TAA Meeting : 06-Sep-2001 Durham University

Group Discussions Notes : Issues of Soil Conservation

Group Leaders: David Sanders & Francis Saxton

§ Since WW2, approaches to Soil Conservation (SC) tended to follow the US approach focussing on control of runoff (contour terracing etc.). This was not generally critically questioned and so was pretty much universally accepted; this view is much less acceptable today with a more realistic and practical approach to development.

§ The tendency is now to look at SC in the broad environmental management perspective and the wider problem of which it is a part. Need to first look at what is now covered by “SC” and why we should be concerned. Only then can we start to consider how it is to be done.

§ Concerns were voiced that SC is being driven by donor agendas with beneficiaries and implementing bodies being drawn along. Need to return to basic common sense farming practices which include SC measures specific to the system and communities.

§ It was noted that very often the SC measures are different from (at odds with) the extension messages presented to the farming communities. Closer liaison between the SC people and extension workers has to be initiated and maintained at all times until the problem is satisfactorily under control.

§ The past focus on run off (as main thrust of SC) is much like closing the barn door after the horse has bolted. Tendency now is to focus on cushioning rainfall (impact) in the first place and to ensure greater water infiltration into the soil. This becomes more an agronomic issue (plant cover & type & management) than an engineering one although both disciplines are inextricably involved.

§ Problems of land tenure are still a stumbling block for effective SC even with the present shift in emphasis of approach. Need to know how the social structure fits into the land tenure system and hence identify areas of responsibility and constraint to development.

§ So often development assistance gets blinkered by the technical solutions to a problem; where in fact the reality is one of policy change. For example, removing feed subsidies for sheep producers would reduce sheep numbers which in turn reduces the pressure on grazing and soils.

§ Too often the problem is one of convincing Governments that soil erosion is a serious problem (even here in UK, SC is not seen as so important). SC is being put in a box and set aside rather than viewed as part of a greater resource management issue.

§ Political problems make matters worse especially where farmers are made to do things (e.g. building bunds) to the extent that SC becomes “psychologically damaging” and further initiatives have had to introduce a name change such as land husbandry! This brings in the social context in which SC initiatives are expected to operate.

§ With these problems pretty much universal, where to start? Where to focus SC efforts? Need to establish among the farmers and the donors as much as with Governments that there is a problem and that it can be tackled effectively. Where an effective system is seen to work (e.g. zero-tillage in Brazil) and it is taken on at a political level then these approaches stand a much greater chance of success. With Government commitment such as this the spread and rate of adoption of such technologies can be dramatic over a relatively short period.

§ However, in face of poor uptake and extension continuity with ever increasing population numbers, concerns are that SC aid will not expand but rather contract in future. The question returns to confront donors “do aid programmes really address the underlying problems?” both in general and in the more specific SC context.

§ Further to SC, a query was raised concerning soil formation. Had any work been done on organic material and organic acids etc. leading to soil production and increased fertility? How important was weathering and organic matter inclusion as part of the broader SC issue?

§ Most encouraging is the shift to farming practices such as zero-tillage which reduce the need for expensive and often socially unpalatable technical solutions to excessive run off. There is now a lot of information and sound practical examples of the benefits of crop & soil management supporting the shift away from conventional SC. This does not mean that as a longer term approach, traditional SC measures (bunding, contour terracing, etc.) do not still have their place.

[ from notes taken by Tony Taucher, 06-Sep-2001 ]