UWICED Occasional Paper Series - UWI Press and Soil Conservation...UWICED Occasional Paper Series...

UWICED Occasional Paper Series

Bishnodat Persaud, Series Editor

1. Small Farmers and the Protection of the Watersheds:The Experience of Jamaica since the 1950sDavid T. Edwards

2. Welcome to the Beachettes: A Study of theDevelopment of Residential Tourism in MontserratAlan Gunne-Jones

3. Farmers and Soil Conservation in the Caribbean

Frank Gumbs

occasional Paper Series No.33

Farmers andSoil Conservationin the Caribbean

Frank A. Gumbs

£AH?€ P>e**University of the West Indies•Barbados •Jamaica •Trinidad & Tobago

UWI CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT

Originally published in 1994 by the CommonwealthSecretariat, London, funded by the AgriculturalDevelopment Unit of the Commonwealth Fund forTechnical Cooperation (CFTC)

Canoe Press University of the West Indies1A Aqueduct Flats MonoKingston 7 Jamaica

© 19 9 7 by Frank A. GumbsAll rights reserved. Published 1997

Published for the University of the West IndiesCentre for Environment and Development (UWICED)by Canoe Press University of the West Indies

Occasional Paper Series no. 3Series Editor: Bishnodat PersaudISBN 976-8125-29-2ISSN 0799-0294

01 00 99 98 97 5 4 3 2 1

CATALOGUING IN PUBLICATION DATA

Gumbs, Frank A.

Farmers and soil conservation in the Caribbean /Frank A. Gumbs

p. cm. (Occasional paper series / UWICED)Includes bibliographical references.ISBN 976-8125-29-2ISSN 0799-02941. Soil conservation -Caribbean, English-speaking.2. Agricultural systems -Caribbean, English-speaking.3. Soil erosion -Caribbean, English-speaking. 4.Sustainable agriculture -Caribbean, English-speaking.5. Hillside Agricultural Project (Jamaica). I. Title.

. II. Series.

S625.C3G85 1997 631.45 dc-2020

Set in 9.5/12 Stone InformalBook design by Prodesign Ltd, Red Gal Ring, Kingston

Printed in Canada

This book has been printed on acid-free paper

Contents

List of Figures vii

List of Tables ix

List of Abbreviations x

Foreword xii

PART I Soil Erosion Status, Sociological,Institutional and Legislative Factors inSoil Conservation

One Introduction 2

Two Soil Erosion Status and Soil Conservation 5Programmes in the CaribbeanSoil erosion status 5

Soil conservation programmes 17

Three Sociological Factors in Soil Conservation 21Sociocultural considerations 22

Socioeconomic considerations 25

Influence of sociological factors on soil 25conservation projects in the Caribbean

Four Land Tenure and Soil Conservation 28

Legal tenure 28

Squatting 31

Five Institutional and Legislative Factors 33in Soil ConservationPolicy and management planning 34

Institutional and legislative arrangements 36

Part II Farming Systems Approach andMethodologies

5/x Farming Systems Approach to 41Soil ConservationIntroduction 41

Farming systems: requirements for successful 42adoption and implementation

Baseline surveys and farm planning 44

Land capability and land use 48

Seven Soil Conservation Measures Appropriate 55for Integrating into Farming Systemsin the CaribbeanBiological or agronomic measures 55

Simple engineering methods 87

Land clearing 110

Eight Integrated Soil Conservation Systems 113

Hillside Agricultural Project, Jamaica 113Existing integrated soil conservation systems 119in the Caribbean

Nine Conclusions 121

Appendixes

Appendix I: Key Articles of Legislation 124

Appendix II: Student Case Studies 136

Bibliography 138

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Map of the Caribbean Basin 3

Figure 2.1 Landslips in Grenada 10

Figure 7.1 Grass barrier of vetiver 58

Figure 7.2 Banana pseudostem and trash barrier 62

Figure 7.3 Trash barrier in banana field 64

Figure 7.4 Bamboo barrier 66

Figure 7.5 Bamboo and trash barrier 68

Figure 7.6 Citrus on the contour with rows 70unstaggered

Figure 7.7 Citrus on the contour and grass cover in 72young citrus

Figure 7.8 Mixed intercropping with no distinct rows 74

Figure 7.9 Row intercropping with several crops 76

Figure 7.10 Spatial arrangements of agroforestry 80systems

Figure 7.11 Agrisilviculture system with several tiers of 81crops

Figure 7,12 Agrisilviculture system of citrus and 82banana

Figure 7,13 Pineapple planted on land without 84removing all trees

Figure 7.14 Cutoff drain 88

Figure 7.15 Eroded cutoff drain 90

Figure 7.16 Ridge and furrow mini-terraces 92

Figure 7.1 7a Mini-terrace or hillside ditch with citrus 94(orchard terrace)

Figure 7.1 7b Mini-terraces with both the terraces and 97the land between the terraces cropped

vii

Figure 7.18 Longitudinal profile of gully bed 99

Figure 7.19 Measuring the profile of the cross section 100of the gully

Figure 7.20a Brushwood check dam 101

Figure 7.20b Cross section of brushwood check dam 101

Figure 7.21 a Log check dam 102

Figure 7.21 b Cross section of log check dam 102

Figure 7.22 Loose stone check dam 103

Figure 7.23a Gabion check dam 104

Figure 7.23b Close-up of gabion check dam 106

Figure 7.24 Masonry check dam 109

viii

List of Abbreviations

ACB Agricultural Credit BankADC Agricultural Development Corporation

CACS Ltd Caribbean Agricultural Communications ServicesLimited

CAO Chief Agricultural OfficerCARD I Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development

InstituteCAR1COM Caribbean CommunityCCA Caribbean Conservation AssociationCFO Chief Forestry OfficerCFTC Commonwealth Fund for Technical CooperationCIDA Canadian International Development AgencyCPU Central Planning UnitCWASA Central Water and Sewerage AuthorityDCA Development Control AuthorityDOWASCO Dominica Water and Sewerage CompanyEIA Environmental Impact AssessmentFACT Farmer Action Committee TeamFAO Food and Agriculture OrganizationFSR/E Farming Systems Research and ExtensionFSRD Family Systems Research and DevelopmentCOCD Government of the Commonwealth of DominicaHAP Hillside Agricultural ProjectHASP Hillside Agricultural Sub-projectICTA Institute of Agricultural Science and TechnologyI FAD International Fund for Agricultural DevelopmentIICA Inter-American Institute for Cooperation in

AgricultureIRDP Integrated Rural Development ProgrammeJAMPLES Jamaica Physical Land Evaluation SystemJAS Jamaica Agricultural SocietyLA land authorities

X

LMC local management committeeMI NAG Ministry of AgricultureMOA Ministry of AgricultureNCC National Conservation CommissionNCEPA National Conservation and Environmental Protection

ActNGOs non-governmental organizationsNRCA National Resources Conservation AuthorityNRCD National Resources Conservation DivisionNWASA National Water and Sewerage AuthorityODA Overseas Development Fund AdministrationRADA Rural Agricultural Development AgencyRPPD Rural and Physical Planning DivisionRRC Regional Research CentreSCD Soil Conservation DepartmentSCU Soil Conservation UnitTFAP Tropical Forestry Action ProgrammeUNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeUNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

OrganizationUSAID United States Agency for International DevelopmentUSDA United States Department of AgricultureUWI University of the West IndiesUWICED UWI Centre for Environment and DevelopmentWASA Water and Sewerage Authority

xi

Foreword

This study which is being published by Canoe Press UWI is beingsponsored by the UWI Centre for Environment and Development(UWICED) as a joint publication between UWICED and the Common-wealth Secretariat. The quality of the study and its direct relevance toenvironmental degradation and protection commend it to UWICED.

The study was published first in June 1994 by the CommonwealthSecretariat. In view of the continuing demand for the information andanalysis provided by it, UWICED is pleased to be associated with theendeavour of the director of The Press UWI and the author to ensurethe continuing availability of the material.

Soil conservation is a general problem within the Caribbean. Somesignificant efforts have been made to deal with it, but these remaininadequate. Environmental considerations have given the issue anenhanced significance. This publication provides a uniquelycomprehensive survey of the issue - its description and extent andtechnical solutions. It indicates the need for more information on theseaspects and, importantly also, on the urgency of a renewed effort inthe whole region, taking into account the great significance of theproblem, not only for the future of agriculture, but also for theprotection of water resources, forests and landscapes.

This document is presented in two sections. Part I examines thestatus of soil erosion and conservation in the region, the sociologicalfactors in soil conservation programmes, and the legal institutionalcontext in which all soil conservation must be implemented andmanaged. It is now realized that these factors are as important as thetechnology of soil conservation and have not been given enoughattention in the past.

Part II focuses on the technology. It examines the farming systemsapproach to soil conservation and the methods now being employedto ensure that conservation projects are integrated into the farmingsystem. The Hillside Agricultural Project in Jamaica, a major initiative

xii

in the Caribbean, has attempted to adopt this integrated approach.This project is therefore discussed in some depth.

The final chapter draws conclusions and suggests some guidelinesfor future projects and programmes which will be of interest toplanners, agriculturalists and everyone concerned with land use in theregion.

This study and its publication has received financial support fromthe Commonwealth Fund for Technical Cooperation (CFTC), theOverseas Development Fund Administration (ODA) and UWICED.

Bishnodat PersaudDirector, UWICED

and Alcan Professor ofCaribbean Sustainable Development

1996

xiii

This page intentionally left blank

PARTI

Soil Erosion Status, Sociological,

Institutional and Legislative Factors

in Soil Conservation

ONE

Introduction

Soil erosion by water is the main form of soil loss in the Caribbean andconservation measures designed to reduce this type of soil loss areconsidered in this book. Here "Caribbean" refers to the English-speak-ing Caribbean Community (CARICOM) member states of Antigua andBarbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada and Caria-cou, Guyana, Jamaica, Montserrat, St Kitts-Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincentand the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago. These are sometimesreferred to as the Commonwealth Caribbean and are all members ofthe Commonwealth. The location of these states in the CaribbeanBasin is shown in Figure 1.1.

Belize and Guyana are also Commonwealth countries on themainland of Central America and South America, respectively.Neither country is very mountainous and almost all of the agricultureis practised on flat land. Soil erosion is therefore not a major problemin these two countries, although some erosion does occur on therelatively flat, poorly structured, sandy soils of the intermediatesavannas. Water run-off from heavy rainfall, especially during theearly part of the wet season when the ground is not adequately coveredwith vegetation, erodes soil from the surface of these relativelyinfertile, fragile soils. The maintenance of adequate vegetation isusually enough to conserve the soil against erosion. Methods ofconserving these soils from erosion are not considered any further inthis text.

The other countries are islands and can be divided into three groupsbased on size and topography. The first group of small islands consistsof land of relatively low elevation and a small percentage of steepslopes, e.g. Antigua and Barbados. The second group also comprisessmall islands but is characterized by a high percentage of steep slopes,for example Dominica, Grenada and Carriacou, Montserrat,St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent, Tobago. The third group is

2 Soil Erosion Status, Sociological, Institutional and Legislative Factors in Soil Conservation

Figure 1.1 Map of the Caribbean Basin

Introduction 3

formed by the larger islands of Trinidad and Jamaica which have highpercentages of both flat or gently sloping land and steep land. Mostof the islands belong to group two.

In most of the islands, the mountainous nature of the topography,high rainfall and poor soil management practices cause excessive soilerosion by run-off. Many attempts have been made over the years todemonstrate soil conservation techniques, provide training andencourage adoption by farmers. However, the adoption andsustainability have not been commensurate with the investment intime and money. Soil conservation has not generally become a partof the culture of the farmers.

Many of the introduced methods are frequently those that havebeen tried and successfully adopted in other countries in regions suchas North America and the Far East where the economic, social andcultural contexts are different. The methods must take the localsituation into consideration and must also consider the needs, desiresand resources of the farmer. New approaches, therefore, have to beconsidered to ensure adoption and sustainability. In the Caribbean,soil conservation methods must be cheap or cost effective and must fitinto the sociological and socioeconomic conditions of the farmer.Ideally, conservation must be integrated into the farming system.

This book is presented in two parts. Part I examines the status ofsoil erosion and conservation in the Caribbean, sociological factors insoil conservation and the institutional and legislative framework inwhich soil conservation is implemented and managed. Recognition isgiven to the importance of the technology of soil conservation forsuccessful adoption and sustainability. Part II focuses on technology.It examines the farming systems approach to soil conservation andthe methods appropriate for integrating into farming systems in theCaribbean. The region's chief example of the use of the integrativeapproach, Jamaica's Hillside Agricultural Project, is also discussed inPart II of this volume. Finally, existing and proposed systems forintegrating soil conservation into the farming system are alsopresented.


TWO

Soil Erosion Status and Soil

Conservation Programmes in the

Caribbean

Soil Erosion Status

The amount of soil erosion occurring in the Caribbean has not beenquantitatively determined. Visual observations on soil sediments instreams, rivers and the sea, particularly immediately after a rain-storm, siltation of water courses and the depth of topsoil have beenused to assess erosion status. The severity of soil erosion dependslargely on topography, rainfall, natural vegetation, credibility of thesoils, land use and soil management.

Several Caribbean islands are characterized by steep slopes with ahigh percentage (58 percent) of the land area having slopes greaterthan 30°. Many slopes (100 percent) are greater than 45° andfarming is practised on these steep slopes. The distribution of slopeclasses in selected Caribbean islands is shown in Table 2.1.

Rainfall is largely influenced by the moisture-laden northeasternTrade Winds and topography, so that rainfall decreases from thewindward to the leeward coasts and increases with elevation. It ishigher on the more mountainous islands than on the flatter islands.Annual rainfall can vary from a low of 625 mm on the leeward coastof relatively flat Antigua to a high of about 7,500 to 8,000 mm in thewettest area of Dominica. The amount of rainfall in the other islandsis between these two extremes and a common range is from about1,300 to 3,000 mm. Total annual rainfall is not only high butprecipitation can be intense. Intensities of 25-127 mm per hour (andoccasionally higher), have been recorded. Strong winds frequentlyaccompany the storms thereby increasing the erosivity of the rainfall.Hurricanes which can and do occur, cause tremendous soil losses.

Soil Erosion Status and Soil Conservation Programmes in the Caribbean 5

Studies in Trinidad [Lindsay and Gumbs 1982] have shown that twomajor storms (non-hurricane) of 49.8 and 75.7 mm during the yearaccounted for between 70 and 90 percent of the total annual soil lossdepending on soil slope. The annual soil loss varied from 28 to 55 t/ha.

Table 2.1 Distribution of slope classes in selected Caribbean islands

Slope%

A

B

C

D

E

F

Antigua%1B,1 2 2.

047.90

12.10195.7

07.91B420.2%14,459082.1

03.90112.1B5,3470282.

03 4 . 2

14.2

%148912.1B,0 23.91B,4 704.2195.

547.916,98902 3 2 . 1Trrindada%1B10,4090224701 3 9 , 8 3 5 582.0172.1B01,7 5 1 2 . 0

2320172.1St. Vincenta%1B,2 2 52.114,9090205.7

242.1

0502.1 f o . T a b l . 22.11Slope0 Class11A11C01E1 10-.0110- 2

01>370

1 1 7 - 3 7 1 3 6 - 5

slopin.

slopin.

slopin. slopin.1Ver. steepl. slopin. th. p r i m a r . vegetatio. ha. bee. remove. o. los. fro. th.

a . a0 r e s u l . o. hurricanes. shiftin. c u l t i v a t i o n 1 fire. a n . 1 d e f o r e s t a t i o . f o . h u m a . s e t t l e m e n t . a n . o t h e . uses. T h . s e c o n d a r .

i. no. a0 p r o t e c t i v . o. th. s o i . agains. erosio. a0 i. th.

vegetation. o . th. slopin. soil. ar. pron. t . lan. slippag. a n . a r . erodible. I . Trinidad. Jamaic. a n . Barbados. substantia0

o. steepl. slopin. soil. ar. d e v e l o p e . o. shale. an. i . thes. soil.l a n d s l i p . a r . c o m m o n . L a n d s l i p . a r . als. c o m m o . w h e r . s o i . i .

o. i m p e r v i o u . calcareou. clay. o. i m p e r v i o u . i n d u r a t e .

c e m e n t e . cla. o. as. laye. a0 i. th. c a s . o. th. s h o a 0 s o i l . o.G r e n a d . an. s o m . location. i. th. v o l c a n i . i s l a n d s . fo. example.D o m i n i c . a n . S . Lucia0 M a n . soil. are. however. no. i n h e r e n t l . ver. T h e i . goo. so i . s t r u c t u r . a n . h i g . i n f i l t r a t i o . rate. r e d u c . t h e i . e r o d i b i l i t y . H o w e v e r . th. i n t e n s . rainfall. stee. t o p o g r a p h . an. soi. managemen. r e s u l . i. h i g . s o i . losse. overall.

Soi. Erosio. Status. Sociological. Institutiona0 a n . Legislativ. F a c t o r . i . Soi. Conservatio.

Although the rainfall, vegetative cover, soil type and topographyare factors that contribute to the high soil losses by water erosion, it isinappropriate land use and poor crop and soil management whichare the most important factors. Most of the farmers cultivate smallfarms on hillsides, usually steep slopes, without adequate or the mostappropriate soil conservation methods. Shifting cultivation bysquatters, clear felling and slash-and-burn cultivation increase erosionsince the land is bare at the start of the wet season. It takes some timefor the crop to grow sufficiently to protect the soil.

The occurrence of surface erosion, gullying, landslips, the amountsof eroded soil carried by streams and rivers during and after a heavyrainstorm and the depth of topsoil or shallowness of the soils havebeen used to assess qualitatively the severity or status of soil erosionin the Caribbean. A brief summary is presented below, using thegrouping of the islands set out in chapter 1.

Group one (Antigua and Barbados)

Antigua

Erosion is not as severe in Antigua and Barbuda as in many other partsof the Caribbean because of the relatively level topography and lowrainfall [Hill 1966]. However, much accelerated erosion has occurredin the hilly areas of Antigua. Cotton which was grown extensively andrequires a long fallow period, was generally grown under poor man-agement. Consequently, erosion has been reported even on the moregentle slopes. Monoculture of sugar cane in the past has also addedto the loss of much soil in hilly areas. The dry season is often long andharsh and torrential rains often occur after long periods of droughtwhen vegetation is sparse. This has contributed to the erosion problem.Overgrazing under the climatic conditions of Antigua and during timesof poor vegetative cover and growth is another cause of acceleratederosion. The result of these factors is that the soil in many places hasbeen eroded to such an extent that the topsoil is shallow or completelylost and rock outcrops are prominent.

Barbados

About 85 percent of Barbados occupies relatively flat coral soils onwhich erosion is not considered to be severe although Vernon andCarroll [1966] did suggest that erosion control measures may benecessary on the soils of the upland plateau of St John's Valley.

In the hilly Scotland District, erosion is very severe. Cumberbatch[1985] reported that it was estimated that 70 percent of the area was


threatened by erosion and that 11 percent of it had reached a verysevere state of degradation. Land slides and gullying are common.

Group two (Dominica, Grenada and Carriacou, Monsterrat,St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent, Tobago)

Dominica

Dominica is characterized by steep slopes where 86 percent of the landarea has slopes greater than 20 ° and only 2 percent of the land hasslopes between 0° and 5 °. Over 66 percent of the land is covered byforests and rainfall is heavy, that is an average of 4,450 mm per yearand 7,500 mm in the wet interior [Caribbean Conservation Associa-tion 1991].

Most of the soils are generally highly permeable and thereforeerosion is not as severe as might be expected given the steepmountainous topography of the island. Slopes greater than 50° (120percent) are cultivated without much erosion, indicating the unusualstability of the soils [Lang 1967a]. In addition, erosion is limitedbecause much of the land is still under forest.

Most of the shoal soils and other soils of low permeability occur onthe leeward side of the island. Erosion of these soils is widespread andsignificant. Poor crop and soil management have been the majorreasons for the erosion. The slow regeneration of soil suitable forcropping in the dry areas, as happens in St Lucia, increases theseriousness of the problem.

According to the Environment Profi/e of Dominica prepared under theaegis of the Caribbean Conservation Association (CCA) in 1991,Dominica has great potential for agricultural development withoutsubstantial incursions into forest lands which are more suited for otherpurposes. In the pre-Independence period before 1978, large estateownership was dominant: 1.4 percent of farmers occupied 56.4percent of the land and 61 percent of the acreage had farm sizes of20 hectares (50 acres) and over. Since Independence, large estateshave declined in importance and have been either divided and soldor in some cases, left to lie idle due to absentee landlords. Demand forland has resulted in government distribution of crown land to farmers,usually in lots of less than 4 hectares (10 acres). Through thegovernment's Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP), andother land reform projects, several estates have been divided intosmall plots and distributed among local tenant farmers, e.g. Carholmin the centre of the island; Melville Hall, Castle Bruce and


Newfoundland in the east; Geneva, Bagatelle and Petite Saavane inthe southeast; and Soufriere in the south.

These programmes have not always prevented furtherencroachment into neighbouring forested areas. Also since 1978, asizeable portion of forest has been turned into agricultural land. InDominica's National Structure Plan [GOCD 1985], a substantialamount of "unutilized" land is to be transferred to more intensive use(including agriculture) by the year 2001. This changing pattern of landuse has implications for soil erosion and conservation.

Forestry and forestry development are important to Dominica.Timber extraction is undertaken but according to Russell [1974] itdamages only a relatively small area and the erosion caused is notsignificant. In discussions with current officers in forestry andagriculture in Dominica, the view that soil loss from logging is notsevere because of selective felling still seems to be valid. The exceptionis where lands are being brought into agricultural production andthere is clear felling for extraction of forest species before landpreparation.

