AGOA/MOZ/75/011 FIELD REPORT N*13 AUGUST 1980

COMPLEXO AGRO-INDUSTRIAL DE ANGONIA PROVINCIA DE TÈTE

MOCAMBIQUE

AN ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND AGRICULTURAL LIMITATIONS TO PRESENT PRODUCTION AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANISATION

OF THE UNITED NATIONS

FAO/UNDP PROJECT LAND AND WATER USE PLANNING

ISRIC LIBRARY

HZ - 1 9 8 0 . 0 1

Wageningen The Rather lands

AGrOA/MOZ/75/011 F i e l d Report No. 13 August 1980.

C A I A

Complexo Agro-Industrial de Angónia

Mocambique

An Assessment of Environmental and Agricultural Limitations to Present Production and Future Development.

Scanned from original by ISRIC - World Soil Information, as ICSU World Data Centre for Soils. The purpose is to make a safe depository for endangered documents and to make the accrued information available for consultation, following Fair Use Guidelines. Every effort is taken to respect Copyright of the materials within the archives where the identification of the Copyright holder is clear and, where feasible, to contact the originators. For questions please contact soil.isric@wur.nl indicating the item reference number concerned.

F. Macapugay, Agronomist

D.J» Radcliffe, Soil Survey/Ian*3-Classification Specialist

D. van Mourik, Soil Survey Specialist.

FAO/UNDP Project Lancl and Water Use Planning Team Leader G»Fo Henrard.

Ministry of Agriculture Pood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

/fc?6'

ft*'V»

1 ., *

J - 1 -

» • • * fc

C O N T E N T. S'

INTRODUCTION

ÏNTRODUCAO

CHAPTER I ..

1.1.

1.2.

1.3.

CHAPTER 2

2.1.

2. .

2.3.

THE PHYSICAL SETTING

Historical Background

Location and Communications

Climate

1.3.1. Growing Period

1.3.2. Temperature'Regimes

1.3.3. Agroclimatic Yields

1.3.4. Agroclimatic'Hazards

1.4. Physiography and Soils

1.4.1. Soil Physical Properties.

1.4.2. 'Soil-Water Relationship

1*4.3. Soil Chemical Properties

j -

CURRENT AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES

Organization and Management

Crops

Inputs

2.3.1. Land Preparation

2.3.2. Planting

2.3.3. Fertilizers

2.3.4. Weeding 2 . 3 . 5 . Control of Pests and

Deseases

2.3.6. Irrigation

2.3.7. Harvest

2.3.8. Storage and Transport

Rotations

Crop Trials and Experimentation

Crop Yields

Marketing

Economics of Production

2.4.

2.5.

2.6.

2.7.

2.8.

CHAPTER 3

3.1.

3.2.

3.2.

CONSTRAINTS TO PRODUCTION

Introduction

CAIA Agricultural Systems or Land Utilization Types

Constraints to Present and Proposed LOTS • ' -

4

6

8

8

9

11

13

13

15

15

16

19

23

25

28

28.

28

28

28

30

32

34

34

35

36

36

36

37

37

40

40

45

45

45

49

l£ My

PLU

UVu«-

3.3.1. Environment Constraints 50

3.3.2. Organizational and Management

Constraints 52

3.4. Preliminary Land Evaluation of Present

CAIA Farms ."->." " ' • '•" ~ 53

'3.5. Constraints to Expansion :.''/>-' ' " 58

SUMMARY,, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMEITDATlÓNS " 59

51. Summary and Conclusions

52. A Development Strategy for CAIA, , -

SUMARI0,_ CONCLUSOES E RECOMENDACOES ' . * . ' 67

51. Sumdrio e C.onclusoes

52. Uma Estratégia para, q, Desenvol-

viment o de CAIA

APPENDIX A. GUIDELINES POR EROSION CONTROL, * , 75

• • • , ,/ „ • -••. , . . « - i - » •-

APPENDIX-, B. CHECKLIST, OF ECOLOGICALLY SUITABLE

CROPS 78

REFERENCES / . ' -".'/''-"'." \ /" '''..*'. 8 o

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .. . . • . . . . * ^ 83

' i • "! « V

— * 4

1 -Z^ r "

LIST OF TEST FIGURES

Page

1.1. Location of CAIA farms,* Raingauges and Major Landscapes ~ 10a

1.2. Monthly Moi'sture Balance and Growing Period 13a

LIST OP TEXT TABLE

S1. ïèelmïcaï':Ob;r^ 63 S1,,, Objectivos Técnicos.,para ,o,Desenvolvimentp de ,CAIA „„ 71 1, '1,;,:- Map: Ref erence:<.pf ..CAIA f arma, and-Distance L.of;-Headi AT/,0

1,2,i«n<-Areas of"'CAIAl'farms' ^ ^ i -V^;---^ <:• ..,Ï.> f.i.xvüj r i r.^x^oTa 11

1.3. R a ^ Ü g e 1 = r n e l l C l ^ P » s - *K*":* ** ^ ^ v.-.^lfia* 12

1.4». - J/leanrAnnual,.axid>Mpnthlyi. iPr iecipi.tation-v. , ,,.'.,-. •.,., .<*„„„ 12 1 i 5 • ,-Approximate f Temperature; .'Regime sr fo r vBif f« ren t -<u -> -r<>

i^,-j.,Crppp.ing^Perip/ls^on) CAIA Farms^-aiicl^at ,iUlqnJgue 7.-v-- ~.:. 14 1 * 6';" r - P o t é n t i a l f Crop ' 'Agroclimatic -Yields?^ o u >.,.-.,. V -y • . v.--' 15

1,7. Phys iog raph ic ' and Soi l*-Proper t ies of'Maj'br^1 '- '"*-' r :~' '•••^Landscapes'1 "-^-'^ *-•'-" ^ ' ' i- '-iï- '-ii^ .* - ! - ^ :i.;v -.....- 17

1,8/'J"Land''and"'Soil''ofJExistlng'' 'cA^^^^ : ' • '" ' • ' ; ' ' s " ' o ; 20

1,9.» -Ava i l ab le ,Wate r n Charac i t e r i s t i c s , . q f .Selected Soi l , Jf. .„ P i t ' s "on CAIA Farms*".".'.' ~. " , j ' f v ; " , - ' '*• ' "-".'- - "* 2 4

1 • 10,-*Chemicalt P r o p e r t i e s - of se lec ted» Soil . P r o f i l e s on- k i - ;

CAIA Farms * '• , • ; > ' . . , . ' ' . '- 2 5

1,11, Generalized Fe r t i l i t y Classes 26 2 . 1 . "-'Crops aii^r-VarfétiVé1 C u l t i v a t e d 0 at-CAIA 1978^79> l t •

.n-1979,48 0';\oA'' \..? /;xi'to i : -T V L.-;.- r.-.-. J - v.- 29 2.12;/' Planting "Time,'Spacing'/ Seed Rate^and'Populatioh V,J *

of CA.IA C r o p s ' - ~-Uc> '"'s 30 2.3. r Actual fPlanting. Dat'es^and. Plant,Population on

'Sample'Plants of: CAIA" Farms f1979r-8Ö Se'asoiï' '- "'",L 31 2.4. Planned Fertilizer .Application,, for rCAIA. Crops . . 32 2.5. CAIA Production-an*.Yields'.forJi197-8t79> aaovo-r-.T.-r 37 2.6. CAIAuMaiz:e -Yields' '1979~8Ö pfedic:ted°'by::FAÖi'/Cf'6p'"" "

Monitoring Study'rl m~5 -°' -^J "-'- i:i p&*w «i> vc i 38 2.7?rlCAIA- Ïst;.'v'Seas00: Tota^o Yiel^tT T979-J80 ',ÏOD4l;ai.^ " 39 2,8. Costs of Production (Mt/ha) and Labour/Mechanised

r..^Inputs for CAIA. Crops 1978-79 -2,9.- Production Costs-,.(Meticais>fper; hectare).,breakdown 6,,-.-

... . for.riMaizei 1978-79 -Season .t .. ./; , ., . ...f s. ...... , v 4 2 2.1,0,.. Crjop Yields^^reciuir^d-r to meet .-PraductionüCpsts 1 , ;•>_ ,r; 4 3 2.11. Crop Gross''Margin's -1978-79' Season s- '. l f o", t-1 .~^:-J 4.4. 3*1» Land Utilization Types currently practiced by CAIA 46

3.2, Suggested Future Agricultural Land Use Types 4>8 3.3» Environmental' Constraints and Land Characteristics 5-1 3.4, Rough Assessment of Environmental Constraints on

CAIA Farms 51 3.5, Sensitivity of Land Utilization on Types to Cons­

traints 53 3.6, Preliminary Evaluation of CAIA blocks for Present

and Proposed LUT3, 55

4 •

• - •• • • • « • i 4 ~ - • ' • ' / .

/ • ,

INTftOTOCTiON

The Contplexo Agro-Indus trial de Angonia (CAIA) supplies a major proportion of the agrucltural produce of Tate Province and makes an important contribution to the agricultural economy of Moaambiqua. CAIA has expanded in resent years and current plans «all for further expansion, both in total area cultivated and in intensification of cropping in oertain areas through increased irrigation. While, the , achlsvswat of C A U i» Mating its jraèMttie* Urgeta bjM been •iBimiilM», Dd* ptotwrtU* «ft*» pgiwli %\ tb.% asyma *f »lp&tt~ cant and irreveraible degradation of soil resources. This"degradation can only be halted by enviromentally sound agricultural planning, and in order to aohieve this planning it is essential that the physical and organisational constraints to present production are identified and fully understood* This study attempts to identify these constraints and lay the foundation for sound agricultural planning to sustain the productivity of the Angonia district for the people of Mozambique. The need for sound planning and conservation of natural resources is stated in the directives of the Third Congress l

of HtELBKV The alternative is the irreversible degradation of the valuable natural resources of Angonia accompanied by an unrelenting • decline in productivity.

It is against this background that the decision was made to proceed with the present study at a meeting of MNA and FAO/MOZ/75/011 in Maputo on the. 2nd May 1980. The objectives of this study are defined as follows ? ' 1

- to make all agencies concerned fully aware of the problems facing CAIA and of the limitations to"present production and ' future expansions.

- to make practical recommendations in broad terms as to the improvement of present land use-practices. S

- to establish the guidelines for future studies needed to•-\ provide adequate data base for farm planning.

- to indicate the need for adaptive research on crop and varietal selection, rotations, fertilizer inputs etc.

•\ ; . ' ,';• •

The present report is based on data collected between October 1979 and June 198O by the Angonia Soil Survey and Land Evaluation' team of Radcliffe and van Mourik. Details on the agricultural operation, together with related conclusions and recommendations were supplied by Macapugay following a visit to Angonia in June 198O.

1

Chapter 1 describes the physical setting of CAÏA. The historical background is briefly discussed, the location cf the various farms is indicated on diagrams and details of the range of climatic and soil/landscape properties-are presented.- Current agrxcxxltural

^practices, including inputs such a3-fertilizer, mechanization,etc and yield, outputs are the subject of. Chapter 2... Chapter 3 identifies and defines both the physical and management constraints to present. production and future development.. Recommendations for minimizing, these constraints and. an outline development strategy are"given in" the 'Summaryg Conclusions and Recommendations*.

ETTROIUCAO

O Complexo Agro-Industrial de Angonia (CAIA) fornece a maioria dos produtos agrlcolae a Provincia de Tete e da uaia importante contri-buiyao para a economia'agrïcbla de Moyambique. CAIA expandiu-se bastante nestes tiltimos anos e existem ja planos para uma expansao" ainda maior, tanto na area total cultivada^ como na intensificaeao das safras em certas areas," atravês de uma irriga9ao crescente.

Embora o sucesso de CAIA, ao cumprir as suas metas de produ$aot tenha constituido um esfor9o notavel, o facto ê que essa produ$ao inuitas vezes ê conseguida a custa de uma grave e irrevérsïvel de-grada9ao dos recursos do solo* Essa degrada$ao sbmente podera ser controlada atravês de uma prudente planifica^ao agrïcola, relacio-nada com o meio ambiente ; e para conseguir fazer-se esBa planifi-cacao necessario se torna que sejam identificados e plenamente com— preendidos os limitantes fisicos e organizac:'onais a actual produyao.

Este estudo pretende identificaT tais limitantes è estabelecer as bases de um plano agrïcola coerente, que apoie a produtividade do distrito de AngSnia e que beneficie o Povo de Mozambique.

A neceesidade de um plano eficaz e da oonservazao dos recursos na-turais foi estabelecido nas directivas do III Congresso da PHELIMO. A alternativa seria a degradazao irrevérsïvel dos valiosos recur­sos naturals de Angönia, acompanhada por um inflfixivel decllnio na produtividade.

floi para combater este estado de coisas que se tomou a decisao de se proceder este estudo, no encontro entre a DINA e a FAO/MOZ/75/011»

em Maputo, a 2 de Maio de 1980. Os objectives deste estudo foram de-finidos da seguinte maneira :

- fazer con que todas as agendas interessadas estejam plenamente conscientes dos problemas enf >entados por CAIA e das limitacoes a produ9ao actual e a sua future expansao.

- fazer recommendacóes practicas, em termos gerais, como a de melhoramento das praticas actuais quanto ao uso da terra.

- estabelecer linhas mestras para futuros estudos necessarios ao estabelecimento de um ponto de partida para a planificazao agrïcola.

- indicar a necessidade de uma pesquiaa adaptavel as culturas e a selec9ao de variedades, rota9oes, aportes de adubo etc.

/

7 ' •••'

O presente rela-torio ê basedo em dados recolhidosentre Outubro de 1979 e Junho de 198O pelo grupo de ''Levanèamento do.SoIa je_ Ayaliasao s daTerra ide, Ang6nia,8.9de Radcliffe e van., Hour ik c Os .detalhè-j a .respeito do trabalho.agricolaobem como das.conclusoes e r.ecomendacoes inerentes». foram fornecidos por Macapugay. a seguir a uma visita a Angónia, em Junho.de A 98O r 0.;i. „ . - , ,, , (_. .j. . ., rf ... .,

O Capïtulo 1 descreve ainstalacao fisica de CAIi,. Dd-se uma "breve resenha de seu passado histörico, ,indica-se a localizasao de diversas machambas porjneio de diagrams e, sao ;apresentados tambSm algurns detalhes acerca da classificacao do clima e do solo e das caracteri-sticasnda paisagem. /- .. ,r. ,.... L

As praticas agricolas mais correntes, incluindo.facto^es.dé prdducao como adubos, mecaniza^ao», etc. ,e.rendimentos de prqducao constituem o ,.tema do Capitulo 2. .,.,-., , ,, .

