1

WLI 1st Regional Coordination Meeting(ICARDA, Aleppo, Syria, 13-15 February, 2011

Bio-physical characterization and socioeconomic study of Tammun and Hebron Bench mark sites, Palestine

Dr. Nasser Sholi

2

The WLI Country Support Team

3

# Institution Abr. Contributors / Names

1. National Agricultural Research Center

NARC Dr. Nasser Sholi (National Coordinator), Dr. Mohamad Majdawi, Ahmad Rabaya, Hazem Mraaba

2. Applied Research Institute -

JerusalemARIJ Nader Hrimat, Esa Zboun

3. Land Research Center LRC Dr. Mohammad Alsalimiya, Wael Abu Rmeleh, Mohamad Sadeq, Maki Al-Hafeth, Murad Al-Hussani

4. Hebron University, Faculty of Agriculture

HU Dr. Rezq Basheer-Salimia

4

The Presentation Contents

Part One : Socio-economic study.

Part Two : Bio-physical characterization.

Part One: Soci-Economic Study

5

6

The conducted socio-economic analysis based on secondary data from different government and other institutions in addition to the analysis of conducted interviewed with key persons in Benchmark villages.

The Palestinian benchmark composed of two sites: (Tammun and Hebron sites), nine villages are existing in the two sites study area. (4 in Tamoun site and 5 in Hebron site)

Methodology and targeted area

7

1. Livelihood Assessment

1.1. Resources: Land Resources: Total area =52.2 km2, (almost equally

distributed). Average ownership varies from 7-86 dunums (70% of owners own less than 30 dunums). Rain-fed agriculture is dominated which is mainly field crops and

forages. Human resources: Total population =7801 persons

Family size = 4.8 to 10.9 per family;49% of the people in the BM sites are females. Population growth ranges between 3.3-3.8.

8

Water resources: Both sites villages suffer from water scarcity and in some cases from

water quality.

The main problems facing the people concerning water are unavailability of permanent water source and the high cost of water by tanks.

Water is generally limited and not sufficient for irrigation or home consumption.

People in most localities depend on rainwater harvesting cisterns ,rainfall as an additional source of water.

The average family's daily water consumption is about 60 LCD (liter per capita per day) which is very far from the world health organization (WHO) which is 150 LCD.

9

Social Criteria:

◦ Level of education and illiteracy

Illiteracy rate: 15% to 40% (depending on the villages).

College or university Students: not more than 5%.

Weakness of education systems might attributed to:

- lack of secondary schools, - low level of income or the - high level of poverty.

10

Availability of Infrastructure:

• Transportation: - Both sites villages are linked to the closest main cities by modern roads. - However, they still suffer from the shortage of inner roads in the villages and the availability of agricultural roads. - There is no public transportation.

• Seweage System and Wastes Disposed: Sewage system through digging cesspits. The villages don’t have tanks to carry away sewage.

• Burning is considered the main method used to dispose the solid waste. This leads to serious pollution problems.

• Electricity: Still very limited for certain hours a day.

• Clinics: In most of the villages there are no clinics, pharmacies or hospitals only mobile clinics visit the villages once a week.

11

Farm revenue- baseline data The feasibility including the revenue of the farmers current agro-

activities need to be studied in depth.

The efficiency use of resources for the main activities is low.

the Gross Margin for main crops -field crops- (wheat, barley and fodder ) is 10%–25% of the operational capital which is already low since these crops are cultivated in traditional way and don’t need high operational cost.

Also the gross margin of livestock is low and it is estimated for sheep about 15% and for cows 20% of the operational capital.

12

Rural employment to include non-agriculture

People in both Benchmark sites are greatly depend on agriculture and animal Productions.

In some areas they move with their animals seeking for grass and water.

The work outside the farm represents in the public sector, in the private one either in West Bank or in Israel, trade and free business, but in limited number and seasonal.

Israeli occupation violation and military practices deprived inhabitants to work in Israel and prevented them (during closures) to market their products in main markets as Nablus.

13

Farmers' skills, awareness and attitudes Farmers have good experience in their agricultural activities in the both

Benchmark Sites; they received trainings.

But, the farmers still use the traditional cultivation and irrigation system

They rarely used chemical fertilizers instead they use animal manure as an organic fertilizer.

Partly they use tractors.

In the time of shortage of water supply, the people transport the purchased water by tanks from surrounding regions and villages.

In some villages People are famous with handicrafts like hair tents

saddles, sacks and ropes which forms additional source of income.

14

Equity and Gender:

In all villages women share men in farm, field work, in social and economical life.

