1. INTRODUCTION - CABI.org Farmer... · AKDN-MERP during the April-October, 2007. While ......

1. INTRODUCTION

Agriculture continues to be the single largest sector, a dominant driving force for growth and main source of livelihood for 66% of the population. Agriculture is one of the major sectors of AJK and Pakistan’s economy. It contributes about 21% to country’s GDP. Agriculture sector employs more than 43% of country’s workforce and is major source of foreign exchange earning.

As a result of October 08, 2005 earthquake, where a significant loss to the human lives and economy has occurred, the infra-structure of Agricultural sector of the area is almost completely demolished. After the earthquake reconstruction and rehabilitation programmes has been initiated in these areas to help the victims to restart a new life. This huge effort required dedicated and selfless services from all the development sectors. In response to this very need call AKDN-MERP with collaboration of CABI SA initiated the activities to rebuild the agriculture sector. Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) and Integrated Crop Management (ICM) using non-formal participatory training methodology has been identified as a preferred approach to develop capacity of the farmers for better crop management through on farm participatory research activities and implemented through Training of facilitators (ToF) and Farmer Field School (FFS) approach.

FFS using non-formal participatory training methodology has been adopted for better crop management and reduces input use especially hazardous pesticides. In FFS, GAPs are continuously being explored. Efforts has been made to build the capacity of small land holder of earthquake affected farmers in better crop management decision making, through rational use of chemicals, increase net profit of farmers and conserve biodiversity and natural Agro-Eco-System. Capacity building of the farming communities through Farmer Field School (FFS) is based on an innovative, participatory and interactive learning approach. The aim of the FFS approach is to build the farmers capacity to analyze their crop production systems, to identify their main constraints, and to test possible solutions, eventually identifying and adopting the practices most suitable to their farming system. The knowledge acquired during the learning process can be used to build on existing knowledge enabling farmers to adapt their existing technologies so that they become more productive, more profitable and more responsive to changing conditions or to adopt new technologies.

The gap between potential and farmer realized yield of crops, vegetables and fruits are ever increasing due to the lack of crop management skills at the farm level. The good agriculture practices and effective management of available resources are vital for profitable and sustainable farming. The success of good agricultural practices lies in implementation of integrated crop management in its true spirit which can help in the rationale use of inputs. The use of quality seed/crop varieties, optimum planting time, and wise use of pesticides, fertilizer, natural resource and biological control collectively form the basis for decision-making in integrated crop management systems. Confidence building and experiential learning by farmers can only be achieved through season long capacity building training programs of farmers using Farmer Field School (FFS) methodology.

Final progress report 2007-08

2

2. OBJECTIVES (MAIN & SPECIFIC)

The project aims at reducing the poverty of rural population of earthquake affected areas (particularly small landholders, tenants, the land less farmers and women), enhance their income, and improve the standard of their living. It also focuses on village level development and capacity building, assisting and training for creation of sustainable livelihood and improving the national and provincial economy through introduction and implementation of good agricultural practices in the project area. Above all its objective is to bring institutional reforms and develop empowerment at local level.

2.1. MAIN OBJECTIVES:

• Empowerment of the farming communities to make right site specific decisions regarding crop management to improve the livelihood and reduce the dependency.

• Socio-economic up lift of the resource poor farming communities through better quality produce.

• Better understanding between farming communities and the extension staff.

• Availability of fruit and vegetables in the local markets with reduced agro-chemical residues and at low prices.

• Sustainability of the environment and reduction in health hazards to pesticide users and consumers through rationalizing use of pesticides by developing awareness and training.

2.2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES:

• Establishment of TOF and FFS.

• Curricula development

• Facilitate network formation between the FFS and service providers.

• Introduction and implementation of innovative participatory technologies that are environmentally friendly and match with international standards of good agricultural practices.

• Awareness of farmers about international sanitary and phyto-sanitary standards of production.

• To enhance vegetables, fruits and crops production, ensure food security, increased income and create sustainable livelihood.

• To integrate indigenous / improved practices for crop management.


3

3. METHODOLOGY

Training of Facilitators (ToF) was established on Maize crop during the first cycle of training programme along with five FFS in different villages of the UC Chakhama, Distt. Muzaffarabd, AJK through the active participation of NRM programme management of AKDN-MERP during the April-October, 2007. While during the second cycle of the training two more ToF were established one on the Fruits mainly apple and Walnut and the second ToF was on best livestock management practices accompanied with 5 FFS each in the same project area. The fruit ToF and FFS training programme was conducted during November, 2007 to August, 2008.

To implement Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) and Integrated Crop Management (ICM) through Farmer Field School (FFS) approaches for sustainable fruits, vegetables and crops production in the selected FFS, training sessions were conducted through participatory learning. This training programme remained one of the initiatives of AKDN-MERP NRM sector on rehabilitation of earthquake victims of Chakhama Union council.

The training programme embedded the pre and post evaluation of the TOF and FFS participants regarding the subject knowledge. Training quality is ensured at each step through the special visits of the Quality Assurance team from CABI SA. Special topics on specific crop issues were delivered in the FFS sessions. Insect zoo were established to identify the insect pest and beneficial insects. Good Agricultural Practices were developed and verified through participatory technology parameters and relevant results were demonstrated, noted and analyzed by the farmers. Data was analyzed using simple excel sheets through averages, percentages and related formulas used in analysis.

3.1. What is Farmer Field School (FFS)?

Farmer field school is a non-formal participatory learning by doing approach. Farmers of any age can participate in this season long training at weekly/fortnightly basis (depending upon the crop). The process seeks to empower farmers in applying the principles learned, to other spheres of their daily lives. The methodology of FFS allows farmers to form & work in group, which is a valuable opportunity to learn from mutual experience and manage their conflicts as well.

A typical Farmer Field School consists of 15-25 farmers having the same interests. The frequency of the sessions may be weekly, fortnightly or monthly depending on the crop and the critical stages in the crop cycle. FFS is facilitated by trained facilitator pre-hand trained through TOF. Based non-formal participatory education methods, the capacity of farmers the site-specific decisions making is enhanced. The activities are designed to respond to the immediate needs of farmers and are geared towards encouraging creativity and independence. The FFS facilitators play a crucial role in ensuring the environment and all resources contribute to the farmer’s learning experiences. The process of organizing a field school starts with a general meeting with


4

village leaders and farmers. During the occasion, the farmer training programme is explained so that the village community knows more about the activity and the steps to be undertaken to ensure an open process of involving the entire community in selecting the farmer participants and the FFS site.

3.1.1. A typical ToF/FFS session covered the following activities:

• Meeting initiation, recitation from the Holy Quran

• Review of previous activities and briefing on the day’s activities

• Agro-ecosystem analysis (AESA)

• Field observation, discussion and data collection

• Review of field observations, visualization of the field observations including information on the condition of the plants, pests and diseases, natural enemies of insect pests, weather, soil and water conditions etc, discussion and decision making on appropriate action.

• Group presentation to the whole group

• Synthesis of the different sub group information and collective decision-making

• Group dynamic activity

• Topic of the day or special topic

• Review and evaluation of day’s activities

• Planning for next session, announcements, closing of meeting

• Following are the components of the training programme (ToF/FFS)

3.2. PRE AND POST TRAINING EVALUATION OF THE TOF/FFS PARTICIPANTS

After the selection of the participants the registration process is completed. The pre-training evaluation of the participants is done by a questionnaire about the knowledge level of the selected crop production, protection and harvesting and post-harvest management. The same questionnaire is again done at the concluding session of the training programme. The success of the training is evaluated on the basis of the knowledge gained between pre and post training.

3.3. AGRO-ECO SYSTEM ANALYSIS (AESA):

During AESA all biotic and abiotic factors affecting each other were recorded. Factors studied included but not limited to the following:

Abiotic Factors Biotic Factors

Soil Pests

Plants Insects

Moisture Diseases

Weather Weeds

Temperature Birds

Water Animals


5

Rainfall Predators

Sunlight Parasites

Wind Plants

The exercise of AESA used to be conducted separately by every group for GAP plot and farmer’s practices plot. Since sucking pests intend to fly away, they were recorded first, after selection of plants without much disturbance, from three leaves (base, centre and tip). Chewing pests were recorded from entire selected branch. For recording parasites and predators entire selected plant used to be examined. Data with respect to diseases were recorded after observing entire selected plant. Sometimes attack of diseases was predicted in view of favourable weather conditions even if there were no symptoms at the time of AESA.

For calculating intensity of weeds, count was taken by using one meter square quadrate at least at three places in the plot.

To record vegetative growth following data were recorded for selected plants:

• Height

• Girth

• Growth rate

• Circumference of stem

• Plant to plant distance

• Row to row distance

• Length of the branch

• Number of leaves on a branch

• Colour of the leaves

• Symptoms of nutrient deficiency

• Length of inflorescence

• Number of inflorescence per branch

• Number of fruits per inflorescence

• Size of fruit and Colour

• Number of pest affected leaves


6

• Number of dried branches

After recording data the groups independently analyzed it, prepared charts, drew conclusion and agreed upon the actions to be taken during next one week/fortnight. Having finished the job with every group, presentations were given by group leaders to all participants of the FFS. After discussion consensus used to be developed and collective decision of the group formed basis for actions during next week/fortnight

3.4. INSECT ZOO:

To demonstrate the relationship among plant, pests’ parasitoids and predators, insect zoos were arranged. Two different methods were used to carry out insect zoo. In Direct Method a particular insect was collected and its interaction with other insects and plant was determined by directly observing it in the glass Petri dishes or a small plastic jar prepared for the purpose.

3.5. GROUP DYNAMICS:

The group dynamics were conducted covering ice breakers, appreciation, folk stories, tit bits and team building exercises. They also learned the practical demonstration of field situations, insect pests, diseases and other cultural practices of fruit and vegetables in their respective locations. The objectives of these exercises were:

• Relaxing the participants;

• Stimulating the flow of communication between strangers;

• Bringing expectations and group reality closer;

• Encouraging everyone to participate and learn;

• Introducing a session;

• Developing new skills to understand complex issues more easily;

• Exposing participants to new ways of judging their own actions particularly in relation to the impact on group work.