" ' ^ J " .,* . <„• i . , t j v»;v, ,;. >»,... . • • • ) < • • • l l r

O Capitulo 3 identïfica.e, define^os limitanjreso tanto fiaicos como de Adrainistracao. a produeao actual e ao desenvolvimento futuro. As recomendacoes.sobre .a„formasde ultrapassar esses limitantes,e o esbo90 de uma-estrategia de desenvolvimento sao dados no "Suiramario, Recomendacoes e Conclusoes".

- 8 -

C H A P T E R 1 .

THE PHYSICAL SETTING

1.1 Historical Background.

An understanding of the history of the development of CAIA gives '-an insight into many of the problems CAIA faces today, particular­ly regarding the diverse distribution of the various farm units, most of which are inherited from the.colonial era.

Dae to relatively fertile soils and adequate rains the northern and eastern parts of Angonia have, in traditional times, produced enough food to sustain a relatively dense and active population. Following the domination of the district by the Ngoni people in the 185QB (Davidson, 196?)» Angonia became an improtant centre for livestock production. By the time the Portuguese entered Angonia in significant numbers, early in the present century, the inhabited northern and eastern areas already had, by traditional standards, a well developed agriculture. The local farmers were cultivating much of the best land in the district and the Portuguese, rather than risk a direct confrontation with the Ngoni, usually chose to.locate their "machambas" on areas whcih were then un­cultivated or underutilized. These areas were of course, generally not located on the most fertile soils of the district.

The Portuguese colonisers were attracted to Angonia by the "temperate" climate and favourable conditions for crop production. Maize, which by this time had become the staple food crop among the local population, was found to grow well in Angor.ia and became in important cash crop for the Portuguese. In addition, potatoes, vegetables and temperate- fruits were produced to meet increasing demands and Angonia became an important centre of supply for Tete Province. The introduction of mechanized culti­vation techniques and the inputs of fertilizer, coupled with adequate supply of very cheap labour under the colonial system, ensured the continued agricultural productivity of the district up to the time of independence.

The largest of these enterprises was Gasa Agricola, which cultiva­ted an area of several thousand ihectares immediately prior to in­dependence, mainly with maize and potatoes, but also with signifi­cant areas of vegetables and temperate fruits such as peaches and apples. After independence, the owner and all but two of the European technicians fled leaving a large part of the machinery in dispepair (Tempo," 1977, quoted in Isaacroan, 1978). This chaotic state of affairs was inherited by the newly formed state controlled UPA (ünidade de Pruducao da Angonia) which took OVCJ. control of Casa Agricola after independence. •' -

~ 9 -

Despite these intial difficulties, and a shortage of trained tech-nican3, U?A has succeeded not only in farming the area of the previous Casa Agricola "but also in taking over additional abandoned farms and opening up virgin woodland areas to cultivation» In the season of 1978/79 UPA-farmed'anfarea 'of around 9»0C0 hectares,. In 1979 U?A was renamed CAIA (Complexo Agro-Industrial de Angonia).

', The -policy of- CAIA is still expansionist, "both in-intensifying cultivation in exisiting areas by;increasing use of irrigation and lay bringing new areas under* cultivationo The latter objective is attained without resource to' the land presently occupied by the family sector, but by opening up woodland in a-'ea of'low population* " ['

1*2 Location and communications. • "• ' " The development of CAIA by taking over abandoned farms and opening up previously unused areas has resulted in a rather 'dispersed distribution-of-farmed-areas- throughout-Angonia district. -The CAIA operation is subdivided into nine *farm blocks' some of which are also _spl.it - into £ a nuniber off sub: blocks.,depending on the • location^ of-eld colonialj f arms*. The:, location of CAIA farm blocks is shown on- Figure *1.1 *•-_..,In, general-; they are^situated around the perimeter of the district, close -to, the,frontier-with Malawi» The present CAIA; headquarters pr-'.'Sede*.-is'.situated on the frontier although there are plans to move it to a site-further:.insife Mozambique. Each farm block has a small field office which looks after the^ day to day running.of: agricultural operations.

; : • - . • - • • ' • • ; .o ~ l r : \ : : . . . .:. . / ; • • : . • . ; p :;\r * - . '

, • CAIA;.headquar,ters- is; situated- 31' km' from- the district; capital of . ,. Ulongua, to. which it is linked by an.-, alii weather-road. -An asphalt

road-is presently under rconstruct ion linking-Ulongue» to .the provinci­al, capital,- Tete, which- is -230 krruaway. ;The present road to Tote is rarely^ impassable for vtrucks» ortfpur0wheel drive vehicles. The CAIAtheciü office I\P stele phone contact, with-Clongue., which has radio; contact with Tete;andjwith; the;/lo.calidade-.8 (sub.district) headquarters at,Dpmue, Matengoj-Balane and Tsangano. - There is,.-an airport at•Ulongue.and; although there are•presently no - regular

i.servicej. there:,are- plansyto.restart them. Discussed airstrips exist at t Matengo Balame and Tsangano•--.>•-.;.-- r- - f ^

. v i J " • .1.' -.' >v. *••','/ " i - " *•• ."-*••' f • ~ ' ; * . : ' ".'T .; '».".*

Access-to the CAIA farm blocks is", at least ..partly*by, earth road which occasionally become impassable after heavy rains..*},.:Tabïe 1.1 gives the distance from the field offices of each farm block to the CAIA headquarters, together with map reference fcr each farm block.

- 1.0 .-

Table 1.1 - Map reference of CAIA farms and distance to ; ' •- Head Office. '

Farm Block Map Sheet. „, . Dis^ice to (DINAGECA, 1;5Ó,000, Prov.) Head Office

(km)

Domue 344 Klangeni 347 Bifolo 387 ' .Matiasse 387 Mongue 387,427 Bzenaa 427 Chi tambe 426,427 Moniquera . 465 , Iflpulo 465

There is no telephone or radio communication between CAIA head­quarters and field'offices.' this lack of communication,'together with the large distances between farms and the', poor roads, is a factor limiting the smooth'running of-CAIA operations. Transport costs are also obviously affected by the' distance of farms from eventual markets. '

There is presently some uncertainty about total areas of-each farm block cropped by CAIA. Recently DINA8SCA (Direccao Naoional de Geograf ia e de Cadastro) have carried out area surveys and drawn .up plans of various blocks, but these plans do not always corre­spond with what one observes in the'field. There is a clear need for accurate topographic survey of CAIA's farms to determine not only areas but also contours for planning conservation works and irrigation where appropriate. For the present, uncertainty over areas makes all CAIA's yield iand input data rather inaccurate and unreliable. The present PAO study has plotted observed cropped areas on aerial photographs and transferred them to standard 1:50,000 maps. Table 1,2 compares PAO estimates-of farm areas (measured by planimetry from map plots) with those of CAIA: and DINAGECA. The larger PAO figures are in part due to the time they were recorded (July 198O) and include some new areas ploughed for the I98O-81 season. ' -

92 36 2

"i 11 27 46 .64 71

f

Tar •.All v-'oatner dirt roads

Din iond usuciy passe tile tori -.'/heel rtrtv.» vehicles

taing'.iajcWOyjasdcito inmate station e>

t \ r>00 000 UNDP FAO MOZ/75/011

- 11 -.

: i. j ...... . • ' • 1 : . ' ••

• ' ' • Table. 102 - Areas of CAIA farms (Hectares) ~:.*7.0

Farm - CAIA Estimate DÏNAGECA PAO/MOZ/75/011

Measurement Estimate ••

Domue " • ' • 438 — " 555 .'*• r • Mlangeni ; ' " ' 800 -• • 1258 :••" :'-"

Bifolo: Chi|>ole •'• 350 300 : :

.Cacen9ha 107 162 .

Matengo Balatib - ' 3 2 ' 62 • • -'

Lichenga > 62 194 • •• ;

Sede • • ^ ?• ' 3 9 189 : .

Muasabuelera 273 227 •

Matiasse * "'" *700~~ " ---_-- • 640 •

Mongue * . . • 1100- " 'L • - - 1540

Dzenza 460 362 Chitambe ' ' • i • 3 2 9 + " ' -,1178 Moniquera • 1499 2210 Mpulo 289 650

- - - - - - •

Total 9527

+ Only part of "block*

1.3 Climate» • ' " .

The climate of Angonia is1 well suited to-production of a wide

variety of crops under rainfed or irrigationed conditions* Tho total

annual rainfall' varies from 725 mm'- - 1149 ram between stations

recording in the-district, and over 90% "normally falls in the 'rainy

season of late November ->early' April. ^Temperatures are moderated

by altitude and the average groining period temperature at Ulongue

is 20.9°C. . - ' - . . _

The district is relatively well covered by a network of raingauges

although some have recently fallen into disuse., Table 1.3-lists

the nearest raingauges to-the CAIA farm blocks,, together with the

numbers of years of available, data at the. time of writing.

- 12 -

Table 1.3 - Raingauges near CAIA Farms

CAIA f Nearest Raingauge ,- • No. o f

Farm Name Latitude Longitude Alt i tude Years —- - (m)

Domue Entaca 14029»s .35005«E 1340 13 Idangeni Lizulo 14°31*S 34°28'E 1460 13 Bifolo Matengo Balam 14051 «s 34°32»E 1370 12 Matiasse . Mapange 14°58'S 34°33'E 1470 , . 12 Mongue •,_

Dzenza Tsangano 15°10«S 34°33'E 1655 12 Chitambe Moniquera Chinhandjie 15°26«S 34°16'E 700 17 Mpulo '

• Source : Adapted from Kauffman (1978}.

•Table 1.4 gives the mean and annual precipitation recorded at each of these raingauges.

Table 1.4 — Qean Annual and Monthly Precipitation (mm")

Raingauge Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Tea

Entaca 106 232 219 180 129 56 7 6 5 4 7 21 972 Luzilo 69 169 237 199 148 44 8 4 1 1 3 22 905 Matengo 47, 141 209 183 138 23" 17 3 , 2 2 4 16 785 Balame -., .

Mapangê 60 127 166 '183 1.14 30, 8 -. 2- 4 2 3 28 727 Tsangano 76 184 -224 243 17.6 76 52 35 23 17 6 28 1140 Chinhandjie 96 214 239 21-1- .184 47 19 13 15 7 3 23 1071

Average 76 178 216 200 148 46 18 10 8 6 4 23 933

Source z Kauffman (1978)

Using calculated Penman evapotranspiration figures (ETó) for the meteorological station at Ulongue (l4s44'Sj 34A22»E, 1270 m) moisture balance curves are plotted in Figure 1o2.

f

- 13 -

v . • . / . . - • .

1.3»1 Growing Periods. Work is currently in 'progress "by the PAO team i'o define the length of growing period* for various recording stations in

'l/Angonia (Radcliffe, PAO/MOZ/75/011 Working Paper in prepara-' tion). Growing period data for five of the stations adjacent to CAIA "blocks are presented in relation to the moisture "balance curves in Figure 1.2. Rainfall distribution ar. d growing period duration at Mapangê, "the- raingauge adjacent -- to-Matiasse and Mongue" "blocks is similar to Matengo JJalaa© and is therefore not plotted separately of Figure 1.2. "Figure 1.2 also showë the"relationship "between the present

- J major cropping periods at CAIA and the rainfall patterns and growing periods.

With the marginal exception of Matengo Balarae, all the rainfall stations have a"growing period of more than 140 daysrin 75$ of-the years This is adequate for growing SR52 variety of maize and more than adequate for potatoes and vegetable crops. The growing period at Tsangano, 'and therefore probably on Dzenza and Chitambe "blocks is Bigni'<-ficantly longer indicating a lower irrigation requirement • or a greater chance of growing rainfed crops in the second (March-June) period. * -• — - —

Detailed analysis of rainfed data for two stations (Entaca and Ulongue (Radcliffe Op cit)) revealed a | in 5 years pro­bability of a significant drought'accuring during the main growing period (i.e. the rainfed cropping period). Such drought periods were observed in January and February of the 1979-8O cropping season, but the SR52 variety of maize, if

, , properly fertilized is fairly drought reistant, and it is , . . unlikely that yields^were more than slightly depressed due

;to moisture stress. The local"'maize suffered much more severely, however, and other sensitive crops could fail in droughty years» Probability of drought occurarice is there-

' fore significant in determining selection-of rainfed crops.

1.3*2'TempeBatüre Regimes. • " ri - ' ' Temperature data only exist for two stations in Angonia namely Ulongue and Vila Coutinho Velha. Temperature is

"closely related to altitude, however, and the mean tempe-"ratures for different cropping periods on CAIA farms are

• '< * v • •

+The growing period is defined as the continuous period from the time when the rainfall exceeds half the potential eyapotranspira­tion (calculated by the,Penman method) to the time when the rainfall falls below half ETo. plus the-time required to evaporate an assume'd 100 mm of stored soil,water. (Kowal, 1977)»

- 14 -

calculated from a graph prepared from seven climatic stations at varying altitude in the north of Tete province' OP adjacent areas of Malawi» Resulting estimates^are given in Table 1.5.

• • • • ' ' ' • . . " • V . . U ._

Table 1.5 - Approximate, Temperature Regimes for different

cropping periods on CAIA_, farms and at Ulongue.

Station/ Elevation • ,* Mean'Temperature (°C)..; Season Farm (m) Dec-Apr Mar-Jun Jul*-0ct t Annual - . i i . | | ' I I I . i l l i I,. •• I . I . 1 -nil ir 1 11 1 111 • 1 i -•! I • ' | : ' . • •

• 1 . . . U. 1 - - '

Ulongue 1270 20.9 ; X ' 1 8 . 2 "' 17.9 19-2 Domue 1150 21.7 •' '19.2 " • 19.2' 20.4

' Mlangeni HOO 20.0 .17-9 17.7 18.9 :: Bi£olo ' 1400 20.0 . 17.9 ' 17.7 18.9

Matiasse 1450 ' 19.7 J ïik ' 17.4 18.6 Dzenza 1450 19.7 17.6 . 17.4 18.6 Mongue 1450 w ,. 19-7 17.6 ' 17.4 18.6 Chitambo 1450 - 19.7 17.6 17.4 18.6 Moniquera 1150 21.7 19.2 19.2 20.4 Mpulo t1050 22.3 19.8 19-9 21.0

Source : Ulongue from meteorological records 1968-79» ' • i- r i , 1 ;j • .

