‘woodlot’ (discussed later in this section).
Other practices and uses of Prosopis juliflora such as graftings (with Prosopis pallida per Felker 2002) tannins, medicines, gums and extracts are outside the scope of this Guide; to date they are in the realm of research and development.
It is a sea change to introduce cash into a pastoralists’ community economy. A tangible benefit of doing this may be to consider cash as supplementing the community’s exchange economy while enhancing the natural resources upon which They always say time changes things, but you the pastoralist community relies. Another actually have to change them yourself. ANDY major change is to look for ways to exploit the WARHOL, ARTIST very species that is inflicting serious negative impacts on pastoralists’ livelihood.
Actions –Utilization of Prosopis juliflora in the arid and semi-arid zones of Ethiopia. Early planning for commercial use of Prosopis should include a cost and benefit cash flow financial analysis such as on page 16 of Gebru (2008). This analysis indicates if an idea for a commercial project is financially feasible. Discussion of other necessary steps to successful business development is in the Building Capacity for Business section.
The uses of Prosopis presented here presume that communities support these ventures based on potential benefit to their household and community economies and are a mix of other country’s’ experience, research results, as well as recent real-life enterprise in Ethiopia. All require further development for benefits to accrue to more communities. To spark that development these uses are summarized here with their sources noted.
Fuelwood, Charcoal, Fuel for Gasification At present time management of Prosopis for these products is not part of the long-term desired outcome among pastoralists in Amibara District of the Afar Region (H.Seide and A. Moya). However, others (e.g. approximately 15% of the Shinile Woreda population in northern Somali Region) rely on charcoaling to make a living (R.Getachew)
Fuelwood. Given that 75% of all Ethiopia’s energy is derived from fuelwood (2002); that the estimated fuelwood demand is 3.5 times the sustainable supply (1993); and that of the total annual incremental yield of wood 80% is derived from the shrubland or woodland (1992); it is obvious that small diameter Prosopis is useful for fuelwood (Felker 2002) and charcoal (Seboka in Steele et al 2009). Fuelwood from Prosopis is being utilized on a daily basis in Afar and Somali Regions. A question the community should have an answer to is “what’s next?” on lands where eradication is the desired outcome –is it rehabilitation to grazing lands or agriculture? (Restoration Section) A different question for natural resource managers is where the community is utilizing Prosopis for fuelwood -- are the infestations of the extent and density and on some lands where the community might investigate managing Prosopis in a woodlot? Or is the desired outcome in this setting eradication?
The weedy nature of Prosopis can be combined with potential for managing the infestations for useful products (such as pods and lumber – see other headings). With the critical need for firewood
stands could be thinned and pruned by people harvesting firewood. However, the trees to be harvested and the branches to be pruned must be very carefully specified. There would be a community cost to ensure that this cutting is carried out as specified. Dense stands (>10,000 stems/ha) of small diameter (<5 cm) Prosopis have been reported to contain up to 60 tons/ha of biomass. Since only several hundred stems per hectare are desirable in managing for woodlot products the harvest of more than 95% of the biomass for fuelwood is highly desirable. (Felker 2002) Further discussion on woodlots is below.
Charcoal. The most extensive experience of commercially producing charcoal from Prosopis has been in the Afar Region with the support of FARM-Africa. The partnership included pastoralist communities, government at various levels, donors, researchers and other NGOs. Accomplishments and challenges encountered are described in Gebru 2008 and Admasu 2009. Most of the following is from Gebru (2008).
The goal of charcoal production in this setting was to eradicate Prosopis from the land (2004-2005). The benefit to the local communities was accrued through business cooperatives which bought charcoal for resale from daily laborers. The laborers may or may not have been pastoralists; however it was intended for the cooperatives to be pastoralist-based. The arrangements of production, marketing and benefit distribution varied from cooperative to cooperative. However, in 2011 an Amibara cooperative representative (A. Moya) now thinks that charcoaling does not provide Prosopis control.
Because the goal was to eradicate Prosopis young trees were to be cut 10 cm below the ground and up to 40 cm deep for mature trees to prevent coppicing. There were difficulties in ensuring that this work was done by the laborers. There was also some loss of traditional natural resource protection because of un-regulated business arrangements, and an inability to enforce cooperative by-laws due to lack of mutuality between traditional leaders, cooperative managers and local government. Lack of land use rights also discouraged cooperative members in some areas from moving forward to rehabilitate the land.
Gasification. Remote communities with severe infestations of Prosopis have the opportunity to produce electricity by local gasification of Prosopis (Bekele in Steele et al 2009). Preliminary surveys highlight the higher efficiency (65% energy conversion) that comes from controlled gas production; converting wood into gas for the production of electrical power. Gasification of Prosopis in Bekele’s Research and Development project relied on a simple design to demonstrate the viability of locally designed and manufactured systems and its suitability for practical use. The conversion to mechanical energy and/or electrical energy also uses relatively easy, well-developed electrical power generation technology. Gasification replaces direct combustion and thus complies with current Ethiopian national efforts to promote ‘cleaner energy production’ with a corresponding reduction of emissions to the atmosphere.