The introduction of the chain-saw and the clearing of land foragriculture throughout the year (with little attention to seasonality)has accelerated erosion. The removal of plantation tree crops andsubstitution of mixed cropping is also a contributor. The cutting ofroads to make agricultural lands more accessible without properconsideration of soil type, road cutting techniques and roadengineering has aggravated the problem. The expansion of agriculturehas led to the increas Tz ( aggravricu)Tj0.3 TsTdliz Tz ( plantatio)Tj0 Tc (s)Tj107j-0.1 Tc 0 Tw 107.765 Tz ( o)Tj0 Tc (e)Tj05.038 Tc 2.47 Tw 1r11. agricultura l a n d erosion propef al,e p r o p e aly an i ha l e t prope erosionTw 107.30.41Tz 0 Grenad.335 T91-0.1 92.416 Tw 111.418 Twj054.1 T94j-6 Tw 111Carriac8 Tw (/T1_.2Tc .1fTc 3f)Tj-0.016 Tc 0 Tw247.75-0.0d0 Grenadz ( erosio.335 Tz78f)Tj-0911-0.016j653 Tw 107.269 Tz ( ha)Tj0 Tc (l)Tj311.1 T94j750 Tw 107suffer.039 Tw ( le)Tj0 T245(f)Tj0.128 Tc 2.365 Twl105 Tz ( ale)Tj0 T5 (e)Tjc (e) T95 026(365 Twfr onsideratim)Tj0 Tc(.)Tj-09428 Tc 2.365 Tw 105 onsideratioo an o f th p r o p e erosion T h e t h o ale prope i l : 269 Tz ( hy)Tj0 Tc08(l)Tj-0.179 Tc 0T3 0 Tw 1071.558 Tw ( th)Tj0 Tc (e)T1 Tc (e T106.489 Tw 108is3.41'5 Tz ( ale)Tj0 02 (e)Tjc9428 Tc 2.365 Tw 105 Tz ( agricultur)Tj0 Tc87f)TjTc (s) Tc 0T3 0 Tw 107.335 Tz ( i)Tj0 T1 3f a l , expansiaTw (/T1_.4Tc .1f.1 T94j1 0 Tw 1189 Tc 0 Twd0 (Theobroma8 Twj12128 T9j222 Tw 105cacaoy)Tj0/T1_.2Tc .1f0 Tc0( a)Tj0 (f) T98.897 Tw 104.523 Tz ( an)Tj0 0(e)Tj-19828 Tc 2.365 Twnutm.039 Tw ( lgTw (/T1_.4Tc .1fTj76167 T8 Tc82.365 Tw(Myris(ca)Tj0 Tc0( a)Tj103f) T98.897 Tw 104fr 105 y)Tj0erosion aa an increas Tz ( ag05(e)Tj -29828 Tc 2.365 Tw3.075 Tz ( ale)Tj 0 052f)Tj T1.234 Tc j 016 Tw 111.( agricul tur)Tj -0.02f prope l, t h l alt l i agricultuy an th l ha l o a g r i - 6 6 4 7 T c 0 2 . 6 1 8 T w 1 1 1 a s h cn5 Tz ( ale)Tjj4677 Tc 02.618 Tw 111io l s o alt al, l o o l i al, a l g alt ls a n th tn l l ls t h o

Figure 2.1 Landslips in Grenada


Although cocoa and nutmeg are not a guarantee against erosion,they cause less erosion than under less permanent crops. Some severeerosion is nevertheless evident on hills where factors conducive toerosion exist, for example, land clearing, shifting cultivation, charcoalburning, fragmentation of land, poor land distribution, squatting,land tenure problems and poor cultivation practices. Gullies frequentlydevelop in nutmeg fields as a result of the nature of the soil andclearing of the ground cover for nutmeg collection. The neglect of thesesmall gullies can lead to the rapid development of large gullies. InGrenada, significant landslips occur in some soil types. Examples of asignificant landslip in Grenada are shown in Figures 2.1 (a) and2.1(b).

In contrast, Carriacou has suffered very severe erosion over nearlythe whole island and in many cases only the parent rock remains. Thissituation has been created by the erodible nature of the soils, cuttingdown of the original vegetation, using unsuitable cultivation methodsand overgrazing. Overgrazing has been aggravated by the "let go"season when animals are allowed to roam freely. This has encourageddenudation of vegetation, soil compaction, reduced infiltration anderosion. The low annual rainfall does not promote rapid vegetativegrowth and aggravates the problem of overgrazing and denudation.Extensive cotton growing in the earlier years with poor soilmanagement practices played an important role in increasing the rateof soil erosion.

The soils of Cariacou are skeletal soils over ash and agglomerate,soils formed from other igneous rocks, and those formed fromlimestone. They are all susceptible to erosion and deep gullies are alsoevident on some of the flatter coastal areas.

Montserrat

Lang [1967b] describes the whole island of Montserrat as sufferingfrom severe soil erosion and the greater portion of the island as havinglost all its topsoil. The extensive monocrop cultivation of cotton in the1940s and 1950s under poor soil management has contributed signifi-cantly to the widespread erosion. Unlike the soils of Dominica, the soilsof Montserrat are generally unstable and many soils are highlyerodible if cultivated on slopes greater than 10° (18 percent). Lang'sassessment may be harsh but the level of erosion is severe without adoubt.

Montserrat is an island of mini farms which offers a challenge toeffective soil conservation and to conservation on a watershed basis.


This is not unique to Montserrat. Effective conservation in this situationrequires the cooperation of many farmers. This is aggravated by thefact that farmers mostly practise clean cultivation of vegetable andfood crops (e.g. root crops and tuber crops) on steep slopes which leavethe fragile soil exposed to erosion. Relay-cropping is seldom practisedand the standard of soil conservation is not high.

St Kitts and Nevis

The retention of forest cover in the mountainous areas of St Kitts hasserved to reduce erosion [Lang and Carroll 1966]. Where the foresthas been cleared and planted with crops, some accelerated erosion isseen. However, since the soils are very permeable and free draining,erosion is not severe. The extensive growing of sugar cane helps toreduce erosion except during the period when the fields are clearedfor replanting before the wet season arrives.

In contrast, much erosion can be seen on the island of Nevis. Inmany areas, and particularly on the smectoid soils, the surface soil hasbeen lost completely. This situation was caused primarily by poorfarming practices and the widespread cultivation of cotton under poorsoil management.

St Lucia

Soil erosion is a major problem in St Lucia. Many of the soils of theinterior are very susceptible to erosion and during heavy rains soil canbe seen being washed away by even the smallest rivulets [Stark et al.1966]. In areas of allophanic clay soils, slumping is a problem andgullying is also common throughout the island. The common practicesof clean cultivation of very steep land and of clearing steeply slopingforested land which would better be left under its original vegetationhave accentuated the situation. Probably the most severe effects oferosion are on the so-called shoal soils (vertisols) which contain a layerof indurated material in the subsoil. Once the surface soil has been lostit is impossible to grow crops on them and regeneration is very slowsince these soils occur in the drier parts of the island. Large areas ofland formerly under cultivation have been misused to such an extentthat they have been abandoned and left idle for many years. Reha-bilitation may be very difficult or impossible.

St Vincent

The soils of St Vincent are entirely of volcanic origin. Four major soilgroups are recognized:


(a) high-level and low-level yellow earths developed over massiverock

(b) recent volcanic ash soils(c) shoal soils and(d) alluvials

Because of the high permeability of the soils, they are not easilyeroded under natural vegetation. The yellow earths are well structuredsoils and not naturally erosion prone. However, several of the soils inthis group have relatively shallow topsoil and the parent material or"rotting" rock can be found within 0.50 m and 0.75 m of the soilsurface. The saturation of the topsoil in the wet season and the shallowrooting systems encourage land slippage. The soils are erosion pronewhen denuded of vegetation or poorly managed. Land slippage alsooccurs in the shallow shoal soils. The recent volcanic ash soils(developed over cindery materials) are more prone to gullying thansurface wash (sheet erosion). Nevertheless, sheet erosion is commonunder poor soil management.

Soil erosion is, however, considered to be a serious problem in StVincent, because of the types of crops grown and the deficient orinadequate crop and soil management [Watson et al. 1958]. Cleancultivation of root crops, groundnuts, banana (and previously cotton)without adequate soil conservation has encouraged erosion.Cultivation of root crops and groundnuts entails a great deal ofdisturbance of the soil and relatively long periods in which much ofthe soil is left bare.

Many farmers of St Vincent have traditionally practised soilconservation and, for many years, represented the best examples ofsoil conservation in the Commonwealth Caribbean. This was aconsequence of the government's policy of financially supporting orsubsidizing soil conservation. With the decline in government subsidy,the standard of soil conservation has declined and there is evidenceof increased erosion and siltation of water courses. The expansion ofannual cropping and banana cultivation to very steep slopes whichshould remain in tree crops or forest has also increased erosion inrecent times.

Tobago

The soils of the mountainous area of Tobago are formed from parentmaterials such as volcanic tuffs, breccias, diorite and schists and arehighly prone to erosion. The northern and wettest end of the island is


still under original forest or permanent tree crops so that erosion isrestricted. Further south, erosion is a more serious problem. Hardy[1942] has described heavy erosion in the Castara-Palatuvier area onthe leeward side of the island where intensive peasant and estatecultivation was carried out. At present, the topsoil is very thin in manyplaces and much of the land has been abandoned and has reverted tosecondary growth. A few farmers still persist with limited subsistencecrop production on the less eroded and less steep slopes.

On the windward side of the island, land on the volcanic soils iscleared, mainly by burning, and is planted with arable crops. Evidenceof sheet erosion, gullying and soil slump can be seen throughout thearea wherever the land has been cleared.

The most eroded area of the island is the Mason Hall-Les Coteauxdistrict. The sandy clay loam soils of this area formed from diorite arevery irregular, steeply sloping and highly erodible. The degradationstarted more than a century ago when they were cleared and usedcontinuously for sugar cane cultivation. After the collapse of the sugarcane industry in Tobago, the lands were settled by shifting cultivators.Today, the drier parts of the area resemble a desert while the wetterparts are covered with scrub vegetation. In spite of this degradationsome areas are still cleared regularly and planted to row crops.

Frequently, a fire started in the drier parts to clear a small patch forplanting will spread widely, leaving the soil bare for the heavy rainsof the wet season. Fortunately, the parent rock weathers quickly to afriable, easily worked material which will support limited cropping. Ifthe land is not cropped too often, there will always be some soil lefton which some cropping can be carried out. Similar erosion damageon the more slowly regenerating volcanic rock or schist would havebeen more disastrous to crop production.

Limited soil conservation is practised mainly in the form ofintercropping and occasionally trash mulching. On eroded soils thetopsoil is shallow and parent material may protrude on the soilsurface. Some soil series have a distinct eroded phase of low fertilityand restricted cropping potential.

Group three (Jamaica and Trinidad)

Jamaica

Soil erosion is rampant and severe in many parishes and on many soilsof the island. One of the major factors is population pressure whichresults in increasing frequency and intensity of land use or the use of


land beyond its capability. The parishes of Westmoreland, Portland,Hanover, Clarendon and St Elizabeth are especially noted as sufferingseverely from accelerated soil loss, but serious erosion is noted in allparishes. Soils on which erosion is a serious problem are the limestonesoils, shale-derived soils and the soils formed on grano-diorite.

The shale soils are noted for their shallowness, poor infiltration andpermeability, factors which contribute to serious erosion problems.They are among the most important soils in areas of extreme soilerosion such as in the Christiana Land Authority and the Yallahs LandAuthority.

One serious consequence of extensive erosion is the common flashflooding in the plains of many areas after heavy rains. The flash floodsthemselves cause much damage to crops, livestock and property.

Trinidad

The earliest comprehensive report on soil erosion in Trinidad was byHardy [1942]. He reported considerable gullying and sheet erosion inthe foothills of the Northern Range, particularly in the west whereintensive cultivation was being carried out. Burning to clear the landfor planting at the start of the wet season is common and landslips arefrequent. In some places the soil surface is within 15 cm (6 in.)of theparent rock. In the Las Lomas district, the sandy soils are described asbeing very credible, but since much of the land is in forest reserve,erosion is not such a severe problem. In the Central Range, land creepis a major problem and the southern slopes show many landslip scars.Chenery [1952] mentioned that Brasso clay, the most widespread soilof the Central Range, is very eroded due to prolonged cultivation upand down slope. He also mentioned that Montserrat clay, a veryproductive cocoa soil, is highly prone to gullying.

Both Hardy and Chenery commented on the severe erosion of themarl soils and the associated red soils of the Naparima District insouthern Trinidad, with caps of exposed white marl being a commonfeature of the hills of the region. In the Southern Range where soils arederived mainly from sandstone, erosion occurs wherever the originalforest cover has been removed.

There has been no comprehensive or sustained programme of soilconservation. Poor agronomic practices have persisted so that topsoilcontinues to be lost especially from soils in the Northern Range andthe topsoil is now shallow in many locations.


Soil Conservation Programmes

Many soil conservation projects or programmes have been undertakenin the Caribbean, sometimes at considerable cost, to protect the soilagainst erosion, to train farmers and agriculturalists in methods of soilconservation, to facilitate production on hillsides and to increase theirproductivity. This effort has been greater in Jamaica than any otherCaribbean island. The problems, however, are still many and seriousand much remains to be done. The Government of Jamaica throughthe relevant ministries and statutory agencies has undertaken variouswatershed protection activities, e.g. reforestation on public lands,establishment of permanent tree crops and engineering works for gullycontrol, river training and drains.

Gumbs [1992] reviewed the soil conservation projects undertakenin the Caribbean over the previous 20 to 25 years and assessed thesuccesses and failures of these projects. A brief summary of the majorprojects undertaken is presented below.

BarbadosThe Scotland District was the target of most of the soil conservationeffort. The main approach has been the use of engineering methodsrequiring earth moving equipment for land reshaping and stabiliza-tion, construction of terraces, dams and silting ponds, surface andsubsurface drainage, the construction of gabion weirs and gabionboxes, and reforestation. This was costly and when government andinternational funding ended, farmers were unable to maintain theeffort. Farmers' plots are also small and non-contiguous and limitimplementation. In some cases reshaping of the land aggravated andincreased erosion because the reshaped land was often more prone toland slippage and surface erosion than the original. In addition, toxicoil and salt from the subsoil were sometimes exposed at the surfaceduring reshaping.

GrenadaThe largest and most significant project was the United NationsDevelopment Programme/Food and Agricultural Organization(UNDP/FAO) project which was implemented over the period 1975 to1985. However, most of the soil and water conservation methodsrequired costly earth moving machinery and were labour intensive.The terraces were costly to construct and had to be used continuouslyto justify the cost. Farmers did not adopt the methods and the demon-stration effect failed.

Soil Erosion Status and Soil Conservation Programmes in the Caribbean 1 7

Dominica

There have not been any major projects specifically dedicated to soilconservation which have received international funding. The countryhas, however, been soil conservation conscious and the farming prac-tices reflect this. The use of tree crops has been a major component ofthe approach to soil conservation.

St Lucia

The main projects undertaken were:

- The Soil and Water Conservation Project which was funded bythe European Development Fund (EOF). The major thrust wasdrainage and land reclamation.

- Development of soil conservation practices for small farmsfunded by the Canadian International Development Agency(CIDA) through McGill University. The main aims were toestablish a soil conservation demonstration, training andresearch field site, and to upgrade the technical capability ofstaff of the Ministry of Agriculture, St Lucia. The demonstrationeffect was not successful, the site was not maintained after theproject ended, and farmers did not adopt the methods.

- Mabouya Valley Development Project. This project is ongoingand has shown promise of continued adoption and potential forsustainability. The approach adopted by the project of providingincentives and promoting community involvement andparticipation seems to be an important reason for theachievements so far.

- The Forest Management and Conservation Project is funded byCIDA and was projected to terminate by the end of 1992. In theproject three sub-watersheds were selected for rehabilitation in apilot phase and to provide a model for extension to other areas.The project has not been finally evaluated but the approach ofinvolving the entire family, the community, the national farmersassociations, social considerations, avoidance of the gratismentality, and provision of institutional supports to the farmers,seems to be contributing to the success of the project.

- Locally funded soil conservation projects of the Land and WaterUse Unit and the Forestry Division of the Ministry of Agriculture.


St Vincent

Three major programmes were the focus in St Vincent:

- The Cumberland Watershed Management Project wasundertaken from 1984 to 1989 and was the major soilconservation project. It was a complementary project to theCumberland Hydro-elective Project funded by the United StatesAgency for International Development (USAID), and the mainobjectives were to maintain good watershed conditions, intensifyagricultural and forestry productivity without soil degradation,and extend the experience to other critical watersheds. Theproject was not very successful for many reasons which havebeen discussed by Gumbs [1992].

- The Small Holder Crop Improvement Project is in progress(1990-1997) and is funded by the International Fund forAgricultural Development (IFAD). It has a soil conservationcomponent which is outlined by Gumbs [1992].

- The Watershed Management Plan for the Colonarie River Basinwas formulated between 1990 and 1995 with funding fromCIDA. The project was essentially an inventory, capabilityassessment and planning exercise for the Basin. It developedmanagement plans, proposals for farming systems and soilconservation.

Jamaica

The following major projects either have been or are being under-taken:- Forestry Development and Watershed Management in the

Upland Regions (1968-1975), funded by FAO- The First Rural or Kenilworth Project (1971-1977), funded by

UNDP

- The Second Rural or Second Integrated Rural DevelopmentProject (1978-1983), funded by USAID

- Projects of the Soil Conservation Unit and Land Authorities

- Strengthening the National Soil Conservation Programme forIntegrated Watershed Development (1979-1982), funded byUNDP, Norway and the Government of Jamaica

- The Hope River Watershed Project was initiated in 1987 andconsisted of three phases; it is still ongoing


- The Small Farm Credit Project (1989-1996) funded by IFAD:funds are provided to the Agricultural Credit Bank (ACB) andPeople's Cooperative Banks for lending to small farmers;a specific Hillside Farmers Support Project in which soilconservation was to be an explicit requirement of the projectwas undertaken

- The Hillside Agricultural Project (HAP) and Hillside AgriculturalSub-projects (HASP) implemented under HAP began in 1987 andended in 1994; it has shown some degree of success and isspecifically reviewed in chapter 9

- The Sustainability of Contemporary Agricultural Land Use in theBlue Mountains of Jamaica was initiated in 1991 and lasted until1994

The majority of projects have failed to achieve their objectives ofadoption and sustainability of soil conservation by farmers. Many ofthe reasons are sociological and, to a lesser extent, administrative andtechnical. These are discussed in the succeeding chapters.


THREE

Sociological Factors


Although farmers on hillsides in the Caribbean are aware of the needfor soil conservation; the level of adoption and implementation is low.It was generally accepted that the development of technologies, thedemonstration of those technologies and the provision of technicalassistance were all that was needed to achieve implementation andsustainability of soil conservation. The belief was that if farmers cansee the reduction in soil erosion and improved crop yield through theuse of soil conservation measures they will implement the methods.The lack of success of soil conservation projects over many decadesusing this approach has led to the realization that soil conservationpolicy, the method of implementation, and human behaviour aremore important than technology.

Soil conservation is not only a technical problem, it is also abehavioural or social problem. Sociocultural and socioeconomicfactors and decision making methods must be considered in the designand implementation of soil conservation projects. It is a mistake tobelieve that because bench terraces are widely adopted by farmers inthe Far East and the USA, they will be readily adopted by farmers inthe Caribbean because a scientist says they are good and should beimplemented.

The review and assessment of the successes and failures of soilconservation projects in the Caribbean [Gumbs 1992] have revealedthe social problems which have constrained the successful andsustained adoption of soil conservation. This chapter examines theimportant sociocultural and socioeconomic factors which must beconsidered and are relevant to the implementation of soilconservation projects, and assesses the actual experiences with theimplementation of soil conservation in the Caribbean.

Sociological Factors in Soil Conservation 21

Sociocultural Considerations

The four cultural criteria in project implementation are:1 Identification of critical behavioural factors

2 Familiarity and closeness of project designers and technical staffwith project events

3 Ability to measure and evaluate success in quantifiable terms

4 Evaluation of the role and performance of the project designersand implementing agency

Identification of critical behavioural factors

It is important to recognize that the critical behavioural factors mustbe identified and considered in the project design. With every success-ful project, social change which is necessary for its successful imple-mentation will occur. The acceptance of this change is necessary if thechange is to be sustained and recipients are not to revert to theirformer ways.

Relevant information has to be gathered which will inform allaspects of project design and implementation. There are two ways inwhich this information can be obtained: (a) by a review of existingliterature; and (b) data collection in the field. A very popular methodemployed today in collecting information very quickly and cheaply isthe Sondeo which is a rapid rural reconnaissance or appraisal. Theinformation gathered by this method is later verified and strengthenedby conducting a baseline survey which is a more formalized methodof data collection.

The questionnaire, discussions with the rural community andsubsequent appraisal of the information should identify, inter alia,current systems, problems and constraints, reasons for certain actions,results of previous attempts to effect change, and attitudes which havebeen conditioned by the physical, social and cultural environment orby tradition. The views of prospective project participants must besought and considered, and the participants given an opportunity tocontribute to project design.

Familiarity with and closeness ofimplementors to project events

Project staff must be familiar with all aspects of the project and mustbe equipped to implement the project. Because all technical and social


factors and their interactions may not be known at the project designstage, there may be a need to adjust the design of the project to meetthe objectives. This must be allowed after suitable consultations.

Some of the more important factors which are necessary to ensurethis relationship are:- knowledgeable and socially aware managers and agents

- clear understanding by agents and extension officers of theproject objectives and their role

- early appointment and continuity of staff

- effective and relatively direct line of communication

- authority of managers to adjust or even redesign in light ofexperience

- suitable extension officer/participants ratio for effective servicingand monitoring

- ability to provide timely inputs in accordance with agreement

- proper monitoring to ensure that project design is beingadequately implemented

- evaluation at important stages to test whether the project hasmet policy, audit, and economic targets and legislative criteria,and to apply the lessons learnt to other projects

- location of project close to participants, i.e. in their locality- involvement of local people in service delivery and in bringing

about changes in attitudesThe organizations which can be involved are voluntary

associations, cooperatives, traditional associations, women's groups,churches and other similar organizations. It is important to considermembership composition, leadership, meeting procedures, and theinfluence of such organizations when deciding on the role that theyshould play in project implementation. The leadership must becarefully chosen and therefore it is necessary to consider their socialand economic background, the process by which they are selected, theterms of their office, the ways in which they are rewarded, and theprocess by which they can be replaced or removed. The importantinterest groups must be represented and attention must be paid tocontinuity or turnover in membership and the obligations of members.Relevant considerations are the frequency of meetings, procedures forcalling meetings, methods of publicizing them, regularity ofattendance, the independence under which meetings are held and theinfluence and authority of those who attend.