Others^from.plot of data for Tete. Fingoe, Ulongue,

- . Purancungo,,yila Coutinho Velha, Lilongwe and Dedza.

Mean temperature, during the rainfed cropping 'period vary from about 20°C on .the, higher farms near the CAIA headquarters and near Tsangano to around 22°C at Domue, Moniquera and Mpulo.

., These temperatures are adequate for maximum production of SR52 maize, although overall growth appears slightly better

; • at the latter warmer sites. Potatoes/and temperate vegetable crops are better suited ;to the. cooler higher areas during this period; although tomato should thrive at any site. Tempera­tures are sub-optimal for crops such as cotton throughout Angonia, and are only marginal for groundnuts on the cooler sites. o-..-- ;t .'..'. .,

. . During the March-June .period when crops are grown on late . i rains and residual moisture or by using supplementary

irrigation, average temperatures vary from 17«6 to 19«8°C. —These temperatures are, ideal for potatoes and vegetables

•'•- and,also for .wheat, which has-been shown to. perform very or-rwell under irrigation.during this period. Temperatures are

: rather marginal for sunflower which should be planted as

early.-as possible ,to avoid the colder, period."?-.in June. The -i r'! irrigation dependent July-Oct. cropping period has similar

temperatures.

i

13.a

Fig 1 2 ' Monthly Moisture Balance and Growing Period

RAINFALL

ETo(mrrt)

220

M O J F M A M J J A S O

I Entaca 169 1155] ] | Lizulo 160 I U 5 1 |

JMptengo Balameisl [ 1391 "j

I Tsangano 197 (1751 ] [Chinhondjie 167 [U7] [

Duration of Growing Period [ daysl Average ( Vblue exceeded in 75% 0 f years)

Possible Cropping Periods

Rain fed Maize ^

x^RainS. Supllrr.(Wheat) /

{"irrigated (Potatoej

;

1.3°3 A'groclimatic'Yieldsc •'.,- ;.• • :., • . j.. 'V •. '•'•.-The*temperature regime and radiation-.characteristics are the

. determinants óf crop yield levels if. water and soil factors . ( are not limiting»;, ..Using; meteorological data from Ülongue

presented in-previous project working paper (Kauffman, 1973) •and standardradiation^data'for; latitude-15

0S, potential •*.'..- agrociimatic. yields of.some present and proposed future crops

are calculated according to the methodology of the PAO Agro-.-Ecological Zones Project.; /Bie simplified calculation procedure .of Doorènbons and Kassam (1979) was .used and the methodology will he explained in a future working paper (gadcliffe, in preparation). The results are presented in Table, 1 .6. . .• - . . . • - . • • " •

.» 4 >

Tahle A .6 - Potential Crop Agroclimatic.Yields,

• i f rf„'

Crop Grow- Cropping"1" Dry Majtter Est. .Moisture Potential

ing Period .Period . ,. Yield.(kg/ha) Content (<fo) \ Yield (kg/ha)

(days) •„•. ^ -;, c . fi \ i Crop

MLS . ' J . " , » • r V - • . • iO0\ f . ' -

Maiae -, .->". .145 -i 1 ;• , . 9 1 0 0 . •_. s-12-; . . 10,300'

Potato . v. .•' • 130J; % li ':- I . 1.6500 • • -70 * . , 21,700 2 6600 70 22,000

3 7000 70 23,300 Sunflower 130 2 3200. . - , - , . , 8 • 7 l , 3,600

Bean -. S / , J&120 -• vw . 29QO -«, j , 10 -, ( . • 3,200

H v : - . ,.•; 2 ••• { -. '3000;., < 1 ;,-, 1 0 - , '„.• 3,300 Groundnuts , ( .110 t 1 . • 'A ... 3406 ' , • - - . v - 1 5 ,.,r<, 4,000 cabhage •.- • - f 110 •', : . 1 - ^ , f 6500 , > « - ; . c 90 . r , . ;65,000 Tomato- ., • r*l20 - .-j-1+2 , .'>.- 2600 r F>- 85 • > , „ , v 17,300 Pepper - _ T.1'30 . - 1 .:.; -3500 .,A~ , 9 0 , ^ ; ;. 35,000

•:• : ? . v .v.3150 ï.-i'a 9 0 . ' ^ J C . , 31j500

Wheat ,. 420 - . 2 - .„ i ;44P0 • ,u .'• n*; 13 , - • , ;- 5*100 Soya Bean70 "120 , 1 - , - , 46QÖ",:, *• i ' ' ' ' "* 0 ^ • 5,000

•: -tt 1 '- November, ~ April • . .-.< 2 - Mai;ch|r-.June - ,j_

• 3"- July • — October i0

it. !'

^ u : - . 7 . ' . T o ' * . - : - . . • . ' • • ' ; •-. ' > • • ."f. * • . . . ;

t.3.4.•Climatic;Hazards ,.j • •-. f '. r'• '•' •'; . ' .A Adverse jclimatic- factors affect ing crop production in Angonia

, • includes, the ,occurarice of hailstorms and ground frost . , -,

• t e Mi

Hailstorms normally occur^during the. main rainfed cropping •period. Although^only. 1 wassrecorded in 12 years at Ulcngue, they are more frequent at ,higher altitudes» Ground frost • UEually.-is .recorded at few times a year: (0-5) at Ülpngue and

- 1'6'~

io more frequent at higher elevations. Records are usually confined, to Juné-July (although it has also "been recorded in May/ August and September at Ulongue) and frost sensitive crops should hè avoided! in this period. The- occurence of a cool mist mainly in the higher areas, in the period fallowing the rains (ï-ïay-Jüly)'results in delayed drying of the maize crop and may promote rots and stalk borer damage. High winds preceding rainstorms are often responsible- for damage to the maize crop "by lodging. This effect can he minimized by keeping the crop well fertilized and free from pests and disease.

Data on intensity of rainfall currently available from two automatic raingauges, one at Ulongue, and the other installed at Chitambe farm lay the present FAO project. At the time of writing data has not heen systematically analysed to determine the proportion of rainfall likely to cause erosion. Erosive showers regularly occur, however and showers'With intensities of more than è5mm/hoür Were obesrved at Ulongue "between mid February and Éid April of 198O. According to Sbaxson e£ al, (1977) about 405e of total rainfall falling in Malawi is erosive rain (more than 25mm/höur), so it can be reasonably assumed that enough intense rainfalls in Angonia to cause an erosion hazard.

1.4 Physiography and Soils. Angonia essentially consists of plateau varying from 800m - 1500m in elevation and underlain by gneisses, migmatites, granites and

'- quartzit of Niassa Basement Complex. (Afonso, 1968). The plateau is part of the African surface (Thatcher, 1967) and is currently being dissected by the southward and westward flowing tributaries of the Revubue river. The degree of dissection increases towards the southwest, as does the realtive relief; slope gradient and consequent hazards for productive agriculture, The district is divided into nine major landscape types on the basis of topography, natural vegetation and' soils, by the PAO reconnaisance survey (Voortman and Spiers, in preparation). These major landscapes are illustrated in Figure 1,1, Their essential topographic and soil

properties together with general cpmmerits as, to their'potential or actual use by CAIA\are summarised in Table 1.7. When inter preting the data in Table 1.7 it must be borne in mind that these major landscapes are broad units defined on the basis primarily from airphoto interpretation with field 'checks at reconnaisance--exploratory level. While generalisations about each landscape are useful in gaining a vfirst impression of the physiography of the district and the most likely potential'areas for CAlA expansion/there are significant differences in so:P.e and suita­bility for agriculture within each major landscape and more detailed information is required before any future selection of CAIA farms can be made.

f

Table 1.7 - Physiographic and soil Properties of Major Landscapes

Major Landscape ..

Physiography Dominant1

Slope Range*

50" Dominant Soils Comment on Potential for CAIA

Moderate-Strongly dissected 5 - 25 Convex interfluves, narrow valleys, Hilly in* S¥.

Yellowidh red - red clays with variable thickness sandy top-soil . Become more sandy and generally poorer in. south and extreme west.

Present : Domue block Futuse : Possibilities for expan­sion in limited areas* of good land, particularly Domue block-SE to Chia area*. -Mostly woodland.

IÏ Moderately dissected-dis- 5 - 1 2 sected, convex interfluves, (2-5) narrow valleys', common, rock outcrops.

Red-Yellowish Red clays with r

loamy-clay topsoils. Usually only moderately deep.

Present : Lichenga farm (Bifolo t>lk) Future T: Most of "better areas of land occupied by 'fami-lyVsector.

Ill Rolling moderatelly dis- " "5 "-"12' sected with convex inter— (2-5) fluves, incised streams and weakly developed dambos2

.. on slopes.

Dark red-Yellowish red clays 'with loamy-clay topsoil. Common quartz stone lines.

Present : -Matiasse,-Mongue blocks, Muasabuelera (Bifolo block). Future" : Go'od land already farmed by CAIA. Remainder pasture. Only very limited expaHsion 'possible

IV Undulating-Rolling moderate- 5"**'12 ly dissected with moderately (2-5) incised valleys and"few dambos.

Dark red-Reddish brown clays. Well structured and fertile.

Present : Parts of Bifolo block (Matengo Balam* & Sede)

Future : virtually all ;ood land farmed by family sector.

Tahle 1.7 continued

Majors Landscape

V

Physiography- Dominant Slope Range Dominant Soils C^

^ e n t on Potent ia l for-CAlA - "

VI

VII

VIII..

Complex of.rolling-hi3ly land associated with Domue mountains.

Moderately dissected with broad concave dambos

Weakly dissected mature landscape with broad inter-fluves and wide dambos

Weakly .dissected mature landscape with broad dambos and long slopes down to major streams.

2 - 5 (5-12)

2 - 5 (5-12).

'2 - "5' (0-2)

2 - 5 (0-2)

Deep brown,-yellowish, red, Presej^ and grey clays. Lithosols Futur^ on"mountains. farme^

Grey-reddish brown imper- Prese^ " fectly drained clays, grey Futur^ clays in valleys. poor ^

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ „^

Deep red clays; 'locally' Prese^..

grey clays and shallower Futur^ reddish brown soils

None ! Most good land already b y family/private sector.

None s"Not recommended due to 'Us.

Mottled yellowish red/ reddish brown clays' with grey clays on lower slopes.

IX . . .Rolling-hilly with convex •, . interfluves, incised rivers.

' Some mountainous areas.

2-25 Moderately deep yellowish red clays, often with sandy loam topsoil which is some­times greyish. S onelines

Maangeni block, occupy * ost remaini good land sector the Cooperative/family expan^j 0nly very limited . - - 0ïl Possible. • Preset^

: Chipole, Cacencha Future (Bifolo block), soils -^ Sxpa for **4« Presej^

: Dzenza, Moniquera, Chitambe, Future

-parision possible, but ^"ther poor. Most area used

Mpulc

common

flat, 1. Sub dominant range in brackets; _. Dambos are xx_u, SOURCE: Adapted from Voortir.an and Spiers (1980) Unpublished data

concave, sometimes streamiess ciegj^C.

sion i^* s t possibilities for expan-fully ^ ° u t h - Land should be care-soil, ected according to slope,

or

- X 9 - -

l

ra d

e o p

H-» , O I Q

U O

CO Ö r l 01 • ra <o '•

h > ft

, a> i d

ra ra <D - i S . cö <D fn

I F

ra

ra 0) E H f> 0) H O ra •

cö CD ü nd C '<D O ^ ! O ra

4

The northern and eastern parts of Angonia district in which the present CAIA farms are situated are predominantly underlain by. red and. yellowish red clay soils, often with a sandy loam or sandy clay loam topsoil. In the system of FAO/UKESCO (1975) " they are classified as ferric and chromic luvisols and ferrallic cambisols. Table 1.8 illustrates the main soil and physigraphic characteristics of each of the CAIA farm^locks. Fieldwork in the southern area was minimal during the reconnaisance survey/ and analytical data are not yet available for Dzenza, Chitambe, Moniquera and Mpulo blocks. y

The Soil Series indicated in Table 1.8 are currently in the process of definition. ..Ful descriptions, together with analytical data will be presented in a forthcoming project working paper (van Mourik and Radcliffe, 1980).

* 1

1»4«1 Soil Physical Properties. In general the physical properties of the dominant soils

1 of the CAIA blocks are moderately good. Soil depth is , , . normally adequate although there are some local shallow

areas,particularlycnlower slopes in Domue and Mpulo blocks. The soils are usually well structured in their dominant clay layers and the topsoils which normally range from sandy loam-friable clay do not pose workability problems. How-ever, there are two commonly occuring physical' properties

" ' which justify serious consideration. Tehse are :

CO Pi p.

I fH Pi

CD U to ^

O CO OO

, O ON

s s M •H

P. m

w nd

o> cd

ü cö U a

&

a IS

U O O

>

CD

P. cd Ö

• H e o

'§ . o

8 r-t tyj

'j1 1 1. Susceptibility to erosion. 2. The presence of compact layers

' within the root zone. * '

The first these properties is by'.far the most serious, and ihe effects of both sheet and gully erosion are readily observable on CAIA farms. The combination of erosive rain­fall (Section 1.3) late planting leaving bare soil exposed to the initial rains and inadequate physical control methods ensure considerable soil losses. Luvosols, in which a lighter topsoil overlies aclay- subsoil, are well known for their high susceptibility to erosion and risks are further increased where there is an abrupt change of"soil texture

' between the topsoil and subsoil (e.g. Sandy-Clay) such as is the case in some of the soils at Domue and Dzenza. Some of the soils with fine sandy loams, and sandy clay loams at,the surface tend to form thin crusts which reduce ' infiltration of rain'and enshance runoff and erosion. I

Table 1.8. Land and Soils of existing CAIA. Farms.

Farm ML 1s

Physiography, Dominant Soils Soil 3 " Drainage

Soil * 4 :•

Soil Series 5

Obs to date

Dorrue

ïülangeni VII.

,}

Bifolo (Chipole J

& Cacenha;» 7 •VIII''

Bifolo (matengo Balame & Sede) IV

Moderately dissected: ,„convex interfluves; -,' . • narrow -flat floored •

m H Cinturao

J.; / v a l l e y s .

• • * • , ' ' J

*" f 1 *

O

— O

3 Deep-very deep*modera­tely structured red ., clays; ;25-75 on thick- >_

: ness of SL^ topsoil. , '" „Shallower soils on lower : slopes. Also deep red—

'. dish brown clays.