Needs and Going Forward – Fuelwood and Charcoal These problems are mentioned only to bring forward what other communities might consider when planning such an effort, not to diminish this project’s excellent advances in making use of Prosopis
while working to eradicate it in the Afar Region. As already noted the Afar Regional government is currently considering new regulations that would address many of these problems. Given the communities’ desired outcomes in at least the Shinile Woreda of Somali Region, NGOs and local leaders there might collaborate with the Somali Regional Government to replicate similar potential benefits of policy (R. Getachew).
Despite the reduced labor and time for producing charcoal from a metal kiln, the idea of the kilns has not gained acceptance. Modifying the kilns to increase the amount of charcoal produced at one time could help gain acceptance of this method (Gebru 2008). A senior energy expert with the Federal government, Seboka (in Steele et al 2009), identifies the traditional earth mound as a technique that combines simplicity with low investment and can carbonize large volumes of wood. Unfortunately this method is highly inefficient; typically 85- 90 percent of the wood is wasted with less than 15 percent of the original timber converted into charcoal. The metal kilns convert 30 – 35% of the wood into charcoal. (Seboka in Steele et al 2009)
Natural resource managers and local government agents can work within their communities to help the citizens be more receptive to the benefits of electricity and promote its sustainable local production, gasifying Prosopis being one form of production.
Gasification. As Regional and National Government policies on land tenure, forest, and energy resources are developed and practiced, then communities can act on the opportunities available for long term management. Until then, actions to achieve desired outcomes on the land and business goals are limited to short-term options.
Livestock Feed As with charcoal, the most developed Ethiopia experience with producing livestock feed from Prosopis in Ethiopia has been in the Afar Region with the support of FARM-Africa in partnership with pastoralist communities, business interests, donors, researchers and other NGOs among other stakeholders. Accomplishments were notable; these and the challenges encountered are described in Gebru 2008 and Admasu 2009. Most of the following is from Gebru (2008).
The goal of producing livestock feed from Prosopis pods and seed was to reduce the seed present on the land. The benefit to the local communities was accrued through pastoralist business cooperatives which entered into contractual agreement for collecting and supplying crushed pods to feed processing enterprises. To achieve success dedication to accomplishing the basics of setting up a viable business focused on:
• verifying the nutritional value of Prosopis pods for livestock with Holleta EIAR, • conducting action research with collaboration between the NGO, local woreda, and Werer EIAR, • verifying biomass assessments of the potential supply of pods, • surveying feed processing plants to explore the potential demand of pods, • studying feasibility by identifying costs of collection, crushing, and transportation to build a cash flow financial analysis for a pastoralist business cooperative,
• organizing and supporting visits for cooperative leaders, local government and the feed enterprises to build linkage with the potential buyers, and • setting up a pilot project demonstration to address production obstacles. As a planning and review point, compare these steps taken to the bulleted list of key topics in the Building Capacity for Business sub-section below. The elements of success are here.
Needs and Going Forward – Livestock Feed NGOs can take the lead with stakeholders (pastoralist leaders, successful cooperative leaders, leaders of milled feed enterprises, and local and Regional governments) to explore the opportunities and obstacles for expanding this use of Prosopis pods. Felker (2002) thinks that year to year variability in pod production should be considered when scaling up this use of Prosopis. He suggests that the highest production of pods is most likely to occur in drought years and that it would be advantageous to have already developed rapidly deployable equipment including portable solar driers and diesel-driven hammer mills (transported in pickup trucks) and heavy duty sealable containers to store the ground pods. He also verifies that production of pods per plant is greatest on individuals managed for tree form in woodlots (below). A focus should be maintained on desired outcomes on the land and for community and household economies. Increasing pod production can be an outcome of a woodlot (below).
Flour for Human Consumption The seedpods of Prosopis are highly nutritious and can be milled into flour that can be used in baking and/or as seasoning in foods. Prosopis flour is best used in mixtures with other more traditional flours up to a level of about 25 percent. Above this the taste may be too strong, particularly for the species Prosopis juliflora.
The novelty of new foods takes time to be accepted. In its native environment in Latin America, Prosopis (better known as ‘Mesquite’) has a long and cherished history of providing food. In newly introduced regions of Africa, India and elsewhere, people need encouragement to experiment. For best results Prosopis flour could be introduced within community programs based upon a selection of well-proven and easy-to-use recipes.