The following indicators reflect the main role of women in these societies:

◦ Women work hand in hand with men and they bear a heavy burden during their service in own farms or field harvest.

◦ Have the responsibility of their families and the house so they don’t spend in the field the same time of that offered by men.

◦ Has her role in sharing her husband in Decision making because she shares most of the farm work.

◦ The Education of woman: They are practicing their right in education, some of them have graduated due to the availability of new schools and co-education system.

15

2 Livestock Characterization

In the villages of both sites, the animal production occupies high percent of the total activities.

People in all villages depend basically on animal production to satisfy their needs and to improve their standard of life.

The number of sheep and goat has been estimated in all

villages about 1500-10000 head.

The cow production is dominated in site 1; in all villages there is cows production, it differentiates between 10 in Khirbit Al-Ras Al_Ahmer to 150 in Biet Hasan. In site 2 the cow production is only in Al-Ramadin village.

Poultry production: It ranges form 2000 – 12000 depends on village

16

Numbers of animals in the period of 1975-1995 were twice of them nowadays; Available data shows a decrease of 40 % in livestock for the following reasons:

◦ Closure of wide areas by Israel.◦ Rise in prices of fodder, straw and vaccine. ◦ Decreasing in net return of milk and meat production. ◦ The limited area for grazing and the fluctuation of rain

and drought. ◦ Difficulties in marketing of livestock production because

the distances between main markets and villages are far.

Continue Livestock Characterization

Water scarcity and low water quality. So farmers depend mainly on rainfed crops.

Rarity and high price of seeds.

High price of fodders, marketing difficulties.

Spread of animal diseases is the most problems the farmers face.

Lack of modernization in agricultural sector such as machines.

Unemployment and unavailability of work chances for both males and females.

Main problems and challenges

18

• Negative impact of occupation practices

• Low level of living standard and common poverty.

• Absence of public communication and transportation.

• Incapacity of exporting and marketing.

• Absence of finance.

Continue … Main problems and challenges

Providing necessary finance to complete the water pipe and to build a reservoir and offering finance to the local councils

Aiding farmers to obtain agriculture inputs such as seeds, equipments…etc, and aiding them by offering farm equipments and tools

Securing means of travelling and transportations and provide villages with public transportation services and agricultural ones.

Suggestions to solve the problems

20

• Securing educational accommodations and enough schools.

• Give more attention to women sector by creating social and culture activities and recreation.

• Establishment of agricultural communities and support them.

• Creative new sources of energy such as bio fuel.

Continue … suggestions to solve the problems

21

Indicators to evaluate the performance of human development at the benchmark sites

Changes in production organization: To measure the use of resources of families and to measure the availability and quality of the resources. Changes in efficiencies of resources use (Capital, Land, Water and labour) by using Gross Margin of different activities

Changes in the level of Income to reflect the ability of the families to satisfy their needs in terms of food, clothes etc., also the possibility to accumulate capital through net revenues.

Determine the availability of cash when it is urgently needed, e.g. when the loan has to be repaid.

22

Identify the health situation of the family as a social criterion to provide an impression of how families take care of their members and their financial ability to pay for physician services when needed.

Development in the level of education and qualifications of the people in different villages.

Identify the Social security of the family to give an idea about what happens to the member of the family in the future when they become old or sick, or, if they suffer an accident how they can maintain a good quality of life.

Continue… Indicators to evaluate the performance of human development at the benchmark sites

23

Second level objectives

First level objective

FTF indicators

National Contribution of agriculture sector in GDP

National Expenditures of rural household ( Proxy of income)

National Prevalence of wasted children under 5 years

National Prevalence of stunted children under 5 years

Program Gross margin per unit of land or animal of selected product ( Crops/ Animal selected varies by country

Program Percent change in value of intra- regional exports of targeted

Feed-the-Future (FTF) development indicators

24

Regions indicatorsAl-rasAl-Ahmar

A'tuf Ein Shibli

Biet Hasan

Freejat Inab Al-Kabeer

Al-Ramadin somara Al -Rahwa

0.9 % -- 9.5 % Contribution of agriculture sector in GDP

60% 60% 55% 50% 58% 50% 50% 65% 85% Expenditures of rural household ( Proxy of income)

4% 4% 7 5% 6% 8% 6% 4% 5% Prevalence of wasted children under 5

3% 2% 5% 2% 3% 2% 4% 2% 1% Prevalence of stunted children 5

10 -25%-10%-

10 -25%-10%

10-25%-25%20%

10-25%15-30%20%25%

10-15%-20%0

15-30%-25%-

15-25%-20%22%

10-20%

-11%-

10 -25%-10%-

Gross margin per unit of land or animal of selected product (

Crops/ Animal selected: )