9 P " * • • : • - • "

•Weakly dissected mature 2 • Very deep weakly structured W-MW »L (tf^Metaia '~< landscape; broadly convex % ° friable^ clays; .'thin SC-C '. . U * .j ,

interfluves; "wide dairbos. "' tdpsoils.sGrey poorly drained > -*- |> o Rivers moderately incised.; ^ clays in dambos.- , ."* ;| -« • f .• * :

•t • •' . i- / « - • ' • ; • ' ; • : . ' . » '

f"" H - '•• * . : m ..: . , - , . . . v-, v; •••; ..ƒ;. - ' •--" C ' „ . • . . . , : ; , : o . ~- .:, '.: -,i - -r _ .- t.,

• • ' , - ' " , , . * O "' -* i , T -H* , -n * . .

Long slopes tojfpassadzi 2 ^ Deep dark reddish brown- '( r MW-1 L (H),'Cacenha« c hf

Riverv Very wealclyfdis- yellowish red moderately' ;-M $ ... P° .* '' ," i sected with shallow dambos. /*,structured clays with clay „-• 'r' - , . , • > ' . •

ƒ• *: • , j: topsoil. ..'Mottled brown. "•*• J*. ;. ,..' H. ~ ^ j> <-< 7 - .. L. V-' . <•'' ~. V' > clays dówhslöpe. , . ..- '•••' .'. • ..,. "i "'

' , • 4

35

,.1 tr «r

- --.- i-t •4

.• -; ; : . *« .3 C O

i — 1 r " 1 f *

Moderately dissected; 3 convex interfluves; fairly narrow dambos; moderately incised valleys.

o ". Very deep moderately ^ * \ MW-I L (H ) Fontèbóa-structured red and brown clays with thin SCL-C top ;

soil. - C - -

I

o

I

incised valleys. <-j uiajs wxx'i xnin ÖU.U—U xop

soil .v

Table 1.8 continued.

Farm ML n,

Physiography SC Dominant Sous Soil 3 Drainage^

Soil S -Soil • -Series 5

l5 8

date

Bifolo (Lichenga) II Dissected with convex 3-4 interfluves and moderately incised streams.

> ~> • +».• .J

Moderately deep yellowish MW red clays; stonelines common; SCL topsoil.

ND not defined

Katiasse, Mongue Bifolo (Muasabue-

lera).

Ill

to

Moderately dissected 3-4L

landscape; convex'inter—' fluves and incised valleys Shallow sloping dambos

Deep-very deep dark red- IPf 'yellowish red moderately * -structured clay soils; distinct black mottles t common in sub-surface ^. layer. Quart» stonefliAes

common 60-120',depth. Top^."

soil SL-SC. "'" ' Locally SL extends to 60 cm.

K-L J%linde f

JTongue, Ka­tiasse, Me-came.

I no

Dzenza

Chitambe

IX Dissected with rolling convex interfluves and incised streams, J- -

IX Complex.Moderately/ 3-5 strongly dissected. Convex interfluves, moderately incised flat floored valleys and strongly incised V shaped valleys.

Deep strong brown-yellowish MW-W ND red sands with LS topsoil.f Also.heavy yellowish red'' ••• x • ! '..**•' i -L clays with LS topsoil. '>V T -l- ' *• '•'

Moderately deep brown mottled KW-I WD clays over a quartz stone line or weathered rock; SCL-SC top soil. Also very deep red clays. *. •

Dzenzaj not defined

Cliitambe, Negumbe.

2

Farm ML Physiography SC Dominant Scils Soil 3 Drainage

Soil p4

Soil

Series 5 Obs to date

Moniquera

Mpulo

IX Moderately dissected with convex Inter-fluves and narrow valleys.

IX Dissected with convex interfluves and narrow . valleys. <

3-4

Yellowish red clays MW with SCL^SC topsoil." " * Occasional quartz stone . l i n e . -, : ' • . . .

Reddish brown-red sandy W clays with SCL..top-soil. Occasional quartz-.stone lines.

HD

ND

Moniquera

Kpulo

Notesj t .., .. . ;

1. Major Landscape. Based on FAO/MOZ/75/OH reconnaissance data (Voortmn and Spiers). 2. Slope Class. Refers to dominant classes as follows:

2 -2-5$- n-"

3 5-8$ 4 C 8-X25ÈI.T. . ; - - . - . . * . ..' . . •

. 5 12-20$ . . < • ; . . . ••

3. W = Well; KW= Moderately Well; I = Imperfect. , • 4« Fertility classes are computed using'Table 1.11. 5. Based on 'Soil of Angonia' FA0/K0Z/75/011. 6. Soil Textures: LS Loamy Sand.

Working Paper, (van Mourik and Radcliffe) SL Sandy Loam.

In preparation. n. " SCL Sandy Clay Loam '."-> • • - . • - . . SC Sandy Clay.

• . . • t C C l a y , i '

Source : Data from Reconnaissance Survey and subsequent studies by FAO/KOZ/75/OH •

1 I I

... .. »

- 23 -

Present irrigated areas are particularly susceptible to erosion as layouts do not take sufficient account of slope. In some eases, for reasons, of command, the poorest lower slope soils are selected for irrigation (e.g. New potato

.' plots at Domue). Clearly, erosion susceptibility is one of the major limitations to continued productive land use in Angónia and the varying degrees of erosion risk, determined by soil and slope, must be fully taken Into account in future land use planning.

Soils on the Matiasse and Mongue blocks are particularly affected by the presence of a compact, poorly permeable layer in the upper subsoil. Such layers have high bulk densities and low aeration porosities thereby restricting but not completely preventing root -pensjtratioji (see Table 1.8). In the field black mottles are corrraonly observed, . indicating some impedence to water movement. Measured permeabilities (using the pour-in auger hole method) at a site' (R015) in Mongue block were 5rom/hour and 1 ^Trm/hour . in the 40-80cm and 97-137cm layers respectively. From ' these figares and the observed mottling some temporary water logging can be presumed following heavy rain. Waterlogging is unlikely to be prolonged, however, due to moderate slopes and highercpermeability in the topsoil, and it is probably not sufficient to reduce crop yields. Some of the clay subsoils on Domue and Dzenza are even more compact but ' occur lewer in the, profile and;'there/ore-have a. lesser effect on root development'. If these'sites suffer significant er erosion over the next few years, however, this ve^y compact subsoil will progressively become more of a problem in restricting root penetration. ' ,

4.2 Soil-Water Relationships. The' moisture retention characteristics and particularly-the available water>capacity (Awe) of- the soil are particularly important in determining, the crops ability to withstand ; dry periods in the case of rainfed cropping, and in deter­mining the water requirements for irrigation. The bulk densities and available water characteristics of selected pro files (sampled during'the reconnaisance survey) on QA.IA. farms are presented in Table 1.9 AWC are calculated between 0.1 and 15 atmosphere tensions, following the recommendations of Maclean and Yaager (1972).

^

Soi l P i t

S. -64 '

- V 211 . * " ' . r •

R023 *:

, R027

BOI'^43

R015

M023

Table 1.9 - A v a i l a b l e H» t e r

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Selec ted S o i l P i t s on CAIA Farms

Horizon ~ ~ * B D * M 2 i S '•« J.,. / v Tex tu re ' / / \ en-Depth (in) Xs/cc) ,'B?

0-0.27.', ' 0.27-0.45

0-0 .25 0 . 2 5 - 0 . 5 5

0 -0 .2 0 .2 -0 /62 • ,- A

O-O.4 ' O.4-O.75

0-22; 0.22-^0.55.

0 -0 .2 - O..2-O.9 '

0 ^ , 1 9 O.I9-O.65

mSL mSL

mSL C '

C ' c

CL j C

SCL C

SCL C

mSL C

•1.68 ' 1.66'

1.46_' I.T8':;

1.12-

1.40'

1 .20 . 1.50,

1.43 1-53

1.66' 1-62

1.63 1.69;

?T 7?—ZS AWC4 AP9 Ava i lab le wa te r a t suc t ion (bargj . A wo ^ ( ^ e

(vol$) (volfo) .. (mm)D

0-0 .5 ' 0 - 1 . 0

CAIA Farm

24 28

25 26

11

19

19 21

21 22 ,

25 21

20

25

1 'Ov

8 0

22 : 0

«"13-0

11 0

0 0

8 0'

129

~1?8

79

U 97 '

130

113

116

258

202

218

Domue

Domue

Bi fo lo (Cacenfha)

Bofolo (Sede)

Mongue

Mongue

Ifongue

ro

Notes : 1.,

2',

• ' 3 .

4o 5. 6.

Clay Loam; mSL - rediuc Sandy Loam.

PD - BD 'C - Clay; CL - Clay Loam; SCL - &00* t -.-. . . ^ . . _ . . _ _ ; ^ _ - Bulk Dens i ty •'• , __, fotai P o r o s i t y Ca lcu la ted accord ing to f o r m u l a 'SP = p ] )

Moisture Content a t S a t u r a t i o n &) °° & _ p a r t i c l e Dens i ty (Taken a s 2 . 6 g / c c ) .

J % d i f f e rence between 0.1 *a r and 15 bar mois ture pe rcen tages

Ava i l ab le Ifeter Capaci ty (AWC) t ^ f n mois ture percentage .

Aera t ion P o r o s i t y (AP) I SP - 0 . 1 J f ^ i l depths r e s p e c t i v e l y Ca lcu la t ed from AW and hroxzon thxckness Ava i lab le Water i n 0-O.5m and 0-1 - ° ^ % O P 0 . 5 m s o i l , AWC of 0 .5 -1 -0» l a y e r s cou ld only be xnfered xf f i g u r e s . As sampling was con f i» 6

s i m i l a r t o sampled hor izons*

B S 2 O r g a n i c Tota l Avail-T ) / n Y \ m 1

Fertility f l l a s s

Farm

figures. As sampling was confined to top 0.5m soil, AWC of 0.5-1.0m layers could only be inrered. it-

similar to sampled horizons.

Soil Pit

Depth Clay(fo)

(1 pH Exchange a"bl :2«5H20) ca

e Cations(me/loog) CEG1

Mg K (me/l00g BS2

Organic C (/o)

Total . - N(£) ._

Avail3 Fertility

Class Farm

V211 0-20 ; 20-55 55-145

J 6 " - 4 4 ••

50

5*9' 6.0 6.5

5.2 3.4 3.7 0

1.7 1,6

- • 1,7~ '

0.6 O08 0*9

8,7 6.6 6.8

88 87 94-

i;-8 "0,4 0.2

0.15' 0,03 192

1 r : • H

Domue

S198 0-r7 7-27 <

27-45 '-

• -• 1 8

20 * 28 •

5 .6 j 5.0 3 -, 6.2

" 3,4 3.6 ;4.6

1.4 1.6. 2.7

0.7 0.4 0,7

7.0 "6.4 8,5

80 90 92

1.4 " 0.4 0.3

0.11 •-0.Ö3 0.03

48 - 56 . 97

'H Domue

7/13 0-15 15-40 80-130 :

40 ^ ,54 r:

6.0 3

6.3 6.4.

. 2.0 -1.7 1.3

? 0 2;1 T 3.3 '• .2.6

0.3 0.2 0.2

4.6 5,4 4.2

98 98 100

1.5 0,8

-• 0,2

0,15 • ' 0.08 .0.04..

. 5 2

•• 1

.L(M) Mlangeni

B8 5-20 > 30-45 * 70-90

• 58 -. 74 • ,73"

1 » —

6o5 7.0; ' '. 8.4

y 8.5 ~ 4.6 . 4.3 .

1*.8 2.0

. ,8.8"

« 0.3 ' 0.1 ... 0.1

22.1 13.8 19.0

49 50 71

•* L

9 '2 -5

' L(H) Bifolo (Chipole)

R023 0-20 '•' 20-62 • 75-150'.

: 64 : • 70

54:

-5". 3 : ' ; 6e'0 • ;•'

6.1 '

v 4,"7 . 4.0 '.*. !4.0

o.v ,3,5 3.1

• 3.4 ;

0,7 : 0.4 i 0,4

11,6 9.0 8.5

75 83 92

, 1.8 : . T.;1 t 0,5

: 0.11. ;, 10.08.

tr ': 3 '4

: .MH) Bifolo (Cacencha)

M096 0-33 33-77 ••

1 2 '•::

• : 3 ? :• * • *

5.1 -.5o'8- :r 0

• 1.7 . ; 2.8

-', • ^5 .T'' 5/6 <

. 0.6 • 0.7

8.9 11.4

85 80

-..0.2 . '0.4 .

. 0.02 0.03

. ' 15 ' t" 8 *

L Bifolo (Muasabue-lera)

R055 0-20 , 20-69.

" ' 12 ;

. - 4 4 . 4..5 •• :•, 0.8

., .2.8 2.0 •6.1

0.5 " 0.4

'8.5 -.11.2

40 84

0,4 0.3 1

„ 0.03 :• 0.02

33 .... 1

' L Matiasse

M095 0-19 ' 19-39 43-1.02

> 'TO ' 10 18

4.7 •• "' 5.5 1 -5.7-

"T/ S ;9 2,0 5 .-6

1.9 2,7 8.4

0.4 0,3 0.4

9.3 606 16.0"

45. 77' 91

. 0-..6; "• 0.-1 ,. : .0.3

<• 'ÓI05 0.01 0.02.

•-• 3 3 <

0 0;.

" M Matiasse

R015 0 - 2 0 •'..•

20-90 . 90-160

26 5.2 52-

5.2 5.6 6.4

• • '2„2 ' 400 " .3.7.-.

. 0.9 ? 1

'". . 1-8

0,9 0.6 0.5

5.4-8.0 6.7

74: 84 90

-. 1.3 0.3 0.3

0.11 0.03

- '• 46'» " '56.

e .. M Mongue

R064 0-18 18-55 55-93

22 44 34

5.2 6.0 6.2

' 2o9 4«0

- 3.6

1.4 0*6 7.0 2.2 006 8.1 2.3 0,6 7,7

70 85 85

0e4 " 0.5 0.2

0.03 0.04 0,02

20 .2 3

I, Mongue

I. Cation Exchange. Capacity.

Source : Samples analysed at o

Chi Base

tedze

Saturation. 30Bray No.1Extract. 4. See Table 1.11

Agri cultural Research station, Malawi except 7/13 < B8 at INIA, Maputo.