Follow an intuitive way to make and handle flour. Collect only undamaged and ripened seedpods that remain on the tree; the taste is reported to be better. By avoiding those on the ground contamination by moulds or damage by insects is also avoided. Reject seedpods that are discoloured or damaged. Seedpods need to be well-dried before milling; this normally takes 3-4 days for sun drying (but less if dried over a fire). Prosopis pods will collect moisture if not actively drying, as when the sun goes down. Dry where there is less chance of contamination and drying will be uniform. Seedpods can be pounded and broken down, but this produces only a coarse flour (and seeds may remain whole). For best results a mill is required – hammer-mills or stone-mills, depending on availability. For the low-income community, coarse milling by hand is typically followed by hammer- milling; with the quality of milling learned from experience. If flour is to be stored use dry and vermin-proof containers.
Honey Traditional bee-keeping exists in large pockets across the dry-land areas of Horn and East Africa: producer groups already operate at commercial levels (for example http://www.terramadre.info/filemanager/DONATE/progetti/miele%20etiope/INGL%20miele%20wu kro.pdf ) and some are engaged in export supply. There is potential for increasing the supply and the quality of both the honey and wax through the development of well structured supply chains, the construction of facilities, and protocols for specific quality and sustainability aspects. Honey bees require access to both water and plants which produce quality nectar. The relative value of Prosopis for nectar should be verified. Water is essential for production particularly when the hive needs to be cooled; bees will travel up to 5 kilometers to obtain water. Production decreases as distance to water increases. This should be addressed when locating hives and production centers; enlist also the help of community leaders and a knowledgeable extension agent. Future introduction of intermediate and modern hives, plus processing of apitherapy products can provide employment for women and the less advantaged members of communities.
Wren and Mamo (2009) provided most of this information. Other sources on this topic may be found in References Section (Dessalegn et al 2009).
Needs and Going Forward – Flour and Honey Successful commercial-scale human food products from Prosopis would require: • seeking and identifying potential markets, starting just beyond the pastoralist’ community and developing access to those markets • continual attention to high quality production, processing, and packaging that would meet a “Grade A” standard for human consumption • on-going training to develop the production and enterprise skills; this is especially needed for honey production. • realistic financing and/or subsidy for production equipment. More details of the business aspects are in Building Capacity for Business sub-section below. Kenya has experience with human-food grade Prosopis flour (Annex 6 in Steele et al 2009). Norwegian and Canadian government agencies along with the Ethiopian Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development have experience with increasing the capacity of Ethiopia’s honey production (Girma et al 2008, Yergi and Teferi 2010).
Woodlot Products In the Afar Region FARM-Africa is exploring the possibility of managing Prosopis for timber, chipwood and quality hand tools (A. Alawis) in cooperation with the Federal Government Forestry Research Centers. For further reading on the highly desirable properties of Prosopis wood and its uses see Felker (2002). On a small scale Felker discusses the high possibility of creating high quality Prosopis products such as pens, perfume holders, clocks, etc. as a way to generate a positive monthly cash flow for poor people in isolated rural areas given a small investment in tools, training and market development.
What would a Prosopis woodlot look like? (They are common in Argentina and India.) It would have only several hundred stems on a hectare; about a 10m x 10 m spacing. Larger tree trunks, such as
occur in older stands or following repeated pruning to a single stem, would fetch the highest price as saw logs. A woodlot can have mixtures of trees of various size managed for different wood products, as well as pods, honey and gums from integrated management systems (Pasiecznik 2001). Grasses would grow beneath the trees at this spacing; livestock grazing would be a use of the woodlot. An issue with managing for livestock forage in a woodlot may be the current concern of when whole pods are exclusively consumed by livestock, creating the fatal “armeko” condition (M. Gltsadik). Applied research into the availability and livestock forage preferences in a woodlot would indicate how to address this issue. Prosopis management training for pastoralists and former pastoralists, such as that conducted by CARE in the Gewane Woreda of the Afar Region, could include an introduction to management of woodlots to explore the possibilities.
Needs and Going Forward – Utilization Practices in General Because pastoralists are accustomed to an exchange, rather than a monetary, economy they understandably do not typically have strong skills in business development, accounting etc. It is also the case that many resource managers and local government officials also do not have adequate skills to support pastoralists in new business endeavors. (Flintan 2010) Developing business opportunities on a community scale could be an intentional focus of NGOs. See Annex 2 for a case example of CARE Kenya’s and CARE Somalia’s approach. We need to work with pastoralists within a ‘real world’ - market aware and orientated context – if we intend to assist them to harness new livelihood opportunities (Wren and Mamo 2009).
Support Systems Building Capacity for Business Government and NGO extension staff in the rural areas are potentially powerful agents for supporting development of viable pastoral community businesses. They can: • assist the community in identifying alternative enterprises and their benefits, • provide opportunities for learning business skills, and • help enable a legal and policy environment that develops markets. (Flintan 2010) The search for alternative livelihoods to supplement or replace pastoral-based livelihoods has been going on for a number of years. However few endeavors have been successful for two reasons, among others. One is a failure to appreciate and understand how to tune into adapting within the pastoralist system, which itself is not a static system. Second is that alternative livelihood businesses typically have not been built on business principles. (Flintan 2010)
Expanding the diversity of products with commercial value collected from rangelands with high cover of invasive species should focus on opportunities for pastoralists to meet a market demand for high quality and well-priced products (Felker 2002). Considerable preparation needs to go into the business design to make the most of opportunities.