3.6. FFS FEEDBACK SESSIONS

FFS feed back sessions were also conducted to review the progress of FFS after FFS sessions. The different problems which were not understandable and answerable were discussed in these sessions with other participants and master trainers through participatory approach.


7

TOT Participant Chart

NRM Activisits

AKDN-MERP, 18

Field Assistant

AED,AJK, 2

Field workers

AED,AJK, 3 Field Tecnision

CABI SA, 1

0

5

10

15

20

AKDN-MERP AED,AJK AED,AJK CABI SA

NRM Activisits Field Assistant Field workers Field Tecnision

3.7. GOOD AGRICULTURE PRACTICES (GAPs)

For season long participatory training, plot for GAP (where decisions regarding crop production and protection were to be made by the participants based on Agro-ecosystem analyses) were set up and an adjacent plot was kept for farmer practices (FP) (where decisions regarding pest control, fertility, irrigation were to be made by the farmer himself as he had practiced in the past) to demonstrate the difference. Based on the crop specific curricula and participatory trials

the success initiatives are jugged and evaluated after the discussion in the ToF and FFS sessions. These recommendations are finalized as Good Agricultural Practices keeping in view their impact on crop production, protection, cost of production and environment.

3.8. RESOURCE PERSONS:

Resource persons are the master of the subjects. They are called in different training sessions during the ToF/FFS to impart the latest knowledge on specific issues of the crops. They are facilitated to transform the theoretical knowledge into practical field experiment through the participatory discussion with the participants. The impact of the trials is analyzed in the next sessions during the AESA and presentation.

3.9. QUALITY ASSURANCE OF FFS:

For quality assurance ToF and FFS sessions were visited by Quality Assurance Specialist and evaluation was done using the format. (Anex-1)

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. ToF SESSIONS CONDUCTED DURING 2007-08:

4.1.1. TOF/FFS Establishment

CABI SA in collaboration with the AKDN-MERP NRM programme established three TOF in the UC Chakhama Distt. Mazaffarabad AJK during the 2007-08. A total of 24 TOFs were selected for the TOF on NRM FFS training, eighteen participants from NRM programme of AKDN-MERP, five from Agriculture Extension Department Govt. of AJK and one from CABI SA, While, in second phase participants of livestock are separated into Livestock ToF resulting into Fruit ToF with 17 participants, details are given in the Table. In Each TOF participants selected a team leader through a


8

transparent election process. Leader of the house had a team of food facilitator, time facilitator and welfare officer. TOF participants were briefed regarding the program objectives, methodology, schedule and logistics. TOF participants were divided into five groups according to their common interests. Each group further selected their group leader.

4.1.2. Staff position in ToF during year 2007-08

S.No Activity Number

Staff position in TOF Maize & Potato Total No. 24

a Laboratory/field Technician CABI 01

b Field Assistant 03

c NRM activists 5 each from Agriculture, livestock and forestry 15

d Field assistants from AED AJK 03

e Field workers (TOF helpers) from AED AJK 03

Staff position in TOF Apple & Walnut Total No. 17

a Laboratory/field Technician CABI 01

b Field Assistant 02

c NRM activists 5 each from Agriculture, and forestry 10

d Field assistants from AED AJK 02

e Field workers (TOF helpers) from AED AJK 02

The first ToF was established on Maize and Potato. The crops for the ToF were selected through the comprehensive field survey of the whole the project area through the ToF participants. The method for the data collection was participatory developed in the initial ToF session. All the selected village leaders/presidents of the Village organizations are involved in this process through the facilitation of AKDN-MERP mobilization programme team.

During the second training cycle the ToF participants of the first cycle training were divided into two TOFs one on Fruits (Apple and Walnut) and other on the livestock. The same procedure is adopted for the selection of the crops and livestock as in the first training cycle. The fruit ToF is concluded in the September 2008, while the livestock is still in progress. The detail of the ToF sessions on maize, potato and the fruits are given


9

in the following table while livestock ToF activities are reported separately in livestock report.

Details of TOF/FFS sites for Maize and Potato April-October, 2007

S.No TOF / FFS Maize & Potato Group Leader

1. ToF Chaka Saeed Kiani

2. FFS Chum Khurshid Ahmad

3. FFS Gail Jabra Muhammad Farid

4. FFS Hama Altaf Hussain

5. FFS Kona Zubair Ahmad Awan

6. FFS Garthama Wasti Saeed Kiani

Details of TOF/FFS sites for Apple and Walnut November 2007-August 2008

Total 11 Farmer Field Schools were established in different villages of the Chakhama union council during the entire project life. During first year ToF was established on Maize and Potato along with 05 FFS. Farmers were selected on the basis of their interest. The details are given in table. During second year TOF was established on Apple and Walnut along with five FFS, later on ToF is also transformed into another FFS on the recommendations of the NRM programme management.

S.No TOF/FFS Apple & Walnut Group Leader

1. ToF Kathai Saeed Kiani

2. Garthama Saeed Kiani

3. Dara Batangi Zubair Ahmad Awan

4. Garmanda Muhammad Farid

5. Khatarnar Fazal-ur-Rehman

6. Hama Muhammad Shafique


10

Number of ToF/ FFS established, sessions conducted and number of farmers trained during year 2007-08

S/No Crops TOF established

FFS established

FFS Sessions

Conducted in each FFS

Farmer Trained

1 Maize & Potato

01 05 14 150

2 Apple & walnut

01 06 20 125

Total 02 11 34 275

Details of ToF sessions conducted during 2207-08

S.No

Details Crops Sessions Conducted

Days Remarks

1 ToF sessions

Maize & Potato

14 28 Sessions conducted fortnightly

2 Feed Back sessions

Maize & Potato

14 14 Feed back sessions for evaluating FFS issues and planning

3 TOF Sessions

Apple & Walnut

20 40 Sessions conducted fortnightly

4 Feedback sessions

Apple & Walnut

20 20 Feed back sessions for evaluating FFS issues and planning

Total 68 102 Achieved the target of training sessions as planned

During ToF and FFS, AESA was conducted. Subsequently feedback sessions were also held. Special topics were identified and detailed discussion held on subsequent training session. Group dynamics and insect zoo activities were demonstrated. For addressing complicated important issues resource persons were also engaged. Data with respect to these activities are given below:


11

Activities carried in TOF/FFS Maize & Potato

a Curricula developed for maize and potato 02

b Special Topics Covered 17

c Exposure visit of TOF participants to Chatrian 01

d FFS exchange visit organized 03

e AESA Sessions in each TOF and FFS 14

f FFS feedback Sessions 14

g Group Dynamics/ Exercises/Energizers/ice breakers held in TOF 21

h Crops in ToF and FFS 02

j Topic discussed in TOF/FFS 28

h Insect zoo 10

i Participatory research trials 10

j GAPs developed 15

Any special activity undertaken

a Visits of Quality Assurance Specialist 02

b Resource person visits 04

c Village economic development committee formed 05

d Lab establishment for the inventory of agricultural biodiversity 01

e Visits of national and international delegates 03

Activities carried in TOF/FFS Apple and Walnut

a Curricula developed for apple and walnut 02

b Special Topics Covered 20

c FFS exchange visit organized 04

d AESA Sessions in each TOF and FFS 20

e FFS feedback Sessions 20


12

f Group Dynamics/ Exercises held in TOF 15

g Crops in ToF and FFS 02

h Energizers/ice breakers 13

i Topic discussed in TOF/FFS 19

j Insect zoo 08

k Participatory research trials 10

l GAPs developed 14

Any special activity undertaken

a Visits of Quality Assurance Specialist 02

b Resource person visits 03

c Lab establishment for the inventory of agricultural biodiversity 01

d Visits of national and international delegates 04

4.2. PRE AND POST EVALUATION

To know about the impact changes in perceptions a comprehensive pre and post evaluation was carried out from ToF participants. Training impacted changes in perceptions of the farmers, the detail results are given in coming as below;

4.2.1. Perception regarding Agro ecosystem analysis (AESA):

Before training 95% participants have no knowledge about Agro ecosystem analysis (AESA) while only 5% perceived that decision regarding insect pest and disease management could be made on the basis of AESA. After the training 100% of the participants were in favor of AESA and declared that insect pest management and diseases management can be done on the basis of AESA.

Figure 1. FFS participants perception regarding

AESA before and after the training.

5

100

0

0

95

0

0 20 40 60 80 100 120Percent Response Yes No Don’t Know


13

4.2.2. Role of Extension worker as Instructor/Advisor Vs Facilitator:

Majority of participants (70%) were in favor of instruction to farmers before training while 25% participants had perceived that farmers should be facilitated as well as instructed. By facilitating they meant helping in the procurement of the inputs. After the training 90% were in favor of facilitating the farmers rather than instructions and now they perceive facilitation as “to make thing easy for other”.

4.2.3. Familiarity of beneficial organisms:

Before the training most of the FFS participants (90%) had no previous knowledge about the existence of beneficial insects for plant protection while 10% of FFS participants had some knowledge but their knowledge was limited only to the concept and not practical. After the season-long training 93% of the FFS participants were in the position to identify and use the beneficial insects for plant protection measures.

4.2.4. Familiarity of insect pests and diseases:

Before the training majority of the FFS participants (69%) were unfamiliar with the insect pests and diseases, its identification and management. After the training 78% of the FFS participants were fully aware about the insect pests and diseases identification and proper management. Their change in perception at this level can be seen as major achievement in terms of cost minimization and profit maximization.

4.2.5. Awareness of safe pesticides:

Before the training all the FFS participants (100%) were unfamiliar with the safe pesticides, its characteristics and benefits. After the training 85% of the FFS participants were of the opinion that safe pesticides are very important to adopt and they were fully aware about its characteristics and benefits.

Fig. 5 Awareness of FFS particpants

regarding safe pesticides

0

100

15

85

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Pre Evaluation Post Evaluation

Perc

ent R

esponse

Figure 4. FFS participants perception about the

insect pests and diseases.

31

78

0

16

69

6

0 20 40 60 80 100Percent Response Yes No Don’ t Know


14

Fig. 8. Famiiarity of FFS participants from the

impacts of WTO before and after the training.