5. In proposed grape­vine area.

1

- 26 -

Prom the data in Table 1«9 the following conclusions are drawn : i) AWÜ is high, ranging from 19"26$o The low value (11$) recorded

at Cacen$ha and the very high value (28$) at Domue were probably partially due to sampling errors»

ii) The high AWC means that the soil is able to store from 80-130mm of water in the top 50cm of soil. Assuring maximum evapotrans-piration of 4»5i™i/day during the rainfed cropping season and 75$ allowable moisture deficit (about 75$ available moisture is held

» between 0.1 and 1.0 tension) the st* pled soil should ïjerable to support growth of crops rooting to 50cm (SR52 maize roots to at least this depth) for dry periods of 13-22 days during the rainy season.

iii) The aeration porosities are based on a rather theoretical calcu­lation and should not be taken'too literally. However, the. zero aerationporosity.and high bulk densities of the subsoil in the " samples from Domue and Mungue confirm field observations of f* compact layer offering'some resistance bo root penetration. .

• v

1.4«3 Soil Chemical Properties.

. Table 1.10 summarises the most important chemical properties of

selected soils on CAIA farms. Generalised fertility classes'are

based on Table 1.11.

Table 1.11 - Generalised Fertility Classes.

A Very High High Medium Low (VH)

•i

(H) 00 (I.).

CEC (me/lOOg) 12 t

6-12 3-6 3 BS($) 75 50-75 25-50 25 N($) 0.15 0.15-0.08 0.08-0.04 O.04 Avail P (ppm) 100 50-100 20-50 20 Exch. k (me/lOOg) " . 0.5' ' 0.2-0.5 0.1-0.2 _ • 0.1

Source : Dabin, 19615 Berger. 1964s Kenya Soil Survey, and PAO/MOZ/75/01 1)

i

•\ Overall chemical fertility is rather variable in the samples

analysed but nutrient retention capacity expressed by CEC ir

usually fairly good (more than 6 me/l OOg) exce^rt for Mlangeni .

block where figures of 3-6 m.e./lOOgare more typical • -

The organic carbon and nitrogen levels at the newer farm of

Domue are appreciably higher than on the Matiasse and Mongue

farms which have been cropped for a long time. These difference

in soil nitrogen levels highlights the need for fertilizer ( ^

trials so that optimum recommendations can be determined for .

each soil ,type'. * ../•••••,

- 27 -

Available phosphorus measured using^Bray No.1 extractant on the * ' ' i-i j *

samples analysed at Chitedze content"limits the empirically derived fertility class' on all th© Bifolo farms and also at Mlangeni. A greater response to phosphate may "be realized oh these blocks. Exchangable potassium levels are generally adequate and the potash component of the composite fertilizer ^applied by CAIA at planting is. probably necessary. Responses to potash fertilizers are rare "in Malawi due to adequate 'soil levels.The unusuallyhigh Mg ;.Ca ratios, in"samples from*Mlangeni

• Muasabuelera (Bifolo) and Matiasse may cause problems in crops .such as groundnuts, which have a' high demand for calcium. Correction could be effected by applying a non dólomitic lime or gypsum but more detailed studies are necessary before any

. . 'i , "> -T r .

specific recommendations can be made. ' ' " ' . 1 • • • ..•-. , - . • , . •

In, general the soils which CAIA presently farms are fairly good. The soil-plant.ecosystem, however, very fragile" in intensive cropping systems and every effort'must'be made to prevent top-soil loss by erosion and maintain èhe physical and "chemical fertility of the existing soil. This can only be achieved by adapting, propping, systems to the capability of thé land cons- .. tructing adequate, physical structures, to 'reduce erosion to an acceptable level. The present level of soils 'information'is presently inadequate, to map'soil units with homogenous management properties and constraints and further.soil survey 'is essential on existing and prqposed CAIA farms to provide ah adequate base for sound agricultural land use planning.

I

- 28 -

CURRENT AGRICULTURAL 'fRACTICES

2.1 Organisation and Management. ' _

CAIA .production policies are. determined at a national level "by the Unidade da Direccao da Agricultura (UDA) in accordance with the national objectives laid down by the Planning'Department of the Ministry of Agriculture. The provincial agricultural authorities (DPA) in Tete assist jCAIA in the realisation of their production targets, and the CAtA director'is responsbile to both the director of UDA and the director ofJ DPA»

Agricultural management of CAIA operation is under the control of an experienced farm manager and an agronomist, both, of whom are expatriate .cooperants and responsible to'the director. These two technicians are responsible for the detailed planning and execution of all the operations"from land preparation to harvest on,all the component CAIA farms. They are assisted in the day to day running and supervision of activities on each farm by a 'Chefe do Bloco' who typically has a little secondary education and only very limited agricultural training. Other sections of CAIA handle procurement of materials and commercialisation of produce, and maintainance of vehicles and equipment»:

f * 2.2 Crops.

CAIA presently concentrates on three major field crops : .üaize, sunflower and potatoes. Maize is grown through the rainy season but sunflower is sown during the later rains and maiares on residual moisture. Potatoes are grown throughout the year, utili­zing irrigation during the dry season. In addition a number of horticultural vegetables are cultivated, both under irrigation and rainfed conditions, and orchards of fruit trees are maintained and harvested annually.

Table 2.1 shows the principle crops grown by CAIA, together with varieties and areas sown in the 1978-79 and 1979-80 seasons. Beans were also planted in 1978-79 ut the seed was of too poor quality to justify sowing in 1979-80.

2.3 Inputs. 2.3.1 land preparation.

Land preparation is wholly mechanised and normally consists of ploughing followed by disc harrowing. Conservation bunds are constructed on sloping sites.

i

- 29 -

Table 2.1 - Crops and Varieties Cultivated at CAIA

1978-79; 1979-80»

f ' • ' • w . . ' Area Sown ^ ° P V a r i e t y • 1978-79 " 1979-80

he

or

id

Maize SR.52 • 5600 6000

Potato BP I 700 • 700 Sunflower, • . Perodovik 050 1 ' 6 0 0

Carrot - Royal Chahtenay and Chantenay Long

V 20 - - 15

• Green Pepper California Wonder 0 5 Tomato Roma & Money maker 60 ^ • 60

Garlic . ? 10 ' ' 10 Cabbage Greengold 35 10 Peach South African 39 39 Plum ? 10 10 Apple Various- 7 7

Source : CAlA statistics and Morais da Silva (1975)»

1 - Local Varieties.

Ploughing is carried out using a disc plough behind a Ford

6600 tractor. Land is normally ploughed twice with the

direction of the. second ploughing perpendicular to that cf

the first. Ploughing is usually carried out about 2 months

prior to seeding, corresponding to September-November in

the case of maize land. Disc harrowing is also normally

carried out twice prior -to planting» *.

li- Where land slopes by more than about 4fa» which is normally

the case, broad based bunds are constructed with tractor

mounted equipment. These bunds are usually constructed at ne<^ 50m intervals downslope irrespective of the slope gradient.

They are often poorly aligned relative tó the contoxvrs and

are not linked to any planned system of gra,33ed waterwas.

Field observations.confirm that these present erosion

control measxires are often totally inadequate and that a more

systematic approach to soil conservation is needed in which

cropping systems and conservation structures are related to

slope and soil characteristics. The guidelines for such an

approach are defined in Appendix A. •

s "

mis

•if:.

I

2.3-2» Planting.

Table 2,2, shows the time of planting, seed rate and planned

plant populations'for the principal annual crops cultivated

at CAIA. .

Table 2.2 - Planting time, Spacing, Seed Rate and Population of

CAIA crops.

Crop Planting time Row Station Seed Rate

: (kg/ha1)

Population

l£ian£sZbaL

Maize Nov-Dec 90 30 17 37j000^

Potato Oct (1) Mar (2) Jun (3)

90 30 2000 . 37tOOO" ,

Sunflower - Feb- Mar 90 30 8 37,000 r Carrot Through year As recommended by seed manu facturers Green Pepper It CI «t • »i

r

Tomato « ti »i •• ^

Garlic April-May. . . it - . -

it "

Cabbage Through.year . ti r

ti

Source : CAIA Statistics.

Maize is normally planted as soon as possible after the first rains. The agroclimatic ' growing period * (see section 1.3) has a 75$ chance of- starting by the end of November, and planting latter than the*-end of December are likely to experience severe yield losses due to inadequate moisture for flowering and grain filling and/or severe1 attack by stalk borer pests (the larval stage of Busseola fusca) which become more active in January-February. During the 1979/80 season, CAIA- completed its maize planting between 8th November" and 12th January* Shortage of equipment and breakdowns were the reasons why the planting period extended into January.

Maize seeding is usually carried 'out using ra' tractor drawn mechanical seeder which injects the seed to'a depth of about 8cm in the soil. Fertilizer (granular composite type) is injected behind each,seed to about 12cm'depth. Due to short­age og equipment and expansion öf total area cultivate, a • significant proportion of CAlA's maize for the 1979-80 season was planted by hand. Following initial broadcasting of com­posite fertilizer (which was not always done duetto shortage in supply) seeds were planted at approximatively 30 cm in­tervals.

In some areas (e.g Domue farm) two seeds were planted at every station giving an increase in plant population. After placement seeds and fertilizer are covered by -,:oil using a tractor/ harrow.

- 31 -

;

•> Actual- planting «la-tee were recorded 'and spscings measured by

• "•' the PAO team on sample plats on each of the CAIA farm blocks.

The results are'presented in Table 2.3."''' '* / ......

Table 2.3 -Actual Planting Dates and-Plant Populations on "sample

plots of CAIA Farms 1979-80 season'.'' '"

Farm . •' Planting date ' Planting method Plant Population % V * "• *" ,- ,. ..- :, (ha).

• * * * ' • • L r • - ' • • ' •

Domue • •-' •» * £ -12/11 . «^

.... . . if ' „ • ' " . .

Hand ' 39?600

Mlangeni 10/12 Mechanised 30y600

Bifolo (Chipole) 20/l 1 Mechanised '' 43,300

Bifolo (Cacen$ha) "* 20/1 r Mehcanised""'v '•' 48^300-

Ma'tiasse • 25/11" Mechanised ' ' '" •37,000

Mongue' ' ' ' 27/12 ;" Mechanised 49,500

Dzen'aa • 25/f 1 Hand '55,600

Chitambe (Plot 1) 13/12 Hand -•73'/too Chitambe (Plot 2) 20/11 Mechanised 49,200

Moniquera 14/12' Mechanised' '*36,00d'

Mpr.lo... .20/12 . , Mechanised 47,100.

Source ': FAO/MOZ/75/011. Population calculated from measured

*" 'spacing. "~ ~ ' " ' '

The average plant population onVthe sample plots is 465300

plantc/ha which is rather higher than the-' planned figure of

37*000 plant's/ha. 'in general the highest populations were

obtained in plots which were sown by hand. The planting on;

the Mongue plot was» late, and subsequent observations ''

revealed a high incidence of stalk borer attack and a low 'c'

y i e l d . ' ' •' ': ' '-

Potatoes can be sown<at any time of the year in Angonia

although planting is avoided during very wet periods due to

incidence of, rot. CAIA normally, carries out three main

plantings in October-November. "March arid "June-July respectively.

Both the latter two crops are dependent on-irrigation although

the March crop also benefits from the late rains and stored

• ' --'soil' moisture. Due'to lack'of equipment, all planting is

• carried out by hand; : ••''••"'• • ':'

-•• .. . . . < / l o ; i o ' : , • . • . - - • . - .'•.-.

.Sunflower is sown relatively late-in the rainy season to reduce

the hazard of fungal diseases'."• 'Li- the plant matures'when

atmospheric conditionsare still humid it is very susceptible

to attack by moulds and rusts. However, February-March planting

can be hazardous as the rains commonly end in March-April and

- 32 -

the crop is likely to e\>ffer reduced yields due to moisture stress. la" Malawi, recommended planting time for sunflower is at the onset of the rainy season (MANR, 1978): (i.e. at the same time as maize) and it could "be desirable to investi­gate whether more disease resistant varieties could "be aquired by CAIA. . •

With the exception of garlic which is sown in April-May and grown under irrigation, most vegetable crops are sown through­out the year. Vegetable plots are normally given supplimentary irrigation, and are fully irrigated during the dry seassn.

t

2.3«3 Fertilizers. Intensive agricultural enterprises such as CAIA are dependent on inputs of high levels of inorganic fertilizer to replenish soil reserves and naintain high crop yields. CAIA is well -aware--of its broad fertilizer needs which are indicated inv. Table 2,4. ' - ' :

• ,*• • * -

Table 2.4 - Planned Fertilizer Applications for CAIA Crops. • • ..

Fertilizer (kg/ha) - - Total - Units / ha T > r > n "• ' ' • " ' , i ii «.••• ,. n..ii i - . - , - C T . - - _

17-17-17 Am. Sul . N P2O5 K20

Maize 300 400 133 51 51 Potato 400 . 400, 150 68 68 Sunflower 200 ~ . 300 • 96 34 34 Beans 200 - • 34 34 34 Carrot 400 400 150 68 68 Green Pepper 350 350 132 60- 60 Tomato 500 500 187 85 .• 85 Garlic 400 200 109 68 . 68 • Cabbage 400 300 130 68 68 Peach . 400 550 181 68 - .68 Plum • 400 350 140 68 - 68" Apple 400 350 140 68 68 ;

Source : CAIA Statistics. . . . ' - • • ' - • • ' : ' . '

The planned applications in Table 2.4 are generally adequate to maintain good crop yields. South African research has shown that an application of 133 kg nitrogen per hetare should be sufficient to sustain maize yields of 6000-8000 kg/ha (Mohr and Dickinson, 1979)«

(

- 33 1 I

In .the cropping.season of -T979' 8P,t however, CAIA fertilizer, .. applications fell.- for ..short of thes.e planned.rates due to.- r

,f difficulties.in .supply». :.Qut o,f the. total,f;er.tilizer„require-

, ment of.approximately :7,000 tons ,,. only,: about 50% was. received ,. inwtot.al^from»government supplies-and jthese„supplies often, arrived.late so that fertlizer .applications could,not always be made at.the most.effective times. A large consignment of fertilizer was also damaged in transit due.to inadequate protection.from rain. ^

v , • ' "

. The complete absence of any fertilizer trials is which'require-raents of individual crops are^related to soil types and agronomic factors such as spacing.and planting date, is another

.factor 'preventing, CAIA'from making optimum use of'fertilizer stocks. Fertilizers are expensive items arid such'trials '*•'

. should result in genuine economies by.relating crop yields /to unit fertilizer applications on different'sites,

CAIA presently uses "two types of complete fertilizer, 17-1,7-1.7 and 15-30-15 which are in granular'form and are n~ normally used in basal applications^ and ammonium sulphate_ • which comes in powder, form and is used as' a 'top dressing.