A primary topic that should be well explored at the start is market research for the potential product and customer base. Other topics to address early in business design are to: • identify the inputs and process needed to create and deliver the product; • identify needed skills and equipment;
• show the steps of acquiring, handling, and storing materials; take into account seasonal availability; • address quality control (product uniformity, consistency and reliability; especially important for human food products); • map out the day-to-day management skills and training needed; • establish pricing of the product and identify margin for adjustments if costs change; and • create a business organization that includes being responsive to that identified above. Include here the accounting practices to be used. • develop a pilot production and distribution. These are essential if new business enterprises are to survive and grow (Flintan 2010, Jiwa and Wanjau 2008, Felker 2002).
Enterprise Design to Address Anticipated Issues. Early in the process of developing actions identify potential ecological, social or economic issues. Previous experience (yours and that of others) is a good teacher; be aware of issues comes from previous efforts. Think the whole process through with your CASE EXAMPLE – ISSUES with CHARCOAL PRODUCTION in the community, potential business AFAR REGION. clients, local government, Seeking to gain similar benefits as the cooperatives, potential funders, and policy unauthorized individuals engaged in the production and makers. Examine issues and marketing of charcoal, by: concerns as soon as they come • crossing local boundaries to harvest Prosopis, up and explore ways to address becoming a source of conflict in some areas, them. Track what motivates your • leaving in some places uncleared stumps which partners and identify the formed thickets due to the high coppicing ability of stakeholder responsibilities that Prosopis, are expected to address the • buying and selling charcoal produced from unknown concerns and move the sources (possibly native desirable species); and community towards their desired • passing permits to unauthorized charcoal traders. outcomes.
Monitoring and Follow-up. FARM Africa’s work in the Afar Region addresses severe Prosopis invasion by focusing on two outcomes to reach agreement on management actions: to improve both pastoralist livelihoods and the biodiversity across the land on which they rely (Admasu 2008; A.Ahmed). This focus has carried the pastoralist community leadership, FARM Africa, and the Afar Regional Government forward to address issues (see Case Example) in a new draft of charcoaling authorization (M.Mohamed). Evaluating results compared to desired outcomes and working with all stakeholders to make changes brings to life the traditional Ethiopian saying: ‘Little by little the egg will walk.’ Business leaders know that many small improvements consistently implemented inevitably produce huge results.
2-5 Rangeland Restoration Restoration of lands occupied by Prosopis needs to be an on-going action because of the persistent nature of the species through the seed bank. Some communities have indicated that restoration of rocky areas is not a priority; their strategy is to contain Prosopis by restricting livestock movement to and through such an area (A.Ahmed). Other communities are reclaiming the drylands (M.Gltsadik). This section focuses on rangelands and does not address agricultural land use.
Actions – What can be done to restore rangelands? Establishing cover of native forage plants in cleared dry-land areas is being explored. To date seeding of native grasses has been found necessary in places where the seedbank in the soil is depleted (Z. Gleysus ). FARM Africa in the Afar Region is finding seedings successful when the precipitation is favorable (500 mm annual average). Other’s experience? EIAR – Werer or Holleta?
Basic criteria for successful revegetation of rangelands should consider the following (Mengistu 2010, Holechek et al 1998):
• Seeding is an expensive and risky undertaking. Can a change to more desirable plant cover be achieved by changing grazing management or other practice such as use of fire? • If seeding is to be done – o Choose areas with the deepest soils, usually on level to gently sloping land o Seed just before, or at the onset of the most reliable rainy season o Best choice of seed is that of native species. Preferable species are: . sufficiently drought-tolerant so as to survive and increase . provide good quality herbage or fair or good grazing value . easy to establish . able to produce an adequate amount of viable seed which can be easily harvested. o Potential herbaceous species (Mengistu 2010) are: . Cenchrus ciliarus . Eragrostis superba . Chloris gayana . Leptochloa obtusiflora . Chloris roxburghiana . Stylosanthes fruticosa o Ensure that the grazing can be controlled; otherwise reseeding should not be started until proper grazing management can be assured. o Ensure that the grazing land meets the minimum growth requirement. Lack of success has been recorded in East Africa in reseeding areas receiving <375 mm of annual rainfall but a high success rate in areas with > 625 mm. . A mixture of grasses, forbs, and shrubs may better meet the multiple needs of the community user (feed, fuel wood, erosion control, etc.). A pure stand has a risk of failure due to weather during time of seeding, insects, etc. . Reseeding practices should include the following: . Make some form of simple seedbed preparation to open the top 2 cm of soil surface such as scratching up the soil surface, trailing livestock through immediately after sowing, or a brief period of heavy grazing just before sowing. . Plant at double the usual seed rate. . Cover the seeds with soil and for best success put chaff or grass mulch on top.