83

1117

89

0

20

40

60

80

100

Aw are Unaw are

Perc

ent R

esponse

Pre Evaluation

Post Evaluation

4.2.6. Safety measures during pesticides application:

Before training majority of the FFS participants (55%) were not familiar with the safety measures during pesticides application while 32% were indifferent and made no comments. After the training 97% of the FFS participants declared that they are now well aware about the safety measures during pesticides application.

4.2.7. Participants’ perception regarding nutrient management:

Before the training majority of the FFS participants (74%) perceived that chemical fertilizers are the most efficient for nutrient management. After the training majority of the FFS participants (61%) perceived that compost is the best for nutrient management in their fields while 17% were in favor of farm yard manure (FYM). Only 9% of the FFS participants perceived that Bio-aab is the best among other nutrient management practices.

4.2.8. Familiarity of the FFS participants about impacts of WTO:

Majority (71%) of the FFS participants were not familiar with the impacts of World Trade Organization (WTO), while only 29% of them were somehow aware with WTO. But their familiarity was limited only to the name and existence of the organization. After the training all of the participants were well aware about the concept, consequences and challenges of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Fig. 7. FFS participants perception regarding the

efficacy of type of fertilizer

100

17 13

61

9

74

16

0

20

40

60

80

FYM Chemical

fertilizer

Compost Bio-aab

Perc

ent R

esponse


Fig 6. Perception of the FFS participants

about the safety measures during

pesticides application.

13

55

32

97

030

20

40

60

80

100

120

Aw are Unaw are Don't Know



15

4.2.9. FFS participants’ perception regarding Organization:

Before the training majority of the FFS participants (65%) were of the opinion that village organization has not to pin point its problems rather it should be evaluated from the outside. After the training majority of the FFS participants (96%) perceive that each organization has to pin point its problems to the line agencies and donor agencies for the betterment of livelihood and increase of per capita income. Before the training they perceived organization as a source of waste of time, made for temporary objectives like distribution of goods as a source of relief and foreign intervention in their religious activities now they perceive it like a welfare body which works for the betterment of the society and development.

4.2.10. Perceptions about harvest and post harvest management.

Before the training majority of the FFS participants (83%) were unaware about he proper harvest and post harvest management techniques while 17% were knowing some harvest and post harvest management but their knowledge was limited to concept and not practical. After the season-long participatory training majority of the FFS participants (90%) are well aware about the harvest and post harvest management techniques.

The FFS participants are now well equipped with the tools and methods involved in trials development at their field level to further furnish their knowledge and to adopt Good Agricultural Practices in their farming system.

4.3. Curricula developed for maize, potato, Apple and Walnut

4.3.1. Potato Crop Curriculum

• Potato crop cultivation

• Preparing fields

• Healthy seed

• Rapid propagation of seed potatoes

Fig. 9. FFS participants perception regarding

Organization

35

65

96

4

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Yes No.Response type

Pre Evaluation

Post Evaluation

Fig 10. Perception of the FFS participants about the

post harvest management techniques.

17

83

1000

90

0

20

40

60

80

100

Aw are Unaw are Don't Know

Perc

ent R

espondents



16

• Healthy plants

• Plant selection for seed

• Rotation

• Sanitation

• Water management

• Pest and disease management

• Disease management

• Late blight

• Bacterial wilt

• Virus diseases

• Insect management

• Potato tuber moth

• White grub

• Cutworm

• Fertilizers

• Organic fertilizer

• Chemical fertilizers

• Pesticides

• What are pesticides?

• Pesticide hazards

• Fungicides

• The effects of insecticides on pests and natural enemies

• Harvest and post- harvest management

• Harvesting

• Seed storage

• Marketing

• Farm economic analysis

4.3.2. Apple Crop Curriculum

• Pest and disease management

• Disease management

• Pruning techniques

• Insect management

• Use of pheromones


17

• Apple scab management

• Codling moth management

• Walnut weevil management

• Fertilizers

• Organic fertilizer

• Chemical fertilizers

• Pesticides

• What are pesticides?

• Pesticide hazards

• Fungicides

• The effects of insecticides on pests and natural enemies

• Harvest and post- harvest management

• Harvesting

• Marketing

4.4. Special Topics Covered

• GAP filling methodology for the Maize crop

• Participatory trial development for the thinning and hoeing in maize.

• Collection, isolation and rearing of the different insect pests from maize and potato crops.

• Disease incidence and its management strategies.

• Participatory trial development for the management of maize stem borer through cultural, mechanical, and physical control methods.

• Participatory preparation of Bordeaux mixture and its application to fruit plants.

• Introduction to the Life cycle of the Maize stem borer, mode of damage, morphology and management, identification of different stages from field collection. Insect zoo a procedure to identify the status, interaction, lifecycle of the pest and natural enemies.

• The safe use of pesticides..

• Integrated nematode diseases management. Harvest and post harvest management


18

• Integrated nutrient management.

• Integrated weed management.

• Integrated water management.

• Facilitation skills (Self and Other’s facilitation)

• Communication skills

• Presentation skills.

• Leadership, its characteristics and responsibilities

• Norms setting skills

• FFS guidelines and tools

• Agro Ecosystem Analysis (AESA)

• Compost making

• Cost of production, Total production and net profit. Application of backing soda + mustard oil + detergent against diseases and aphids.

• Thinning

• Pruning

• De Toping.

• Nitrogen deficient leaves identification.

• Phosphorus deficient leaves identification.

• Potash deficient leaves identification.

• Grass hopper attacked leaves identification.

• Army worm attacked leaves identification.

• Jassid attacked leaves identification.

• Fertilizer application.

• Calibration of spray machine.

• Appropriate spray method. Apple and walnut insect pest and diseases management.

• Classification of insect pest in different groups based on mode of damage.

• Identification of parasitoids and there role in pest management.

• Insect zoo a procedure to identify the status, interaction, lifecycle of the pest and natural enemies.

• Pruning and training of Apple orchards.

4.5. Exposure visit of TOF participants

An exposure visit for ToF participants was arranged to Chatrian, a very pleasant place up hills. The main objective of the visit was to make the participants relax;


19

enhance their capabilities in working together, sharing experiences and knowledge with local people. Questions-answers session was also arranged and the ToF participants were fully equipped with the knowledge of Seed Potato production and Maize threshing techniques.

Exposure visit of the ToF participants provided an opportunity for joint learning. Participants found it stimulating to see the enterprising skills of other farmers and were eager to try them out on their own fields.

4.6. FFS exchange visit organized

Exchange visits for FFS Kona and Jabra participants were arranged to FFS Chum and Hama to exchange the knowledge and share experiences of these FFS participants particularly

for potato seed production and GAPs developed in maize and potato.

AESA Sessions in each TOF and FFS

During the training programme regular AESA sessions were conducted. AESA plays a vital role in developing the capabilities and skills of the trainees in crop production, pest and disease infestation, role of natural enemies in managing the pest outbreak, impact of environmental factors and their relationship with crop health. The chart preparation,

presentations and participatory discussions help farmers to build their self confidence in decision making and also contribute in sharing experiences and knowledge among the other participants. it is no doubt a very powerful social development tool that proves very successful during the training programme.

4.7. FFS feedback Sessions

Regular FFS feedback sessions were conducted to analyze the potential of trainee’s performance in conducting FFS. During the feedback sessions following topics remained in discussions. Feedback is the mirror image of field activities. It is considered very essential tool in participatory training programmes

• Logistics arrangements for FFS

• Technical issues and problems

• Participants’ attendance and involvement

• Social problems and their solutions


20

• GAPs implementation and results

• Participatory research trails conducted in FFS

• Planning for the next sessions

4.7.1. Achievements

During the feedback sessions it is revealed that farmers took keen interest in the training programme and their attendance ranged between 80 to 90%. Moreover farmers learnt the latest crop production technologies and implemented the curricula through practical field trails.

4.7.2. Lessons learnt

The land holding in the project area is very small that is insufficient to fulfill their livelihood so rural communities have to do other activities to support their livelihood that resulted into occasional attendance shortage particularly during the grass cutting season.

4.8. Group Dynamics/ Exercises/ Energizers/ice breakers held in TOF

Social activities are important in long term training to keep the group motivated, energetic and cohesive. Following group dynamic exercises with specific objectives were carried out for timely and appropriate use of resources.

• Body Language

• Hot hot, cold cold

• Water bridge

• Observing things

• Hopes & fears

• Name game

• How will be the leader

• Back to back and speak (Communication exercise)

• Nine dots

• Wearing the coat

• Wearing the coat

• Leader walk / who is the Leader?

• Mirror and Actor

• How many squares?

• Shoes color

• Chinese whisper

• Hand Tie


21

• Fire Bridge Crossing

• Long chain/ line

• Ponds’ Game

• Match stick Game

4.9. Crops in ToF and FFS

Maize and potato crops were selected for the training programme through the comprehensive survey conducted. ToF participants were involved in developing the participatory tools for the survey. Village organizations formed by social mobilization programme of AKDN-MERP facilitated the process. For maize, three FFS villages were selected those are Garthama Wasti, Gail Jabra and Kona while in Chum potato was the main crop along with maize and FFS Hama was specially established for potato seed production.

4.10. Topic discussed in TOF/FFS

• Logistic management and planning for activities (Participatory exercise).

• Effective leadership and leadership quality role play.

• Team building and division of responsibilities to achieve the required goals (Participatory discussion and presentations)

• Development of harvesting indicators for the potato and maize crops.

• Factors affecting the harvest and post harvest.

• Insect pest and natural enemies’ life cycle understanding through the rearing in laboratory.

• Collection, isolation and rearing of the different insect pests from maize and potato crop.

• Cotesia flavepes isolated from the parasitized Larvae of maize stem borer developed in to the adult preserved and presented in TOF for discussion.

• Participatory development of the yield estimation methodology from the pre-harvest.

• Planning for the next sessions at the end of every TOF/FFS session.

• Logistic management and planning for activities live stock and Fruit TOF/FFS (Participatory exercise).

• Collection, analysis and data interpretation in maize and Potato FFS.

• Visit of TOF orchards and preparation of orchards layout and history (Farmer’s interviews).