One aim of a successful soil conservation project is theinstitutionalization of the behavioural changes that have beenintroduced by the project. When this occurs the specific projectsupports can be withdrawn or reduced to a minimum. Projects arefrequently designed for three to five years. While this time period maybe adequate for infrastructural development projects (e.g.construction of facilities or structures and training), longer periods (10to 15 years) may be a more realistic period when behavioural changeis a factor. It is often not feasible to sustain or fund a project for suchlong periods and therefore realistic and specific targets must be set fora project which falls within the three- to five-year period. It is criticalthat the required behavioural changes are clearly understood andinstitutionalized by both public sector and community organizationsin order to ensure continuity after the project has ended. Soilconservation projects are frequently substantially subsidized, thusreducing the potential for long-term behaviour change. Often,therefore, the view that farmers who practise soil conservation mustbe assisted by grants becomes entrenched.

Measurement and evaluation of success

Measurable criteria are essential for the assessment of a project'ssuccess. Input and output parameters which measure behaviouralchange must be quantified. Success must not be measured in terms ofthe number of farmers who have adopted the proposed practice butthe impact of the cost of adopting the techniques on the farmers'income and the improvement of his standard of living or quality oflife. The number of people who have been targeted and who havebenefited has to be assessed. Socioeconomic assessment is consideredin the next major section. However, it must be noted here that for afarmer, money is the bottom line, and for soil conservation practicesto be sustained they must result in economic benefits.

Evaluation of project designers and implementing agencies

The role and performance of project designers, implementors andparticipants are important to the success of a project. A poorly de-signed project or the failure of participants to cooperate will cause aproject to fail regardless of how good the other components are. Theproject designers, the funding agency, in addition to the implementingagency and participants must be evaluated. These evaluations willallow the identification of the basis for success and failure. It will avoidsimilar errors being repeated in similar projects and prevent alienationof the community from participation in other projects. Conversely,


successful projects, methods, or systems can redound to the benefit ofother projects.

If a project is not to collapse after project funding and other supportsare terminated, the organization's or recipient's implementationcapacity must be improved or must be adequate. This assessment mustprecede the project's commencement. It may be better to extend theproject for a while longer if this would increase the chances of survivalrather than terminate at the official termination date.

Socioeconomic Considerations

Analysis of economic efficiency or cost/benefit analysis must be carriedout. Sometimes it is necessary to assess the economic efficiency ofproject alternatives. Lack of trained manpower and time often pre-vents the exploring of alternatives.

It is not always easy to obtain prices to assess cost/benefit. Somebenefits may not be easily and accurately quantifiable. In addition,many distortions in the pricing system which are common indeveloping countries occur, e.g. protective tariffs and quantitativerestrictions of imports and exports; unrealistic exchange rates whichundervalue or overvalue national currency; government controls overinterest rates. These distorting factors can make appraisal of the socialor economic benefits of a project based on actual prices bothincomplete and inaccurate. If market forces operate freely in thepresence of domestic and international competition, actual prices ofall factors of production would give an accurate assessment.

Projects such as soil conservation which are socially profitable butwhich incur a loss on the basis of market prices may have to besubsidized as a matter of public policy. The kinds of subsidies andmethods of implementation can have adverse social impacts whichmust be avoided.

Farmers in developing countries seldom keep good records of theiractivities which are essential for any accurate economic analysis. Moreattention must be paid to proper record keeping both by farmers andimplementing agencies if the true economic impact of soilconservation is to be obtained.

Influence of Sociological Factors onSoil Conservation Projects in the Caribbean

The economic impact of the soil conservation projects implemented inseveral countries of the Caribbean has not been evaluated and the


information to permit this evaluation has not been collected. Theprojects can therefore only be evaluated on the basis of the number offarmers who have adopted and implemented the technical recom-mendations. The implementation of the methods promoted by theprojects has not been widespread and usually does not reflect the effortand expenditure. Most of the conservation projects did not achieve theobjectives of adoption and sustainability by farmers. Several factorsare responsible for this and many of them are common to projectswhich have been implemented in the Caribbean islands. The mainfactors are set out below.

Squatting and land tenure

Farmers who do not have title to their land or are squatting do notreadily adopt soil conservation if it costs them time, money and labour.Preventing soil loss is not a priority since they do not own the land.

Small farm size

Many conservation practices are considered unacceptable becausethey reduce the already small land area for cropping, e.g. drains,terraces, some types of contour barriers and trees.

Engineering structures

Conservation based on engineering structure are often too costly andtechnically difficult for resource poor small farmers who comprise themajority of farmers on hillsides.

Educational level and trainability

The farmers on hillsides often lack formal education and therefore thetraining programmes must take this into consideration. The farmerscannot be expected to absorb quickly technically complicated meas-ures, unless they are correctly presented.

Top-down rather than bottom-up approach

The system of instructing farmers to adopt methods which are assessedby the technicians to be good for them, has not led to successfuladoption. This approach does not always consider the needs, limita-tions and social context of the farmer. The bottom-up approach whichinvolves the participants and relevant members of the community atthe planning and implementation stages overcomes many of thedifficulties.


On-farm demonstration rather than demonstration on governmentstations

Demonstrations on government stations in particular have not provedto be a successful method of transferring soil conservation technology.Farmers generally feel that they do not have the resources of thegovernment stations to implement the measures.

Labour availability and cost

The various farm activities compete with soil conservation for labour.Soil conservation does not take precedence when labour is scarceand/or expensive.

Economic benefits

Farmers are more motivated to adopt soil conservation for economicreasons than for altruistic reasons such as saving the soil for posterity.Some soil conservation methods, e.g. bench terraces, often result inyield declines in the early years, especially when the subsoil is exposedduring construction.

Subsidies and dependency

Financial support provided for soil conservation leads to the farmersceasing to practise soil conservation when the subsidy is terminated.They come to accept soil conservation as a measure which must befinanced in total or in part by the government. Some assistance seemsto be necessary but the type of subsidy and method of administrationare critical if such assistance is not to be abused or to be ineffective.

Poor project management

Early appointment of staff, fully trained staff with full awareness ofobjectives, staff continuity, timely inputs, available markets for thecrops recommended have influenced the successful implementation ofthe projects.

Role of extension officers and agents

They must know and understand their roles and use the most effectivemethods for disseminating information and transferring technology.The perception that the messengers are not competent, reliable orsincere impacts negatively on the participants and reduces thechances of successful implementation.

These factors have played important roles in limiting the success ofthe implementation of soil conservation and must be considered infuture projects or programmes.


FOUR

Land Tenure and Soil Conservation

Legal Tenure

A distinctive feature of agricultural land tenure in the Caribbean is thelarge number of small holdings which occupy a disproportionatelysmall area or percentage of agricultural land. A high percentage of theland is not owner occupied. The data for Grenada, St Vincent and StKitts presented in Table 4.1 are typical.

Lack of secure tenure by the large majority of farmers restricts theeffective functioning of both the land market and the incentive for longterm investments in land and agriculture. In St Lucia a majorlimitation is "family land" which is jointly claimed by members of anextended family, sometimes more than 50, who have undivided rightsto cultivate or otherwise occupy a portion of the family's land. Theactual cultivator of the land is therefore without incentive to invest inthe land or to use it as collateral. Many of the very small farmers haveshort-term rented land and would like to lease or own to be able toaccess credit and increase investment. Farmers with short terminsecure tenure do not grow tree crops and cannot readily bepersuaded to do so. In St Kitts the government owns more than 90percent of the land and only recently has it been persuaded to offerlonger leases (35 years) to induce a long-term view of agriculture.

In Antigua, the production from small farms is declining. Mediumand some large scale entrepreneurial farmers are developing a widevariety of enterprises for the local and export niche market usingimproved technologies. Enterprises include meat production, melon,pineapple, pawpaw (papaya), good quality vegetables (especiallyonions) under appropriate irrigation. The Agricultural DevelopmentCorporation (ADC), a government organization with a productionremit, is producing pineapples, food crops, vegetables and fruits. Thefuture of agriculture in Antigua will be determined by these groupsunless government increases security of tenure to small farmers and


assists with timely inputs, e.g. fertilizers, water, storage, transport,marketing and technical assistance. The advantage of this trendtowards larger scale production, however, is that soil conservationwould be easier to implement.

The state is a major land holder (Crown lands) in many Caribbeancountries. In the extreme case of St Kitts, the state owns as much as 90percent of the land. This facilitates the protection of land as forestreserves or protected areas for water production, national parks andother activities in the public interest. In all states, the Crown has thelegal right to acquire lands for public purposes. The legal right isgenerally prescribed in the Land Acquisition Act. Unoccupied landsmay also be vested in the Crown, e.g. under the Crown LandsOrdinance of St Lucia or Crown Lands (Vesting and Disposal) Act ofBarbados. However, in some islands the records of ownership and titleto land are not always current and easily available. In this situationthe ownership of some land, including the exact amount of landowned by the state, is not always known or is in dispute.

Most states have made efforts to protect small agricultural holdingsby legal instruments enshrined in the Agricultural Small Holdings Act(St Kitts/Nevis), Agricultural Small Tenancies Act (St Lucia and StVincent), Security of Tenure of Small Holdings Act (Barbados),Agricultural Small Tenancies Ordinance (Grenada and Dominica).

In several islands, for example Dominica, Grenada and St Lucia,governments have been purchasing estates for distribution to farmersor distributing Crown land in land settlement or rural developmentschemes. Although farmers are required by legislation to practise soilconservation, this is not enforced and there is often insufficient orinadequate agricultural extension and technical support to ensure orenforce good soil management.

It seems, therefore, that insecure tenure is a major deterrent tofarmers practising soil conservation on small holdings. Most of thefarmers on these lands are not interested in soil conservation per seand in protecting the land which they do not own. Small farmers donot adopt soil conservation practices which they perceive to be usingtheir limited available space and to be competing for scarce resources(e.g. labour) without bringing a cash return. Therefore, a small farmeron steep land which he does not own is likely to experience soil erosion,on his plot and downslope.

Land Tenure and Soil Conservation 29

Table 4.1 Farm size distribution and type of tenure in Grenada,St Kitts and St Vincent

Grenada

Farm Size Distribution

Size of farms No. of % of(ha) farms farms

<2 7218 88

2-20 902 11

>20 82 1

49% of farms were < 0.5 ha

Tenure

Owner

Owner/rentercombination

Renter

Manager

Family owned

Share cropped

Landless

sr KittsFarm Size Distribution

Size of farms No. of % of(ha) farms farms

0.04-1.2 3,000 92

1.2-10 220 7

>10 32 1

Tenure

%offarms

Owner 36.4

Operated free* 38.5

Renter/short lease 23.5

Share cropped 1.6

% of land Area of agric.area land (ha)

31 2,411

36 2,800

32 2,489

37 2,878

22 1,711

6 467

22 1,711

11 855

1 78

0.7 54

as part of old estate arrangements


St Vincent

Farm Size Distribution

Size of farms(ha)

<1.0

1.0-2.0

2.0-10.0

10.0-20.0

>20

No offarms

4,888

974

852

35

50

% of % of Area of agric. landfarms land area (ha)

72

14

12.5

0.5

0.7

15

11

22

4

49

1,783

1,288

2,612

480

5,860

Tenure

Owner

Renter

Squatter

More thanone form

4,763

1,094

298

465

72

17

5

7

68

9

3

20

8,124

1,084

319

2,427

Squatting

Squatting is a growing problem in the Caribbean. It is being acceler-ated by the declining economies and rising unemployment. Squattingtakes place largely on state-owned lands, large estates or lands withabsentee owners. Squatters commonly occupy land at high elevationand on steep slopes and use the land for housing and agriculture.Because of the lack of permanence in the tenancy, there is no incentiveto practise soil management which would conserve the soil againsterosion. There is slash and burn activity and crops are planted inrelation to market demand and not land capability. Forest fires anddeforestation frequently occur from slash and burn agriculture andother activities of squatters.

The number of squatters and the area of land they occupy have notbeen determined but it is evident that there is substantial squatting inmany of the islands. By 1994, the Minister of Food Production ofTrinidad and Tobago was estimating the number of squatters to beabout 50,000 out of a total population of 1.2 million people. Then,interviews with technical staff in the ministries of agriculture anddepartments of forestry indicated that squatting is a serious problem.There are many squatters' settlements with poor or no infrastructureand public amenities. Many of the squatters obtain their livelihoodfrom farming.

Land Tenure and Soil Conservation 31

Squatting is such a major problem in most territories thatgovernments seem to have little alternative to regularizing majorsquatting areas and providing the basic infrastructure or to providinglow cost housing in identified residential developments. There is needfor an associated legislation to prevent further spread of squatting andfor adequate institutional arrangements for monitoring andimplementing the system.

The problem of squatting has to be addressed in any land useplanning to reduce the significant erosion which occurs on squatters'holdings.


FIVE

Institutional and Legislative Factors


The major activities and problems arising in the watersheds of theCaribbean relate to forestry, agriculture, tourism and settlements.Water production and the protection of water sources, deforestation,soil erosion, flooding, pollution from agricultural chemicals and sew-erage disposal are the major concerns. Watersheds therefore have tobe managed to protect against the kind of use which would create orexacerbate these problems.

There are five elements which are critical to the management andprotection of watersheds in the Caribbean:1 Policy and management planning2 Political will3 Institutional arrangements

4 Supporting legal instruments5 Technical, financial and other supports for implementation

This section is concerned mainly with reviewing the institutional andlegal arrangements for facilitating or promoting the adoption of soilconservation and minimizing soil erosion and the pollution of watersources by agricultural activities in the watershed. It is concerned withforestry management as it relates to agroforestry, soil management,and the protection of water intakes against pollution, The consultants'reports to the Food and Agriculture Organization/Tropical ForestryAction Programme (FAO/TFAP) on land use and watershed manage-ment and on legislation were important sources of information for thischapter.

Institutional and Legislative Factors in Soil Conservation 33

Policy and Management Planning

PolicyCaribbean governments have explicit or implicit policies of watershedprotection. The policy translates into sectoral policies with implica-tions for watershed management or into prescriptions against severalkinds of activities in the watershed which can damage the watershedor cause environmental degradation. There is, however, a need formore clearly articulated policies on watershed management.

Management planning

Planning and management of land use and watershed developmentare ad hoc and generally ineffective. There are no comprehensive landuse plans nor land zoning. Countries have periodically preparednational development plans, and sectoral plans. Some, such as Trini-dad and Tobago, have also prepared or have in preparation (e.g. StVincent), national physical development plans which have not beenapproved by Parliament and implemented. Land use planning andland zoning have not been addressed in a comprehensive manner.

Urban development, water and sewerage development, andforestry development are regulated, and approval is required beforeactivities are undertaken. Agricultural development is not regulatedand activities can be undertaken without approval. In fact, statutoryregulations deliberately exclude agricultural lands from town andcountry planning control and seek to encourage agriculturalexpansion.

In the Caribbean, a lack of an integrated system of planning, lackof legislation to control development, and lack of capacity to monitordevelopment and enforce compliance are important deficiencies inland use planning. In St Lucia, proposals for development are requiredto be sent to the Central Planning Unit (CPU), where they are dealtwith by the physical planning section. However the great majority ofdevelopment plans are never sent or decisions are largely decided inthe political arena. Physical planners make recommendations to theDevelopment Control Authority (DCA), but these are made on an adhoc basis and there is limited contribution by the Public Health andFire Departments and the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) in the caseof agricultural development, and the Water and Sewerage Authority(WASA). Because of the absence of a land use plan and ineffectiveland zoning, agricultural land can be subdivided for housing withoutreference to MOA. Housing expansion increases water runoff, and in


the absence of proper provision for drainage can increase flooding andsoil erosion. There is need for a fully integrated group within the CPUto plan future land use taking into consideration economic,sociological and environmental/ecological factors.

In Barbados, the Town and Country Planning Departmentapproves proposals based on certain guidelines. They would seekadvice where necessary from other departments with interest in landuse or the environment, e.g. agriculture, water authority, health,works. The advice is based on ad hoc views of appropriate land use.There exists a pragmatic approach to zoning without a comprehensiveplan.

In Dominica, as in so many of the islands, there is a lack of acoherent national land use policy and plan but planning permissionis required (subject to exemptions made by the minister) for any landdevelopment, excluding the use for agricultural purposes. This has ledto unsuitable areas being farmed while more suitable lands areunderutilized. Zoning restriction for various forms of agricultural landdevelopment need to be considered by government. In St Kitts amultiplicity of statutes relates to land use and the Town and CountryPlanning Act seems not to be implemented.

In St Vincent and the Grenadines there is a Physical Planning andDevelopment Board which includes as ex officio members, the ChiefTechnical Officers concerned with the most important resource sectors.The board has all the usual powers including planning, landacquisition, development permission; also, it may issue treepreservation orders and prohibit the destruction of trees, forests andwoodlands. A novel provision is the power to require environmentalimpact assessment. The board was established by the Town andCountry Planning Act of 1976 but this was repealed by the Town andCountry Planning Act of 1992.

Land use planning suffers from two types of problems:

- First, there is an institutional need to replace the existinggovernment agencies which have limited or overlappingjurisdiction with an appropriately constituted land use body.

- Secondly, there has been a failure to integrate physical,sociological and economic factors in the planning process.

These shortcomings need to be addressed and sufficient resourcesprovided for the execution of the mandates from the political direc-torate.

Policy and management planning must also address a range of con-straints which affect the practice of soil conservation. These include:


Attitudinal constraints such as the farmers' reluctance toembrace change and to adopt agroforestry which involves theuse of trees on small farms.Structural constraints such as prevailing systems of land tenure,endemic political patronage, and institutionalized avoidance ofenforcement of laws.Squatting on Crown lands which has been compromised by apolitical culture that ignores violation. Squatting is a seriousproblem in the Caribbean as indicated in chapter 4. A policy anda management plan to address present and future squatting arerequired.Low priority to the forestry sector which has to be inferred fromthe modest budgetary allocations for forestry management anddevelopment. There is need to emphasize the importantintangible values of forest cultivation and the role of forestmanagement in soil conservation.Uncontrolled grazing resulting in serious denudation ofvegetation in the dry season and erosion in the wet season.Lack of trained human resources which hampers managementand law enforcement.

Institutional and Legislative Arrangements

Major institutions

Appropriate institutional arrangements and legislative instrumentsare required for the successful adoption and implementation of soilconservation. Planning, management, provision of infrastructure, andtechnical support to farmers are all necessary functions which requireappropriate, properly structured and functioning institutions. Theremust also be legal instruments to give authority to the institutions tocarry out their functions and to enforce compliance. Soil erosion andconservation are important factors in watershed management andprotection and in the Caribbean there are many institutional struc-tures and arrangements already pertaining to watershed manage-ment and protection. This can be a problem if the institutional rolesand jurisdiction are not clearly defined to avoid overlap and conflicts.

In the Caribbean, the MOA or Department of Agriculture is themajor institution responsible for soil conservation in both public andprivate agricultural lands. In many states, a Department of Forestry


or a Forestry Unit is located in the MOA and takes responsibility foraddressing soil erosion in forested lands. The ultimate responsibilitiesare with the Chief Agricultural Officer (CAO) or Chief Forestry Officer(CFO) who assign specific responsibilities to the appropriate units orofficers. The units are named and structured differently in the MOA inthe various territories, e.g. Field Engineering Division (Trinidad andTobago), or the Land and Water Use Unit of the AgriculturalEngineering Services Division of the MOA (St Lucia), or the Land UseUnit (Grenada). In some of the territories, there is no unit in the MOAdedicated to soil conservation but an agricultural engineer oragronomist is assigned the responsibility. All agricultural extensionofficers are expected to have some knowledge of soil conservationmeasures to be able to advise farmers. In the event of specialinternationally funded projects, a specific project team is established.

Forestry departments only occasionally have active programmes insoil conservation although conservation of soil is specifically stated asone of the reasons for declaring forest reserves. However, thepreservation of forests, reforestation and action against deforestationhave always been important features of their work programme, whichhave contributed to the reduction of soil erosion.

Because soil erosion can affect water intake zones, surface waterreservoirs and the quality of water supply, the institutions whichregulate water resources development are concerned with soilconservation. In all the Caribbean islands there are functioning waterand sewerage authorities. They have broad powers for waterconservation and protection of water gathering grounds. Generally,these bodies have full power and control over all public waters, toconserve, augment, allocate, distribute or redistribute, and monitorwater resources. Catchment areas are required to be retained as forestreserves and the CFO has responsibility for their protection,conservation and maintenance. In St Lucia, WASA power is limited torequesting the CFO to protect any water gathering grounds threatenedby deforestation and since the CFO powers are restricted to the smallarea of Crown lands, the effect is insignificant.

The MOA through its CAO or CFO is generally represented on theWASA board and this representation should be used more positivelyto:

- foster interrelationships with other sectors, such as works,drainage and health, which are also represented on the board

- promote programmes for soil conservation awareness, adoptionand enforcement


The WASA should use its authority and power and the factor of theimportance of water to the nation to enforce proper soil managementand the protection of the soil against erosion.

The institutional arrangements cannot always be separated fromthe legislation and these are considered in some detail in Appendix A.The institutional arrangements for soil conservation in Barbados areof particular interest and are discussed below.

Legislation and related institutional arrangements

The fact that the Caribbean has been administered by separate bodiesor groups in colonial times and post Independence has led to thedevelopment of non-unified legislation. This has usually been devel-oped in the context of the particular economic, social and politicalenvironment. A substantial amount of legislation that relates to activi-ties in the watershed which affect soil erosion and conservation wasenacted decades ago and has not been amended or repealed to reflectthe changes which have occurred. There are also institutional deficien-cies. Consequently, some of the legislation is outdated, ignored andgenerally unenforceable due to inadequate technical personnel formonitoring and enforcing compliance, and sometimes lack of politicalwill. Sometimes, the institutional roles and jurisdictional competenciesare not clearly defined in several resource management areas, e.g.development control and planning approval; allocation and use ofpublic lands; conservation and protection of watersheds and watersupply; pollution control and the maintenance of water quality.