. Protect young seedlings from grazing for one-two years, to allow the plants to become firmly established and to reseed.
Needs and Support Systems There is a need to avoid using introduced grass species unless it is well-documented that these species will not become aggressive in Ethiopian ecosystems. The effort required to develop that certainty for introduced species is likely intensive. Experience in America has shown that introduced species, which were used because they were adaptable and easy to establish, have become a nuisance themselves and are crowding out native species or worse, changing the frequency of fire. Recall that the original problem being addressed is because a species was introduced to Ethiopia.
There is a long-term need to continue to develop production and the plant genetics of native Ethiopian grasses so their seed is readily available for restoration. Local systems of seed production could support the need for native seeds in reclamation – this is another long-term potential development. Further applied and formal research, and sharing of results of best restoration practices, would also aid restoration work.
NGOs have been providing support to communities committed to reclaiming land for cultivation of irrigated crops. Intervention actors along with local and regional governments could also provide these forms of support - supplies, equipment, and technical information - for restoring rangelands.
Monitoring and Follow-up Monitoring of restoration projects would note the project inputs and resulting plant cover. Lessons learned should be shared as broadly as possible.
Section 3: Policy and Other Expected Future Needs While strategic planning and action is required on national scale, it is the development of regional and/or sub-regional strategies that offer the best potential for making changes through action, and for attracting funds for investment. The documentation, review, and evaluation of sub-regional and regional strategies can then be used to finalize a National Prosopis Strategy.
3.1 Role of Policy Institutions, such as property rights and customary authority for example, and the incentives that these institutions produce or fail to produce, effect the range and effectiveness of possible invasive species management.
Policy development in the Afar Region, (Case Example next page), shows the role of policy in management of Prosopis, specifically by expanding community livelihood opportunities. The Afar Regional Government has stepped forward to develop regulatory and policy support for pastoralist cooperatives and their Prosopis products. They recognize Prosopis as a priority natural resource problem (second only to water resources) and are working closely with NGOs such as FARM-Africa, local Pastoral and Agricultural Development officials, and Regional Government Bureaus to advance the results and address the problems of containing, controlling, and along the way making use, of Prosopis. The Regional Government’s goals are to protect the indigenous resources and support the kebeles and woredas in achieving their objectives. (M. Mohamud)
3.2 Contributing to Policy Development Key actions should aim to build from the experience of its community members and that of others in the region: • first, to consolidate the evidence base (the knowledge, experiences, results, information); • second, to expand the use of “best practices” from the evidence base, and • third, to share the evidence base through the development of policy briefs/roadmaps. Together these actions have, and can continue to, feed into an ongoing range of policy initiatives in the Horn of Africa as well as to encourage future investment in the region. (Flintan 2010)
This process can be repeatedly used to update policy addressing natural resource management topics. The Case Example of Prosopis in the Afar Region (below) illustrates how lessons learned in the pilot effort informed the next draft of policy. Because approving the policy can take some time an adaptation of this process can also be used to keep the policy-makers appraised of the impacts from on-going needs such as evidence based increase in acres infested.
To communicate invasive species management needs to policy-makers a widely accessible geo- spatial reference is needed. Such a reference would be used to characterize the problem at the applicable scales and to visually provide external actors (including local authorities, central governments and the international community) the scope and severity of invasive species problems so that they can appropriately address them in policy and decision making. (Flintan 2010) In summary, at the foundation of policy development are two actions: a) working with and strengthening customary institutions and pastoralist ‘voice’, and b) collaborating with local, national, and regional stakeholders, including government, local and external agencies, and the private sector. Successful collaboration is supported by documentation of results and impacts on anticipated topics of concern, in a format that has visual appeal and can be widely shared.
3.3 Supporting Policy for Land Tenure in Pastoral Areas Natural resource managers, local pastoral development officials, and community leaders can be open to maximizing opportunities that lend support to Government proclamations, policy and regulations which provide pastoral communities with land tenure.
CASE EXAMPLE – POLICY on PROSOPIS MANAGEMENT in the AFAR REGION. Based on the lessons learned from piloted interventions and experiences from other countries, Afar National Regional State Pastoral, Agriculture, and Rural Development Bureau (PARDB) drafted a regulation in consultation with stakeholders which will guide Prosopis management in the region. The process was facilitated by FARM-Africa. The regulation outlines possible strategies to prevent further spread of Prosopis invasion and how to rehabilitate invaded areas. The regulation also identifies institutions responsible to lead Prosopis management at different levels, and their roles and responsibilities. The regulation is awaiting approval from the regional council to be enacted. Once the regulation is endorsed, there will be a need to prepare a detailed implementation guideline, mobilize the stakeholders for its implementation. (Gebru 2008)
To help, there could be focus on the evidence base of: • expanding Government incentives for investing in the Nation’s rangeland resources ; and • the economic benefits to communities of sustainable rangeland production. Steps along the way to develop the evidence base for policymakers are to: • document the benefits of protecting pastoral land from invasive species encroachment and conversion to unsustainable land uses; • promoting appropriately-targeted community economic development; and • improving coordination and information-sharing between different government agencies and at different levels, especially regarding invasive species and food security (Flintan 2010, CARE International/RECONCILE 2009)
While much remains to be done, FARM-Africa’s work with the Afar Regional Government shows that this is possible. It is anticipated that one of FARM-Africa’s publications will be a freely-shared manual that describes and supports Community Action Planning, and how CAP has helped create a legal and policy environment for market development and played a supportive role in meeting the communities’ need for information.