4.11. Insect zoo

In natural system eco-system, there is a wide range of interactions between plant and


22

animals present in that system. Plants provide food for plant eating animals. When a particular type of plant eating animal consume too much of crop or commodity, which reflect to human value, is often called a pest. Those animals, which feed on plant-eating animals, are called natural enemies of those pests. Chemical based control program in crop has actually increased the pest problems, disturbed the agro-ecosystem and has killed the non target and environment friendly organisms such as parasitoids, predators and birds. Over and misuse of pesticides has laid to tremendous economic loses and hazards to human health. In natural systems, there is a check through complicated interactions between pest and natural enemies. In a stable agricultural eco-system, pests usually cause a small amount of damage to crops. Presence of pest is very important to make sure that there is food available to allow established of natural enemies, which helps to prevent the pest outbreak.

Therefore, it is critical that pest and natural enemies must be recognized by the FFS farmers through an exercise called insect zoo, insect zoo is the process of learning by doing through participatory way for the development of technology and enhancing capacity building of the participants. Different insect zoo exercises carried out were;

• Aphid verses Lady Bird Beetle

• Aphids verses Hoverfly larvae

• Aphid verses Chrysoperla larvae

• Mummified aphids for emergence of parasitoid

• Aphid verses Spider

• Lady Bird Beetle pupae for development

• Developmental stages of maize shoot borer

• Codling moth larvae for development

• Lady Bird Beetle larvae verses aphids larvae

• Stethorus Beetle verses Mites

• Ichnemonid larvae development

• Lady Bird Beetle verses Scale insect

• Robber fly verses other insects

• Trichograma verses Codling moth eggs

• Unknown insect identification through rearing of eggs

• Interaction between fruit drop and fruit fly infestation

• Identification of diseased leaves among the dropped leaves due to other factors

• Feeding behavior of Chrysoperla Larvae on whitefly nymphs

• Feeding behavior of Lady bird beetle on aphids

• Fruit fly rearing for life cycle understanding


23

• Tagging of new fleshes of different ages to check its fruit bearing

• Spider identification

• Difference between soft scales and hard scales

4.12. Participatory Research Activities Maize & Potato, Apple and walnut

During ToF/FFS training, some on farm participatory activities were conducted to build the confidence of the facilitators regarding certain issues of different crops. Such exercises and activities were conducted to develop key skills among TOF and FFS participants. These research activities are simple type of experiments which can be conducted with farmers.

4.12.1. Maize (Zea mayz L.) Field Trials:

Maize (Zea mayz L.) being the highest yielding cereal crop in the world, is of significant importance for countries like Pakistan, where rapidly increasing population has already out stripped the available food supplies. In Pakistan maize is third important cereal after wheat and rice. Maize is a very important edible crop of the area also used in forage to feed animals. It contains Glucose, Carbohydrates and Corn oil. Corn oil is useful for heart and diabetic patients.

4.12.2. Sowing Trials:

As a common practice farmers of the area broadcast maize seed in their field. In their minds high seed rate is better for grains production as well as forage to feed their animals. Seed rate they were using was 80-90 kilograms per acre which was reduced to 20-24 kilograms per acre. On the basis of regular Maize Eco System Analysis (MESA), the FFS participants decided to sow Azam and Azam Local maize varieties in lines, ridges and broadcasting. In lines and ridges trials, the row-to-row distance was kept 2 feet while plant-to-plant distance was 8 inches. The spacing thus maintained was convenient for the farmer to carry out earthing up and hoeing practices as well as for the health of crop which can be judged from production comparison of FFS plot and farmer practicing plot given in yield comparison figure.

4.12.3. Varietals Test of different varieties

Ancestor old farming system is one of the key issues of the area. Most of the farmers are sowing old seeds and no such attention is given to improved varieties. In this connection, various improved varieties were introduced to compare them with each other according to their performance in existing environment and yield production and to recommend them that which one is better for them. FFS plot was divided into three parts where three different varieties namely Azam, Azam local and Local were sown in their respective plot. During varietal test, maximum result was shown by all improved varieties i.e. Azam and Azam local as compare to that of local. The graph clearly shows that ridge sowing of Azam variety has given maximum yield per acre i.e. 120 mound per acre


24

Fig. Results of the plant proetection trials developed.

40%

25%

20% 20%

6%9%

0% 0%0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Cutw orm Stem borer Aphids Jassid

Level o

f in

festa

toin

befo

re a

nd a

fter

BA

Ps

Infestation level (Mid Aug.) After use of BAPs

followed by Azam local variety having 104 mound while Local variety stands for minimum production i.e72 mound per acre.

4.12.4. Thinning and hoeing:

On the basis of regular AESA the FFS participants introduced thinning and hoeing practice. Before as a common practice farming community was not used to and aware with the benefits of thinning and hoeing. Results of the said intervention were appreciated by the participants looking to its yield. The said practice was a new intervention.

4.12.5. Fertilizer trial:

The farming community was not used to with the application of proper fertilizers and its proper dose. On the basis of regular AESA, the farmers developed nutrient management trials of different fertilizers treatments in the FFS plot. During special topic on the subject matter, it was decided to practically demonstrate the benefits of recommended fertilizers and its dose. Four trials were designed and implemented participatory in FFS plot.

During AESA the detail effect were shared with participants of the FFS. NPK along with Urea have very positive effect on plant growth, health, stover and grain yield. The cost benefit ratio of the trial was also shared with FFS participants.

4.12.6. Plant Protection Trial:

Plant protection trials were developed on the basis of regular AESA in the field. Major problems were cutworm, stem borer, aphids and jassid. High incidence of these insect pests’ resulting low yield and increase cost of production in terms of pesticides application, the local farming community was practicing two to three times sowing (in case of cutworm). The results i.e. infestation level before GAPs and after the application of GAPs of the well established trials are shown in the figure above. GAPs developed were; biological control like release of natural enemies (Chrysoperla cornea (Green lacewing) which is generalized predator for the prey of sucking pest, Release of Trichogramma species on cards which is specialized egg Parasitoids of Lepidoptera eggs, physical control, and use of home made formulation.

4.12.7. Maize Trials Results

Maize FFS and ToF Trials regarding different sowing methods and yield comparison in different treatment were carried out through out the training. Participants took data on each step during the AESA and then after the data analysis following results was achieved.


25

Line sow ing

Desi BroadcostLine sow ing

Azam Kathai BroadcostLine sow ing

Azam Pirsbaq Broadcost

4.6

4.8

5

5.2

5.4

5.6

5.8

6

avera

ge p

lants

/Metre s

quare

Varieties and sowing methodologies

Average number of plants per metre square in different sowing

methods of maize varieties raised in TOF plot Chaka during 2007

Line sow ing

DesiBroadcost

Line sow ing

Azam KathaiBroadcost

Line sow ing


0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Cobs/p

lant

varieties

Average no. of cobs per plant in different maize varieties

raised in TOF plot chaka during 2007


26

Line sow ing

DesiBroadcost Line sow ing

Azam KathaiBroadcost Line sow ing

Azam PirsbaqBroadcost

12

12.5

13

13.5

14

14.5

15

15.5

Nu

mb

er

of lin

es

Varieties

Average number of lines per cob in different maize varieties raised in

TOF plot in Chaka during 2007

Line sow ing

DesiBroadcost

Line sow ing

Azam Kathai BroadcostLine sow ing


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

No

.of

gra

ins/lin

e

Varieties

Average number of grains per line on maize cobs in different

varieties raised in TOF plot chaka during 2007


27

Average yield of different maize varieties raised in TOF plot

Chaka during 2007

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Line sow ing Broadcost Line sow ing Broadcost Line sow ing Broadcost

Desi Azam Kathai Azam PirsbaqVarieties

Yie

lds m

onds/K

anal

4.13. GAPs developed

4.13.1. Maize production for food and livelihood:

After a devastating earthquake, the farming communities were very hopeless from farming and especially from income generating activities involving their personal efforts. A season long maize varietals trails were established. Azam, Azam local and local varieties were selected for the FFS process. Special attention was given to their behavioral change in terms of sustainability like working in their own lands and their involvement in local income generating activities. At the end of the training looking to high yield of Azam variety, low cost of production, maize farmers realized that farming can be contribute in their livelihood improvement.

4.13.2. Rehabilitation of earthquake victims:

The gap between potential and farmer realized yield of crops, vegetables and fruits was high in the earthquake area due to lack of resources and crop management skills at the farm level. The good agriculture practices and effective management of available resources were vital for profitable and sustainable farming for the rehabilitation of the earthquake victims. The success of


28

Average Gross income of the different varieties of maize crop

raised in ToF and FFS during the year 2007

3600033000

51200

44000

60000

52000

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

Line sow ing Broadcost Line sow ing Broadcost Line sow ing Broadcost

Desi Azam Kathai Azam Pirsbaq

Varieties

Ru

pe

es

good agricultural practices was in the implementation of integrated crop management in its true spirit which can help in the rationale use of inputs. The use of quality seed/crop varieties, optimum planting time, and wise use of pesticides, fertilizer, natural resource and biological control collectively form the basis for decision-making in integrated crop management systems. The knowledge and skills of the farming communities were enhanced in integrated crop management decision making. The knowledge and skills acquired by the farming communities during the season long farmer participatory training and research will be utilized in future for good crop management and production that will ultimately contribute in improving the livelihood of the earthquake victim’s in the area.

4.14. ISSUES AND OPTIONS FOR CROP MANAGEMENT:

4.14.1. Maize crop duration:

As discussed earlier, Azam, Azam Local and local varieties were sown in the FFS plot the phenology of Azam variety covers from mid May to Mid October.

4.15. Economic Analysis:

From the economic analysis it is obvious that Azam variety has produced high yield i.e. 120 mounds followed by Azam local (104 mounds). The yield in the farmers practicing plot was very low i.e. 28 mounds per acre. The main reason was that the farmers don’t show attention to the sown crop that what its need and what we have to do which will lead us to better yield and self sufficiency. The farmer’s collected data about Maize production per acre, cost of production per acre in Pak rupees, yield per acre and net profit per acre of each variety as shown in the figures.