In addition to legislation which directly pertains to agriculture,there are numerous acts pertaining to town and country planning,forestry, water and sewerage (the aspects dealing with managementof water runoff, storage and quality) and Crown land protection,which are relevant to soil conservation. All territories have a Townand Country Planning Act, in addition to the Water and Sewerage Actand many have a Crown Lands Ordinance.

The Town and Country Planning Act is intended to ensure theorderly development of the towns in particular, and generally excludesjurisdiction over agricultural lands. The act does not specificallyaddress land use planning. The Water and Sewerage Act aims atprotecting water resources through forestry protection and theprevention of inappropriate land use in water intake zones. Thislegislation should be extended to enforce the proper use of land in thewatershed. The Crown Lands Ordinance protects these lands againstmisuse and often includes the rights of land acquisition for the Crownor of declaring forest reserves.


Although there are many acts which, if enforced, can contribute tosoil conservation, there are relatively few which focus specifically onsoil conservation. Three of the more significant ones are:

- Soil Conservation (Scotland District) Act (Barbados)- Barbados Agricultural Development Corporation Act (Barbados)

- Forest, Soil and Water Conservation Act (Grenada)

These and the other pertinent legislation are presented inAppendix A.


PART II

Farming Systems: Approach and

Methodologies

SIX

Farming Systems Approach

to Soil Conservation

Introduction

The soil erosion status in the Caribbean, and the sociological, institu-tional and legislative factors which influence soil conservation wereconsidered in Part I.

Part II deals with the practical measures or methodologies forintegrating soil conservation into farming systems in the agriculturalcontext of the Caribbean. It therefore considers the requirements forsuccessful adoption and implementation of the farming systemsapproach, and the physical data which are required for makingdecisions on the actions to be taken. It is with regard to the latter thatthe information to be collected in baseline surveys, and land capabilityand land use are considered.

The methodologies emphasize the agronomic or biologicalapproach. They focus on methods that are within the capability ofsmall farmers. Gullies are common features of farmlands in theCaribbean and these are therefore considered even though the controlof the large gullies is often beyond the capability of the small farmer.Most farmers clear the land at one time or the other and therefore itis important for them to be aware of the most appropriate methods ofland clearing.

Part II examines existing systems of soil conservation which areintegrated into farming systems but does not examine proposedmodels. The Hillside Agricultural Project in Jamaica is also discussedas a practical example of an attempt to integrate soil conservationinto farming systems based on a tree crop system of farming. Some ofthe shortcomings of this effort are also considered. Finally, AppendixB contains case study exercises for the student of soil conservation towork through using the principles considered in the book.

Farming Systems Approach to Soil Conservation 41

Farming Systems: Requirements forSuccessful Adoption and Implementation

A farming system can be defined as a reasonably stable arrangementof farming enterprises that are managed according to well definedpractices in response to the physical, biological and socioeconomicenvironments and in accordance with defined goals, preferences andresources. The integration of soil conservation into the farming sys-tems therefore means that soil conservation methods must be sustain-able in the physical, biological and socioeconomic environments.

Clearly visible techniques such as terracing and contour draininghave become synonymous with soil conservation but there are manyagronomic practices which are not generally associated with soilconservation but which reduce soil erosion or can be used to enhancesoil conservation. The farmer, however, has to take a conscious,deliberate and organized approach to ensure that soil conservation isone of the objectives of the farming system. With this approach, thefarmer may not be required to make radical changes to his practicesor significantly increase his inputs, but may benefit from increasedproduction.

Farming systems research and extension

Appropriate farming systems can be developed or improved andsuccessfully adopted by farmers through the Farming SystemsResearch and Extension (FSR/E) methodology. FSR/E is an appliedfarmer oriented, agrobiological approach to research informed bysocioeconomic considerations in a team effort that includes extensionresponsibilities. It is an approach to generating, evaluating and deliv-ering technology which is appropriate to the social and economicenvironment. If the technology is not to be rejected, changes must notbe drastic and the profitability of the farm, which is a business, mustnot be decreased by the new technology.

To minimize the chance of rejection, the farmer must participatefrom the planning through to the implementation, evaluation andrecommendation stages. The FSR/E approach can be used to select ordevelop the most appropriate soil conservation techniques to fit intothe farming system with or without modifying the farming systemsand to get farmers to adopt the systems. The emphasis here is onadoption and continuity.

Four stages are required for the FSR/E methodology and for thesuccessful integration of soil conservation into farming systems. Theseare:

42 Farming Systems: Approach and Methodologies

1 Diagnostic

2 Planning and design

3 Implementation

4 Evaluation and recommendation

Diagnostic stage

Existing farming systems, soil conservation practices and the biologi-cal, physical and socioeconomic environment are characterized andanalysed. The information is obtained in two steps. The first is thereview of all pertinent existing literature. The second is to carry outsurveys which can be through formal, informal, quantitative or quali-tative data collection procedures. Formalized and quantitative surveysfor data collection can take time and be costly. However, recent trendsare towards informal methods with complementary and focusedformal surveys to verify informal results or to explore some particularaspect in greater detail. A popular method of collecting informationquickly and cheaply is the Sondeo method which was originally formu-lated at the Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology (ICTA) inGuatemala by Hidlebrand in 1981. In this process information on themajor constraints and problems limiting the productivity of a definedagricultural system is obtained and analysed. A rapid reconnaissancesurvey or appraisal of the farming system is conducted among repre-sentative farmers in a specific area within the system to obtain therelevant information. The information obtained by this method is laterverified and strengthened by conducting a baseline survey which is amore formalized method of data collection. Diagnosis does not takeplace only at the beginning of the programme but is a continuousprocess and the information can be used to make modifications. Animportant element of this stage is consultation and involvement offarmers who need to be an integral part of the process.

Planning and design stage

During this stage, the information gathered during the diagnosticstage is analysed and farmers are actively involved in design. Problemsare identified and prioritized and appropriate farming and soil con-servation systems designed or soil conservation systems adapted to fitinto the existing or modified farming systems. The appropriate exper-tise required to design and implement the systems must be put in placeor consulted as necessary. The plan must be developed and finalized


in consultation with the farmers. Provision must be made to monitoror to test the systems to be implemented.

Implementation stage

All inputs required for the programme must be identified and madeavailable on a timely basis, in accordance with the implementationplan. Staff members must be fully aware of all aspects of their job andshould be fully trained. If the programme involves testing or formulat-ing of technologies, experiments should be established in the farmers'fields under typical farming conditions which are appropriate andtherefore adaptable by farmers. The design of these experimentsshould be simple so that farmers will be able to understand andmanage them with less supervision during the verification and evalu-ation stages. At this stage, the normal farmers' practices must also becarried out as a control for comparison.

Evaluation and recommendation stage

During this stage, the results of the on-farm experiments or testing areassessed. The researchers and extension officers must discuss theresults with farmers to obtain their opinion of the treatments. Theresults must also be subjected to both an agronomic evaluation andstatistical analysis. This assessment of the results from the farmers'point of view is most important and must be clear before decisions aremade on the treatments to be recommended to farmers or those to betested further. If one or two treatments show greatest promise theycan be further tested in farmer-managed trials referred to as thevalidation stage. This gives the farmers themselves the opportunity tomanage and evaluate the treatments.

After evaluation or validation, treatments can be recommended fordissemination by extension officers through suitable communicationsystems. The dissemination process only starts when farmers begin toaccept or adopt the technologies and when they begin to pay the costof inputs and accept the risks of the intervention.

Baseline Surveys and Farm Planning

In planning any enterprise, including farm planning, it is absolutelynecessary to have the required data. In farm planning, data will berequired to evaluate the capability and suitability of land for thecurrent and proposed use under the given set of physical, social andeconomic conditions. The relevant data can be obtained by baseline


surveys. These surveys provide the physical, social and economic datafor developing the farm plans and the associated soil conservationmethods appropriate to the farming system and the physical andsocial environment.

The database which would provide the information for planningwould include the material indicated below.

Physical data

Geographic location and elevation. This is needed to be able to locatethe land on a map and to assess the implications of the proposedactivities to the surrounding areas.

Climatic conditions

The important climatic factors are temperature, rainfall, relativehumidity and wind. In the Caribbean, rainfall and wind are frequentlythe more important factors. These four climatic parameters woulddetermine the crops that are most suitable for specific locations.

TemperatureSome crops perform better under cool conditions, e.g. solanum potatoin the Christiana area of Jamaica; while others perform poorly underthe cool and humid conditions of the high elevations, e.g. banana,mango, papaya in the elevated Montreal area of St Vincent.

RainfallData on the amount, intensity and duration of rainfall are very usefulfor the development planning of the farm. Such data determinewhether annual crops can be grown without irrigation in the dryseason and the need for soil conservation on sloping soils.

Relative humidityThe quality of some crops, e.g. Blue Mountain coffee is improved butthe incidence of pests and diseases is increased by high humidity.

WindWind causes damage to crops and animals during storms and hurri-canes. The banana crop is particularly sensitive. In addition highwinds increase evapotranspiration and irrigation requirement. Theinformation would help in identifying the most appropriate locationfor crops and in determining the need for windbreaks.


Evapotranspira tionThis factor when compared with rainfall distribution would indicatewhether irrigation would be required and would provide an estimateof the timing and amounts of irrigation.

Soils

Soil typeThe classification, texture, fertility status and other soil properties, andarea of the soil types are important. They help us to infer the behav-iour, capability and appropriate land use of the soils. They play a vitalrole in the design of suitable farming systems.

Topography and slopesThe physiography or land form in the project area helps in the designof the farm plans, the location of crops, the infrastructural needs andsoil conservation methods. The land forms may include alluvial plains(flat areas), terraces at different elevations, undulating, rolling andsteep areas and each may have different soil types. The classificationof slopes qualitatively by terms such as flat, gentle, moderately steep,steep and very steep, or quantitatively into percent or degree of slopes,aids planning.

Erosion hazardA map showing eroded areas, the degree of erosion which has occurredand the potential erosion hazard helps to determine the soil conser-vation measures which will have to be instituted to reduce the risk oferosion and to enable sustainable use to be made of the land.

Hydrology and drainageThe amount and location of surface and subsurface sources of water,the present use and availability for irrigation are useful data. Theavailability and distribution of pipe borne water are also important.

Drainage of the soil is affected principally by slope, texture andstructure. Low lying areas with poor or imperfect external or internaldrainage can become flooded or waterlogged for prolonged periods.These areas should be known and included in the data collected sothat proper drainage can be effected,

Present land useInformation on present land use provides the necessary backgroundfor future planning. It also gives an indication of the capability of theland, although in some cases farmers may be persisting in activities


that are degrading the environment. Natural vegetation is particu-larly useful in indicating the fertility status of the soil and specific soilfactors such as pH, salinity and excess or deficiency of ion species.

Infrastructure

The accessibility to the farm and to market and social amenities isessential for efficient and successful farming and must be assessed orincluded in the development plans.

Socioeconomic data

Social infrastructureThese include schools, hospital or clinic, post office, churches, commu-nity centres, and determine whether the farmer will live on farm orelsewhere.

Factories

The presence or absence of processing facilities will determine thecrops to be grown and therefore the land use in relation to thecapability of the land.

Labour availabilityIt is very important to know if an adequate supply of quality labour iseasily available. This would influence the systems that can be intro-duced in light of the competition for the available labour.

Capital availabilityThe availability of funds from lending agencies such as banksat attractive interest rates frequently determines the success ofagricultural enterprises or lifts the level of farming above subsistence.This factor is as important, in modern farming, as land, labour andmanagement. Information on capital availability and conditions oflending influences the choice of systems to be implemented.

Preferences of farmers

Farmers often show preference for certain commodities or activitieseven though they may not be the most economical or appropriate forthe environment. They usually have good reasons for their choices andthese must be determined and considered in preparing the farm plan.

MarketsMarkets must be available for farmers to sell their produce if theventure is to succeed. Knowledge of market demand or studies to


provide the information, and marketing arrangements are all essen-tial to the planning process and the success of the farming enterprise.

Technical services and farm suppliesAdvice through the extension service should be easily available to thefarmers particularly to those small farmers who lack technology know-how or the resources to purchase the services. Other technical supportservices, e.g. equipment repair and tractor rental, are also important.Farm supplies needed for running the business successfully must beavailable in adequate quantities for the community of farmers or stepsmust be taken to expand the supply.

After all the data are collected, they should be carefully analysedand evaluated so that the appropriate land use and farming systemssuitable for the physical and socioeconomic environment can beselected. Computer programmes have been developed which wouldallow soil properties to be matched against crop requirements to givesuitability ratings. Jamaica has developed the Jamaica Physical LandEvaluation System (JAMPLES) computer programme for rating thesuitability of soils for specific crops. However, to develop farmingsystems which include soil conservation measures for a particularproject area, all the physical and socioeconomic factors must beintegrated and this requires a team of people with the appropriateexpertise.

Land Capability and Land Use

Land capabilityThe demand for land for the various uses (residential, industrial,commercial, recreational, agricultural and nature reserves) continuesto rise and to put pressure on a finite resource. It is therefore essentialto make the optimum use of the resource without causing it to dete-riorate. Proper land use planning is critical. Soil and land use surveysprovide the information which allows planners and decision makersto know the potential or capability of the land. The surveys involve aninventory of the soils and vegetative cover of the land. Soils areclassified according to defined criteria and this classification is used toassist in the determination of land capability or suitability.

Different soil classification systems for agriculture have beendeveloped and many are specific for some countries. Twointernational systems are now used widely or universally, the 1974FAO/UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural


Organization) soil map of the world, and the 1975 United StatesDepartment of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Taxonomy. The latter is thetwelfth "Approximation on Soil Classification" developed by the USDAover a number of years. In addition there are many nationalclassification systems in use.

The current agricultural land capability system in the Caribbean isbased mainly on degree of slope as the dominant factor and to a lesserextent on factors of erosion, drainage, rainfall and soil fertility. Thissystem of land capability classification is based on the former systemof the USDA in which the suitability of the land for mechanizedagriculture is of prime importance. This system was adopted by theRegional Research Centre (RRC) of the Imperial College of TropicalAgriculture (later UWI) and the classification of soils for each territorywas published in a series of soil and land use surveys between 1958and 1974. The relevance of this system to the Caribbean isquestionable because (a) complete mechanization is not possible dueto size of farm, topography and sometimes crop type; and (b) manualcultivation is often the only practical and suitable form of landmanagement on most of the hillsides.

This historical system is still referred to in many reports and istherefore briefly outlined below. However, if farmers only cultivatedslopes as recommended, production would be reduced considerably.Therefore a more pragmatic, treatment-oriented approach isrecommended which links slope classes to the conservation treatmentsrequired to avoid erosion.

Table 6.1 Slope classes and gradients

Slope class GradientsDegree Percent

A 0-20 0-3B 2-5 3-9

C 5-10 9-18

D 10-20 18-36E 20-30 36-58F Over 30 Over 58

Source: Soil and land use surveys carried out by the Imperial College of Tropical Agriculture,1958-1974.

In the RRC system soils are classified into seven land use slope classesshown in Table 6.1. Based on these slope classes, the risk of soil erosionand difficulties of management, the soils have been classified intoseven land capability classes which indicate the most intensive suitableuse as shown in Table 6,2, In some cases an eighth class is added for


the extremely steep land, beach sand and mangrove, characteristicswhich preclude their agricultural use.

Table 6.2 Land capabilities class, slope limits and recommended land use

Land capability class and slope limits Most intensive suitable use

I Slope limits 0-5° A and B slopes of Suitable for cultivation with almost nogood soils limitations.

II Mainly C slopes of good soils, and Suitable for cultivation with moderatelevel land of less favourable soils limitations.

III Mainly D slopes of good soils, and Suitable for cultivation with severe orgentler slopes of less favourable soils strong limitations

IV Mainly E slopes, some D slopes Marginal for cultivation due to erosionrisk but suitable for tree crops, pastureand forest.

V Mainly E and F slopes Unsuitable for cultivation, but suitablefor planted forest, tree crops andpastures.

VI No slope limit but shallow soil over Unsuitable for cultivation due tohard rock (includes all steep rock land) erosion risk but suitable for tree crops,

pasture and forest.

VII Mainly F slopes of deeper soils; no Unsuitable for agriculture should beslope limit of soils with rock outcrop; left in natural vegetation.river wash

Source: Soil and land use surveys carried out by the Imperial College of Tropical Agriculture,1958-1974.

A broad grouping of the land in this manner into seven landcapability classes is useful for some purposes such as determining acountry's available arable acreage. It is not, however, adequate forspecific land management recommendations. Between the extremegeneralization into these seven classes and the extreme detail of thesoil survey, certain intermedial groupings are necessary in order tocompile a land capability classification.

Slope class is in many cases the primary factor in determining landcapability, but the need to align this assessment with the detailed soilsurvey requires further subdivision within each land capability class.Four principal limiting factors are considered significant in this respectand they are shown by a small letter following the land capabilitynumeral: "e" if the principal limiting factor is slope and erosion risk;"w" if it is excess water in the soil, seasonally or otherwise, giving poornatural drainage; "s" if it is a soil factor implying usually shallow ordroughty soil; and "c" for the climatic factors.


These four factors may therefore adversely affect the productivityof soils in Land Capability Classes II to VI. They do not apply to ClassI which has no limitations nor to Class VII which is unsuitable forcultivation. The Land Capability Classes are therefore further definedas follows:

Me. Land suitable for cultivation with moderate limitations. The risk oferosion is the chief factor limiting its use.

llw. Land suitable for cultivation with moderate limitations. Naturallywet land on which drainage is the main factor limiting its use.

Us. Land suitable for cultivation with moderate limitations. Soil fertilityor some other factor is the main limitation to its use.

I He. Land suitable for cultivation with strong limitations. Must be culti-vated carefully to prevent erosion of the soil. Rotational strip crop-ping is advised for this land.

Illw. Land suitable for cultivation with strong limitations. Naturally wetland needing much attention to drainage. Contour drains are nec-essary to remove water and prevent erosion of the soil.

Ills. Land suitable for cultivation with strong limitations imposed by ad-verse soil factors.

I He Land suitable for cultivation with strong limitations imposed by cli-matic factors (especially low rainfall).

IVe. Land marginal for cultivation, that is, in extreme danger of erosion.Improved grassland or tree crops should be established on thisland. Some cultivation with extreme precautions.

IVs. Land marginal for cultivation due to soil factors. Economic treecrops or grass should be established on this land. Some cultiva-tion with extreme precautions.

Ve. Land not suitable for cultivation, steeply sloping with extreme dan-ger of erosion. Tree crops, food or forest trees should be estab-lished on this land.

Vs. Land not suitable for cultivation due to adverse soil factors. Usuallysteep land that should be used for forest or food trees.

Vie. Land not suitable for cultivation. Very steeply sloping land thatshould never be cleared of its natural vegetation.

Vis, Land not suitable for cultivation. Thin rocky soils on steep slopingland that should never be cleared of its natural vegetation.


Vic. Land not suitable for cultivation due to a combination of adversefactors usually dominated by dry climate. Should never becleared of its natural vegetation.

These further subdivisions still classify Class IV soils as marginal andclassify soils in categories greater than IV as unsuitable for cultivation.

Land suitability

This term is now used more often and refers to the suitability of theland for specific use and provides more details than land capability,particularly in qualitative economic terms. The details of this systemare provided in the FAO Framework For Land Evaluation [FAO 1976].The term "land evaluation" is sometimes loosely used but the FAOFramework For Land Evaluation is quite specific. It provides a standardset of principles and concepts on which evaluation systems can beconstructed. It emphasizes the importance of explicitly stating theintended land use, the level of management and whether it is basedon current or potential suitability of the land.

Land use and soil erosion

A first defence against soil erosion is to use the land withinits capability and to use the soil conservation practices that areappropriate for the capability class. The returns to inputs, includingsoil conservation, decrease from Class II to Class VII. Therefore it isnot cost effective to use a conservation practice which is suitable forClass V in a Class II soil situation. It is also necessary to have soilconservation treatments which can fit into the socioeconomic environ-ment and allow maximum use of the land.

Proposed treatment-oriented land capability scheme

In the Caribbean farmers are forced to cultivate soils outside of thehistorical capability classification proposed by the RRC because ofscarcity of land, market demand and better prices for certain com-modities. If the authorities were to enforce land use in accordance withthis scheme many farmers would be forced out of farming and thenations would be unable to meet their food production expectations.

A treatment-oriented land capability scheme is needed. This wouldallow crop production on the steeper slopes provided it is associatedwith appropriate crop and soil management. A treatment-oriented


land capability scheme would permit marginal lands to be usedbeyond the capability proposed by the RRC in their soil and land usesurveys, through the introduction of suitable crop and soilmanagement systems. It would bring more soils in Classes IV-VII intogreater and sustainable agricultural production.

The scheme being proposed would classify soils in each slopecategory into different classes of fragility based on soil factors, forexample, depth of soil, credibility, and fertility status. Appropriate soilmanagement treatments would then be proposed for crops or cropcombinations on the soil. A treatment-oriented or managementscheme which would permit steeper slopes to be more intensivelycultivated is presented in Table 6.3.

Some fruit trees, for example mango and papaya, are not suitablefor the high wet elevations because of disease problems.

The above general and summary guidelines should be used todevelop specific recommendations for the different soils on variousslopes and climatic conditions.