For a brief but comprehensive look at land tenure and current (2009) developments at various levels of governments and communities see http://www.elmt- relpa.org/FCKeditor/UserFiles/File/elmt/200910/SummaryLandTenure%20Work%20in%20Pstoral%2 0Areas%20by%20ELAP%2029%20Oct%2009-edited.pdf
3.4 Policy Specific to Aspects of Invasive Species Management – Development of quarantine practices should begin at the Woreda and District levels and involve pastoral community elders and potentially affected business leaders. Suggestions from early adaptors of such practices should be included in the development so that compliance is supported. In the future licensing long distance hauling of viable Prosopis seed may helpful to advance prevention practices and to cover cost of early detection/rapid response along highways.
Policy which supports local, regional and federal governments in promoting early detection / rapid response can be developed on the topics of land tenure, technology /training to better conduct and use invasive species inventories, and meaningful recognition of exemplary inter-community cooperation. Educators, influential community leaders and mid-level resource managers can collaborate to build and maintain support for this work by identifying its benefits to potential partners and government.
3.5 Future Opportunities There has been a growing agreement among policy makers and others that resource or land users can be in a position to provide environmental services – through alternative land management and beneficial land use practices – and could be compensated for the costs of their provision (Flintan 2010). Such payment schemes are not common for rangeland management; however interest in them is spreading. Natural resource managers can encourage policy that would support research which addresses how this opportunity may relate to integration of invasive species management and carbon trading ventures. Challenges which policy and research should address include: lack of infrastructure and accessibility, market interest and function, the willingness and capacity of the communities to manage such ventures, and the influence of insecurity without land tenure.
Terms Used * Arid zone - the arid zone altitude range is from 126 metres below sea level to 1,200 metres; mean annual rainfall is from 100 to 600 mm and the Potential Evapotranspiration (PET) is estimated at 1,700 – 3,000 mm. The mean temperature is above 27 0C. Since rainfall is erratic crops are irrigated. The arid zone plains are shrub grassland, except some patches of woodland. The Rift Valley and escarpments are covered by wooded grassland. Crop production is only along rivers. Nomadic and semi-nomadic pastoralism is the common livestock production system in the arid zones. (Mengistu 2006) * Semi-arid zone - the semi arid zone altitude range is 400 – 2,200 metres; mean annual rainfall of 300 – 800 mm; PET ranges between 1,900 to 2,100 mm. Hilly areas and stony terrain are under wooded grassland or shrub grassland; flat land may be cultivated for rainfed crops (often mechanized). Extensive grazing is the major land use. Increasing and progressive settlement is replaced grazing lands with small to medium farms, some of which are mechanized. Originally the vegetation in the rift floor and escarpments was wooded grassland. (Mengistu 2006) * Cover of infestation: based on canopy cover of invasive species, in relation to the total management area. High, Severe: cover is too high to capture livestock production value from the area. Low: scattered plants, up to 5% cover * Pattern of infestation: Dispersed - there is land currently without the invasive species located between infestations of moderate to heavy cover. Continuous – the opposite of dispersed. * Management area: these should be identified through Participatory Rangeland Management, a Community Development Committee, or similar community based-socially inclusive stakeholder process. Management areas should take into account the lands which the community relies upon. Desired conditions will vary across the management area based on current inventory and resource potential (e.g. productive soils). Examples of desired condition developed by a kebele with current moderate cover and dispersed patter of infestation may be: Manage for low Prosopis cover, of scattered individual trees for shade within 1 km of the __name___ (Kebele). Manage for no Prosopis cover on the bottom lands 0.5 km from the western edge of the __name__ (River). Land is to have a cover of grass for dry season grazing. Manage for contained Prosopis infestation on the south side of __name a hill or grazing area__. * Metadata – Metadata identifies the source of data used in GIS projects. It also discloses the date, derivations used to obtain the data, attributes and codes within the data. Metadata helps the potential user determine the accuracy and use constraints of the data; this is key information to appropriate use of GIS data. * Policy - is used broadly to refer to written statements of government or other public institution setting out the ideals, aspirations, guiding principles, goals, approaches and procedures for addressing a public issue or advancing a public agenda. (CARE INTERNATIONAL/RECONCILE 2009 )
