Search

Preventing the off-site effects of soil erosion is an essential part of good catchment management. Most efforts are in the form of on-site soil and water conservation measures. However, sediment trapping can be an alternative (additional) measure to prevent the negative off-site effects of soil erosion. Therefore, not all efforts should focus solely on on-site soil conservation but also on the safe routing of sediment-laden flows and on creating sites and conditions where sediment can be trapped. Sediment trapping can be applied on-site and off-site and involves both vegetative and structural measures. This paper provides an extensive review of scientific journal articles, case studies and other reports that have assessed soil conservation efforts and the sediment trapping efficacy (STE) of vegetative and structural measures. The review is further illustrated through participatory field observation and stakeholders’ interview. Vegetation type and integration of two or more measures are important factors influencing STE. In this review, the STE of most measures was evaluated either individually or in such combinations. In real landscape situations, it is not only important to select the most efficient erosion control measures but also to determine their optimum location in the catchment. Hence, there is a need for research that shows a more integrated determination of STE at catchment scale. If integrated measures are implemented at the most appropriate spatial locations within a catchment where they can disconnect landscape units from each other, they will decrease runoff velocity and sediment transport and, subsequently, reduce downstream flooding and sedimentation problems.

Despite several approaches that aimed at mobilising East African farmers to embrace soil and water conservation (SWC) activities, farmers hardly responded since they were seldom involved in the planning of SWC activities. Two tools that employ farmers' participation were developed and applied at Gikuuri catchment in Kenya. The first tool involved farmers to map soil erosion using their own indicators and determine the soil erosion status at catchment scale. This formed the basis upon which they undertook to plan for SWC measures at catchment scale. Farmers also predicted crop yield losses based on the soil erosion status. Farmers widely approved the soil erosion status map since their own indicators and perceptions were used. The second tool provided cash flow trends for a variety of SWC activities and farmer situations. Farmers can use land with a high, moderate or low erosion status and often have rather different socio-economic settings. The net benefits over 5 yr for bench terraces, fanya juu terraces and grass strips were illustrated to assist farmers in making informed decisions on SWC adoption. The two tools increased awareness on the need for collective actions among farmers and showed fields that cause run-on on downslope fields. The improved awareness of erosion problems and the related financial consequences increased farmers' willingness to share the investment costs for cut-off drains.

This paper describes the results of a survey on farmers' perceptions of the effect of woody natural vegetation on wind erosion. Sixty farmers were interviewed in three villages in northern Burkina Faso. The farmers mentioned that the presence of woody vegetation between the crops could benefit yield, but feared competition between the natural vegetation and the crop. Vegetation in a field was considered to increase deposition and decrease erosion on that field. The most important vegetative characteristics that affect wind erosion were, according to the farmers, vegetation's shape, porosity, flexibility and arrangement of the vegetation in the field. At present, most farmers do not apply this knowledge to the management of the natural woody vegetation on their fields