The complete/fertilizer (17~17-*17 or 15-30-15) is normally applied by mechanical.seeder in the case of mechanically sown

. crops such as maize. Due to its powder form, ammonium sulphate is always applied „by .hand as a top dressing, and

^ some losses inevitably_occur due to run off resulting .from „subsequent'rainfall. Maize'normally receives two top \ r , dressings of. ammonium sulphate; the first during the vegetative stage' when the' plant lias 5-6 leaves and' tn'e second' at tassel initiation. - x , - '* • > •»• •

Due to uncertainty over areas cropped and'inadequate'record keeping at CAIA field offices, it is' difficult'• to give an' accurate estimate of actual fertilizer application'sates. ' 0-ut of ;the eleven .plots sampled by FA0/M0Z/75/01 1, only "f

three applied complete fertilizer at planting, while a further six applied'.' complete fertilizer •'up Jto two months' afterwards. These post-planting-applications were broadcast by hand and it is likely that- most7óf the' granules were * washed away in subsequent rain'and run'off. The-average application rate was 200 kg/ha (c.f. ''planned'figure' of -300 kg/ha). All eleven plots-received at'leasts-one top'dres dressing of ammonium sulphate.'- Although only two blocks :

(Domue and Moniquera) received their full three applications of fertilizer (1 basal and 2 top-dressing) at the correct time.

34 -X-t is in-terestlng -to note that these two faxTf. "blocks •proviAeö. the nignest yields in the samples taken hy the PAO team (See Section 2.5*1, Table 2.6,)=

2«3.4. 'Weeding. .-•.-' •• .•'''.

' , i #. •

An atrasine based herbicide, Gesaprim (marketed by Ciba-Geigy) is

commonly applied to maize fields shortly after "planting." Gêsaprim

provides pre-emergent control of annual'dicot,weeds 5 some annual

grasses are resistant to Gesapriml' ' .

. Gesaprim.provides effective weed control on. CAIA farms and subse­

quent weeding is.not necessary. , Due;to,.shortage of supply, however,

only a relatively small proportion of total cropped area'was treated

with, herbicide. Where herbicide was not' applied'' weeding W s carried

out by tractor, drawn implements or by; hand. '*' 'l

Gesaprim herbicide was. applied to three out of the eleven maize plots monitored by PAO in 1979-80, and was observed to give an effective

control of weeds,-. Effective control was also achieved purely by

manual or tractor weeding .on seven of,the remaining plots. .Only one

plot (Mongue) was severely weed affected and'this was at least parti­

ally due to late planting. " .

Weed infestation is frequently a factor in reducing potatcj'ields

on CAIA farms.. •

2.3.5. Control of Pests and Diseases.

Infestation by insect .pests is perhaps the most serious factor li­

miting present production of 'CAIA. Effective pest control in .the

major crops of maize and sunflower is hampered by the limited uBe of

rotations^, a shortage of spraying equipment and protective clothing

and the .lack Of-tfacilities*for aerial spraying...t Disease problems

are4of 'relativelyjminor. -importance in„the field crops at the present

time.. '•>.< ..-•'. •> \•••*>.•"..;.r ~, . " • •' r ' •

• " • ' • ' . ' ' \ O • - '' i , " ' " . !•• •-'-' • '

Stalk borer ( the larval jstage. of .the jr.othf Busseola'fusca) is the

most serious pest of .'maize. ' Attack,often' occurs when the plant is

25-50 cm high and the borerfenter the stalk and.feed on the contents.

Destruction'of the ,stem .inferior may kill the plant before .flowering.,

or otherwise impede the flow of nutrients to', the developing cob which

will be small 'or not form at^all. Maize cobs, often experience a.se­

condary attack by stalk borer which enter through the leaf sheath and

feed on the developing grain.v All stages, and .degrees of severity of

stalk borer attack were.observed on the various plots monitored by

PAO during the 1979-80 season. In general the severity of attack was

dependent on the number of years the field had been under maize culti

vation and also the planting" date.

Attack was most severe on the older farms of Matiasse, Mongue and

Bifolo and was minimal on the newly opened Domuê and Mpulo farms»

Present control methods of spraying with Basudine (Ciba Geigy) are clearly ineffective at controlling stalk borer. Alternatively me~ thods are powder application to individual plants (recommended in ' Malawi) which would have a very high, labour requirement for a farm the size of-CAIA, or possibly aerial spraying. Stalk borer winters in the stems of old plants and these should be burned prior to plough­ing for a new crop. According to the CAIA agronomist, Ciba-Geigy have recently produced a product which gives effective control of stalk borer if applied at seeding. v

Other maize pests include cutworm (Agostis Ypsilon) and army worm. The former is easily controlled by Basudin and the latter rarely causes.significant damage. Termites attack maize steps during dry periods and cause losses when maize stands drying in the- field prior to harvest. Earlier harvesting would cut these losses is precluded' by lack of drying and storage facilities. , .

Potatoes suffer some losses due, to cutworm which is. controlled by

Basudine. Mildew and blight also affect crop yields, particularly .

in the rainy season (November-March) c op.-

Sunflower sometimes suffer severe pest which is difficult to control when the plants are in the flowering stage,' due to difficulties of pesticide application and lack of protective clothing for the workers. Aerial spraying is the only apparent effective solution if attack occurs late in the growing period.

Diseases of-sunflower are reduced by the relatively late planting in February-March. ' . . .,

• • ". • • f i

• i -

2.3.6. Irrigation. .. . f; • ' ' . • . " • ' • : • •

Current use of irrigation is limited to several small areas of po­tatoes (March-October planted), vegetables and fruit trees. Simple earth dams are constructed and water is fed into channels either by gravity or by diesel pumps although only one pump was in working order at the time of writing. One of the larger dams, serving the or­chards of<-Lichinga farm (part ofr the. Bifolo Block) was destroyed dur­ing the rainy season of 1978-79» r

• • • , ; - . . i

In field irrigation of potatoes and vegetables is normally carried

out using simple downslope and cross-slope channels and small furrow

basins aligned parallel to the contours. Bunds bounding these basins

are broken at regular interva-ls (Once or twice weekly) to allow flood­

ing of microcatchments. CAIA practice this system on slopes of up to

20$ and erosion losses are readily apparent.

- 36 - . .. .

CAIA presently has ambitions to extend considerably ita irrigated area -and possibilities of irrigation development will be one of the subjects studied by a Bulgarian team during late 1980. The main cons­traints to irrigation development are managerial ones at present as surface water resources appear adequate. It is essential, however, that characteristics of soils and slopes are fully taken into account in selecting new irrigation areas. s 1

2.2,,'J. 'Harvest.

The maize crop is normally harvested using Fortschritt combine har­vesters. , In the 1979-80' season CAIA have the capacity to harvest 80$ of the maize mechanically, the rest is harvested by hand. Labour is recruited from local villages to make up any shortfall.

Due to lack of drying and storage facilities, CAIA•normally harvests maize late (in July-A\;gust) when the moisture content of the cobs has fallen to about 12%. This delayed harvest means that further yield losses occur due to pest damage (mainly stalk borer'and termites) as the maize dries in the field.

The potato and vegetable crops are presently harvested by hand as soon as they attain maturity.

2.3«8. Storage and transport. ' .. < .

Harvested crops are stored in sacks or.boxes as appropriate in ware­houses built from local materials at the field offices of each CAIA farm block. No facilities for controlled environment storage, drying or fumigation exist and every effort is made to transport produce to the markets as soon as possible. Transport is however also a problem due to poor roads, an insufficient number of vehicles and the lack of -air transport facilities except from Tete. Transport problems are one of the major factors limiting expansion of production of vegetables . and soft fruits. " .

2.4/ Rotations K - '

CAIA presently does not systematically practice crop rotations. The two main reasons or this are the lack of a suitable crop to grow on a sufficient, scale to rotate with maize, and the pressure on CAIA to achieve production targets which militates against putting land down to fallow or less productive use.

I

; ! ' ~ 37 T " S

The resulting dominant cropping system is therefore maize monocropping,

which, in the experience of sorrounding.countries like Malawi and

Zimbabwe, can only be expected to give sustained yields on the best

land with a high level of management to prevent erosion and build up

of pests and diseases.

The land farmed by CAIA is generally not the best and the deleterious

effects of monocropping on yield and pest incidence on the older

farms is already apparent. Therefore the need for designing and ad­

hering to sound crop rotations based on land capability is fundamental

to the continued productivity of CAIA. v

» • >

2.5. Crop Trials and Experimentation.

There are presently no trials carried out on the crops grown at CAIA to determine(best varieties and optimum agronomic inputs.

ÏÏFIA (institute Nacional para Investigacoes Agronómicas) maintains a small trial for both rainfed and irrigated wheat on Dzenza farm close to Tsangano. The yields for irrigated wLea'u obtained in 1978-79 from this plot were the highest in Mozambique, (5*4 tons/ha for best variety) confirming the suitability of Angonia for wheat pro­duction.

2o6. Crop Yields.

Actual crop yields per farm block are not accurately recorded at CAIA. However, records of the quantities of crops marketed are usually kept. Rough estimates of crop yield per hectare for the ' 1978-79 season, based on total marketed production, percentage marketed and area cultivated are presentated in Table 2.5»

Table 2.5. CAIA Production and Yields for 1978-79

— — » * - " — ' ' ' 1 ' I » I » — W » I W I — i»i' mar. . - • • HU'MiJMHj&CTWp—

Marketed % Marketed Total Area " Yield Crop Production (approx) Production Cultivated (kg/ha)

(kg) (kg) (ha).

Maize 9,100,000 80 11,000,000 5600 2300 Potato 5,605,000 100 5,605,000 700 8000 Sunflower . 95,000 100 95,000 150 600 Carrot 360,000 100 360,000 20 18000 Garlic 25,000 100 25,000 10 2500 Cabbage 81,000 40 202,500 35 6000 Tomato 93,000 .- 40 232,500 60 4000 Peaches 105,000 100 - 105,000 39; ' 2700 Plums 7,000 100 7,000 10 700 Apples 4,000 . 100 4,000 7 . 600

i.

tcf*mmmmm**m*

38 -

Table 2.6. CAIA Maize -Yields 1979-80 predicted by FAQ Crop Monitoring Study.

Farm Block

Doraue

Mlangeni .

Bifolo '

Chipole

Bifolo

Cacencha Matiasse iMongue

Dzenza Chitambe 1 Chitambe 2

loniquera Mpulo

Planting

date

Fertilizer Application

17*17:17 Planting Later

Harvest Yield Corrected^

Am.Sul Pestsl date Ears kg/ha Yield 1st Top 2nd Top (sample) 100 plants (corop) (kg/ha)

Comments

m/11

10/12

20/11

20/11

25/11 27/12

25/11 12/12 20/11

14/12 20/12

+

+ +

+ + +

+ +

0-1 1 Apr 100 - 6920

1-2 14 May 100 -' 6140

2 17 Apr 63 2020

2 14 May 88 5570

2-3 15 Apr " " 85 - 4830

2-3 5 -Jun • 73 2260

1 15 May ' 100 ,." 5420 1-2 28 May 71 . 4830 1-2 15 Apr 93 7270

1. 15 May 86 6340 0-1 15 May 91 ' 2450

5540 Representative of Block

4910 Slightly higher than average.

1620 Slightly lower than average.

446O Representative of

Block 3860 -Repr. of Block 1810 Lower than average

for block. 4340 Rep. of Block. 3860 Rep. .of Block. 5820 Higher than average

.. ' for block. 5070' Rep. of Block. 1960 Slightly lower than

average.

1Pests 2. Reduced by '20$ to allow for losses due to pests as crop dries on field, and harvest losses.

Source t

0 - Completely pest free.

1 - Slightly affected. 2 Moderately affected with significant yield < - ' '

reduction. * , *• • Severe damage with consequent groos yield .,

reduction. Radcliffe and van Mourik * Monitoring the Maize Crop for :Land Evaluation * Working Paper FAo/Moz/75/011

- 39 - : ;

The figures in Table 2.5° are rougu approximations and should be trea­ted accordingly. However all these yields are rattier low ty inter­national standardsc A yield of at least 400Ó kg/la'should-be expect­ed from 'the SR 52 hybrid of maize'grown under a fairly'high level of management» whereas in 1978-79 CAIA only achieved half this figure.1

Potato yields are low at 8000 leg/)'.-a but figures are not representative because of low rainfall. Estimated yield with normal rains 15„000 kg/ ha o

Evidence suggests-, however, that 1978-79 was a poorer than average year. Morais da Silva, writing in 1975 cites maize yields of 5OOO-6OOO kg/ ha, potato yields of 15000-20 000 kg/ha, carrots and.-cabbage yields of 30 000 kg/ha, and tomato yields of at least 50 000 kg/ha. The FAO/MOZ/75/OI1 crop monitoring study during the 1979-80 season es­timated maize yields, based on 25 plant samples from sample plots on each of the CAIA blocks, considerably in excess of the 2000 kg/ha recorded in the preceding season.' -Table-2.6 illustrates the results • of the FAO study in .terms of maize yield, together with relevant data on fertilizer applications and pest/disease ratings. \ -

After applying a conservative correction factor of 20$ to account

for losses due to pest damage as the crop dries in the field and

harvest losses, the average yield predicted by the FAO team is 3930

kg/ha which is fair. Differences in yield between CAIA blocks are *

attributable to physical factors such as soil fertility, and mana­

gement factors such level of fertilizer application (see Section

2.3.3). The most important contraihing factors to production of

maize and other crops are discussed in Chapter 3» ' 'J'

Production data for the first season (November-March)- potato yield

for 1979-80 are presented in Table 2.'7. ' ' ' *

Table 2.7 CAIA First.Season,Potato Yields 1979-80

Block Production total (kg) Area (ha) Yield (kg/ha) . - 1. . . •' "

1 • " , i " ' . " ' " - ' '• " • " , i " ' - - - . - • • , . . " " " " " " " " "

170 7250 200 9000

170 5290 170 3340

Chitambe 1,233,000 Dzenza 1,800,000 Mongue 900,000 Mlangeni 567,000

- 40 .«

These potato yields are all rather less than the target yield of "" 15j000 kg/ha which was surpassed in the 1978-79 season and are low

by international standards. Possible reasons for this are degeneration in the seed stocky insuf­ficient fertilization, and shortage of water during droughty periods in January and February» The comparatively higher yields at Chitambe and Dzensa may be partially due to the lighter textured topsoil.