-Wheat & barely -Irrigated vegetables

- Goats - Cattle

- - - - - - - - - Percent change in value of

intra- regional exports of targeted

25

List of potential stakeholders at the benchmark site (including also NGOs)

- Farmers associations ---- Local

- Japanese International Cooperation Agency

- Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees (PARC)-- NGO

- Land Research Center-- NGO

- Applied Research Institute – Jerusalem -- NGO

- Palestinian Red Cross– NGO- MAO - Government

26

Part Two: Biophysical Characterization

Site name:(Hebron and Tammun sites) Region: West Bank – Palestine

27

1. General Information

Follow …General Information:

28

The sites well known for field crops production and as rangelands.

Are exposed to different threats including occupation practices, urban growth and drought.

There is a crucial need to study, protect and develop these areas

29

2. The geopolitical status of the selected sites:

60% of Tammun site and 53% of Hebron site located in area C

40% of Tammun site and 47% of Hebron site are located in area B

Area A….Area B….Area C…

30

ITEM

SPECIFICATIONS

Benchmark total area (km2)

Tammun Site (km2) Hebron Site (km2)

Area (km2) 52 25.5 26.5Population within the Benchmark sites

7801 3800 4001

Localities within the Benchmark sites

--- Khirbet 'Atuf,

Khirbet Humsa,

Beit Hasan,

'Ein Shibli

'Anab al Kabir,

Khirbet ar Rahwa,

Somara, 'Arab al Fureijat,

Ar Ramadin

3. Area and Topography:

31

Tammun site: From -100 to +500 m

4 .Elevation and Isohyets :

Hebron site: From 400 to 600 m

32

Temperature and Rainfall:

To date, there is no metrological stations neither in Tammun nor in Al-Dahria sites.

Expected highest temperature upon the neighboring villages is about: Tamoun : 33-35 ℃ Al-Dahria: 36-38 ℃

Expected average rainfall upon the neighboring villages is about: Tamoun : 290-370 mm Al-Dahria: 260 – 320 mm

5 .Climatic Conditions:

33

6 .Land use / land cover and topography contour lines:Ta

mo

un

sit

e

34

Heb

ron

sit

eLand use / land cover and topography contour lines:

35

7. Agro-ecosystem characterization

36

7. Common cropping patterns

vagetables 0.1%

fruit trees 0.5%

field crops and

forages 99.4%

Distribution of cultivated crops in Tammun site. (MoA.2011)

vagetables 1%

fruit trees 3%

field crops and forages

96%

Distribution of cultivated crops in Hebron site. (MoA.2011)

37

Soil characteristics

38

1- general soil characteristic:The soil of the southern part of Hebron governorate generally composed of two types:1- Terra rossas 2- Brown and pale rendzinas

Soil Southeastern part of Hebron Governorate

39

A sampling grid has been drawn over each watershed and one sample was taken to represent each square

The following variables were studied:

1. Slope steepness (percent; using a clinometer).

2. Surface cover of the land: by estimation; recording percentage of dominant cover (stoniness or rockiness).

3. Vegetation type and coverage (percentage cover) , type of cultivated crop.

4. Texture of the surface ( samples were taken from selected sites for mechanical analysis in the lab).

5. Limiting soil depth - through use of an auger.

6. GPS coordinates - easting, northing and elevation

2. Study methodology

40

A grid of uniform sampling (500m)

41

3. Results

42

Landform soil type PHEC

(mS/cm)

P

(ppm)

Organic C.%

OM%

Tot Carbonates (Wt %)

Wide valley flats and plateaus

7.5 0.2 6.9 0.66 1.14 31.4

Summit surfaces 7 0.37 14 1.91 3.29 21.3

Drainage lines 7.7 0.21 7.7 1.04 1.79 31

Moderately steep slopes

6.9 0.39 18.2 1.78 3.06 24.9

Steep slopes 7.1 0.28 7.7 1.39 2.39 30.1

3.1 Chemical and physical properties

43

Landform soil type F.S and coarser (0.2 - 2 mm)

Very Fine Sand (0.05 - 0.2 mm)

Silt (0.002 - 0.05 mm)