Table 6.3 Guidelines for recommended soil conservation practices

Slope

Degree Percentage

0-4 0-7

4-10 7-18

10-20 18-36

Type of crops or croppingsystem

Recommended physical soilconservation practice

20-30 36-58

Best lands for intensiveannual production;mechanized monocropping

Good for intensive annualcrop production; mixedcropping on credible,fragile soils

Semi-permanent crops;annual crops suitablyintercropped withsemipermanent orpermanent crops

Permanent crops, forexample, fruit trees in purestands with grass groundcover, or mixed with foodcrop on the less fragilesoils; agroforestry

Good crop husbandry;contour farming

Vegetative barriers;Hillside ditches

Storm water diversion anddownhill drains; vegetativebarriers; hillside ditches;mini-terraces; narrowridges and furrows;mulching

Hillside ditches; reversedsloping narrow terrace;tree basins especially at thehigher slopes; relaycropping of food crops


Slope Type of crops or cropping Recommended physical soilsystem conservation practice

Degree Percentage

30-45 58-100 Production forest; Full ground cover always;agroforestry on the less soil conservation measuresfragile soils * (Forest in association withspecies and permanent agroforestry depending onfruit trees only) crop mix

45+ 100+ Forest for watershed Full ground cover alwaysprotection


SEVEN

Soil Conservation Measures

Appropriate for Integrating into

Farming Systems in the Caribbean

Most of the farmers on hillsides in the Caribbean cultivate small areasof land, have few resources and are not technically educated. Gener-ally, they do not have or cannot afford to hire machinery for soilconservation, and other farm activities compete for the scarce avail-able labour. Sometimes the land is too steep for the safe operation ofmachinery. The soil conservation measures must therefore fit into thisbackground. The measures that are suitable for integrating into thefarming systems fall into two categories: biological or agronomic andsimple engineering. They can be used separately or in combinationdepending on the conditions and these are discussed later.

For effective soil conservation in the Caribbean context of manysmall farmers on the hillsides, it is important to ensure that a microwatershed operates as a unit under the control of an association of allthe farmers and with appropriate leadership. The importance of astrong institutional basis cannot be overestimated. This is furtherdiscussed with reference to Jamaica. An incentive (cash and/orcommunity facility) should be considered in return for farmersagreeing to allow their land to be planned for conservation (e.g.continuous contour hedges or ditches) and for carrying it out. In thisarrangement if some fail to agree or to perform, all are excluded frombenefiting. In this way there is community pressure to conform.

Biological or Agronomic Measures

Many of these measures are not normally associated with soilconservation but because they provide early, rapid and more complete


ground cover or better root growth and soil binding, they reduce soilerosion.

Soil managementImprovement of the physical and chemical properties of the soilincreases plant growth and soil protection against erosion by water.Improving soil structure increases the water holding capacity, infiltra-tion rate and credibility of the soil. This can be achieved throughtillage, drainage and the incorporation of organic matter, growingtrees with fibrous root systems or certain trees which can return leaflitter to the soil or stabilize the soil against erosion. Fires which destroysoil organic matter and hence soil structure must be avoided.

Several minerals are known to be essential for plant growth andmust be provided in adequate amounts and in the correct ratio orbalance to avoid antagonism in the uptake of minerals. Fertilizerapplication and liming to increase pH of acid soils are essential forrapid growth and crop establishment which are particularly importantin monocropping systems. The role of minerals in plant growth andthe fertilizer requirements of crops can be obtained from books onbasic soil science such as Brady [1974], or Russell [1973].

Tillage

Tillage is an important soil management activity which impacts onthe sustainability of agricultural systems in the tropics. Excessivetillage of sloping soils increases soil erosion and therefore tillagesystems which minimize the use of implements and soil disturbanceare preferred. Conventional tillage which may include a combinationof primary and secondary operations is normally performed in seed-bed preparation and mostly on flat or gentle to moderate slopes. Onsteeper slopes several tillage practices are preferred. These are:

- Zero (no) tillage: where the crop is planted directly into the soilwithout preparatory tillage

- Conservation tillage: a tillage system which facilitates theconservation of soil and water

- Zonal tillage: tillage of only the strip or zone of the soil in whichthe crop is to be planted

Several researchers [Lai 1975; Lindsay and Gumbs 1982] have shownthat there is much greater soil loss and reduced runoff from tillagecompared with no-tillage plots. No tillage can reduce soil loss to almostzero.


Reduced and minimum tillage, in which the total number of tillageoperations preparatory to planting is reduced from the conventionaltillage for that soil type, are sometimes recommended for the gentlerslopes. They increase infiltration and reduce runoff and soil erosion.

Timing of planting

The establishment of crops, possibly with irrigation, late in the dryseason or early in the wet season before the onset of the heavy rains,provides better ground cover before the heavy rains come.

Pest and disease control

Crops must be adequately protected to avoid leaf destruction and poorgrowth. In view of the high cost of biocides, frequent unavailability inmany rural communities in developing countries, and environmentalhazards, methods of control besides the use of chemicals, e.g. biologi-cal control and integrated pest management involving the use ofmultiple cropping, rotation, resistant varieties must be pursued.

Crop rotation

This can promote healthier and rapid crop growth and ground coverby preventing the build-up of pests and diseases and by improving soilproperties.

Plant spacing

Many crops have traditionally been planted in rows far enough apartto permit interrow tillage to kill weeds, spraying of pesticides, appli-cation of supplemental fertilizer and the harvesting of the crops. Thisis applicable to mechanized crop production on flat land or gentleslopes but not on steep slopes where mechanization is not feasible. Inaddition, interrow cultivation keeps the soil loose and thereforeerodible. There is usually more erosion in row crops than closergrowing crops.

The number of plants grown per hectare can be very important toboth yield and erosion control. Many crops can be grown on hillsidesat row spacings that are less than those recommended for flat landwithout reducing yield [Mohammed and Gumbs 1982]. In some casesyield can be increased. Mohammed and Gumbs have shown that thecloser spacing reduces soil loss. The closer spacing is therefore

Measures Appropriate for Integrating into Farming Systems 57

Figure 7.1 urass barrier of vetiver


preferred on hillsides in the Caribbean where crop husbandry is notmechanized. It also provides earlier ground cover, higher leaf arearatio and better ground protection against raindrop impact.

Contour cultivationAn important practice on hillsides is contour cultivation. On gentleslopes it can largely eliminate soil erosion and on steeper slopes it cancontribute to the reduction of soil loss. Tillage, planting and other cropcultivation activities must be carried out on the contour. For this reasonit is important for all farmers on hillsides to be taught how to lay outcontour lines using the "A" frame. The details of the construction anduse of the "A" frame are given by Gumbs [1987].

Vegetative barriers

Live or dead vegetation can form effective barriers for controlling orreducing erosion even on steep slopes. Examples are described below.

Crass barriers

Grass barriers are strips of grass planted at intervals on the contour(Figure 7.1) and are used frequently in the Caribbean. They can alsobe established by leaving 0.5-1.0 m strips of land untilled at intervalson the contour. Local grasses and other weeds soon become estab-lished as barriers. Several grass species can be used for the plantedgrass barrier. Vetiver or Khus Khus (Vetiveria zizanioides) is the mostpopular or commonly used grass. Other grasses used include Napiergrass (Pennisetum pupureum), Guatemala grass (Tripsacum laxum) andGuinea grass (Panicum maximum).

Some farmers prefer not to use grass barriers because they claim itoccupies too much space on their small holdings or it encourages thenesting of rodents. To overcome the unattractiveness of growingnon-commercial species as barriers, commercially viable species, e.g.pineapple, aloe vera, can be substituted, or commercial products canbe developed from vetiver. This latter approach cannot be undertakenby individual small farmers but would need technical and businessenterprise support and cooperative farming.

Grass barriers are adapted to hillsides where orchards or row cropsare to be established, but are not suitable for slopes which are stony,non-uniform and where many gullies exist. The soil trapped behindthe barrier gradually converts it into terraces.

The normal width of a grass barrier is 0.3-0.5 m (10-15 ft), but itshould be wider on steep credible soils. On the gentler slopes (10-20percent) grass barriers can be 20-40 m (70-140 ft) apart; on steeper


slopes (20-40 percent) they should be 10-20 m (35-70 ft) apart. If grassbarriers are used with mini-terraces or hillside ditches, the distancesbetween barriers can be increased.

Construction procedure:

- Clear the contour line of obstacles (e.g. stones, shrubs) andsmooth out land irregularities

- Stake out the barrier lines with stakes every 5-10 m (17-35 ft)

- Use fresh root cuttings for planting material; plant two rowsclosely in a staggered or triangular pattern to form one grassbarrier; the spacing between plants can be 10-30 cm (4-12 in.)depending on grass species

- Cut grass 15 cm (6 in.) above ground level to promote regrowth

Dead vegetation barriers

Various types of dead vegetation, e.g. tree trunks and branches,banana pseudostems and leaves or trash (Figures 7.2 and 7.3), grassand other vegetative cuttings, and bamboo (Figures 7.4 and 7.5) canbe used as trash lines or barriers which are staked along the contour,or simply laid out without staking if the vegetation cannot readily bewashed downslope.

Further details of the techniques are presented by Gumbs [1987].Mulching over the soil surface as a whole (not in trash lines or bands)is very effective in reducing soil erosion but the mulch must provideadequate coverage and must not be readily washed downslope. Thisis sometimes a problem where the slope is steep and the mulch is thin.This method of using vegetation to reduce erosion can be exploited inprogrammes of tree crop rehabilitation.

Cropping systems

There are two basic types of cropping systems: monocropping andmultiple cropping. The latter is very much the more desirable systemon hillsides but sometimes farmer preference and other considerationsmay make monocropping the desired system. Monocrops, however,have to be grown in a way that limits soil erosion since this system isthe most difficult to manage to achieve acceptable levels of erosioncontrol on sloping lands.

Monocropping

Monocropping is the growing of a single crop species on a given areaof land in a given time. In a monocropping system, especially with


Figure 7.2 Banana pseudostem and trash barrier


Figure 7.3 Trash barrier in banana field


Figure 7.4 Bamboo barrier


non-perennial crops, the land may remain bare for a period of time.This is the time when the soil is most prone to erosion. In this casemonocrops have to be combined with some form of soil conservationmeasure (such as barriers, drains or mulching) to prevent erosion.

If the monocrop is a tree then the threat of soil erosion is not severe,especially if the tree crop is planted on the contour. Figure 7.6 showscitrus planted on the contour but the plants in successive rows are notstaggered. Therefore, the rows appear to be up and down the hill. Theyoung citrus plants in the foreground of Figure 7.7 cannot protect thesoil and therefore a grass ground cover is essential. If the tree crop hasto be replanted on steep slopes, the young trees can be interplantedamong the older trees which are progressively removed as the youngtrees become large enough to provide soil protection.

The type of monocrop must be suitable for the slope on which it isto be planted or must be combined with soil conservation measures.The following guidelines can be followed:

Degrees

0-5 Any monocrop

5-10 Any monocrop and barriers

10-20 Avoid growing small annual crops; large crops like banana, plantainand barriers and/or drains; fruit trees or tree crops

20-30 Fruit trees, tree crops (e.g. cocoa, coffee)

30-40 As for 20-30° but with drains, or forest

Over 40 Forest

When monocropping systems are used, especially with smallannual crops, careful attention must be paid to the agronomic factorsmentioned above. Good soil fertility management, most suitable cropvarieties, closer row spacing, good pest and disease control, and croprotation can reduce soil erosion and, in effect, be good soilconservation measures.

Multiple cropping

Multiple cropping is defined here as the growing of more than onecrop simultaneously on the same area of land. It does not includesequential cropping where two or more crops are grown in sequenceon the same field each year.Multiple cropping is therefore synonymous with intercropping andmay be:


Figure 7.5 Bamboo and trash barrier


Figure 7.6 Citrus on the contour with rows unstaggered


Figure 7.7 Citrus on the contour and grass cover in young citrus


Figure 7.8 Mixed intercropping with no distinct rows


Figure 7.9 Row intercropping with several crops


Mixed intercroppingTwo or more crops are grown simultaneously with no distinct rowarrangement (Figure 7.8)

Row intercroppingTwo or more crops are grown simultaneously where one or more cropsare interplanted in rows (Figure 7.9)

Strip intercroppingTwo or more crops are grown simultaneously in different strips wideenough to permit independent cultivation but narrow enough tointeract agronomically

Relay intercroppingTwo or more crops are grown simultaneously during part of the lifecycle of each: a second crop is planted after the first crop has reachedits reproductive stage of growth but before it is ready for harvest

Intercropping is a good method of soil conservation because theground is always covered or can be arranged to be always covered withvegetation. There may be only short periods when the ground is notfully covered. Under these conditions, raindrops are intercepted, rateand amount of runoff are decreased and erosion is markedly reduced.

The intercrops may be similar in height or they may be at differentelevations providing a tiered canopy. Intercrops in which the leavesand roots occupy or dominate different elevations above and belowthe ground, respectively, have certain distinct advantages in theefficient utilization of growth factors for rapid crop growth.Agroforestry systems are good examples and these are discussed fromthe soil conservation view point.

Agroforestry systems

Agroforestry refers to land use systems in which woody perennials aregrown in association with crops and/or animals on the same land unit.The different forms of agroforestry are:

agrisilviculture (trees and crops)silvopastoral (trees, pasture and livestock)agrisilvopastoral (trees, crops, pasture and livestock)other combinations (e.g. trees and bees, trees and fishpond)


There are both economic and ecological benefits to be derived fromagroforestry systems. In order for the agroforestry system to besustainable it must be environmentally sound, economically andtechnically feasible, and sociologically acceptable to the farmers.

Trees can be used specifically for soil stabilization and erosioncontrol by, for example, mechanical reinforcement from the rootsystem, root wedging, buttressing, interception of raindrops, physicalbarrier to soil and water movement downslope, accumulation of soilorganic matter from leaf litter and consequently improvement of soilphysical properties. Land use problems can be ameliorated byagroforestry systems, e.g. soil erosion, declining soil fertility,deforestation, forest degradation, pasture degradation, riverdegradation, and crop and animal protection. Trees can provide food,animal feed, energy (fuelwood, charcoal), shelter (materials forhousing), raw materials and cash income for social commitments.Trees can therefore play very important roles environmentally,economically and sociologically in hillside farming if suitable treespecies are selected and used appropriately. This has been emphasizedin the land use and watershed management reports of the TFAP from1991 to 1992.

Agrisilviculture

Spatial arrangement of trees

Figure 7.10 shows the different spatial arrangements of trees in agris-ilviculture agroforestry systems.

The random mixture is commonly used in the Caribbean whereforest species, coconut or citrus may be the tree crops which are inter-planted with banana or other food crops (see Figures 7.11 and 7.12).Sometimes the trees on the land are not removed or some trees areplanted to provide shade, fruits, additional income and soil conser-vation. An example of this is shown in Figure 7.13 where pineapplehas been planted on land with mango and other tree species.

In the alley cropping system annual food crops are grown in thespaces (alleys) formed by hedgerows of woody perennials. The woodyperennials include legumes, bamboo and various shrubs. Leucaenaleucocephala, Gliriddia sepium, Acacia mangium, Calliandra calothyrsusare the more common species used in the Caribbean. Cajanus cajanand Sesbania grandiflora are good candidates but they have not beenused in this way. The hedgerows are cut at intervals during croppingto minimize shading and to reduce competition with the crop.


Trees alongborder

Foodcrops Trees along

—border

Food row tree row

Alternaterows

Alternatestrips or

alley cropping

Strips of food crops —n Strips of trees

Randommixture

O Treesx Annual food crop

Figure 7.10 Spatial arrangements of agroforestry systems


Figure 7.11 Agrisilviciture system with several tiers of crops


Figure 7.12 Agrisilviculture system of citrus and banana


Figure 7.13 Pineapple planted on land without removing all trees


The cuttings may be used for animal feed or as mulch. If the hedgerowsare allowed to grow during non-cropping periods, they can be cut forfirewood, charcoal, stakes or fence posts.

Where alley cropping is carried out on sloping land the perennialhedgerows are planted on the contour across the slope. This systemhas been shown to increase yields and reduce erosion.

Tree crop rehabilitation for erosion control

Soil erosion on farms with poorly maintained tree crops can be reducedby a programme of crop rehabilitation. Trees are trimmed, prunedand fertilized and the trimmings applied to the soil as barriers or asmulch where possible to reduce erosion. This method of soil conserva-tion is appealing to farmers because it is inexpensive and results inimproved crop growth, yield and income. Pruning can be repeated asappropriate and the method of soil conservation can be combined withother methods like intercropping to further reduce erosion.

Silvopastoral and agrisilvopastoral systems

Caribbean farmers have found combining trees with livestock, or treeswith livestock and annual crops economically and sociologically bene-ficial. Systems utilizing coconut (or citrus), pasture and cattle and/orsheep are common. While farmers are reluctant to grow grass asbarriers or as pastures for soil conservation, they are more receptiveto growing grass if livestock is included in the system. With such asystem the farmer practices soil conservation without making a con-scious effort. Alternatively, he can be encouraged to adopt soil conser-vation measures if it brings economic benefits.

Because livestock can damage young trees the system must preventthis from taking place. Livestock can be introduced when the trees aremature or hardy. Cattle can be provided with a nose-shield to preventeating the developing trees. Goats are not used in these systemsbecause of their ability to graze excessively even on the barks of trees.If annual crops are grown in combination with trees and livestock, theannual crops must not be accessible to livestock during crop growthand harvest.


Simple Engineering Methods

Sometimes agronomic or biological methods are not fially effective incontrolling erosion and these methods have to be combined withphysical structures. The latter has to be simple and low cost if they areto be acceptable to small farmers. There are four types of engineeringstructures which are relevant to small farmers of the Caribbean.

- Contour or cut-off drains

- Downslope waterways

- Mini-terraces and eyebrow terraces

- Gully control structuresStorm drains are large drains at the top boundary of the farm. It is

seldom relevant in the Caribbean context of several non-contiguoussmall farmers located at different elevations on the hillside. It wouldbe meaningless for a small farmer to dig a storm drain at the topboundary of his small holding without provision for the safe dischargeof the intercepted water. Frequently a cut-off or contour drain isadequate.

Stone barriers are not recommended for the Caribbean. They arevery labour demanding and are really only feasible where stone iscommonplace on the site and especially if it restricts farming. Thereare few places where all the conditions are right.

Contour or cutoff drains

Cutoff drains may be needed at intervals in the cultivation to limit theoverland flow of water. These drains may be at 10- to 30-m (35- to105-ft) intervals along the slope depending on the degree of slope andintensity of rainfall. In some cases the interval is 50m (175 ft) or more.Cutoff drains are to be constructed when there is evidence of soil washand erosion rills on the farm or on other farms on the same soil typeemploying similar agricultural practices. They should be combinedwith other conservation measures to prevent erosion of soil betweenthe drains. Where the highest point on the farm adjoins the public orfarm road, a cutoff drain should be placed a few metres below roadwaylevel.

Cutoff drains usually measure 50 or 60 cm (20 in. or 2 ft) wide and40 cm (15 in.) deep. In stable clayey soils almost vertical side wallscan be used, but in the more unstable sandy soils, the walls mustrecline. Excavated soil from construction can be placed on the


Figure 7.14 Cutoff drain


Figure 7.15 Eroded cutoff drain


Figure 7.16 Ridge and furrow mini-terraces


Figure 7.17a Mini-terrace or hillside ditch with citrus (orchard terrace)


downslope side of the drain to form an embankment. A relativelyshallow cutoff drain is shown in Figure 7.14. The cutoff drain in theforeground of the banana field in Figure 7.15 has either beenconstructed too large or there has been erosion and enlargement ofthe drain. The side slopes are largely unprotected and prone to furthererosion.

Downslope waterways

Water from the cutoff drains and terraces should be discharged into anatural waterway, non-erodible stony ground, grassland with goodcover, or an artificial waterway.

An artificial waterway is a wide and shallow drainage channel forbringing water safely downslope. The downslope grade of thewaterway should not exceed 25 percent. On steeper slopes, checkdams should be used. If water from the cutoff drain has to flow downthe bank of a river, especially if it has a steep grade, the flow pathshould be protected with stone or grass sod. The inlet, in particular,must be stabilized with stone or grass sod. If the water is dischargedonto grassland, the cutoff drain should be widened at the dischargeend to distribute the water over a larger grassed area.

Mini-terraces

Several types of terraces have been described and construction speci-fications given by Gumbs [1987]. The bench terrace and modifiedbench terrace have several disadvantages. They are costly to construct,require much labour if constructed manually, and can result in re-duced crop yields due to exposure of poorer subsoil. The mini-terrace,sometimes referred to as a hillside ditch, does not have these disad-vantages and is more manageable by small farmers.

The procedure followed in forming mini-terraces is as follows:- Contour lines are established where the centre of the terrace

will be located. The spacing between contour lines will dependmainly on the steepness of the slope, rainfall intensity and cropsto be grown.

- Starting from the top of the hill or where the uppermost terracewill be located, the soil is pulled downward to form themini-terrace on which crops will be grown. The mini-terraceslopes backwards so that it functions as a drainage channelwhich is established on a 5 percent grade across the slope. Someterraces may be left uncropped and are used for traffickingacross the hill.


- If the terraces and drainage channels abut each other the fieldlayout is referred to as ridging or ridge and furrow (Figure 7.16).

A mini-terrace with citrus grown on the terrace is shown in Figure7.17a. In this case it is referred to c s an orchard terrace. Sometimesthe land between the terraces alone is cropped and the terraces areused for drainage and traffic. In other cases both areas are croppedwith food crops as shown in the diagram in Figure 7.17b.

Eyebrow terraces are short or discontinuous mini-terraces acrossthe slope. They, therefore, give the appearance of eyebrows across theslope of the hill.

Gully control

Gullies are developed by water erosion and will continue unless thegully is stabilized by structural control measures and revegetation.Gullies can be classified by size and by shape.

Cully size Cully depth (m)

Small <1.0

Medium 1.0-5.0

Large >5.0

These can have shapes that are U shaped, V shaped or trapezoidal incross section.

Figure 7.17b Mini-terraces with both the terraces and the land betweenthe terraces cropped


Large gullies and most of the medium sized gullies requiresubstantial cement masonry structures which are beyond thecapability of most small farmers. A large gully often affects severalfarmers and sometimes the community as well. The plugging orcontrol of these gullies usually requires the intervention of governmentor other agency.

Cully treatment measures

Filling and shapingSmall gullies with low water flow can be stabilized by filling andshaping after the surface water is diverted. Steep gully heads and gullybanks should be shaped to a gentler slope (about 1:1). The gullies canbe filled in by spade, shovels and plough. However, filling, shapingand diversion alone will not be enough to control gullies where therainfall is very heavy. Additional gully control and slope stabilizationmeasures such as check dams, stone barriers, wattles and revegetationshould be undertaken.