The main reasons for the low yield of sunflower during the 1978-79 season are the poor quality seed (mixed local varieties were used) and the'lack of adequate moisture for flowering and-yield formation.

2.7» ' Marketing.'

CAIA produce is marketed through government agencies such as ICTECA. Most of the maize from the 1978-79'season was>distributed from the |J DHJECA warehouses at Caldo Xavier (Moatize) and Ulongue. A signifi­cant quantity of maize (24s800Kg) went to Avicola,' Chimoio and a small ; amount to Carbomoc at Moatize.'- > Most of the perishable fruit crops ;! such as peaches are flown Tete to Maputo. Transport is a limiting \ factor in transfer of produce to markets. .,• it

2.8. Economics'of Production. • .

Table 2.86 shows the production costs per hectare, together with labour ii and tractor inputs, fuel and lubricant consumed and total distances for transportation. •

The figures in'Table 2.8. do not cover any overhead costs such as maintenance of buildings and equipment, depretiation costs or pay­ment of salaried staff. The data also assumes application of inputs such as fertilizer, her­bicides and pesticides to the full planned level (e.g. See Table.2.4)» This was frequently not the case so actual production costs are pro­bably somewhat^lower than those stated.

«. i ' ' . ) " : "•'"• * '•-':

Table 2.9. gives-a- detailed breakdown-of the'costs,of production for maize in the same season.

O

4 o • >S 1 -^ I O

4

=3 O" CD

tii I-IJ

tn I

Table 2.8. Cost of Production (Mt/ha) and Labpur/mechanised'Inputs for

• CAIA'Crops 1978-79. 1 J I o

Source : CAIA:Records.

Crops • tëan-<Lays: Trac to r hours T r a n s p o r t a t i o n •

Fuel i .'-Lubricant' *- Cost of Product ion J 0 1 •

( k m ) , . : . ( i t ) i :.(")-: • • (ha/tot). .

Maize 46.79 18.60 206 • 1347.60 ; ;:- -148.29 * i

) 18,217,53 _,Sean 28.13 27 .5 - 41" ,- : 1.896.0 • ., 208.56 26 ,425.44 (x)

Sunflower < 28.13 14.72 . :: -58 - •: ' 436.32 I - • 48.0- -- t 10,599.40 t ; Po ta to ( n o n - i r r i g ) 224'. 13 27.32 m i | 6829.80 ; : ^ 7 5 0 . 0 2 * , 70 .098.58 .: P o t a t o ( s e e d / i r r i g a t e d ) 194.42 23 .24 ' 800 : 4939.41 I 543.34 i 92 ,228 .14 C a r r o t ( i r r i g a t e d ) '. 572.16 14.0 : i 691 , 4230.0 463.3 \ £4,118,66 Green Pepper ^ 391.14 15.32;- , g :555; • 3423.92 ! "; J a 376.41 C H *

1 . 39,569.20 ( n o n - i r r i g ) 1 ^ * I ~

*• * * 9 * *

; 1

Tomato ( i r r iga ted ) 357.93 16.04- * '1137; ' ; 918.24 t >; ^ 761.01 'T •.. ! 61,257.40 *

Cabbage( i r r iga t ed ) 215.3 14 i28T- •J 925 5635.68 619.92 f 38,875.44 ' G a r l i c ( i r r i g a t e d ) 658.29 15.6 - ••' * 44V 1 2739.6 301.36 t 128,745.48 ^ -Peach 150.98 1 2 . 0 ' ' 144 l 936 .0 103.0 K 54,776.72 • Plum 173.54 v 12.0 ; .133 i 87Ö. 0. 97 .7 - s

i 40,170.54 -v

Apples 117.5 y — u -> »-' i 69 ! 414.0 t t

, . 45 .54 . ;. ' i' -. *-'

1 1 (

60,876.30 ••• •• "•'

'-I

« •" '..* — -J .*J • i , >'«; ;'• . .

(x) Corrected after error in original CAIA figures!

* « _i.

«- .-- o

' 1, ' -

' 1 - M

{ - 42 -

Table 2.9 Production Costs (Meticaie/ha) breakdown fcr Maize

1. Labour/Mechanized Costs. -> - - _

Item Cost Item Cost

Land Preparation : Weeding : Tractor(x2) 812.00 Ploughing (x2) 1964.00 Manual (x2) 348.OO Harrowing (x2) 988.00 Herbicide appl . 615.38

F e r t i l i z e r Handling/appl. '" "129.84 - Pood (Workers) ' 193.14 Conservation bunds^ „• r; : 409.92 - 'Harvesting} 'T 812.00 Seed treatment 116.00 -' Post harvest handling 1496.54 Seeding : Manual 58.00 (di rect t ransport ,1242.00)

Tractor 267.68 •

Tractor (x2) 535.36 Total « 8489.86

2. Material Costs.

Item — —1

c

Seeds

Cost Item Cost

1 604.62 Fertilizer J

• 17-17-17 (300kg) 'Geaaprim (5kg) 1342.00 Am.Sul ' (400kg) Basudine ( 1 liter)' • .- '479.54.- Sacks" 1 A

Miscellaneous 302.00 Total . ' 9727.67

3459.00

2528.00

1012,50

Total Costs of Production : 1. Labour/Mechanization ...... 8489.86 Metic&is.

. 9727.67 Meticais 2. .' Material ! 1,,

18217.53 ïfet icais .

1 DOLLAR m 32.00 Meticais,

Source : CAIA Records,

Table 2.9 shows fertilizer costs to be the most expensive component in

total production' costs. This highlights the need for fertilizer trials

which would have a long term benefit in determining optimum levels. Poet

harvest transportation account for a fairly high proportion of production

'eosts.' ' ' ' I !

43 - ;

The yields required for each crop to J break,even» (i.ejfor the value of the produce to equal the costs of'production) 'are calculated from official government prices'and the.figures in Table 2.8 and are pre­sented in Table 2,10. ' ' > <

Table 2.10. Crop Yields required to meet Production Costs.

Crop Farm Price(x)' (Mt/kg) ,: Yield to meet Cost (Kg/ha)

Maize Potato (consumption) Suriflower Bean Carrot Green Pepper Tomato Gar l i c Cabbage Peach Plum Apple

o

o

4-50 6.00 9-00

:2o.oo: 6,0Ö>

10.00 8.50

65.00

3.. 50.

45;P0,; 50,00 50.00

> (•

O

f4050 11680 ! l l 8 0

r11320 * 10700'

!3960 ' *! 7210^' JI98O'" • " 1 1 1 0 0 - l -

! l220

' j 8 o ° ! ' Il220-'

(x) Refers to harvested part ( e.g grain, seed, tuber etc). Projected for 1980-81 season. , • !

Using the targets yields calculated^in" Table 2,10'Wd the crop .yields for the 1978-79 (table 2.5), gross margins are calculated per crop for this particular season in Table 2.11. Crops are arranged in order of profitability. • - • ;..

The lack of accurate record keeping makes economic analysis of .CAIA ! operations difficult and the figures in Table 2.11 should be treated with caution due to the imprecise.data^on yields and,cropped areas and probable overestimates in actual .production cos'ts.> 'However, the domi-nance of maize and to a lesser extent potatoes in-controlling the e-conomic fortunes of CAIA is appreciated, and more attention should be given to maintaining high yields of these two crops. In the 1979-80, initial indications are that the maize yield will break even but there is likely to be a shortfall in potato yields (Section 2.'6.). The importance of these two 'crops in making Mozambique self sufficient in food production and less dependent on^foreign exchange, must, be taken into account in assesment the production economics of these crops.

-r - • • t * '• . ' f- I ' t - - . - } J ,

Sunflower is an attractive crop economically<duè tb its 'low costs of production but tha problems of disease attack and late season water shortage have to be solved before high yields can be expected. <

Table 2.11. Crop Gross Margins 1978-79 Season.

Crop Area Actual Yield Target Yield (x): Deficit/ Farm Prices Profit/loss Total ^ (ha) (kg/ha) • (kg/ha) Surplus (Mt/kg) per ha Profit/loss

(kg/ha (m x 1000) (Mt x 100)

Peach 39 '" 2700 1220 + 1480 45.00 + 66.6 +2,597.4 Carrot 20 18000 10700 + 7300 6.00 + 43.8 + .876.0 Garlic 10 2500 . 1980 + 520 65.OO + 33.8 + 338.0 Potato 700 17OOO- 11680 + 5320 6.00 + 31.9 +22,344,0 Plum 10 700 800 - 100 50.00 - 5.0 - 50.0

- 783.0 *• Sunflower 150 600 1180 - 58O 9.00 - 5.2 - 50.0 - 783.0 *•

Maize 5600 • 2000 , 4000 , • - 2000 4.5O - 9.2 -51,660.0 " ' Cabbage 35 6000 11100 - 5100 3.50 - 17.8 - 624.8' Tomato 60 4000 7210 - 3210 8.50 - 27.3 - 1.637.1

, • Apple •7

1 600 :- 1220 - 620 50.00 - 31.0 - 217.0

(x) Tiëld required to jus-tify production I COStS.

- 45 -

;

Given the required level of fertilizer and other inputs and proper maintenance of orchards CAIA should be able to supply its workforce and make a profit from the vegetable and fruit crops currently grown» Thé'gross margins for cabbage and tomato in Table 2.11 should be treat--ed- with particular-caution ,as a-large proportion of the produce "(60$ .„assumed) is sold internally and has to.be estimated for in the yield 'figures. Apples and plums gave poor' returns due to poor condition —of the-orchards.-• --- —'- *— --- • —'• ~~ ~ ~ """ "* "

CHAPTER 3. .'• CONSTRAINTS'TO'PRODUCTION. -. ;.

3.1. Introduction.

In order to increase crop production on existing CAIA farms and ,to„ expand cultivation into new areas it is necessary to recognise and, accurately define the constraints or limitations which may prevent CAIA from achieving their future production targets. ' J• '

Constraints may be "either due to physical"factors such as poor soil fertility or inadequate moisture or may be primarily managerial such as inadequate supply of fertilizers or'transport difficulties. -In some cases constraints are specific to site and to the particular *

. type, of-agricultural system practised. -The present chapter, there-, fore, attempts first to define the agricultural systems presently practised by CAIA or appropriate to CAIA's needs 'ahd- objectives in future, secondly to define the likely constraints to" there systems, and thridly to assess the impact of the various constraints on each cropping system. Following the framework of this approach, which is based on PAO (1976), a preliminary land suitability evalup+ion is made for present CAIA 'farms. '

.' n- . • Ir- ,'. • , v . .

3»2. CAIA'Agricultural Systems of Land Util ization'Type's.

The'CAIA'agricultural systems'mentioned'above correspond to—the' "-more general land \ i t i l iza;t ion types (LUTs) in, the terminology' of T

FAO. o - - •• - • ' • * . - - ' • ' . • _ ' - • " ' . • L < j - s •:

Using information derived.'from Chapter 2, Table 3«1 shows the es­sential characteristics of current LUT's'practiced'by CAIA. ' ~

- 4 6 -

Table 3.1. land Utilization Types currently practised by CAIA.

HJT Main Crope Rotation Cropping^ Irrigation . Planting %

Code Crops Period Harvest Marketed1

':'App.Arei ,tiva (ha)

H

S

V1

P1

P2

P3

Maize

Sunflower

Bean,Toma­

toes, Cab*-

bage.

Potatoes,

Carrots,

Garlic

Peppers

Peaches, :

Plums .

Apples.

Nil Nov-April Nil Mechanized 80-90

Maize Feb-June Nil Mechanized 100 Some-' - Nov-April^- ' Nil- Hand .40

times/ Mar-June Partial Hand 40 Maize • • ' t '.

Potatoes.

Some- Nov-Mar Nil Hand -'100

times/

Maize

Sun­

flower

Mar-June

July-Oct

Perenial

6000

600

35 35

4003

Partial ' Hand,' r 100 > 2003

Full . . ' Hand • 100 u - 1003

Partial . Hand • { 1

100' 60

1. • • . - . - * • • • . . ,

1. Excluding local sales to CAIA workers.

2. Various plantings within this period.

', 3» More than 95$ is Potatoes.

Inputs such aB tractor ploughing and harrowing of land prior

to sowing, adequate applications of fertilizer (at least in

theory) and adequate weed control through either chemical

methods or tractor/hand weeding are common to all CAIA LUTs. Econo­

mic data are omitted because information on overhead costs is not

available. Approximate gross margins are calculated per crop using

recurrent production costs in Section 2.8. • , r ,

Definition of possible future LUTs is a rather subjective excercise

as environmental conditions in Angonia allow;a large number of crops

and cropping patterns to "be,considered. The present study defines

only what we believe to be the most relevant LUTs for achieving the

most important objectives -of CAIA. We interpret these objectives

as follows:

i). to contribute to achieving self sufficiency for

Mozambique in essential foodstuffs and oilseeds,

ii). To produce high value crops for distribution to

urban centres or for export.

1.

.e

• l - 4 7 -

iii). To ensure conservation of soil and water ;• resources for continued productivity» •• -

iv). To form a "base for the overall development of .'Angonia district and to; provide adequate;

. "• employmenti for the local workforce. •; , •

In working for objective No.i;t CAIA are quite correct in their-choice of maize as the major crop. Maize is the high­est' yielding cereal crop, is* the-.'Staple food of most of the > population of Mozambique, and/is ideally suited to the en-' virbnmental.conditions of Angonia.'- Present.yield levels „ -are "held -back more by organisational, difficulties 'rather than physical constraints. Present practices, however, of maize'-monocropping are likely to :fail' in the1 long termr.'on '' most of the CAIA land use to soil loss by'erosion. • In-'ae-dition CAÏA has problems in obtaining sufficient quantities . " of fertilizer and agrochemicals and is therefor~ unable to combat the progressive problems of declining fertility le­vels and" build up of pests on land which has been under maize for a number of years. 'If objective No.i) is attained at the expense of objective iii) it is neither in the:best interests of CAIA nor of Mozambique. Therefore a number of LUT's (codes ML MP and Mf) are suggested for future develop--ment, still based on maize, but using rotations and/or intercropping to combat soil erosion, maintain soil fertility" and reduce the demand of expensive fertilizer per unit of

. crop^ production._ .The production of wheat using supplementary irrigation is suggested as a means to achieving objectives i) and ii) and "to diversify cereal production.