4.16. GOOD AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES (GAPS) DEVELOPED IN POTATO:

Potato (Solanum tuberosum) belongs to Solanaceae family and is considered as the ‘king’ in food staples. Potato is the largest produced and consumed vegetable in Pakistan. Potatoes are grown in Pakistan primarily as a cash crop which is consumed mostly by urban customers. Exception to this rule, where potato is grown primarily as a subsistence crop, occurs in the extreme northern areas of the potato’s range. The potato in Pakistan is not primarily a rural staple, but


29

rather is an urban marketed crop which provides significant income to rural farmers. Potatoes are grown by both large and small scale farmers. In the uplands, potato is predominately a small farmer’s crop. In Hama and Chum FFSs were established and addressed various aspects of potato Agro-ecosystem and harvesting, post harvesting up to marketing level.

4.16.1. Seed Rate

Desiree variety was sown in the potato FFS plot. The recommended seed rate was 1234kg (30-38Mn) per acre. Row to row distance was kept 2.5 feet while plant to plant distance was kept 9 inches. In this way the seed rate was properly maintained.

Table: Economic analysis of cost of seed and production in farmer plots and GAP plots.

S. NO ISSUE FARMER PLOT

GAP PLOT DIFFERENCE

1 Seed spacing (inches)

3.5 9 2.5

2 Seed rate/acre (kg)

1800 1234 566

3 Rate/100 Kg.

2050 2050 -

3 Cost of seed/acre (RS)

36900 25300 11600

4 Total Yield /acre (kg)

5000 8000 3000

:

4.16.2. Seed Dressing

Maximum fungus disease management research at the initial through seed dressing was organized in small experimental plots in FFS plot The objective of was to check out the comparative efficacy of different treatments against disease specially Blight incidence, which is the most serious constraint to potato production. In plots, different trials were developed, in first trial the whole potato was

Fig.8: Comparative efficacy of different seed

treatments against Blight in potato.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1% R

edom

il

Red

omil+

Woo

d as

h

1% D

ithan

e

Dith

ane+

Woo

d as

h

Con

trol

Treatments

Prc

ent B

light in

tensity


30

treated with 1% solution of Redomil (10 gms in 10 liter of water), in second trial it was treated with 1% solution of Diathane. In the third trial cut potato were treated with a mixture of Redomil and Wood ash (1 part Redomil and 4 part Wood ash), while fourth trial was made by dressing the cut tubers with a mixture of Diathane and Wood ash in the same proportion. These treatments have been compared with the untreated plot to observe the intensity of Late Blight. During AESA comparative efficacy of each treatment recorded against the intensity of Blight. 1% Redomil treated plots were resistant against Blight attack and then followed other treatments in the sequence mixture of Redomil and Wood ash,1% Diathane and mixture of Diathane+ Wood ash.

The results of these trials could have far reaching impact, since better understanding of disease control especially blight through seed treatments will help farmers and local growers in significant quality yield of potato.

4.16.3. Weeding and Earthing-up:

On the basis of regular AESA the FFS participants introduced weeding and earthing up in the potato plot. Earlier farmers were not practicing weeding and earthing up as they were cutting the weeds to feed their animals. The benefits of weeding and earthing up were practically demonstrated. This can be termed as another best GAP in potato plot.

4.16.4. Nutrient Management;

Potato crop has strict requirement for a balanced fertilization management, without which growth and development of crop are poor and both yield and quality of tubers are diminished. Among the major nutrients, potassium not only improves yield but also benefits various aspects of quality. Some of the tuber quality parameters affected by potassium nutrition are; tuber size, percentage of dry matter, starch contents, internal blackening, storability and resistance to mechanical damage. Potassium also provides resistance against pest and diseases and drought and frost stresses. Field trials were conducted with different treatments of nutrients.

T1 = DAP +Urea (In second dose only Nitrophos)

T2 = DAP (Nitrophos in second dose)

T3 = NPK (Nitrophos in second dose)

FFS results show that a balanced NPK fertilization increased tuber yield, increasing K doses decreased the yield of small grade tubers and increased the proportion of large marketable tubers. Potassium application also dramatically decreased the incidence of late blight. A maximum yield of 8.00 tons/acre was obtained by application of 90kg N/acre, 50 kg /acre P2O5 and 75 kg K/acre (NPK) against a tuber yield of only 5.00 tons/acre at farmer plots. Multiple function of NPK leads to numerous positive effects for potato with comparison of farmer’s plots.


31

Multiple functions of NPK with comparison of farmer’s plot

Multiple function GAP Plot Farmer Plot

Yield 8000 kg./acre 5000 kg./acre

Marketable tubers Fleshy and cosmetic

Colored

Black spot bruising

Disease susceptible

Cosmetic Problem

Tuber size Large-Medium grade Small grade

Resistant to mechanical

damage

Resistant Susceptible

Storage Extended shelf life

Decrease gradually the

weight loss of tubers

Short shelf life

Increase gradually the

weight loss of tubers

Resistance to frost and

drought

Improved frost hardiness

Reduced Transpiration

Frost hardiness

Active Transpiration

Disease Resistant Improved plant health and vigor

Making infection less likely or

Enabling a quick recover

Bronzing of the canopy

Poor root growth

Shortened stolons

Susceptible to fungus

4.16.5. Potato Insect Pest & Disease Management:

Major Potato insect pest problems were Cutworm, Wireworm and Aphids while late blight disease was the most severe disease problem in potato crop. The farmers of the

area were unaware about the insect pests and diseases and its economic threshold level and the loss it could cause. Through insect zoo, the life cycle of these insects and its interaction with the beneficial organism were practically demonstrated. The Good Agricultural Practices developed were; release of Chrysopa cornea (Green lacewing) eggs, larvae and adult in the field (Chrsopa cornea is generalized predator for the prey of sucking pest i.e. aphids etc), Use of local formulation (detergent, baking soda and mustard oil), use of chemicals (proper dose and proper time was insured along with safety measures during spray) and cultural control methods were adopted.


32

Fig. Seed Potato economic analysis

88

69600

220000

150400

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

Production in

mounds per

acre

Cost per acre Total

production in

Pak Rs.

Net benefit

Valu

es in

Pak R

s.

4.16.6. Composting

Use of fresh Farm Yard Manure (FYM) during land preparation is a common practice in the area being a major reason for spread of diseases and insect pest. Practical demonstration of compost making was another GAP (Good Agricultural Practice) being practiced during FFS sessions. So farmers were facilitated to utilize the farm wastes in compost making which also will help them to keep the environment clean and on the other hand reduced the cost of production in account of fertility management. This activity proved very fruitful in managing farm wastes and as well as improving soil fertility. The farmers have adopted this GAP, because it will help them to lower their cost of production and increase their yield with less or no reliance on chemical fertilizers.

4.16.7. Potato Crop Phenology/Cropping Calendar;

Cool growing periods suitable for potato occur in different places at different times of the year, determining locally variable cropping calendar. Generally these can be considered as the autumn, spring and summer crop. The summer crop is even smaller, some of it grown at relatively higher altitudes. However, it is important since it provides fresh potato to market when the only alternative is potato kept in cold storage, considered inferior due to higher sugar accumulation that affects flavor and cooking quality.

4.16.8. Seed Potato Economic Analysis:

On the basis of regular AESA, the farmers recorded production data of each trial developed. One of the plots was selected for seed potato production due to demand for the potato seed from the nearby vicinity. Seed production and economic analysis of Seed Potato is depicted in the figure.

The figure point out that through Good Agricultural Practices the farmer can earn Rs. 1,50,400 per acre through seed potato production. Seed potato production is very profitable because the dwellers of the area find it hard to bring the seed from other area due to transportation problems and high seed rates.


33

4.17. GOOD AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES (GAPS) DEVELOPED IN APPLE:

Apple (Malus pumila L.) is the most important fruit crop among the temperate fruits. In AJK apple varieties like Red Delicious, Kashmiri, King Star, Sky spur, Kala kola and Golden Delicious are most popular cultivars. Apple is a very nutritious, aromatic and delicious fruit. It is very rich in Vitamin C, B and A. It contains about 11% sugar besides essential minerals in appreciable amounts. It has color appeal, appetite and is most refreshing. It can be used in many

different ways. It is cooked, made into preserves, Jellies, candied, canned, prepared as fresh apple juice, and made into cider or vinegar. The peel is used for making pectin.

Apple crop is a high input-demanding crop, usually farmers expensed thirty thousand Rupees per acre as input cost, if efficient steps for orchard management has to be taken (yet most of the farmers do nothing regarding the orchard management) Through adoption of improved practices and alternatives of pesticides, framers were empowered/ sustained to reduce the production cost within fourteen thousand Rupees per acre, availed 44.00% net profit in terms of input cost.

4.17.1. Balanced Fertilization:

Balanced fertilization aims to correct any nutrients deficiency that may occur in the soil at the time of crop sowing in a field. We will have to modernize farm production rapidly through increased and judicious use of agricultural inputs, especially fertilizers. Generally apple growers of the area do not use fertilizers in their orchard The fertilizers contribute abut 50% towards yield increase. It has, therefore, become imperative to make balanced and efficient use of fertilizers for increasing agricultural productivity. Multi-nutrients fertilizers should be introduced with high priority. These would be formulated to suit particular soil, crop combinations, to supply all deficient nutrients in the correct proportions.


34

Initial

GAP Plot

FP plot

S1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

perc

en

tag

e in

festa

tio

n

Data plots

Comparison of CM infestation in GAP and FP plot of apple in

ToF during 2008 at Kathai

In GAP orchard nutrient trials have been carried out in order to find out the efficacy of each trial on fruit quality production, plant growth and resistance against diseases. In treatment first balanced fertilizers, Urea, SOP, and DAP were used, DAP +SOP were applied as second treatment and Urea + DAP as third treatment while single Urea was used in fourth treatment. Balanced fertilizers Urea, SOP and DAP significantly increased the fruit size, plants growth and limited the diseases incidence, followed by treatment DAP + SOP and Urea + DAP. Single application of Urea increased the vegetative growth especially water sprouts. In FFS session they were facilitated in use of balanced fertilizers for the purpose of optimal and quality apple production. At the same time farmers were trained to apply fertilizers one to two feet away from main tree trunk provide the maximum fertilizers to feeding roots. Also farmers were facilitated to mix fertilizers within soil clock wise direction to protect feeding roots by damaging during hoeing practices. These GAPs proved very encouraging in good plant health and farmers obtained maximum fruit production. Another intervention was the demonstration of composed making as most of the farms wastes and vegetations wasted thereby also a major reason for the outbreak of diseases and insect-pests. So farmers were empowered to utilize their farm wastes in composts making by managing farm wastes and improved their field fertility.