Grade stabilization structuresIf a gully is too large to be eliminated by filling, shaping and revege-tation, it must be stabilized against further erosion. Two approachescan be followed:(i) Temporary structural measures such as woven wire with or with-

out stone or rock fill, brush wood, logs, loose stone and bouldercheck dams can be used to facilitate the establishment andgrowth of permanent vegetation. The structure must be designedin relation to the size of the gully, the rainfall intensity and rateof water flow in the gully to prevent it becoming readily washedaway.

(ii) Permanent check dams may be constructed across the gully bedto stop channel and lateral erosion, reduce the original gradientof the gully bed, and the velocity of flow and erosive power ofrunoff. Check dams can be made of gabion baskets, wire androck fill, masonry concrete. The check dam must be designedand constructed to withstand the maximum flow of water in thegully. Check dams for large gullies require engineering skills.The gully catchment must be well vegetated to prevent erosionto the gully edges and walls.

Number and spacing of check damsThe number of check dams required is determined from the gully reach(total length of the gully) and the longitudinal profile or slopes of the


gully bed between the proposed first and last check dam. Figure 7.18shows graphically an example of the longitudinal profile along thegully bed. It shows the angle and vertical height of rise of the gully bedat different horizontal distances. The angles can be measured with aclinometer or dumpy level and the horizontal ground distance with atape starting from the bottom to the top of the gully.

The gradient between each check dam is called the "compensationgradient". It is formed when material carried by flowing water fills thecheck dams to spillway level. The compensation gradient, the effectiveheight of the check dam and the longitudinal profile determine thespacing between check dams. The check dams are located on the graphof the longitudinal profile by:

- selecting the location of the first check dam at the lowest point inthe gully reach;

- identifying the effective height of the first check dam;

- starting at the effective height a 3 percent slope line is drawn tointersect the profile. The point of intersection is the location ofthe second check dam site. The process is repeated to determinepoints where the ensuing check dams are to be built.

The number of check dams required is obtained by counting theintersections on the profile curve.

Figure 7.18 Longitudinal profile of gully bed


Surveying the cross section of the gullyThe profile of the cross section is the major factor in the determinationof the dimension of the check dam and hence the cost of construction.The cross section is measured as indicated in Figure 7.19 at the pointwhere the check dam is to be located. Two rods, a measuring tape anda carpenter's level are sufficient to measure the cross section profile.

One worker holds the rod vertically at location A in the centre of thegully bed (the lowest point of the cross section). Another holds theother rod horizontally by using a carpenter's level so that one end ofthe rod intersects the vertical rod at O and the other end touches theground at location B. The vertical rod at A is then moved to the pointwhere the first horizontal rod touches the ground, B, and thehorizontal rod is made to touch the ground at a new point and themeasurements recorded. This process is repeated at other points of thegully sides as shown in Figure 7.19. The cross-sectional profile, e.g.ABCD, is obtained from the vertical and horizontal distances of thetouching rods.

A is centre of gully; B, C and D, are 1 st, 2nd and 3rd touching points,dimensions in metres

Figure 7.19 Measuring the profile of the cross section of the gully

Construction procedures

The construction of check dams or earth plugs or gully plugs generallystart from the bottom to the top of the gully. However, if rocks for thedam have to be transported from the bottom to the top of the gullythrough the gully channel, then construction must start at the top.Construction must be done in the dry season.


Figure 7.20a Brushwood check dam

Figure 7.20b Cross section of brushwood check dam

Brushwood check damsTwo rows of posts are driven into the soil at intervals across the gullyfloor and brushwood is placed between the two posts as shown inFigures 20a and b to form the dam. A third row of shorter posts isdriven into the soil about 2-3 m (7-10 ft) downslope to form thelowermost of the three rows of posts or counter-dam. Brushwood isintertwined in this row of posts (Figure 7.20b). The main objectives ofthe check dam are to slow the rate of flow of water and to hold fine


Figure 7.21a Log check dam

Figure 7.2Ib Cross section of log check dam

material carried by the flowing water. Sediments collect at the up-stream sides of the dam and counter-dam to form a gully bed andapron, respectively, as shown. These reduce or absorb the energy offlow of water and prevent the gully floor around the check dam ordrop structure from being eroded. Vegetation should be established onthe brushwood side of the taller row of posts to further reduce thevelocity of flow of water and thereby stabilize the structure. Brushwooddams are temporary structures and are used as interim solutions.


Log check dams

Hardwood logs and posts are placed across the gully. They can alsobe built from poles, planks, heavy board and slabs. The main objectivesof log check dams are to reduce the velocity of flow of water in thegully and to stabilize gully heads.

Log check dams are designed in accordance with the geometry ofthe cross section. The front and cross-section of a log check dam arepresented in Figures 7.21 a and 7.21b. The following are the designconsiderations:

- The maximum height of a dam is 1.5 m (5 ft) from the groundlevel

- The length and depth of the spillway vary between 1.0 to 1.5 m(3-5 ft) and 0.5 to 0.6 m (1.75-2 ft)

- The length of posts used is 1.5 to 2.0 m (5-7 ft) and their top enddiameter more than 8 cm (3.125 ft)

- The ends of the logs should enter at least 50 cm (20 in.) intoeach side of the gully

- The tops of the posts should be tied with building wire

Loose stone check dam

Relatively small rocks are placed across the gully so that they sitproperly and interlock. The main objectives are to control water flowand channel erosion along the gully bed and to stop waterfall erosionby stabilizing gully heads. A loose stone check dam is sometimesreinforced with wire across the gully. The front view of a loose stonecheck dam is shown in Figure 7.22.

Figure 7.22 Loose stone check dam


Figure 7.23a Gabion check dam


Figure 7.23b Close-up of gabion check dam


The design specifications are as follows:- Maximum effective height of the dam is 1.0 m (3 ft), and its

foundation depth is at least 0.5 m (1.75 ft).- The foundation of the dam is dug so that the length of the

foundation will be more than the length of the spillway and thefoundation of the wings should be dug in such a manner that thewings will enter at least 50 cm (20 in.) into each side of the gullywall.

- The crest and middle must be constructed with bigger stonesthan the rest of the dam.

Gabion check dams and masonry check damsThese dams are generally too expensive and technically too difficultfor small farmers to construct. Gabion check dams constructed tostabilize a gully in the Scotland District of Barbados are shown inFigures 7.23a and 7.23b and a diagram of a masonry check dam isshown in Figure 7.24. The technical specifications are given below.

Specifications for gabion check dams

- The foundation of the dam should be excavated to a depth equalto one-half the effective height of the dam and the banks shouldbe excavated to allow the wings of the dam to enter at least 45cm (18 in.) into each bank.

- A layer of gabion baskets is placed in the area excavated for thefoundation baskets. The vertical sides of the baskets are tied withbinding wire of the same diameter as the wire of the baskets.

- Random rubble stones hard enough to withstand abrasion,non-disintegrating, and resistant to weathering, are packedinside the baskets. The bigger stones should be put along thesides of the baskets while the smaller ones occupy the middle.

- After filling of the gabion baskets with stones to one-third, placefive parallel ties between their inner and outer sides. Five moreare placed when the boxes are two-thirds full.

- After overfilling a gabion basket slightly to allow for subsequentsettlement, a lid is laced with binding wire to the top of the foursides. The lid must be stretched to fit exactly to the sides.

- If there is more than one layer of baskets in a gabion check dam,the ones in the upper layer must be laced to those below.

- The soil excavated for the foundation and from the gully bedshould be used as back fill behind the dam and wing walls.


Figure 7.24 Masonry check dam

Specifications for masonry check dams

- The dams should be built at a stable point of the gully bed justbelow the sliding area to hold debris and material as well as tostop the movement of soil.

- The foundation of the dam must be dug to a durable layer below,such as solid rock. If there is no solid layer, the foundationshould be dug at least 1 m (3 ft) deep, and a reinforced concretelayer at least 30 cm thick be constructed. On this concrete layer,the body of the masonry check dam must be built with randomrubble stones, and cement mortar (ratio 3:1).

- The wings should enter at least 1 m (3 ft) into the sides of thegully and where this is not possible due to rocks, the wing wallsshould be tied to the rocks using mortar.

- The foundation should be longer than the spillway.

- A weephole must be built at ground level and other weepholesbuilt in that section of the dam under the spillway.

- The upstream face of the dam is vertical, whereas the inclinationof the downstream face is 20 percent (0.2:1).

- Stones must be piled behind the mouth of the weephole.- The space behind the wings of the dam must be filled with soil to

a height equal to the depth of the spillway.


- The stones used in constructing masonry check dams must behard enough to withstand abrasion, non-disintegrating, andresistant to weathering.

Land Clearing

Many problems of severe erosion have their genesis at the time of landclearing. Land is usually cleared by land developers for agriculturaland non-agricultural uses and by farmers themselves. Land clearingfor agricultural land development may be large scale by privatefarmers or by the government for land settlement programmes, orsmall scale by small private farmers. In all cases the appropriate landclearing methods must be employed to avoid damage to the land andto minimize soil erosion.

Several factors have to be considered before choosing land clearingmethods. Lai and Russell [1980] have listed several of these whichinclude land area, history of land use, climatic conditions (inparticular amount and distribution of rainfall), vegetation (type,species, size and density), socioeconomic conditions (cost andavailability of labour), environmental issues (pollution potential,sediments), soil conditions/properties (soil type, stoniness),topography, soil management (tillage methods and harvestingtechniques), and intended land use.

Methods of land clearing

The methods of land clearing can be classified as follows:

ManualChemical (tree poisoning)

Ring barking

Burning

Mechanical

Manual land clearing

This involves the use of hand held mechanical tools, e.g. hoes, cutlass,spades, axes, winches and saws and is the method commonly used insubsistence agriculture. It is suitable for use under the following con-ditions:- small land area- available time


- cheap and available labour

- topography that is too steep, rugged, wet or rocky formechanized land clearing

- fragile sites which could be readily damaged by mechanized landclearing

- soil characteristics and environmental conditions do not justifylarge scale mechanical operations

With the manual method land can be cleared selectively and overtime so that large areas of soil do not remain unprotected during therainy season. The cleared areas should then be planted and cropsestablished before other areas are cleared. On steep sloping soils,trunks, branches, stems and other vegetative material can be laid onthe contour across the slope as a soil conservation measure asdiscussed earlier.

Manual land clearing is more expensive and time consuming perunit area of land than mechanized methods but it is recommended forCaribbean conditions where small farms and steep slopes aredominant.

Chemical methods

Trees and bushes can be killed with the use of chemical weedkillerssuch as 2,4-D without damage to the soil. The amount of chemical hasto be sufficient to kill the vegetation and prevent regeneration. Thehigh cost and unavailability of chemicals often make this methodunsuitable for small farmers.

Ring barking

The removal of the bark of trees in a complete circle can result in thedeath of certain species. Sometimes chemicals are used in conjunctionwith ring barking to speed up the rate of kill.

Burning

Vegetation is frequently burnt in the dry season before cutting theremaining standing material to clear the land. This method can havesome beneficial effects if the land is left fallow for a prolonged periodto allow for soil regeneration. Burning also increases the supply ofexchangeable bases and available phosphorous^ It is less damaging tothe soil than bulldozing but if steep slopes are to be left fallow the cutmaterial after burning should be used as barriers across the slope as asoil conservation measure.


Mechanized land clearing

Where large areas of land are to be cleared and labour is not cheapenough and available in large quantities to complete the job quickly,mechanized land clearing becomes necessary. The slope of the landmust not be too steep to prevent the safe operation of mechanizedequipment. Where the slope is steep, the chain-saw, as a mechanicalaid, is used to increase the rate of land clearing. The chain-saw is suchan effective tool for cutting trees that it is easy to use it wantonly andconsequently damage the environment.

Where the girth of woody perennials is not too large and the slopeof the land gentle/moderate, the brush cutter or jungle buster iseffective and can quickly clear the land. The bulldozer can be verydestructive to the soil when used to push down large trees and uproottree stumps. Many soils which support tall vegetation are often low infertility. They may be low in exchangeable bases, acid, shallow andhave undesirable physical properties. When they are cleared bybulldozers and the topsoil disturbed or removed, the remaining soilcannot support adequate crop growth. This has frequently led toaccelerated erosion. Care has to be taken when the bulldozer is used.Selected felling combined with soil conservation measures arerequired.

The use of chains for hauling cut timber with tractors from the fieldcan damage the soil. When the land is steep and cultivation will notbe mechanized, most of the cut timber can be left in the field to protectthe soil. Selected paths can be used to haul the remainder of the timberto minimize soil damage.


Eight

Integrated Soil Conservation Systems

The preceding chapters provided the principles and considerationsthat must be taken into account to successfully integrate soil conser-vation into farming systems. This chapter first examines the experi-ence of the Hillside Agricultural Project (HAP) of Jamaica where anattempt was made to involve farmer and community participation inproject design and implementation. Secondly, it examines broadly theexisting systems in the Caribbean where soil conservation has beenintegrated into farming systems.

Appendix B contains exercises which the student of soilconservation should carry out using the principles outlined in the bookto gain some practical experience.

Hillside Agricultural Project, Jamaica

The overall goal of HAP was to increase the economic well-being of theresidents of the hillside lands in two watersheds, Rio Minho and RioCobre, in a manner that promoted rational land use patterns.

The project was initiated in February 1987 and was completed in1994. It was funded by USAID at a cost of US$10 million. HAP itselfwas not a project implementing agency. It consisted of a core staff ofa project manager and deputy project manager and office supportstaff. It funded self-managing sub-projects (Hillside AgriculturalSub-projects or HASP) that promoted the production and productivityof perennial tree crops. Between 1987 and 1991, 16 sub-projects wereapproved and two were pending. Fourteen of the 16 sub-projects weresimilar in nature and were concerned with farm improvement. Theother two were a watershed inventory sub-project and a baseline studysub-project. The HAP had certain defined objectives and criteria andthe sub-projects had to satisfy these conditions before they wereapproved.

Integrated Soil Conservation Systems 11 3

It should be made clear that HAP was not a soil conservation projectper se and this was often not the primary objective of a sub-project.However, because erosion must be controlled if the improvement offarms on hillsides is to be sustained, soil conservation was recognizedas an important aspect of the project. However HASP did notemphasize soil conservation and this can be considered to be adeficiency in some cases.

The purpose of the project was to increase productivity and expandthe area of both export-oriented and domestic perennial crops. Thistargeted increase in agricultural production was expected to result inan increase in the productive employment of hillside residents and indisposable income. The specific goals and objectives of the sub-projectsvaried and included: increasing tree crop production and farmerincomes, improving crop development by introducing improvedtechnology, controlling soil erosion and land degradation, increasingcommunity participation and strengthening local institutions.

At the sub-project level specific targets or outcomes had to be setand quantified. An important consideration was that the detailedgoals and objectives should reflect local specific needs. All sub-projectshad to list a set of local constraints which would be addressed. Formaldetailed case assessments of local constraints through farmerinterviews, walk over surveys, or rapid rural appraisals were to beundertaken but these were not frequently achieved. In some cases, themajor problems common to an area were assessed through individualsor organizations with experience of previous work in the area, e.g.extension officers, NGOs.

The sixteen sub-projects approved and implemented were:1 St Mary Cocoa Growers Support

2 IICA/MINAG Farming Systems

3 Agroforestry Promotions

4 NW St Catherine Coffee

5 UNITAS

6 Upper Clarendon Processing Company

7 Manchester Rural Agricultural Development Agency (RADA)

8 Rio Minho Cocoa Expansion9 Guys Hill Coffee

10 Blackwoods11 Elgin12 Windsor


1 3 Mango Top-working

14 Above Rocks

15 Watershed Inventory

16 Baseline Survey

The first 14 sub-projects listed above had different specific objectivesand targets but they were all concerned with perennial or tree crops.It is not feasible to outline for each project the specific objectives andtargets, and the constraints to production which the projects sought toovercome, but the general approaches to project design,implementation and evaluation promulgated by HAP will beconsidered. The detailed project proposals and progress reports arelocated at the HAP office.

The key pillars of HAP strategy were:

- Community participation in all phases of the project cycle or the"bottom-up approach''

- Strengthening of local institutions

- Project implementation through a sponsoring organization

- Non-monetary incentives to farmers

- Extension service to farmers

- Crop improvement through agronomic and cropping systemsapproach

- Inclusion of soil conservation in the sub-projects

- Sustainability of sub-projects

Community participation

The HAP strategy calls for community participation from the problemidentification or planning stage, through project design, implementa-tion, monitoring and evaluation, i.e. the "bottom-up approach" in thetrue sense. Except for the IICA/MINAG Farming Systems sub-project,the projects have been weak in community participation in the firsttwo stages of the project cycle, The HAP proposal preparation involvessome discussion with farmers in targeted districts but a more in-depthprocess is required. In many cases this information is supplementedby information from NGOs and extension officers with experience inthe area. A preliminary needs assessment is obtained during theprocess. Farmers and the community have not really been involved inproject planning.


There has, however, been greater success in communityinvolvement in project implementation. All sub-projects haveincorporated this approach by establishing local managementcommittees (LMC) which include representatives of local farmerorganizations and other community representatives. The FarmerAction Committee Team (FACT) of the IICA/MINAG sub-project is thebest example of farmer mobilization and community participation inHAP. (This was discussed in chapter 3.) FACT has functioned in allstages of the project cycle and should be adopted by othersub-projects. Apart from FACT, communities of other projects havenot participated in project monitoring and evaluation. The strategytherefore needs to be implemented more fully if it is to achieve theobjective of project adoption and sustainability

An alternative to the FACT strategy is to use existing localorganizations that are functioning efficiently, e.g. cooperatives andselect Jamaica Agricultural Society (JAS) branches. In some cases thesemay need strengthening to improve their effectiveness.

Strengthening local institutions

One of the aims of the HAP is to strengthen the capacity of localcommunity organizations, such as JAS branches, coffee and cocoacooperatives, and youth organizations, to initiate and implementprojects. This would encourage farmer participation in project imple-mentation and ensure sustainability. The success depends on thepresence of existing functioning organizations which can benefit fromthe sub-project. This is not always the case.

Sponsoring organizations or implementing agencies

The implementation of sub-projects through permanent organizationswith suitable experience has the advantage of permanence as regardsfuture institutional support. Organizations have different strengths,resources, capabilities and effectiveness. These must be carefully as-sessed in relation to the requirements of the project and the capacityof the organization to deliver efficiently.

Non-monetary incentives

For sustainability, the project does not offer cash incentives or cashsubsidies for soil conservation because farmers come to depend oncash support and never take full responsibility for soil conservation.The experience of the HAP has been that soil conservation declines orceases with the removal of subsidies.


Extension service to farmers

Similar extension approaches are used by the sub-projects. Districtmeetings are held to inform farm families of the assistance to beprovided by the sub-project and to distribute applications. The appli-cations are reviewed by the local management committee and thefarms are visited by the staff to decide if the farmers qualify forparticipation.

Training sessions are held by way of field days, seminars,demonstrations and workshops. Field visits are the primary methodused to ensure that farmers utilize the appropriate cultural methodsand soil conservation practices. The Socioeconomic Impact Studyrevealed that 92 percent of all respondents were visited. Thedemonstration plots on farmers' fields are the focus of the trainingdays which provide the mechanism for farmers both within andoutside the sub-projects to learn the particular production technology.The demonstration plot was an important extension methodology butit did not cover all the techniques that needed to be demonstrated.Fertilizer application, pruning and plant spacing were the mainpractices demonstrated. This may be because cocoa and coffee werethe primary focus and the extension message seemed to be thepromotion of the practices recommended by the cocoa and coffeeboards.

The report on the Comparative Analysis of the Hillside AgriculturalProject and Sub-Projects by the Caribbean AgriculturalCommunications Services Ltd (CACS) revealed that soil conservationtechniques received the least attention of the five primary extensionmessages promoted by the sub-projects. On average a third of thefarmers received some instruction in soil conservation. The AboveRocks sub-project was the lowest with only 10 percent receiving soilconservation advice. According to the farmers, the most effectiveextension approach was the extension worker visits (49 percent); fielddays came next (17 percent); then group meetings (9 percent); anddemonstration plots last with 3 percent. About a quarter (23 percent)felt that they were all equally important.

The extension service was rated as good by 80 percent of therespondents while the remainder felt that there needed to be bettercommunications.


Agronomic Approach/Cropping Systems Approach/Soil Con-servation

The HAP concept is that the most suitable form of development forsmall holder hillside agriculture is a perennial crop regime incorporat-ing sound conservation practices. The perennial crops were mainlycocoa, coffee, forestry species and other tree crops (e.g. coconut,mango, avocado).

The agronomic approaches were concerned mainly with plantingnew trees to adjust or increase previously low plant populations andwith rehabilitation by pruning, fertilization and shade control.Generally, it represented the implementation of the package ofpractices recommended by the commodity boards, and tested overmany years.

Cropping systems included the use of bananas, plantains, rootcrops, legumes and vegetables. Many were associated with cocoa andcoffee which were frequently the main crops. The improvement in theperformance of the minor crops was not monitored and thereforeconclusion on the effectiveness of the project on these crops could notbe drawn.

Specific attempts to address soil conservation were not common incocoa fields. There were very few gully plugs/check dams, hillsideditches, barriers. The principle applied was that the establishment orpresence of trees addressed the high priority placed on soilconservation by most sub-projects.

There was, however, sensitivity to the greater need for imposing soilconservation practices for coffee, where leaf accumulations did notparallel the cocoa situation. There was a widespread occurrence ofcontour grass, stone or bush barriers, as part of the cultivation system.The imposition of minimum tillage, strip cropping and mulches wereemphasized on demonstration plots.

The sub-projects which have emphasized agroforestry, nurserydevelopment with youth participation, integration of fruit treedevelopment with processing, mango top-working to convertnon-commercial mangoes into exportable varieties, are commendablebut the technical competence, management on a continuing basis, andmarketing are not always in place and haveoene r i n t o u sn( o)Tj0 Tc (r)Tj19201 Tc 06241 Tw 92 Tz sustainabil witn of t h ehgn p a h i c h a n d

Existing Integrated Soil Conservation Systems in theCaribbean

In the Caribbean many different mixed cropping or mixed farmingsystems exist. The systems are usually designed specifically for eco-nomic: reasons but some are associated with specific agronomic or landmanagement practices for the purpose of soil conservation. The exist-ing farming systems have not been fully assessed economically andtechnologically. The Caribbean Agricultural Research and Develop-ment Institute (CARDI) attempted to address the improvement ofagricultural production and productivity through a Farming SystemsResearch and Development (FSRD) Project. A major objective was toimprove the systems employed by farmers through the incorporationand integration of appropriate technologies in the systems.