I saw the angel in the marble and carved until I set him free. MICHELANGELO, SCULPTOR AND ARTIST
Key References Admasu, D. 2008. Invasive Plants and Food Security: the case of Prosopis juliflora in the Afar region of Ethiopia. Prepared for IUCN by D.Admasu of FARM-Africa. http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/invasive_plants_and_food_security___final.pdf
CARE International/RECONCILE. 2009. Report of training on policy advocacy for CARE International ELMT project staff. Nakuru, Kenya August 27-29, 2009. CARE Somalia, Partner. In IR6 Strengthening Pastoral Area Voice section of http://www.elmt-relpa.org/aesito/elmt?&id_cms_doc=34
Coppock, L. J. 1994. The Borana Plateau of Southern Ethiopia: Synthesis of pastoral research, development and change, 1980-91. FAO Corporate Document Repository. Produced by International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILRI), PO Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. ISBN 92-9053-283-1. http://www.fao.org/wairdocs/ilri/x5461e/x5461e00.htm#Contents
Dessalegn, Y., D. Hoekstra, K. Berhe, T. Derso and Y. Mehari. 2010. Smallholder apiculture development in Bure, Ethiopia: experiences from IPMS project interventions. IPMS Case Study. Nairobi (Kenya): International Livestock Research Institute. http://mahider.ilri.org/bitstream/10568/812/5/Apiculture_Bure.pdf Flintan, F. and A. Cullis. 2010. Introductory guidelines to participatory rangeland management in pastoral areas. Published by Save the Children, USA, Addis Ababa Ethiopia and FAO. ISBN 978- 99944-847-1-3. http://www.elmt-relpa.org/aesito/hoapn?&cms=null&id_cms_doc=58 Scroll to Subject Area of Rangeland Management General Flintan, F. (ed). 2010. Learning by Doing: Working Towards Participatory Rangeland Management (PRM) in Pastoral Areas through ELMT/ ELSE. Draft version. Published by Save the Children, USA, Addis Ababa Ethiopia, CARE, and Veterinaires sans Frontieres, Suisse with partner ELMT/ELSE. In http://www.elmt-relpa.org/aesito/hoapn?&cms=null&id_cms_doc=58 Scroll to Subject Area of Rangeland Management Regional Felker, P. 2002. Ethiopia-National Plan for Prosopis-3 February 2002 FINAL DRAFT. Download at http://sites.google.com/site/petersprosopismesquitesite/documents Document name is same as title; it is at the top of the page. Gebru, G. 2008. Experiences on Prosopis Management - Case of Afar Region. FARM-Africa. http://www.farmafrica.org.uk/resources/FARM%20Africa_Experiences%20on%20Prosopis%20Mana gement%20Afar%20(2008).pdf Girma, M., A. Tegegne, S. Ballo, and N. Alemayehu. 2008. Challenges and opportunities for market- oriented apiculture development: The case of Ada’a-Liben District, Ethiopia. Conference on International Research on Food Security, Natural Resource Management and Rural Development held at University of Hohenheim, Tropentag, Denmark. October 7-9, 2008. http://www.tropentag.de/2008/abstracts/full/20.pdf Jiwa, F., and K. Wanjau. 2008. Guidelines for the identification, selection and development of alternative enterprise opportunities – A document of CARE Kenya’s livelihoods diversification and marketing technical working group. CARE Kenya, Partner. In IR4 Livelihood diversification section of http://www.elmt-relpa.org/aesito/elmt?&id_cms_doc=34
Mengistu, S. 2010. Forage development for sheep and goats. In Sheep and Goat Production Handbook, Alemu Yami and R.C. Merkel, eds. Ethiopia sheep and goat productivity improvement program, USAID and MoARD. http://www.esgpip.com/HandBook/Handbook.html SCUK-CARE Ethiopia. 2009. Policy Brief on climate change. In IR4 Livelihood Diversification section of http://www.elmt-relpa.org/aesito/elmt?&cms=null&id_cms_doc=34 Steele, P. (ed.); Breithaupt, J. (ed.); Labrada, R. (ed.) 2009. Proceedings Expert Consultation (no.4). ‘Increased food security - control and management of Prosopis’. Meeting held Awash, Ethiopia 15- 19 October 2007. FAO, ESAF. Rome, Italy. 132 pages. Download (20 MB file) from: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/agphome/documents/Biodiversity- pollination/Weeds/Docs/Prosopis.pdf Wren, S., and G. Mamo. 2009. Summary Report on the Potential for Plant Based Rangeland Enterprises in the Drylands of Ethiopia - Improving Pastoral Livelihoods and Natural Resource Management through Plant based Rangeland Products Enterprise in Borana and Guji Zones. CARE Ethiopia, Partner. In IR3 Natural Resource Management section of http://www.elmt- relpa.org/aesito/elmt?&id_cms_doc=34
Annex 1 Further Reading
Other Potential Sources of Information – Inventory A general description of segmenting satellite images to determine vegetation cover can be found in Essa et al 2006 “Mapping dynamics of invasive Prosopis juliflora in the Northern Emirates of the UAE: an application of remote sensing and GIS”. However, the drawback is that more recent images of that kind are no longer available.