4.17.2. Integrated Codling Moth Management;

Codling moth has the greatest potential for the damage than other apple pest, yet it can be effectively controlled with proper timed treatments. A variety of tools were practiced for CM management, including insecticides, mating disruption pheromones, cultural control, and use of gunny bags. An IPM programme uses several of these strategies. Because of its impact on natural enemies, mating disruption is a preferred strategy in an IPM programme, but it was supplemented with insecticide spray and with cultural control/use of gunny bags for effective control of CM. This has made major contribution to control CM in GAP apple orchard with comparison of farmer’s orchards.

4.17.3. Codling Moth (Cydia pomonella) Monitoring;

Sex pheromone traps for codling moth monitoring and control were installed for monitoring purposes. This proved very effective in minimizing the indiscriminate use of pesticides as these traps give the exact time of pesticides application and also reduce the male population of codling moth thereby diminished its infestation in the area. These traps were checked at a week interval by FFS farmers and number of adult moth per trap was recorded.


35

4.17.4. Spider Mites (Tetranychus urticae)

Mites have become one of the serious pests of apple during the last couple of decades in apple growing area of the project. To record the density and dynamics of mites, 15 leaves (5 from top, middle and bottom portions each) were collected from each of 10 trees by FFS groups. Number of eggs, nymphs and adults were recorded under magnified lens. Average population of 25 mites per leaf recorded. Trials of three treatments developed with three replications following fortnightly applications.

Water.

500 gms detergent + 100 liters of water.

500 gms detergent + 100 gms Baking soda +100 liters of water.

Treatment of detergent + Baking soda and water given 100% mortality followed by treatments detergent + water and simple water at the rate of 90% and 80% mortality respectively

4.17.5. San Jose Scale:

Scale insects are a peculiar group and look quite different from the typical insects we encounter day to day. Small, immovable, with no visible legs or antennae, they resemble individual fish scales pressed tightly against the plant on which they are feeding.

Scale insects feed on plant sap. They have long, threadlike mouthparts (stylets) six to eight times longer than the insect itself. Feeding by scales slowly reduces plant vigor. Heavily infested plants show retarded growth and eventually suffer dieback of twigs and branches. Finally an infested host become so weakened that it dies. It was recorded that Scale insect infestation causing 20% damage to younger shoot whereas 7-10% mortality are common in young plants. Infected fruits have very little market value; approximately 35-40% losses in terms of prices have been noted.

In FFS sessions trials have been conducted and a number of successful GAPs developed for Scale management with active

Fig. Effects of Chrysopa + mustard oil and

insecticides in GAP Orchard against Aphids

population

20

5 8

0

10

20

30

Initial GAP Insecticide

Plot type

Ap

hid

s

infe

sta

tio

n

Fig. Comparison efficacy of treatments (GAP) against Mites

population

53

0

25

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Wate

r

Det

erge

nt+w

ater

D+S

oda+

water

Initial

Infe

sta

tion le

vel


36

participation of farmers. Use of Mustard oil 50 cc + Backing soda 50 gms and 50 gms detergent in 100 liters of water significantly managed Scale infestation in branches and fruits.

4.17.6. Aphids (Aphis pomi)

These are the sucking pests and do the damage by sucking the cell sap from the tender offshoots and leaves. Aphids are found in colonies and mostly colonies are of smaller size less than 10- individuals per colony. Number of aphid colonies on six trees were counted and recorded by five group’s each.Data was combined and the maximum population density were calculated, that was 15 or more aphid colonies per tree. Alone natural enemies could not be keep aphid population below economic thresh hold level. However, of naturally occurring tiny predators Chrysopa and Lady bird beetle larvae, voraciously attack aphid larvae have been practiced as supplement control with already developed GAP insecticides (Mustard oil +Detergent +Water.) Insecticides were used for comparison in farmer plot.

4.17.7. Apple Scab (Venturia inaequalis)

Apple Scab is one of the serious diseases of apple, which infect both fruits and leaves. Scab usually attacks young tissues, leaves becoming resistant with age. However, once leaves become very mature the cuticle starts to deteriorate and once more becoming susceptible. In FFS plot infected leaves were found in July however, Scab intensity were very high early of August, about 25% of leaves infestation noted. This late Scab on leaves contributes to over wintering. However, Scab infection on fruit was observed in early August, when about 15% fruits were infected in middle of August.

4.17.8. Powdery mildew

Powdery mildew is an important disease of apple in fruiting orchards and in trees nurseries. The disease is observed in all parts of the AJK, where apple trees are grown. Powdery mildew can affect trees directly by killing fruiting spurs and causing russet on fruit. Powdery mildew can be particularly damaging in nurseries, where mildew can kill developing shoots resulting in “Bushy” tree. Infected shoots were found from June to October. The infection kept on increasing with passage of time and about 20% shoots were recorded infected by the middle of July. During FFS sessions, a trial for management of apple Scab and Powdery mildew was developed as alternative of pesticides, for the purpose to judicious use of chemical and minimize the environmental

Fig. Comparative Efficacy of GAP and insecticides agains

Scab and Powdery Mildew Infestation

25

2

7

20

0

6

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Initial GAP FP

Perc

en

t in

festa

tio

n


37

degradation. Treatment of (GAP) Backing soda 1000 grams in 100 liters of water applied twice in the current season. This treatment significantly diminished the density of fungus attacking apple crop. Results were presented in Figure.

4.17.9. Apple Canker (Wood Rot)

Several fungi causes’ wood rot, including Trametes versicolor, Polyporus hirsutus and Schizophylum commune. The two most common symptoms, wood rot are breakage of the limbs or main trunk and the presence of the young bodies. Wood rot fungi are opportunistic wound pathogens that colonize winter injured or mechanically injured tissues. Where pruning is performed improperly, cut surface may remain for long periods of time, thus creating a favorable environment for wood rotting fungi. Approximately 60% of the orchards trees were infected in the project area. Farmers were facilitated in controlling of Apple Canker by using a paste of lime and copper sulphate (Bordeaux paste). It proved very affective against Apple Canker and reduced to 4% infestation in Apple orchard. Farmers adopted and disseminated this technology through FFS program.

4.17.10. Pruning and Training:

Generally farmers of the area don’t prune the orchards which look like wild trees orchard. Pruning is the removal of excess branches of the tree for the purpose to provide sunlight and aeration for better growth and fruiting while training is the reformation of small plant from the beginning till tree development or reforming of the small plants. Farmers were facilitated and trained in pruning and training in order to manage their orchards properly.

4.17.11. Harvest and Post Harvest management

Generally, the farmers of this area harvest immature fruits and stored it in unhygienic condition in rooms or dirty gunny bags with out sorting and grading which cause a lot of disease problems. Due to this improper storage practice, most of the fruits are destroyed and so the farmers are unable to get any reasonable price in the market. Special topics regarding harvesting and post harvesting management practices were conducted.

4.17.12. Marketing Management

The farmers usually face a lot of marketing problems such as poor quality fruits due to improper management and storage practices, improper packing methods and materials (use of dirty plastic or gunny bags), transportation problems, non-availability of local market and no access to main market. In this respect, a special topic on proper fruit packing and packaging as well as sorting and grading was delivered. Production of Apple in TOF GAP plot was 120 kilograms per tree and 60 kilograms per tree in farmer’s orchard have been recorded.


38

4.18. SUCCESS STORIES

Season long farmer training program contributed to the rehabilitation of earthquake victims through a number of activities in crop management and production. Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) like improved method in pruning, sex pheromone and Augmentative biological control of crop management, cultural control, use of gunny bags, use of mustered oil and backing soda (Sodium Bicarbonate , NaHco3) to control powdery mildew, scab and other fungal diseases and water spray for mites management proved very successful. This will help in saving a lot of farm inputs of the farming communities and conserving the ecosystem which will ultimately contribute in the agriculture system sustainability. By dissemination and adoption of these GAPs most of the farmer practicing various alternative pest control strategies of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) using various indigenous and improved technologies during training through the basic principle of learning by doing and collective crop management. The use of pesticides alternatives to manage the insect pests and disease will help in reducing the cost of chemicals and improve the health of the farmers and quality of the farm produce. Farmers were empowered in the market strategies of a particular farm produce and fetched more prices of their farm products in market. Cost of production decreased and net profit increased significantly that added value in the life of the farm families to improve the socioeconomic condition in the earthquake areas. Number of interventions carried out to improve the benefit cost ratio of the farm produce in different farmer field schools through participatory approaches were as under;

4.18.1. Use of Mustered Oil, Detergent and Backing Soda;

Application of Mustered oil, Backing Soda and Detergent in dormant and foliar season proved very effective for the control of over wintering mite adults and eggs. San-Jose scales, aphids, apple scab, powdery mildew and blight in vegetables and cereal crops.

4.18.2. Application of Lime Solution:

Knowledge and skills enhanced in developing lime solution, which in dormant season application effectively controlled mites’ problems in orchards.

4.18.3. Use of Backing Soda:

Application of 2% solution of Backing Soda as fungicide against fungus on different crops significantly controlled fungus diseases.

4.18.4. Use of 5% Urea;

5% urea spray at end of the season proved to be very successful in management of mites and scab in orchards by shedding all leaves.

4.18.5. Sex Pheromone:

To manage and monitor codling moth populations, pheromone sex capsules were used and installed on mass basis, this effectively controlled codling moth infestation in the apple growing area of the district.


39

4.18.6. Use of Potash containing fertilizers:

Farmers were facilitated in use of potash for crop productivity and resistant against diseases. Especially in potato potash proved very effective against late blight out break.

4.18.7. Corrugated Paper and Gunny bags Bindings;

This is the key GAP for codling moth control. Under this activity corrugated papers and gunny bags were bounded in apple FFS, these were also the effective tools for the management of codling moth population in the area.