Consideration is given here to the systems on hillsides which canbe grouped as follows:

(a) Monocropping of tree crops(b) Systems based on tree crops

(c) Systems based on banana

(d) Systems without tree crops

Monocropping of tree crops

Pure stands of cocoa, citrus, coconuts, forest species and, to a lesserextent, fruit trees are the main tree crops cultivated. Grass is oftenassociated with coconuts for grazing of livestock. These tree cropsstabilize the soil, especially if leaf litter is present or allowed toaccumulate. This system effectively conserves the soil on all classes ofslope against erosion. Small and large livestock are sometimes intro-duced into the system. Large stock (cattle) can damage the soil in thewet season and increase erosion. Therefore, the numbers and thesystem have to be carefully managed.

Systems based on tree crops

At higher altitudes the dominant tree crop maybe cocoa, citrus, spices,coconuts or coffee. The farmer then chooses from a multiplicity of cashand food crops such as vines, bushes and ground crops for fillingappropriate spaces. The times of planting and harvesting are such thatthe ground is always covered or occupied by crops, and consequentlyis very effective in conserving the soil against erosion. The random

Integrated Soil Conservation Systems t 19

distribution of the crop mix prohibits mechanization. If inorganicfertilizers are used these are applied to individual crops in relation tothe time of planting.

If the tree crop is not sufficiently dominant to prevent the soil fromeroding, log or trash barriers are used to reduce erosion.

Systems based on banana

Banana may be grown as the dominant crop with a tree crop (e.g.citrus, coconut) and/or one or more cash or food crops as intercrop.The favourable price of bananas over recent years has led to thegradual replacement of the tree crop which may have been thedominant crop to the point where banana is dominant or exists aspure stand. In these systems the ground is always covered or largelycovered by a crop or is associated with contour drains or barriers toreduce erosion.

Systems without tree crops

A random or systematic mix of several cash or food crops is common.The farmer may choose as many as six to ten different crops in his mixmainly to spread his risk and income distribution. The mix of crops isgenerally randomly distributed and serves, incidentally, to ensure thatthe ground is always partly or completely covered by a crop and toreduce the spread of disease. Sometimes one of the crops (e.g. pigeonpea, yam, pineapple) is grown at intervals on the contour and theother crops occupy the spaces between these contour crops with orwithout vegetative or trash mulching.


Nine

Conclusions

Soil erosion is a serious problem in the Caribbean. Several efforts havebeen made and continue to be made to reduce or minimize soil erosionbut it has been recognized that historically farmers do not often adoptsoil conservation methods on their own volition or even when themethods are demonstrated to them. This failure arises from the use ofsoil conservation methods that are not appropriate to the physical,social and economic environment. Therefore, the social context andmethods of extension are critical.

In the Caribbean most of the farmers on hillsides are resource-poorsmall farmers who do not have a soil conservation culture, and whohave limited formal education and training. Therefore, the methodsof soil conservation must be simple, inexpensive and must preferablygive an economic benefit quickly and must not compete seriously forscarce labour. In the past the focus has been on physical or engineeringmethods but adoption of these methods has been limited. A differentapproach is therefore needed. There are many practices which are notnormally associated with soil conservation but which can reduceerosion. In this regard the agronomic or biological methods are veryimportant.

The two parts of this book have considered the institutional,sociological and technical factors which are necessary for thesuccessful implementation and adoption of soil conservation projects.Experience in the Caribbean has shown that the following factors areessential:

- strong institutional base to promote soil conservation- enforcement of existing relevant legislation

- active, knowledgeable and adequate numbers of extensionworkers with good communication skills

- identification of critical behavioural factors at the project designstage to ensure that changes are sustained

Conclusions 121

- early identification of farmers with the project (from the designstage) and active involvement throughout the project, i.e. thebottom-up approach

- identification and involvement of community leaders in bringingabout change

- public awareness and education- proven inexpensive or cost effective technologies

The institutional and sociological factors have been considered inPart I. Part II has concentrated on the technical requirements, and hasemphasized that agronomic or biological methods which can beintegrated into the farming system are more cost effective thanphysical or engineering methods and more readily adopted byfarmers. Since gullies are common problems on farms located onhillsides, appropriate methods for their control are given prominence.The methods of control inevitably involve some simple engineeringtechniques but the methods presented are simple, and sufficientinformation is given to be of practical benefit.

It is hoped that this approach of integrating soil conservation intofarming systems will be widely appreciated and adopted and that thisbook will contribute to this process.


APPENDIXES

APPENDIX I

Key Articles of Legislation

The key articles of legislation which have relevance to soil conserva-tion are presented below for several Caribbean countries.

Antigua and Barbuda

The Forestry Act (1941) focuses on the prevention of deforestation andthe encouragement of reforestation. It requires that a permit beobtained from the CFO to clear land for cultivation, pasturage or otherpurpose, or to cut, lop or fell any timber or burn any wood or charcoalwithin the forest reserve. It empowers the governor general to declareany estate or part thereof to be under the operation of a reforestationscheme, or to make regulations for the management and control ofactivities in the forest reserves. Provision is also made for compensa-tion to estate owners carrying out afforestation schemes.

The Land Development and Control Act (1977) provides for theorderly and progressive development of land in urban and rural areasand the preservation and improvement of the amenities of such areas.It requires permission to develop any land but expressly removes thedevelopment of land for agricultural purposes.

The Antigua Agricultural Development Corporation Act (1978)establishes the corporation whose functions are to stimulate, facilitateand undertake the development of agriculture in the state; to developand manage, on a commercial basis, such plantations and otheragricultural land as may from time to time be vested in it; and toadminister such agricultural development schemes. It definesagriculture to include forestry, but it does not specify the requirementsfor good husbandry and soil management.

The Agricultural Small Holdings Act requires tenants of smallholdings to practise good husbandry.

The Crown Lands (Regulation) Act (1917) entitles the competent

124 APPENDIX I

authority to establish conditions for the lease of state lands. This cantherefore be structured to accommodate the objectives of good landmanagement and general management policy.

The Draft Forestry and Wildlife Act, if enacted into law, willsupersede the existing Forestry Act (1941). It provides, inter alia, forthe conservation, management and development of forests;protection of water reserves and promotion of proper soil and forestconservation practices.

Barbados

In Barbados most of the soil conservation effort has been concentratedin the Scotland District. The Soil Conservation Unit (SCU), establishedin 1957 to control and reverse soil erosion problems in the ScotlandDistrict, is perhaps the best institutional arrangement for soil conser-vation in the Caribbean. The programme is directed and monitoredby the Scotland District Soil Conservation Board comprising the deputyCAO (chairman), senior agricultural officer, chief technical director,general manager of the water authority, chief town planner and fourothers nominated by the MOA to include representatives of the agri-cultural community. Functions include advising the CAO on landutilization to prevent soil erosion. The CAO, after consultation withthe board may prepare conservation proposals. The legal authorityfor carrying out the work of the unit was provided by the Soil Conser-vation (Scotland District) Act (1958) which gave wide powers to theCAO in consultation with the Soil Conservation Board. The 1991 SoilConservation (Scotland District) Amendment Act now empowers gov-ernment, through the board, to enter private lands for soil conserva-tion; it can charge the owners for work done and can restrict or dictatethe use of the land. The SCU is managed by a soil conservationspecialist and a deputy and they are supported by supervisory andfield staff.

This institutional structure for soil conservation should beconsidered as a model for the Caribbean. It has the potential forintegrating the inputs of relevant technical sectors and the farmingcommunity to achieve the multidisciplinary approach to soilconservation. A successful institutional arrangement requires that theexecuting or responsible agency be fully aware and that there isinteraction between the relevant government organizations, researchand academic institutions and private interests. The government's rolewould be management , publ ic educat ion, regulation and

Key Articles of Legislation 125

enforcement; research and academic centres would be concerned withdata gathering, information processing and dissemination; and thepublic would voice demands and assist in implementation andawareness. These other aspects can be included in the Barbados modelfor greater effectiveness.

The Barbados Agricultural Development Corporation wasestablished to facilitate and stimulate agricultural development andto develop and manage government plantations. It provides for soilconservation within the coral region (non-Scotland District) ofBarbados by the establishment of grasslands and soil and waterconservation works.

Specific focus on the environment is being initiated in some of theterritories. In Barbados, an Environmental Unit is located in theMinistry of Labour, Consumer Affairs and the Environment. Proposalshave been made to create a Department of the Environment withinthe ministry. It would rationalize the current diverse institutionalframework for environmental management and formulate anEnvironmental Act.

The other legislative instruments which pertain to agriculture andcan be used to support the soil conservation effort are:

(a) The Cultivation of Trees Act: promotes and provides incentivesfor cultivation of approved trees

(b) The Tree Preservation Act: prohibits the cutting down of any treeof a defined size without approval

(c) The Security of Tenure Small Holding Act: provides for terms oftenure and reasonable security for the tenants of land 4 hectares(10 acres) or less

(d) The Cane Fires (Prevention) Act: prohibits lighting of fires inconservation areas and the destruction or interference withtrees, shrubs and plants in these areas

(e) The Land Acquisition Act: The Crown Lands (Vesting and Dis-posal) Act makes provision in the public interest for compulsoryacquisition, vesting in the Crown or disposal of land

(f) The Livestock (Control of Strays) Act; Animal Act: caters for thetrespass of animals on land and damage to land

Dominica

The Forest Ordinance 1959, the original forest legislation, deals withthe designation of forest reserves and the control over forest produce.

126 APPENDIX I

It authorizes the designation of private land as protected forests forwater and soil conservation and other public purposes, The ForestRules (1972) made under the ordinance specify the actions that areprohibited in a forest reserve and give details for issuing licences andpermits to harvest forest produce (including timber and charcoal) andfor clearing and cultivation in a forest reserve. The rules prohibit anyexploitation of forest products, squatting, setting of fires, livestockgrazing, land clearing and hunting in all forest reserves, unless alicence has been issued by the CFO.

The Land Acquisition Ordinance gives the president the power toacquire any private land for a public purpose by making a declarationto that effect. A Board of Assessment will determine compensation ifthe sale price cannot be agreed.

The Crown Lands Ordinance (1960) gives power to preventtrespassing and contains provisions for the grant, sale, exchange andlease of Crown lands

The Water and Sewerage Act (1989) makes provision for a nationalpolicy for water and the granting of exclusive licence to the DominicaWater and Sewerage Company (DOWASCO) for the development andcontrol of water supply and sewerage facilities. All existing gatheringgrounds shall either be retained as forest reserves or protected forests,or be declared controlled areas. To protect gathering grounds fromdeforestation or animals, DOWASCO may request the Ministry ofFinance or the Ministry of Health to take action, or restrain, impoundor shoot such animals.

The Town and Country Planning Act of 1975 is the substantiveplanning and development legislation. Subject to exemptions madeby the minister, planning permission is required for any landdevelopment, excluding use for agricultural purposes. Zoning of landfor various forms of agricultural development is needed. Currently,unsuitable areas are being farmed while more suitable lands areunderutilized.

The Development and Planning Corporation Act of 1972 creates acorporation to be responsible for physical planning. It, however, doesnot meet and has delegated its functions to a small technicalcommittee under the planning division of the Economic DevelopmentUnit of the Ministry of Planning.

The Dominica Land Management Authority Act of 1973 has as itsprimary purpose the establishment of a land management authorityto promote agriculture and related activities. The act, however, is notin use.


The Agricultural Small Tenancies Ordinance of 1953 coverstenancies of cultivated and pasture land under 4 hectares (10 acres)but more than 0.2 hectares (0.5 acres). It lists the several naturalresource related conditions to which the tenant must agree, e.g. goodhusbandry to include soil conservation and fertility maintenance. Theordinance is not apparently in use.

Grenada

The Forest, Soil and Water Conservation Ordinance 1949, amendedby The Forest, Soil and Water Conservation (Amendment) Act (1984)provides for watershed protection, permanent reservation of lands,designation of prohibited areas and procedures against squatting andillegal grazing. It provides for the declaration of lands other than statelands to be protected forest. The act also provides for the appointmentof a chief forestry officer responsible for the management of all landsbelonging to the state.

The forest policy, which was followed until 1984, addressed issuesrelating to forest reservation, forest management, utilization,research, education, private forestry, forest industries and recreation.Forest reservation proposes permanent preservation of a tree crop onsuch areas of land as are required for the prevention of soil erosionand flooding, and the preservation of water supplies. It also proposesthat lands which are unsuitable for agriculture should be exploited forthe economic production of timber crops.

The Land Development (Control) Act 1968, amended by the LandDevelopment Control (Amendment) Law of 1983, relates to thecarrying out of building, engineering and mining or other operationson any land. It is broad enough to encompass silviculture but notagriculture. A draft agricultural land development policy which makesrecommendations on a range of issues addressing the protection, useand development of agricultural land and land zoning is underconsideration by the government. Approval of the policy is a necessaryprecursor to the formulation, approval and implementation oflegislation for the development of agricultural lands.

The National Water and Sewerage Authority (NWASA) Act 1990established NWASA with full power and authority over all waters.Section 38 requires catchment areas to be retained as forest reservesand imposes on the CFO the responsibility for their protection,conservation and maintenance.

128 APPENDIX I

The other relevant legislative instruments are:

(a) The Agriculture Fires Act: requires a licence to set fires

(b) The Agricultural Small Tenancies Ordinance: defines the rules ofgood husbandry and oversees the observance of the rules

(c) The Crown Lands Ordinance: establishes the conditions for thealienation of state lands

Jamaica

The Watersheds Protection Act 1963 was enacted in 1963 to providefor the protection of watersheds and adjoining areas. It established aWatershed Protection Commission with power to acquire, hold anddispose of property and to do all things necessary for the purpose ofthe act. It empowered the commission to undertake watershed work.Between 1963 and 1974, areas to be treated and works to be under-taken had to be declared for approval by the commission.

In 1974, the Natural Resources Conservation Division (NRCD) ofthe Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry was established and in June1991 The Natural Resources Conservation Authority (NRCA) Act wasenacted to amend the 1963 act. In 1983 all 33 watersheds in Jamaicabecame "declared watersheds" so that work could proceed in all ofthem, and in 1985, the NRCD was required to undertake purelyinvestigation and monitoring. The investigation was to be carried outin conjunction with the Forestry Department which would undertakeimplementation.

The new act of 1991 is wider and provides for environmentalimpact assessment (EIA). There is also provision for increasedpenalties and stricter monitoring to control such activities as charcoalburning, mining of sand and marl, and logging. However, lack of stafffor enforcement, deficiency in training, inadequate public awarenessand poor education are major shortcomings.

The Rural and Physical Planning Division (RPPD) of the Ministryof Agriculture is the custodian of agricultural lands and an importantagency for ensuring appropriate land use. It undertakes land reformusing the physical capability of the land as the main criterion. Itupdates the database of land resource and provides data to manysources concerned with land use.

The Soil Conservation Department (SCD) was established in theMinistry of Agriculture in 1973 under the seven-year FAO project,Forestry Development and Watershed Management in the Upland


Regions, which began in 1968 [FAO 1990]. In 1980, the SCO wasamalgamated with the forestry department as the Forestry and SoilConservation Department.

Land authori t ies (LA) are also impor tant ins t i tut ionalarrangements for carrying out soil conservation. They have conductedsoil conservation on public and private lands in collaboration withSCO [FAO 1983].

St Kitts

The National Conservation and Environmental Protection Act(NCEPA) 1987 is the centrepiece of federal legislative regulation offorestry matters and provides for the establishment of protected areas,e.g. national parks, nature reserves, marine reserves, botanic gardens,historic and scenic sites. It deals particularly with forestry, soil andwater conservation in six sections and, in this regard, it:(a) prohibits the cutting and felling of timber without the consent

of the director of agriculture(b) confers power on the minister in consultation with the National

Conservation Commission (NCC) to make regulations for:- the establishment of forest reserves and the prohibition of the

grazing of livestock in such reserves- national exploitation of forest resources- conservation of threatened species of flora- promotion of reforestation- regulation of charcoal burning- procedures and exemptions in retard to the felling or cutting of

timber.NCEPA mandates the Minister of Development in consultation withthe NCC to "provide regulations for soil conservation including theidentification and protection of critical watershed areas and naturaldrainage systems and the encouragement of scientific farming tech-niques by means of physical and biological soil conservation designedto prevent soil erosion".

All ghauts (natural drainage channels) declared a protectedarea are "to be managed in the public interest as stable andproduction natural drainage", with ancillary power of the minister, in

130 APPENDIX I

consultation with the NCC, to make regulations requiring "specialland use rehabilitation, management and conservation measures''.

NCEPA, without requiring the making of regulations, directlyprohibits unauthorized cultivation, cutting, burning or clearing of landor vegetation, grazing of livestock, construction of structures, removalof sand in any area of special concern.

With regard to water resources, NCEPA requires the minister, inconsultation with the NCC and the water boards, to make regulationsto conserve and develop the nation's water resources or reduce soilerosion and thereby meet the present and future water needs fordomestic, agricultural, commercial, industrial and other beneficialuses. It provides for the donation or exchange of land of an owner fordesignation as a protected area, and for the prohibition ofunauthorized willful damage to any tree, shrub or grass planted or laidout. Finally, NCEPA prohibits the unauthorized deposit of waste,rubbish or litter in a protected area or forest reserve.

The extensive regulation-making powers of NCEPA are yet to beexercised except in relation to the Brimstone Hill Fortress NationalPark Regulations 1991. Regulations to supply the detailedprescriptions of the act have not been enacted. This act has the promiseof becoming a model for the other Caribbean states.

A major omission of the NCEPA is the failure to grant permission toenter an estate owners land to execute required works without theowner's consent. There is also no tax waiver on land being reforested.These provisions were included in the Forestry Ordinance of 1904which was repealed by the NCEPA.

The multiplicity of other legislative instruments in St Kitts relate toland tenure, land use and agricultural development. Theseinstruments can be summarized as follows:

Land tenure

There are four main legislative instruments relevant to land tenure:

- The Limitation Act provides for a time limit for acquiringpossessory title to land

- The Prescription Act provides for a time period for the acquisitionof easements of water or watercourse or use of water

- The Land Acquisition Act provides for compulsory acquisition ofland by the Crown

- The Title by Registration Act

Key Articles of Legislation 1 31

Land use

Some of the relevant legislation includes NCEPA, the Town andCountry Planning Act, the Agricultural Development Act, the LandDevelopment (Control) Act, the Building Act, the Planting of SugarCanes Prohibition Act, the Frigate Bay Development Corporation Act,the South East Peninsula Land Development and Conservation Act.

Agricultural development

The dominance and history of agriculture in the economy of St Kitts isevidenced by much statutory regulation of agriculture. There are atleast twelve acts which deal with agricultural activity but none of theacts addresses soil conservation specifically. There is need to revise themultiplicity of statutes in order to eliminate duplication and overlapof jurisdiction and to clarify the hierarchy of decision making authoritywhere duplication is unavoidable.

St Lucia

The major relevant legislation relating to agricultural land manage-ment is as follows:

The Land Conservation and Improvement Act which empowers itsboard inter alia to:

(a) advise the relevant authority on matters relating to the generalsupervision of land and water resources

(b) advise the Development Control Authority and any other agencyinvolved in land use on matters concerning land conservationand improvement

(c) offer, in conjunction with government agencies, technical ad-vice in field and land management to land owners and/or occu-piers

The Agricultural Small Tenancy Act is restricted to land amountingto no more than 2 hectares (5 acres) in one or more parcels. This areaof land can be controlled for proper soil and water conservationpractices. The tenant is required to follow good husbandry practicesdefined generally to mean the application of measures for soilconservation, maintenance of soil fertility and the preservation of thecapital value of the holding.

The Forest, Soil and Water Conservation Ordinance is anamendment act which provides for possible incentives to encourage

132 APPENDIX I

the allocation of private lands for protected forest. Compliance withthe rules by owners of the protected forest entitles the owner toremission of any land tax that may exist and monetary compensationor compensation by exchange of land.

The Crown Land Act authorizes the government to make rules andregulations concerning the sale, occupation and allocation ofgovernment lands. The forestry department has drawn up a policy forCrown lands, which was revised by the management of the CIDAForestry Project and submitted to Cabinet.

The Town and Country Planning Act is a broad policy instrumentin terms of land development and does not specify the developmentof farm lands.

The Water and Sewerage Authority Act is concerned with waterconservation and protection of water gathering grounds. Under thisnew act, the authority may request the chief forestry officer to takeaction to protect any water gathering grounds that may appearseriously threatened by deforestation.

While the above policy instruments may have served as a usefulmeans of achieving their stated objectives, they are only broad policymeasures and are not specific to the utilization and management ofagricultural lands. It is therefore evident that a policy on agriculturalland management is of utmost importance.

An act entitled "Land Conservation and Improvement Act, 1987"to provide for land conservation and the establishment of a landconservation board was placed before Parliament as a bill. It isbelieved that the political implications of the act and the proposals forformulating and implementing protection orders may be obstacles.The proposed act is fairly comprehensive and would provide for properland use and protection against soil erosion and other forms of landdegradation.

St Vincent and the Grenadines

The Rings Hill Enclosure Act 1791 and the Land Acquisition Act 1947both empower the competent authorities to acquire land for publicpurpose subject to compensation.

The Agriculture Act 1954 requires owners to practise goodhusbandry, which is understood to involve the terracing of steep land,soil conservation and preservation of vegetative cover and forests onslopes and ridges. The act authorizes the CAO to take over the


supervision of agricultural land whenever the owner/occupier is notperceived to be practising good husbandry.

The Agricultural Small Tenancies Act 1957 regulates tenancies of 4hectares (10 acres) and less and requires tenants to practise goodhusbandry in order to maintain the capital value of the land throughthe employment of protective and conservationist practices. This actand the previous one, if properly employed, can become importantpolicy instruments for good soil management.