Clay

(<0.002)Texture class

wide valley flats and plateaus 3.3 29.4 30.1 37.2 Clay loam

summit surfaces 0.8 27.6 28.3 43.3 Clay

drainage lines. 2.2 43.1 13.4 41.2 Clay

Moderately steep slopes

slopes1.2 28.0 19.4 51.4 Clay

steep slopes 4.2 29.6 26.1 40.1 Clay

3.2 Soil Texture

44

Landform soil type Ca Mg K Na

Wide valley flats and plateaus 51.2 8 311 41.4

Summit surfaces 46.4 9.2 299.1 56.9

Drainage lines 50.4 13.6 332.3 25.9

Moderately steep slopes 54 9.2 351.2 10.4

Steep slopes 50 14 294.4 10.4

3.3 Soil Cation Exchange Capacity (meq/100 gr.)

45

Soil Characterization Tammun Benchmark site

46

Soil Characterization: Tammun Benchmark site

1. General soil characteristic:The soil of the Tammun benchmark sites and is composed of two types:1- Terra rossas 2- Brown and pale rendzinas 3- Grumosols

47

2. Methodology

Field survey, which consisted of augers and soil profiles were aimed at the pedological characterization of main soils available in the area.

Taking into consideration the following:

Geographic and agricultural information:

Slope class, Slope shape, Parent material, Land form and topography, Erosion degree, Erosion type, Surface Coarse Fragments& size, Rock outcrops, Sealing, Cracks, Land (plant) cover, Dominant crop, Effective root depth, Soil drainage class etc......

48

Soil chemical properties

pHECds/m

OM%

HCO3ppm

CO3ppm

NaMeq/l

K Meq/l

CaMeq/l

Ca+MgMeq/l

CECMeq/l

Paste extraction

Black dichromate method.

Gravimetric method

Flame photometer

Titration method

Soil physical properties(texture by hydrometer method)

sand Silt Clay Texture class

Continue ….Methodology

49

Results: upper plain, Bottom (Lower Plain), Upper slope etc... Example 1: Upper plain

1. Soil texture :

2. Soil Chemical properties:

Horizon Depth sands Silt Clay Texture class

Ap 0 -31 cm10.0% 30.0% 60.0% Clay

Bw1 31-71 cm27.5% 37.5% 35.0% Clay Loam

Bw2 +71 cm40.0% 30.0% 30.0% Clay Loam

Horizon Depth pHECds/m %

HCo3Ppm

CO3ppm

NaMeq/l

CaMeq/l

KPpm

Ap 0 -31 cm8.02 0.66 3.13% 6.1 24 27.3 5 6.6

Bw1 31-71 cm7.97 0.75 2.98% 6.1 36 37 7 3.3

Bw2 +71 cm7.77 0.82 2.66% 6.1 24 45 5 2.7

50

Item classification type

Soil Vertisoil (Grumsol)

Soil depth Very deep soil

Parent material Alluvial-collovail

Topography Plain

Rock outcrop Non

Surface coarse fragment Common

Slope 6%

Slope shape gently slope

Dominant crop Irrigated vegetables& Field crops

Sealing Non

Cracks Wide

Human influence Fencing and stone removal

Erosion type Rill and sheet

Land Unit description

51

Results:Example (2): Bottom (lower) plain 1. Soil texture :

2. Soil Chemical properties:

Horizon Depth/cm Sand Silt Clay Texture class

Ap0-39 12.5% 22.5% 65.0% Clay

Bw139-76 12.5% 25.0% 62.5% Clay

Bw276-150 20.0% 10.0% 70.0% Clay

Horizon Depth pHECds/m %

HCo3Ppm

CO3ppm

NaMeq/l

CaMeq/l

KPpm

Ap 0 -31 cm8.56 0.5 3.02% 18.3 nil 41.9 13 1.9

Bw1 31-71 cm8.03 0.72 2.90% 18.3 nil 60.5 12 3

Bw2 +71 cm8.82 1.8 3.42% 24.5 nil 99.1 12 1.4

52

Item classification Type

Soil vertisoil (Grumsols)

Soil depth Very deep soil

Parent material Alluvial-collovail

Topography Plain

Rock outcrop Non

Surface coarse fragment Common

Slope 6%

Slope shape gently slope

Dominant crop Field crops

Sealing Non

Cracks Wide

Human influence Fencing and stone removal

Erosion type gully, Rill and sheet

Land Unit description

53

1- Water: using and designing suitable water harvesting techniques

2- Soil erosion: Rehabilitation the areas that affected by erosion mainly caused by runoff3- Rangeland : rehabilitation and construction of new protected rangeland areas

4- Forage and field crop: Introducing and distribution local, tolerant drought forage and filed crops5- Livestock: improvement of livestock sector at the targeted area

6- Capacity building and exchange framers experience

7- Conduct pilot applied research and studies on the following subjects• Land use Suitability Mapping• Crop Suitability Mapping• Soil Mapping system

RECOMINDATIONS FOR THE NEXT PHASE

54

Thank You