4.18.8. Bordeaux Paste:

A mixture of Bordeaux paste was prepared by Lime + Copper Sulphate +water was used successfully against apple canker/Blue Rot in FFS.

4.18.9. Soil Fertility Management;

Nutrient management in different crops Urea, DAP; Phosphate, Potash, Ammonium nitrate and FYM were applied to investigate the balance fertilization. Farmers were also facilitated to apply fertilizer away from main stem or trunk and to mix fertilizer in soil and protect feeding roots from damaging during hoeing. Farmer’s skill was also developed in compost making and it’s usefulness to maintain the soil fertility.

4.18.10. Potato seed production as an economic activity:

In Potato Farmers Field School area, potato was first cultivated for kitchen purpose only. The main hurdle they perceived was seed availability to them. Through FFS the farmers were trained in potato seed selection, seed production, seed storage and good agricultural practices on pre harvest and post harvest management of potato crop. Looking to its profit, the FFS participants were convinced to plant potato crop in area during the next crop season. The area due to its high altitude (approximately 7000 ft) provide good environment for potato seed production and table purpose as well.

4.19. QUALITY ASSURANCE

According to the results of the Quality Assurance team the following are the main discussion points.

4.19.1. Critical analyses of FFS

During the report period the Quality Assurance Specialist visited the project twice and in each visit monitors the activities in three schools. Critical analysis of FFS can be summarized as under:

• Establishment was good in more than 90 % Farmer Field Schools,

• Organization is excellent in more than 78 % Farmer Field Schools,

• Management was good in 85 % Farmer Field Schools.

• Implementation require improvement in 15% Farmer Field Schools, as it is the first time that village activists are given the task to implement the training in FFS.

• Logistic arrangements require improvement.

• Social and technical capabilities of the FFS participants are improving, Moreover farmers were observed involved in all activities.


40

• The farmers’ interest in participatory research trials are encouraging, it would help them understand the crop management, and other decisions at farm level.

• The working environment with the host management is highly appreciated.

4.19.2. Suggestions:

• Trainee Facilitators should perform actively during FFS visit.

• Implementations of Decisions made during AESA needs to be improved.

• Basic Philosophy of FFS approach should be reminded to participants steadily and correlated to each FFS activity.

• The FFS participants should be motivated to disseminate the knowledge gained through the FFS to other non-FFS farmers for the better impact of the initiative took by the AKDN-MERP and CABI SA.

• Logistics arrangements may be improved to increase the efficiency of the effort made.

5. ACHIEVEMENTS:

• CABI SA with the collaboration of AKDN-MERP successfully completed the training of trainers and farmer field school (ToT/FFS) training programme in three crops and trained 275 farmers.

• The Farmer-led participatory training on Integrated Crop Management (ICM) through Farmer Field School was initiated for the first time in AJK especially in UC Chakhama.

• FFS on multi-crop TOT approach was successfully implemented

• The practices used during TOT/FFS sessions were fully acknowledged and adopted by the FFS as well as neighbor farmers.

• The FFS members realized the long-term effects of chemicals on human health, field and environment and have started thinking for incorporation of the local resources in the management of their crops.

• The FFS members have realized the positive impact of cooperative farming and hopefully they will introduce it among the village / community organizations.

• The FFS members have admitted that use of pesticides is a last option for pest’s management while other alternatives are more effective, economical and safe for beneficial organisms.

• The ToT / FFS members have accepted that excessive use of nitrogenous fertilizers and irrigation mostly causing adverse effect on crop health and yield. Similarly imbalance use of fertilizers results the weak growth, insect, disease problems and finally less production.

• The programme is fully owned by the growers and they have realized that the approach is effective one and are demanding for continuation on other crops.

• Training brought change in perception regarding participatory approach in the farming community and line agencies involved.


41

• Developed farmers’ access to improved seed & other inputs like fertilizers & insecticide / pesticides from NRM programme of AKDN-MERP is highly appreciated.

• Different interventions like use of Copper sulphate, botanical pesticides and local made formulation (Detergent, Backing soda and Mustard oil) spray against insects in various vegetables were very successful and were adopted widely.

• Beneficial insects e.g.; predators (lady bird beetle, Chrysopa carnia, Syrphid fly and Dragon fly) were also found more effective in controlling different pests by adopting IPM methodology regularly in crop husbandry.

• Decision making capabilities of the farming communities are improved in crop management.

• Most of the farmers are convinced to implement Integrated Pest Management techniques in crops, fruits and vegetables, with less reliance on chemical control.

• Different interventions like light traps, pheromones traps, Augmentative biological control agents and local made formulation (Detergent+Backing soda+Mustard oil and Bordeaux paste) application proved very successful and will be adopted widely by the farming communities.

6. LESSONS LEARNED

• Clear message about the FFS activities to the farmers gave good results in terms of participation and cooperation.

• Opening and closing the day activities according to the scheduled improved the management time skills of the ToT / FFS members.

• Honoring of the Crop Management Decision (CMD) taken by FFS members and implementation by them has proved very helpful for building the concept of ownership and collective working.

• Indeed extension workers are the main force that can be used for mass scale dissemination of technology in the agriculture field so their participation in these programmes should be insured.

• Selection criteria for FFS farmers and sites should not be relaxed for any reason because it is of prime importance for successful running of FFS.

• Implementation of the decision taken in FFS feedback session should be checked regularly to ensure proper application of the required inputs.

• Simple, easier format for AESA and communication in local language can contribute more inputs in the capacity building of the farming community.

• Strong coordination with the line departments, projects, donors, local government and farming community verified very supportive in the adoption of the technology.

• Implementation of the Crop Management Decisions (CMDs) should be checked regularly.


42

7. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROTOCOL ANNEX:1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Financial support provided by Aga Khan Development Network Multi-input Earthquake Reconstruction Programme (AKDN-MERP) is gratefully acknowledged, without that, this work was not possible. We wish to express our sincerest gratitude to Mr. Miraj Khan Programme Director AKDN-MERP and Melad-Ul Karim Programme Manager NRM, for their keen interest in the programme. We also acknowledge the logistic arrangements provided by the both.

Special thanks are due to Ms. Zohra Khanum Manager NRM and Mr. Jalal-ud-Din Manager enterprise development, AKDN-MERP for their moral support for conducting season long participatory training and research through farmer field school on field crops, vegetables and fruits in the earthquake affected areas of Union Council Chakhama, Distt. Muzaffarabd, AJK.

Thanks are also due to the loving farming community who spared their valuable time to get first hand knowledge on vegetables, fruits and field crops management and production.

i

i

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION TEAM

CABI South Asia

Qamar Zia

Coordinator Training and FPTR

Shakeel Ahmad

Subject Specialist (FPTR)

Dr. Shamsul Islam

Subject Specialist (FPTR)

Dr. Kauser Iqbal Khan

Quality Assurance Specialist

Daud Hussain Anjum

Senior Field Technician

ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Aga Khan Development Network Multi-input Earthquake Reconstruction Programme (AKDN-MERP) is contributing significantly to assist those communities affected by the October 8, 2005 earthquake. CABI South Asia initiated “Season long participatory training and research through Farmer Field School on field crops, vegetables and fruits” in collaboration with AKDN-MERP in district Muzaffarabd union Council Chakhama.

For dissemination/adoption of technology, group participatory approach was followed through Farmer Field School (FFS). CABI – South Asia trained participants identified by the AKDN-MERP, enabling them to establish and run FFS successfully. During Training of Facilitators (ToF) practicing FFS were established and subsequently regular FFS were started.

During FFS Agro-Eco-System Analysis (AESA) was carried out by participants, charts prepared, discussions held and decisions were taken to manage the crop during next one week/fortnight. CABI – South Asia also provided backstopping to practicing FFS. Quality Assurance Specialist (QAS) from CABI – South Asia visited FFS and gave suggestions for improvement.

During 2007-08 CABI – South Asia held 34 ToF sessions against target of 34. AESA was conducted in 34 ToF sessions, whereas, 11 practicing FFS were visited by CABI staff. More than 34 feedback sessions were held and 48 special topics were discussed in detail. About 18 insect zoos were arranged and more than 04 resource persons were engaged to deliver lecture. For resolving differences, 20 On Farm Participatory Research Trials were arranged. More than 30 workshops/short trainings were held. QAS visited 02 ToF and 06 FFS during the year under report.

To evaluate the knowledge and skill level of vegetable, fruits and field crops management and production, a pre and post evaluation was carried out. Before season long training 95% participants have no knowledge about Agro ecosystem analysis (AESA) while after the training all the participants were trained on AESA as a best tool for crop management. Majority of participants (70%) were in favor of instruction to farmers before training while after the training all participants perceived that farmers should be facilitated in site specific crop management decisions. Pre FFS, 90% farmers had no knowledge about the existence of beneficial insects for plant protection while after the training 85% of the participants had basic knowledge of beneficial insects. Before the training all the FFS participants (100%) were unfamiliar with the safe pesticides, its characteristics and benefits and the safety measures during pesticides application. After the season long training they were fully aware about the safe pesticides and safety measures during pesticides application.

The science and farmer component of the farmer field school methodology was followed extensively during the season long training. Three Maize varieties were sown to evaluate that which variety best suite the area. The results clearly shows that ridge sowing of Azam variety has maximum yield per acre i.e. 120 mound per acre followed by Azam local variety having 104 mound while Local variety stands for minimum production i.e. 72 mound per acre in GAP plots, where as in FP plot the yield remained very low i.e. 28 monds/acre. Participatory compost making was another GAP being practiced during FFS sessions. On the basis of fertility management trials, NPK along with Urea proved the best for plant growth, health and grain yield. GAPs developed for the control of insect pests and diseases were; biological control like release of natural enemies Chrysoperla

vi

cornea which is generalized predator for sucking pest, Release of Trichogramma chilonis on cards which is specialized egg Parasitoids of Lepidoptera eggs, physical control, and use of home made formulation.