The Central Water and Sewerage Authority (CWSA) Act 1978 vestsevery body of water in the government to be held in trust for its citizensand confers control on the authority. The act identifies variousfunctions of the authority, some with implications for activities in theforestry sector, and for the protection of water resources. It empowersthe authority to purchase by private treaty or to acquire compulsorilyany land or interest in land, or other property in accordance with theprovisions of the Land Acquisition Act. Private forests can be acquiredfor watershed management or water resources conservation.

The Crown Lands Act and Regulations 1983 pertain to thedeclaration, reservation and protection of Crown lands.

The Forestry Resource Conservation Act 1992 makes provision forthe establishment of a forestry department headed by a director withspecified functions which relate to the conservation, management anddevelopment of forestry. It clearly requires the director to promoteagroforestry in agriculture and proper soil and water conservationpractices, and to prepare at intervals not exceeding ten years anational forest resource conservation plan. The act declares certainareas as forest reserves and empowers the competent minister todeclare other areas as forest reserves for the sustained production oftimber and water, the conservation of soils and the preservation offlora and fauna. The minister is accorded power to regulate or prohibitthe use of chemical or organic compounds used for agriculture; tocontrol soil erosion and sedimentation; to establish standards andland classification systems to guide land use in erosion prone areas;to manage and protect water resources, watershed, streams and rivers.

The Town and Country Planning Act 1992 repeals the Town andCountry Planning Act 1976 and is designed to enable the orderly andprogressive development of land, the proper planning of town andcountry areas, and the control of development including change ofland use. The act establishes the Physical Planning and DevelopmentBoard. The board may prohibit the destruction of trees, forests andwoodlands and has the power to require the submission ofenvironmental impact assessments.

134 APPENDIX I

Implementation of legislation

It is evident that all territories have adequate legislation and institu-tional arrangements which provide the policy framework for regulat-ing soil conservation arid other aspects of soil management. Thedeficiencies, limitations and constraints to the implementation oflegislation are:

- multiplicity of legislation with overlapping jurisdiction and noclear hierarchy of authority

- failure to develop regulations to give effect to the legislation;

- inadequate penalties for breaches of the legislation which do notdeter violation

- lack of political will to implement because of political expediency

- failure to provide adequate budgetary allocations to supportimplementation

- inadequate technically trained staff to monitor and enforcecompliance with the legislation

- inadequate and insufficient educational programmes and publicawareness activities

- lack of incentives to farmers to encourage compliance

- need for technical assistance to farmers in tree crop cultivation,soil conservation and other soil management techniques, cropproduction and marketing

Existing legislation can address a range of activities which influencesoil conservation, e.g. illegal fires, forest preservation, squatting,uncontrolled grazing, poor crop husbandry practices. The legislativeframework exists. However, the implementation of the legislation,management planning, and soil conservation technology appropriatefor the Caribbean are required for successful soil conservation.Appropria te soil conservation technology and the methods ofimplementation are presented in Part II of this volume.

Key Articles of Legislation HS

APPENDIX II

Student Case Study Exercises

The following exercises are given so that the student of soil conserva-tion can gain experience in designing programmes of soil conservationactivities as case studies. The case studies should take into considera-tion the principles outlined in the book and the socioeconomic contextof the Caribbean.

Project Profile

A soil conservation programme is to be developed in a project areawith the following features:

Area: 18km2

Terrain: Hilly with varying slopes including steep slopes; largenumber of gullies and ravines.

Soils: Two major soil types.(1) Loose credible, shallow or shallow and bouldery inplaces(2) Loose, friable, erodible, deep profile

Present croppingHigh percentage of cocoa and coffeeBananaSome food cropsFew scattered fruit treesForest trees

Farm SizesSmall farms 0.5-5 hectares

Tenure(a) Owner occupied(b) Short-term leases

136 APPENDIX II

Constraints- Low yield of crops because of low technology- Low or no use of suitable fertilizers- High incidence of disease- Low crop husbandry

Specific objectivesIncrease productivity of farmsIncrease farmers' incomeImprove land-use practices, particularly the adoption of appropri-ate sustainable soil conservation methodsStrengthen producers organizationsStrengthen extension services

Soil conservation practices are to be developed for the following farmsituations:

Student Case Study Exercises 137

No. Farm Slope Cullies/ Cropping Tenure Soilsize Ravines type

1 Small G/M Small Banana, food crops Lease 1

2 Large S Large Cocoa, coffee, food crops Owner 2

3 Medium S None Free choice Lease 1

4 Small S Small Coffee Lease 2

5 Large S Small Food crops, fruit trees, banana Lease 1

6 Medium G/M Moderate Vegetables, banana, cocoa Owner 2

7 Small G/M Large Vegetables Owner 2

8 Large G/M Small Vegetables, banana, tree crops Owner 2

9 Medium S Small Cocoa, food crops Lease 1

10 Small S None Vegetables, banana, food crops Owner 2

11 Large G/M Moderate Free choice Owner 2

12 Medium S Large Vegetable, tree crops Owner 1

Farm Sizes Slopes

Small 0.5-1.5 ha G gentle

Medium 1.5-3.0 ha M moderate

Large 3.0-5.0+ ha S steep

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baker, R. J. 1974. So// and Land Use Surveys: Cayman Islands. Research Centre ofthe British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA; Trinidad. No. 26.

Barker, G. H. 1968. So// and Land Use Surveys: Jamaica, Parish ofStAnn. ResearchCentre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No. 24.

Barker, G. H. 1970. Soil and Land Use Surveys: Jamaica, Parish ofTrelawany. Re-search Centre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No. 25.

Brady, N. C. 1974. The Nature and Properties of Soils, 8th ed. New York: Macmil-lan.

Caribbean Conservation Association. 1991. Environmental Profile of Dominica.Bridgetown, Barbados: Caribbean Conservation Association.

Chenery, E. M. 1952. The Soils of Central Trinidad. Port-of-Spain, Trinidad: Gov-ernment Printer.

Cumberbatch, E. R. St J. 1985. "The threat of erosion to the soils of Barbados".Barbados Sugar Review, no. 53: 2-5.

Dolly, D., ed. 1988. A Rapid Reconnaissance Survey in Four Districts of County Victo-ria. St Augustine, Trinidad: UWI Department of Agricultural Extension.

Finch, T. F. 1961. Soil and Land Use Surveys: Jamaica, Parish of Portland. ResearchCentre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No. 11.

Finch, T. F., and T. A. [ones. 1959. Soil and Land Use Surveys: Jamaica, Parish ofClarendon. Research Centre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad.No. 7.

Food and Agriculture Organization. 1976. Framework for Land Evaluation. Rome:FAO.

Food and Agriculture Organization. 1983. Strengthening the National Soil Conserva-tion Programme for Integrated Watershed Development, Jamaica: Project Findingsand Recommendations. Kingston, Jamaica: FAO.

Food and Agriculture Organization. 1990. Catalogue of FAO Projects in Jamaica.Kingston, Jamaica: Office of the FAO Representative.

Government of the Commonwealth of Dominica. 1985. National Structure Plan ofDominica. Roseau, Dominica: Government of the Commonwealth of Domin-ica.

Gumbs, F. A. 1987. Soil and Water Conservation Methods for the Caribbean. StAugustine, Trinidad: UWI Department of Agricultural Extension (CaribbeanAgricultural Extension Programme).

Gumbs, F. A. 1992. Integrating Soil Conservation into Farming Systems in the Com-monwealth Caribbean: Status Report and Components of a Regional Programme.London: Commonwealth Secretariat.

Hardy, F. 1942. "Soil erosion in Trinidad and Tobago" Tropical Agriculture, no.29: 29-35.

138 Bibliography

Hill, I. D. 1966. Soil and Land Use Surveys: Antigua and Barbuda. Research Centreof the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. Nos. 19A & 19B.

Lai, R. 1975 "Role of mulching techniques in tropical soil and water manage-ment" , IITA Technical Bulletin (Ibadan), no. 1: 38.

Lai, R. 1976. "No-tillage effects on soil properties under different crops in west-ern Nigeria". Soil Science Society of America Journal, no. 40: 762-68.

Lai, R., and E W. Russell. 1980. "Watershed management and land use". InTropical Agricultural Hydrology, 111-39. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Lang, D, M. 1967a. Soil and Land Use Surveys: Dominica. Research Centre of theBritish Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No. 21.

Lang, D. M. 1967b. So/7 and Land Use Surveys: Montserrat. Research Centre of theBritish Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No, 22.

Lang, D M., and D. M. Carroll. 1966. So/7 and Land Use Surveys: St Kitts and Nevis.Research Centre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No. 16.

Lindsay, J, L, and F. A. Gumbs. 1982. "Water runoff and soil loss from an Ultisolunder different crops and soil management". So/7 Science Society of AmericaJournal, no. 46: 1264-66.

Mohammed, A., and F. A. Gumbs. 1982. "The effect of plant spacing on waterrunoff, soil erosion and yield of maize (Zea mays [L]) on a steep slope of anUltisol in Trinidad". Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 27: 481-88.

Morgan, G. W., and R. Baker. 1967. So/7 and Land Use Surveys: Jamaica, Parish ofPortland, Research Centre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad.No. 23

Price, R. W. 1960. So/7 and Land Use Surveys: Jamaica, Parish of Hanover. ResearchCentre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No. 12.

Price, R. W,, and T. A. Jones. 1959. So/7 and Land Use Surveys: Jamaica, Parish ofStJames. Research Centre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad,No. 8.

Russell, E. W. 1973. Soi7 Conditions and Plant Growth, 10th ed. London: Longman.Russell, J. 1974. World Crops 26, no. 3: 134-35.Stark, J 1963 So/7 and Land Use Surveys: Jamaica, Parish of St Elizabeth. Research

Centre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No. 14.Stark, J , 1963, So/7 and Land Use Surveys: Jamaica, Parish of Westmoreland. Re-

search Centre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No. 15.Stark, J 1964b. So/7 and Land Use Surveys: Jamaica, Parish of Manchester. Research

Centre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No. 17.Stark, J , P. Lajoic, and A. J. Green. 1966. So/7 and Land Use Surveys: St Lucia. Re-

search Centre of the British Caribbean at UWI, ICTA, Trinidad. No. 20.Vernon, K, C. 1960.4 3 T z ( 4 0 2 9 T 0 T 5 7 . 0 8 8 T w 7 0 . 9 1 2 . 7 5 9 T z ( L a n d ) T j 0 7 S u r v e y 2 . 1 9 4 T w 8 6 . 8 3 8 T z ( U s ) T 8 2 . 0 8 8 T c 7 2 T z ( 1 T w 8 8 . 2 1 4 T z 2 7 0 7 9 T c 0 0 . 8 T d ( V e T w 9 4 . 1 1 8 T z 4 0 2 9 T c 9 7 7 9 T c 2 . 1 . 2 T w ( C e n t r ) T j 0 T c ( e ) T j 0 . 4 5 5 T c 1 4 . 0 8 8 T w 7 0 . 9 1 2 T z ( S u r v e y s : ) T j 5 6 S u r v e y s : 0 8 . 7 3 8 T w 8 8 r y 3 T z ( S ) T j 0 T c ( t ) 1 4 ( h ) T j 0 . 2 1 . 0 2 T w 8 8 . 3 4 t e r . ) T j / T 1 _ 8 7 8 . 5 T f 0 . 1 . 1 5 ( . ) T j 0 . r c ) 4 4 T z ( R 2 T z ( R e ) T j c ( h ) T j 0 . 1 8 6 T c 0 T w 1 . 0 8 1 T c T j 0 . 1 7 2 5 . 3 8 8 2 T w ( C e n t r ) T j 0 T c ( e ) T j 1 . 0 8 1 T c 1 1 0 . 4 5 T w 9 5 . 8 5 4 T z ( o ) T j 3 1 0 T c ( e 5 c 0 . 4 5 8 9 2 . 0 0 . 0 9 T w ( t h ) T j 0 T c ( e ) T j 0 . 2 4 9 3 T c 1 . 5 8 7 w 9 4 . 3 7 4 T z ( B r i t i s ) T j 0 T c ( h ) T j 0 . 1 1 0 . 0 8 1 T c 0 a , ) T j 2 5 . 3 8 8 2 T w ( C b b e a ) T j 0 T c ( n ) T j 4 0 0 . 0 4 6 6 c ( d ) T j 2 1 . 0 0 . 0 9 T w ( a ) T j 0 T c ( t ) T j 0 . 2 3 0 . 0 4 6 T c 9 3 T w 8 8 6 2 1 T z ( U W I ) T j 0 T c ( , ) T j 0 . 0 3 5 3 T c 0 . 4 7 1 T w 8 5 . 0 1 3 T z ( I C T A ) T j 0 T c ( , ) T j 0 . 1 1 0 . 0 8 1 T d ) T 2 2 ) T j 2 5 . 3 8 8 2 T w ( C i d a d ) T j 0 T c ( . ) T j 1 2 T c 0 . 4 4 5 j 0 . 0 9 8 1 8 . 6 4 3 T z ( N o ) T j 1 7 3 1 5 ( . ) T j 0 . 1 1 8 2 T w ( T z 3 2 T z j 0 . 0 T c ( . ) T j 0 . 2 5 6 T c 0 T w T w 1 0 . 4 4 0 0 9 8 T c 0 1 0 . 0 8 - 1 0 K . 6 4 3 T z ( N o ) T j 1 . 0 2 9 T . 6 0 7 a , ) T j 1 7 9 7 . 7 4 T z ( . T j 0 . 2 5 6 T c 0 T w T w 1 0 . 4 4 5 3 9 8 T c 0 1 0 . 0 8 - 1 0 j o i c ) T j 0 T c ( , ) T j 0 6 t a r k K No rolld.Green.. ReseaTz ( Re)Tj0 Tc (-)Tj0.029 Tc 032829 Tc 3496 Tw 91.86 Tz (h)Tj0.186 Tc 0 Tw 19529 T.60627.11 c51461.86 Tzentre o T r i n ( t h ) T j 0 T c ( e ) T j 0 . 2 4 9 5 T c 1 . 5 8 5 6 T w 9 1 . 8 6 T z ( i t i s ) T j 0 T c ( h ) T j 0 . 1 1 9 5 2 9 T . 6 0 2 9 6 . 1 1 c 5 1 4 6 1 . 8 6 T z b b e a nt UWI, ICTA,... Gr .Tj0.256 Tc 0 Tw 17315(.6 T3.526 1793 70.912 H.643 Tz ( No)Tj013 Tc 1.69.526 c7937 Td(VeTwyneTj0.256 Tc 0 Tw 1530.046 606.11 Tw 910.08 -10 Tc 3.749 Tw ( A)Tj6tark).602230.45c512970.912 pectorTj0.256 Tc 0 Tw 1530.046 072.11 Tw 910.08 -10joic)Tj0 Tc (,)Tj1530.043 T3w 86.5TTc 3.749 Tw ( A)Tj5381 Tc Tj4w 86.5A.643 Tz ( No)Tj01081 Tc 787.11 c2T8 7 Td(VeJones.643 Tz ( No)Tj0030.046 3Tw 94.3.035.086 Tw 19.9( C)Tj0 Tc (.)Tj0.0.046 1 -9.9680086 Tw 960)Tj0 Tc (.)Tj- an1530.046 1.562 TTw 910.08 -10.759 Tz ( Land)Tj0 1 Tw 85.013 Tz838-59 Tz Tw 8887654 T( ReseaTz ( Re)Tj Tz ( Us)T85 1.02 Tw 88.34 Grenada3 Tz ( S)Tj0 Tc (t)T5081 Td)0130.45 Tter. C e n t r e oV e ( t h ) T j 0 T c ( e ) T j 0 . 2 0 9 4 8 1 T c T 6 6 6 T w 9 1 . 8 6 T z ( i t i s ) T j 0 T c ( h ) T j 0 . 1 6 8 2 9 T 6 6 2 2 9 . 9 6 . 0 8 3 5 3 T w ( C b b e a ) T j 0 T c ( n ) T j 1 3 2 5 T c 1 4 4 7 w 9 4 . 3 7 4 T z ( ( a ) T j 0 T c ( t ) T j . 6 0 0 7 3 1 5 ( . T d ) 0 0 5 6 2 T T w 7 0 T z ( 1 U W I ) T j 0 T c ( , ) T j 0 . 2 9 0 2 9 T c 5 9 . 5 2 6 c 0 9 4 8 2 T w ( G r ( I C T j / T 1 _ 8 7 8 . 5 T ( S ) T j 0 0 5 6 2 f 0 . 0 3 5 c ( . ) T j 0 . 3 . 0 6 2 6 5 4 T T j 1 2 8 4 7 T w e ) T j T A ) T j 0 T c ( , , . 5 T ( S ) T j 0 4 9 8 6 2 f 0 . 0 2 3 3 8 1 T c 8 0 6 . 1 1 . 0 8 5 0 2 1 T z ( i d a d ) T j 0 T c ( . ) T j 2 3 3 8 1 T c 1 7 j 0 . 0 9 8 9 ( C ) T j 0 T c ( . ) ( S ) T j 0 T c ( t ) 2 5 T c ( . ) T j 0 . 7 . 7 9 5 c 0 . 8 4 7 T w ( 2 0 j 0 . 0 W a t s . ) T j 0 . 2 5 6 T c 0 T 0 8 3 4 7 w 9 4 3 8 0 1 0 0 . 0 8 - 1 0 T c 3 . 2 0 9 8 2 9 T 4 . 6 4 6 ( d ) T j 2 0 3 . 0 8 6 T w P . T j 0 . 2 5 6 T c 0 T w 9 0 T c ( e 5 7 7 9 T c 1 0 T c 3 . 7 4 9 T w ( A ) T j 5 ( h ) T j 0 0 3 6 . 1 1 c 5 1 2 4 8 2 T w ( G r p e c t o r T j 0 . 2 5 6 T c 0 T w 9 0 T c ( e 4 9 1 . 1 1 j 2 0 3 . 0 8 6 T w j o i c ) T j 0 T c ( , ) T j 0 9 8 2 9 T 4 . 1 3 6 w 8 6 . 5 T T c 3 . 7 4 9 T w ( A ) T 0 9 8 2 9 T 2 0 j 4 T w 8 6 . 5 A . 6 4 3 T z ( N o ) T j 1 2 0 . 0 4 6 1 5 7 . 1 1 c 5 1 1 8 7 0 . 9 1 2 J o n e s . 6 4 3 T z ( N o ) T . 6 0 0 8 . 0 8 1 T c 4 3 1 T w 8 5 . 0 1 3 T z 1 9 . 8 a d ) T j 0 T c ( . ) T . 6 0 2 3 0 T c ( e 7 9 7 . 1 1 7 7 . 8 3 . 0 1 3 T z 8 6 0 ) T j 0 T c ( . ) T j - a n ) T j 0 T c 9 8 N 4 5 9 8 2 9 T 2 0 j . 1 1 j 2 0 3 . 0 8 6 T w j o i c ) T j 0 T c ( , ) T 2 8 6 2 1 w 1 0 d ) 4 . 7 4 T z ( . 5 4 3 T z ( 9 8 2 9 T T z 8 1 . 1 1 j 2 0 3 . 0 8 6 T w . 7 5 9 T z ( L a n d ) T j ) T 2 4 6 2 T T w 2 1 7 0 . 9 1 2 3 8 T z ( U s w 9 0 T c ( e 1 0 j . 1 1 j 2 0 3 . 0 8 6 T w S b e a ) T j 0 T c ( n ) 2 0 0 1 . 1 1 8 2 3 T w 8 6 T w V i n - 5 9 T z T w c 2 T 1 0 T w 8 6 T 1 7 2 8 4 7 T w e ) T j c ( h ( . ) ( S ) T j 0 T c ( t ) 1 5 T c ( . 3 . 2 2 1 T w 8 5 . 0 1 3 T z t e r . ) T j / T 1 _ 8 7 8 . 5 T f 0 . 1 6 4 2 9 T . 6 0 9 1 w 8 6 . 5 ( h ) T j 0 . 1 8 6 T c 0 T w 1 1 5 8 1 T c T 3 1 . 1 1 c 5 1 9 5 7 T d ( V e e n t r ) T j 0 T c ( e ) T j 1 1 5 8 1 T c 6 8 2 9 4 5 T w 9 5 . 8 5 4 T z ( o ) T j 1 5 0 . 0 4 6 8 4 6 2 T . 3 . 3 0 0 . 0 8 - 1 0 ( t h ) T j 0 T c ( e ) T j 0 . 2 4 0 ( h ) T j 0 4 7 8 6 T w 9 1 . 8 6 T z ( i t i s ) T j 0 T c ( h ) T j 0 . 1 1 1 5 8 1 T c 6 9 . 1 1 c 5 1 9 5 7 T d ( V e b b e a ) T j 0 T c ( n ) T j 2 5 3 0 . 0 4 6 1 8 7 w 9 4 . 3 7 4 T z ( ( a ) T j 0 T c ( t ) T j . 6 0 1 2 0 . 0 4 T d ) 3 6 2 3 . 6 8 6 9 . 0 7 0 . 0 8 - 1 0 U W I ) T j 0 T c ( , ) T j 0 . 1 8 3 2 9 T c 3 4 3 T w 8 5 . 0 1 3 T z ( I C T A ) T j 0 T c ( , ) T j 0 ( S ) T j 0 4 9 8 6 2 f 0 . 0 2 T c ( . ) T j 0 . 3 . 5 8 7 0 . 9 1 2 T j 1 2 8 4 7 7 2 . 1 ) T j i d a d .,..

Tropical Forestry Action Programme. 1991-1992. Reports of the Consultants on Leg-islation (Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, Montserrat, St Kitts-Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines). Bridgetown, Barbados: FAO.

Tropical Forestry Action Programme. 1991-1992. Reports of the Consultants onLand Use and Watershed Management (Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Domin-ica, Grenada, Montserrat, St Kitts-Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines).Bridgetown, Barbados: FAO.

140 Bibliography

UWICED Occasional Paper Series - UWI Press and Soil Conservation...UWICED Occasional Paper Series...

Documents

Transcript of UWICED Occasional Paper Series - UWI Press and Soil Conservation...UWICED Occasional Paper Series...