The Remote Sensing Tutorial, Dr. Nicholas M. Short. Covers the basics of remote sensing, a broad range of satellite imagery applications, including rangeland vegetation. The tutorial is in a format for teachers which can be distracting or helpful. Last updated in April, 2010.
See http://www.csa.gov.et/pdf/Zena/Donors%20Meeting/5eth_lc_may09_integrated_v5.ppt for other natural resource mapping that was/is being completed in Ethiopia; in this case by the Natural Resources Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization, United Nations.
Potential ARC-GIS training opportunities – some are free When locating online training it is advised that websites be either of government or belonging to public education institutions (indicated by .edu in pathname). ESRI is the company which has developed and sells the ARCGIS software; they also would be a sound source of training tutorials.
http://training.esri.com/gateway/index.cfm
http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.3/tutorials/tutorials.htm
http://library.rice.edu/services/gdc/training-gis/self-directed-training/online-gis-tutorials-1/ESRI- online-tutorials/esri-courses
http://libweb.uoregon.edu/map/map_section/listserves_tutorials/map_Tutorials.html
For Acacia drepanolobium: a large UN / Spain project in southern Ethiopia (Biruk Asfaw)?
Suggestions for the National TWG
Most recent list of members:
Potential Members: An Ethiopian National Prosopis Technical Working Group should include those working on invasive species issues from each Region and the Principal Cities of Addis Ababa, and Dire Dawa and neighboring countries of Kenya, Somalia, and Sudan. Invitations for new participation could be tasked out to a designated Regional representative and sent to (in no particular order) those working on the issue, including but not limited to: community leaders, District and Zone Pastoral Development Office staff, Regional officials including those from Land Departments; and Pastoral, Agriculture and Rural Development Bureaus, Federal level officials( from the Ministry of Agriculture including many associated Departments, e.g. the Plant Protection Center; Environmental Protection
Agency; Institute of Biodiversity Conservation; the Ministry of Trade; the Ethiopian Rural Energy Development and Promotion Center; and the Ministry of Culture, the Pastoralist Commission with the Ministry of Federal Affairs, the Ethiopian Mapping Authority); private business owners and developers; University and international experts and research scientists, students; NGO Natural Resource Managers; private consultants; foreign development officials.
Potential Structure and Function of the National TWG. With such a broad membership a Steering Committee could be established to guide the goal setting and function of the National TWG. In general the structure and function of the National TWG would be similar to the Regional TWGs. A unique responsibility of the National TWG would be to share information between the Regional TWGs.
Annex 2 – Further Reading Prosopis Utilization – Woodlot Products A furniture and flooring potential has been identified by Felker (2002); he points out that Prosopis wood is not only far superior to Cupressus and Pinus patula (Ethiopia’s forested plantations) but it is on par with the world’s very finest cabinet woods. Felker goes on to say that the drawbacks of small and shorter Prosopis logs can be overcome with today’s saw and joinery tools. The challenge is to develop a sustainable industry (potential $25 million USD market) – and to do so is entirely reliant on the development of a private sector that is willing to invest in its future. The problems at present (2002) are: a) lack of knowledge of potential export markets b) no current Ethiopian experience in the use of Prosopis for furniture or flooring, and c) limited financial resources of the private Ethiopian forestry industry sector. Felker gives a solid description of what is needed, and resources available to develop pilot scale samples, a market discovery campaign, and attracting investment. He indicates that a consortium of universities and government agencies would be appropriate for kick-off. A complete copy of his thorough treatise is available at http://sites.google.com/site/petersprosopismesquitesite/documents with the document labeled 3febfinalEthiopiadraft.pdf
Building Business Capacity. –Example, from the Enhanced Livelihoods in the Mandera Triangle Project, of building business development skills among pastoralists. CARE Kenya and CARE Somalia conducted several community assessments to identify the most appropriate and feasible alternative enterprise options. The results were helpful for the communities to identify specific community enterprises and women’s groups interested in those enterprises. Also, the assessments answered the question: ‘what support is needed to make the enterprise a reality?’
Two approaches followed. First, a Livelihood Diversification and Marketing TWG was tasked to specifically provide training in business development skills (BDS) for both organizations and communities. Seventy four trainers and over 900 individuals were trained in business development skills. Additionally BDS training materials and curricula for business literacy was adopted by the Government for Northern Kenya. Around 250 women were trained in functional literacy and 300 women were trained in group savings and loans.
Secondly, CARE-Kenya developed guidelines to identify and develop training for the alternative enterprise options. Hundreds of people participated in this training. The result was to develop their production skills in the selected opportunities (e.g. honey processing, mat making, skin and hide production). Materials which provided start-up support for production (e.g. bee hives) were also supplied as appropriate.
(ELMT Cumulative Narrative Report, 31st August 2007 – 31st December 2009.)