11 FFS were established in different villages of UC Chakhama AJK on three crops i.e. Apple, Maize and potatoes. Farmers were involved in all steps and stage of crop production through participatory approach which is the main theme in the FFS. Approximately 275 farmers were trained according to the slogan of approach “learning by doing” in different issues of each crop addressed with compensation trials of different options in order to investigate more appropriable technology for each and every issue which is environmental friendly, easily available, more cheaper and comparatively less toxic with standard or high crop production.

During these season long farmer-led activities, FFS sessions were held and facilitation through FFS on various aspects of crop management i.e. Pruning and Training, Nutrient Management, Water Management, Weeds Management, Pest and Diseases Management, beneficial and harmful insect, harvesting and post harvesting management, Marketing and other related social activities like facilitation skill development adult learning process, Non formal adult education farmers field schools. Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) like improved methods in pruning, sex pheromones and use of mustered oil and backing soda (sodium bicarbonates NaHCo3) to control powdery mildew, scab, blight and other fungal diseases, application of Bordeaux paste against apple canker or blue rot ,spray of 5% urea for prevention of apple scab in autumn and water spray for mites management very successfully incorporated and disseminated to farmers .

Good Agricultural Practices were developed and adopted by the concerned farming community in order to combat their insect pest and diseases incidences in vegetables, fruits and cereal crops. By adopting and applying these GAPs, cost of production has reduced to 50% while Integrated Pest Management practices were adopted widely.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements…………………………………………………….………….……i

Project Implementation Team……………………………………………….…….…..ii

Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………....iii

Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………vi

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1

2. OBJECTIVES (MAIN & SPECIFIC) ................................................................................ 2

2.1. MAIN OBJECTIVES: .............................................................................................. 2

2.2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES: ....................................................................................... 2

3. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 3

3.1. WHAT IS FARMER FIELD SCHOOL (FFS)? .................................................................... 3

3.1.1. A typical ToF/FFS session covered the following activities: ............................. 4

3.2. PRE AND POST TRAINING EVALUATION OF THE TOF/FFS PARTICIPANTS ...... 4

3.3. AGRO-ECO SYSTEM ANALYSIS (AESA): ............................................................. 4

3.4. INSECT ZOO: ........................................................................................................ 6

3.5. GROUP DYNAMICS: .............................................................................................. 6

3.6. FFS FEEDBACK SESSIONS .................................................................................. 6

3.7. GOOD AGRICULTURE PRACTICES (GAPS) ......................................................... 7

3.8. RESOURCE PERSONS: ........................................................................................ 7

3.9. QUALITY ASSURANCE OF FFS: ........................................................................... 7

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION........................................................................................ 7

4.1. TOF SESSIONS CONDUCTED DURING 2007-08: .................................................. 7

4.1.1. TOF/FFS Establishment ................................................................................. 7

4.1.2. Staff position in ToF during year 2007-08 ....................................................... 8

4.2. PRE AND POST EVALUATION ............................................................................ 12

4.2.1. Perception regarding Agro ecosystem analysis (AESA): ............................... 12

4.2.2. Role of Extension worker as Instructor/Advisor Vs Facilitator: ....................... 13

4.2.3. Familiarity of beneficial organisms: ............................................................... 13

4.2.4. Familiarity of insect pests and diseases: ....................................................... 13

4.2.5. Awareness of safe pesticides: ...................................................................... 13

4.2.6. Safety measures during pesticides application: ............................................ 14

4.2.7. Participants’ perception regarding nutrient management: .............................. 14

4.2.8. Familiarity of the FFS participants about impacts of WTO: ............................ 14

4.2.9. FFS participants’ perception regarding Organization: .................................... 15

4.2.10. Perceptions about harvest and post harvest management. ........................... 15

iii

4.3. CURRICULA DEVELOPED FOR MAIZE, POTATO, APPLE AND WALNUT .............................. 15

4.3.1. Potato Crop Curriculum ................................................................................ 15

4.3.2. Apple Crop Curriculum ................................................................................. 16

4.4. SPECIAL TOPICS COVERED ...................................................................................... 17

4.5. EXPOSURE VISIT OF TOF PARTICIPANTS ................................................................... 18

4.6. FFS EXCHANGE VISIT ORGANIZED............................................................................. 19

4.7. FFS FEEDBACK SESSIONS ....................................................................................... 19

4.7.1. Achievements .............................................................................................. 20

4.7.2. Lessons learnt.............................................................................................. 20

4.8. GROUP DYNAMICS/ EXERCISES/ ENERGIZERS/ICE BREAKERS HELD IN TOF................... 20

4.9. CROPS IN TOF AND FFS ......................................................................................... 21

4.10. TOPIC DISCUSSED IN TOF/FFS ............................................................................ 21

4.11. INSECT ZOO ....................................................................................................... 21

4.12. PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH ACTIVITIES MAIZE & POTATO, APPLE AND WALNUT......... 23

4.12.1. Maize (Zea mayz L.) Field Trials: .................................................................. 23

4.12.2. Sowing Trials: .............................................................................................. 23

4.12.3. Varietals Test of different varieties ................................................................ 23

4.12.4. Thinning and hoeing: .................................................................................... 24

4.12.5. Fertilizer trial: ............................................................................................... 24

4.12.6. Plant Protection Trial: ................................................................................... 24

4.12.7. Maize Trials Results ..................................................................................... 24

4.13. GAPS DEVELOPED ............................................................................................. 27

4.13.1. Maize production for food and livelihood: ...................................................... 27

4.13.2. Rehabilitation of earthquake victims: ............................................................ 27

4.14. ISSUES AND OPTIONS FOR CROP MANAGEMENT:...................................... 28

4.14.1. Maize crop duration: ..................................................................................... 28

4.15. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: ......................................................................................... 28

4.16. GOOD AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES (GAPS) DEVELOPED IN POTATO: ...... 28

4.16.1. Seed Rate .................................................................................................... 29

4.16.2. Seed Dressing ............................................................................................. 29

4.16.3. Weeding and Earthing-up: ............................................................................ 30

4.16.4. Nutrient Management; .................................................................................. 30

4.16.5. Potato Insect Pest & Disease Management: ................................................. 31

4.16.6. Composting .................................................................................................. 32

4.16.7. Potato Crop Phenology/Cropping Calendar; ................................................. 32

4.16.8. Seed Potato Economic Analysis: .................................................................. 32

iv

4.17. GOOD AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES (GAPS) DEVELOPED IN APPLE:.......... 33

4.17.1. Balanced Fertilization: .................................................................................. 33

4.17.2. Integrated Codling Moth Management; ......................................................... 34

4.17.3. Codling Moth (Cydia pomonella) Monitoring; ................................................ 34

4.17.4. Spider Mites (Tetranychus urticae) ............................................................... 35

4.17.5. San Jose Scale: ........................................................................................... 35

4.17.6. Aphids (Aphis pomi) ..................................................................................... 36

4.17.7. Apple Scab (Venturia inaequalis).................................................................. 36

4.17.8. Powdery mildew ........................................................................................... 36

4.17.9. Apple Canker (Wood Rot) ............................................................................ 37

4.17.10. Pruning and Training: ............................................................................... 37

4.17.11. Harvest and Post Harvest management ................................................... 37

4.17.12. Marketing Management ........................................................................... 37

4.18. SUCCESS STORIES ....................................................................................... 38

4.18.1. Use of Mustered Oil, Detergent and Backing Soda; ...................................... 38

4.18.2. Application of Lime Solution: ........................................................................ 38

4.18.3. Use of Backing Soda: ................................................................................... 38

4.18.4. Use of 5% Urea; ........................................................................................... 38

4.18.5. Sex Pheromone: .......................................................................................... 38

4.18.6. Use of Potash containing fertilizers: .............................................................. 39

4.18.7. Corrugated Paper and Gunny bags Bindings; ............................................... 39

4.18.8. Bordeaux Paste: .......................................................................................... 39

4.18.9. Soil Fertility Management; ............................................................................ 39

4.18.10. Potato seed production as an economic activity: ...................................... 39

4.19. QUALITY ASSURANCE ................................................................................... 39

4.19.1. Critical analyses of FFS ............................................................................... 39

4.19.2. Suggestions: ................................................................................................ 40

5. ACHIEVEMENTS: ........................................................................................................ 40

6. LESSONS LEARNED .................................................................................................. 41

7. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROTOCOL ANNEX:1 ...................................................... 42

v

Final Report

NRM Farmer Field Schools in Chakhama Valley

April 2007- August 2008

CABI Ref.: FR/CABI-PAK/DR-10005/1103

CABI South Asia

Opposite 1-A, Satellite Town, Data Gunj Bakhsh Road Rawalpindi

Tele: 051-9290132, 9290332: Fax: 051-9290131

E-mail: [email protected]


Quality Assurance Protocol ANNEX:1

42

Summarizing Quality Assurance results of FFS

Excellent:>80%(280 - 350);Good:60% to 79%(210 - 279);Satisfactory:40% to 59%(140 - 209);Poor:< 139

Criteria Total Score

FFS FFS FFS Overall Average

Rating Remarks

A. Establishment 43

A.1 FFS site selection 8

A.2 FFS membership 15

A.3 IPM/FP orchards selection 12

A.4 Over all Plot condition 8

B. Organization 60

B.1 Proper group formation 8

B.2 Group coherency exists 10

B.3 Division of responsibilities 8

B.4 Familiarity with FFS concept 10

B.5 Farmer's interest 8

B.6 Farmer's organization 8

B.7 Community development 8

C. Management 59

C.1 Time management 6

C.2 FFS material 11

C.3 Exchange visit 9

C.4 Logistic arrangements 6

C.5 Farmer's attendance 12

C.6 FFS planning 15

D. Implementation 188

D.1 Communication 6

D.2 Facilitation skills 19

D.3 Participatory approaches 8

D.4 Special Topic 10

D.5 New finding 11

D.6 Eco- system analysis 45

D.7 Team Building Exercises 8

D.8 Science and Farmers 32

D.9 Insect Zoo 41

D.10 Day Evaluation 8

Total 350

Percentage 100

Ranking

Recommendations

1

2

3

4

5

1. INTRODUCTION - CABI.org Farmer... · AKDN-MERP during the April-October, 2007. While ......

Documents

Transcript of 1. INTRODUCTION - CABI.org Farmer... · AKDN-MERP during the April-October, 2007. While ......