Sunflower is hot necessarily-the-most pro'ductive.- oil crop .for Angonia because of disease problems if it is planted early in the rains and problems o'f moisture, stress if late planted as

.presently practiced. .According to Boorenbosj Kassam'et-al _. j (1979) 'sunflower needs' at' least 600 mm'of water to r«alize its _•-. full.yield potential and extension advice in Malawi (MANR,1979)„ I stress the importance óf planting on the early rains. Accord- *.> ing to rainfall records,from Ulongue the rains of 1978-79 . _L_

'. terminated 'in March,, and as a result the sunflower crop (plant-- -' ed^JPebruary-March) was left to complete. ..at least three quarters ?of its growth cycle, including the sensitive.^flowering period, ; purely on soil residual mositure. The situation is not-a typi-)cal as only in 40$ of years-does,the rainy season at Ulongue" • extend into' April (Radcliffe, PA0/M0Z/75/011, Unpublished. data): 1 'j '"*'.•'• X _ L '< • ••

jSoya bean, groundnut or the-Brassica oil crops (rape or»mustard) * are, possible..alternatives to. sunfjWer._ The jfqrmer is a parti-_ cularly promissing crop with good yield potential and a ready market either as an oil or as a high protein stock feed.

- 48 *>

It is already sucessfully grown on a commercial basis in Malawi and

trials are in progress on the 25 de Junho state farm near Maputo. Downy mildew has been recorded on some imported cultivars in Mozam-biaue (Taysum, personal communication) and could be very serious if

spread. Therefore j imported seed must be strictly screened for pathogens

before release to farms. Groundnuts are known to yield well in An-

gonia but growing period temperatures are sub optimal on the higher

CAIA farms and kernel formation may be insufficient on'soils with

high Mg:Ca rations (Section 1.4*3)• Soya bean and. groundnut are al­

ternatives included in proposed LUT ML either in rotation or as an

intercrop with maize. The Brassicas could be grown under existing.

LUT P1, P2 or P3 (Table 3.1).

It is beyond the scope' of the present study to evaluate all the va­rious cash crops which could be.grown'at CAIA.: Garlic and Peaches ^presently give'good returns and if processing facilities are ins­talled} which'is a strong possibility in the future, the potential for production of perishable fruits' and vegetables is much increased.

LUT FW, Puelwood plantations is included for possible reclamation of

unsuitable (steeply sloping or poor soils) land currently farmed by

CAIA. • •' ;

Table 3.2 summarises the possible future LUT's considered to be most appropriate in meeting CAIA*s needs and objectives and designed to minimise the effects of the various constraints discussed in Section 3.3» The need for trials on any new crop such as soyabean must be recognised prior to adopting the suggested cropping system suggested below. •...-.. .

- v *• T

Table 3»2 Suggested Future Land Use Types.

LUT Main Crops <

Rotation Crops

Min % Rotation

Crops

"1

Growing ;lrrigat.

Period j 1

i

, i Planting/ !Markets

Harvest '

i

ML Maize Soya Bean Bean, Groundnut•

20 •

• . r - '.

Nov-Apri3 !; MI i

Mechanized Urban

Centres,;

Mf4 l-Maiae'

i Perenial 3

Cover Crops • 40 ; Nov-Apri3 Nil • Mechanized. t Urban

Centres,;

M F 4 jMaize - Perenial ' Cover crops

70 • Nov-April Nil flMechanized

•

Urban Centres,;

Ws5 | Wheat Perenial

Covercrops 40

i

Mar-July Par tialljfechani zed (surface) : .' i

Urban Centres

Wr5 | Wheat , 1

Perenial cover crops . • 4 0 ' • Mar-July

Partial •. j " (sprinltler)l

Urban Centres,

j Vr2 Vr3

Vegetables? Various0 j- •; 50

.'•" (••'. 5 0 ' :.

Mar-June

July-Oct

" • (Hand Full [j_^ •• 'T sprinkler V(

Export^ •

FW Trees'u

i

" - L U - •'• ' V i

; ! ' - 1 - - • •-

i t . - -M

— , . --Nil- j -'t 1

Local

J

- 49.-

- • Notes :

. i - • ;

1. Alternatively these legumes could "be intercropped if the appropriate technology was made available to CAIA» 2 rows of legumes "between each row of maize would be a possible system. ."

2. If factories for porcessing soya or groundnut oil were developed, oils could be marketed, with reduced transport costs and higher market prices» Beans would probably be marketed locally.

3- Grown for fodder, pasture (incorporating livestock into

system) or green'manure. Pigeon pea (Ca janus ca jan) or . ."• . \

Alfalfa (Medicago Sativa) could be considered. . Weeping

lovegrass (Eragrotis Curvula) could alternatively be con­

sidered primarily as a ' conservation crop • with some

grazing value when young.'

4. Growing Period, Planting/Harvesting and Markets refer to

maize only. Any rotation-fodder crops to be fed either

to'CAIA owned -stock or sold to other local livestock schemes.

5» Data'on growing period etc.'refers only to wheat»

6. Gravity or pumped.

7. Mainly high value types (e.g. Garlic) to justify costs of sprinkler irrigation.

8. Including 50$ cover by'perenial crops to guard against erosion. 9» Perishable products could be canned if factories'were cons­

tructed. Distance to markets a limiting factor for bulky produce.

10» Gmelina arborea, Eucalyptus saligna or the leguminous Leucaena Leucocephala are worth trying. The latter could also 'txmr~~"~ valuable source' of green fertilizer or fodder (Vietmeyer, 1979)

• • . ' •" • i • . -i

, ! - r • . . .

It is assumed that adequate levels of inputs such as fertilizer, pesticide etc will be available for each LUT, although fertilizer needs should be reduced in rotations with legumes or when green manures are applied. Mechanized land preparation (tractor ploughing, harrowing etc») and cons­truction or conservation bunds, waterways etc. related to slope classes are also assumed. Guidelines for physical conservation requirements are given in Appendix A. • •••.,'

3.3. ' Constraints to>Present and Proposed LUTs.

Constraints to present production.can be broadly classified into those

which are environmental?or physical in nature (i.e. soil, topographic

and climatic fectors) 'and those which are. primarily due to deficiencies

in organization and management. The environmental constraints are, nor­

mally very site specific and their magnitude is usually dependent on the

particular cropping system or LUT.

- 5® -The organization and management constraints are less site specific (although factors such as transport costs vary according to the dis­tance of specific farms to eventual markets or crop stores) but also vary in the magnitude of their effects on the various LUT's (e.g shortage of fertilizer will he less limiting if there are alternative sources of green manure "built into the cropping system). .

3 «3•1• Environmental Constraints o

The most important environmental constraints to sustained agricultural production at CAIA are listed below : ' _

Unacceptable Soil Loss by Erosion (e)'. Inadequate Available Moisture (m)

< Restricted.Rooting\Conditions (d). Low Nutrient Status (n) Unfavourable Topography for Irrigation(t) Occurence of climatic hazards (c).

. » • ' , • • •

The code symbols follow the suggested notation of Purnell (1977)»

A number of other physical constraints are important in local areas on many of the CAIA farms. These•include drainage conditions/oxygen availability in the root zone, which is mainly restricted to bottom­lands and lower slopes and conditions for seedling establishment which" are never seriously limiting except in cases where severe erosion is occuring. Topsoils vary from loamy sands to friable clays except in the. dambos where heavy clays.often occur but these are seldom farmed by CAIA and workability of the soil is therefore not limiting. Con­ditions for mechanization is a constraint mainly affecting local areas such as eroded lower slopes. All these factors are' significant in various other areas of Angonia where CAIA has not sited 'farms and are therefore considered in the reconnaissance•land evaluation of Angonia (Voortman, in preparation). ) . •* '.,

These constraints, which approximate to 'land qualities* in the termi- i nology of PAO (1976) are relatively specific in their effect oh agri­cultural production but are not normally directly measurable in the field, except by empirical observation of crops, soil loss etc. In fact, each constraint is the result of several' directly'measurable or calculable distinct environmental properties?-or 'land characteristics• (FAO$1976). Measurement of contributory land characteristics allows a semiquantitative definition of each constraint, which can be related to the specific requirements of crops or LUT's. Table '3«3 shows the-land characteristics which determine the individual constraints listed above. •' - > . , / • . • ' ' ' . ;

f

- - 51 -Table 3»3» Environmental Constraints and Land

Characteristics

Constraint

(=Land Quality). Land Characteristics

m

d

n

Slope (Gradient length), Soil Erodibility (Texture/struc-ture and variation with depth), Rainfall Erosivity, In­filtration Rate, Observed Erosion.

Growing Period Length, Drought Periods, Soil Available Soil Water, Irrigation requirement.

Effective depth,.Texture/structure/Porosity? Stoniness.

CEC, BS; Organic matter, Levels available N,P,K, Exchange­able Cation Ratios, Micronirtrrent Levels.

Slopes, Interfluve width and regularity, relative relief, Ease of command.

Records of hail, ground frost, strong winds, intense rain­fall (causing direct crop damage).

For present purposes a broad qualitative assesment of the severity of . x-each constraint oni.éusiainedragÉiculturaï land mser.oh' eacBL>5f CAfAefarrns is made. Only the dominant topographic features and soil types of each farm ( as expressed in Table 1.7) are considered. » '

The resul'ts are shown in Table 3.4»

Table 3»4» Rough assessment of Environmental Constraints

on CAIA farms.

Farm +. Block

Constraint''

Domue 2 Mlangeni ,. Bifolo (Chipole,

Cacencha) Bifolo'

1

1

. 1 (M.Balame,Sede) Bifolo (Lichenga) Bifolo

u 1 1

' "l (Muasabuelera) Matiasse *'l Mongue

Dzenza "' 1 2

Chitambe 2 Moniquera Mpulo

1 2

m'

0

0 0

,0 f

0 2

1 1 0 0 0 0

n

' r 1

"* 1

1 1 1

l

o

1

1' 2

"2-1

)2 "2

2 2-3 2

0-1

1-2 1-2 0-1 0-1

1. Codes as on Page 0 = No constraint Jl = Slight constraint

2 = Moderate constraint

3 = Severe constraint

(üjr»i> yiei.ris unlikely to be affected)! (Slight yield depressions/corrective

inputs required) (Significant yield depression/correct

tive inputs essential)» (Not suitable foi* most agricultural LUTs).

2, Taken for rainfed cropping period.

The estimates of severity of constraints in Table 3«4 are used to make a preliminary assessment of the suitability of existing CAIA farms for the land utilization types^listed in Tables 3*1 and 3»2. However, firstly the organizational and management constraints, which also affect land suitability are identified.

3.3*2. • Organizational and Management Constraintsv

• • - • • : . . ^

These constraints are identified from the description of current agri­

cultural practices on CAIA farms in* Chapter 2". They are liste'd below

Difficulties in supply of material inputs (seed, fertilizer etc.). Includes amount, quality and arrival time. Planting too late. Inadequate fertilizer. Inadequate weed control , •

Inadequate control of pests and diseases. Late harvest. Lack of drying / storage facilities. ,

High transport costs. Availability of'markets. """ " -.. ~- . • -

Lack of trials to determine optitrjum varieties, input levels etc. Lack of basic data (topography, soils etc) for farm planning. Inadequate record keeping. ••-•- • - - -.

Lack of trained personnel.

With the exception of high transport costs which is dependent on the distance of farms to eventual markets, these constraints affect crop production on all CAIA farms irrespective of location or physical con­ditions. Constraints Nos. 2-5 are due in part to the first constraint, •difficulties in supply of material inputs, which is a problem at the ^national level. The delay in harvest (Constraint No.6) of maize is due to the lack of drying and storage facilities"(Constraint No.7). Although some reduction in transport costs (Constraint No.8) could be realized by improving roads, this constraint and the availability of markets (Constraint No»9) are really determined by -.he situation of Angonia relative to the urban-centres and ports of Mozambique.

-r

1.

2. 3. 4-5-6.. 7. 8. 9-10. 11. 12. 13. 1

<

i

i

- 53 f

Constraint No. 10-13 call for addtional studies, training programmes

etc which have to be decided at government level. Suggested programmes

for necessary .further survey and other activities are given in the

Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations.

3.4» Preliminary Land Evaluation of Present CAIA farms.

Land evaluation should, in the strictes sense only be applied to re­

latively homogenous units of land, whereas most of the CAIA farms

possess a range of land/ soil types which cannot be mapped out with

the information currently available.* The mapping and characterization

of these units.is essential to future farm planning and is the main

objective of the proposed semi detailed soil surveys. However, at

this stage, we consider an approximate land suitability evaluation

based on the dominant soil types in each farm block would provide

useful guidelines for CAIA policy decisions. Therefore a land e-

valuation for the LUTs defined in Section 3.2 based on the constraints

ror.land qualities in Section 3.3 is carried out according to the frame­

work (of FAO (1976).- The variation in soils and topographic factors

on each-farms must be remembered when interpreting land suitability

classes.

Following definition of LUTs and constraining land qualities, the requirements of LUTs are compared with the most significant constraints. Table 3»5 shows the sensitivity of present and proposed LUTs to various environmental and organization/managemeny constraints. Some of the constraints (such as rooting conditions, climatic hazards or lack of trained personnel) are common to all LUTs (except FW, Fuelwood plan­tations) and are therefore not included.

Table 3»5» Sensitivity of Land Utilization Types to '' Constraints.''' ' ' * , r M

LUT2 C o n s t r a i n t s

Environmental 3 Organization and Management4

< resent m i 9

I ++ + + s ++ -M- + 71 ++ + + V2 •H- + PI ++ + + P2 4-f +

P3 ++ + 0 + ML ++ + + Mf + + + MP + Ws ++ + Wr + + W2 + +

7r3 + FW

++

+ ++ i + - 4+ ++ + ++ + .

+ +

+ ++ + +

+ +

++ + ++ ++ + ++ + + ++ + ++ + + ++ + + + ++ +

+ + + + ++ + + + + *f*+ ++ + + + + + +

++ + + + ++ + + + ++ + + -H- ++ ++ + + ++ ++

54,-

1. (blank) Not sensitive ' + Sensitive (Constraint likely to slightly limit LUT)

++ Very sensitive. 2. For description of LUT's see Tables 3»1 and 3.2 3« e Unacceptable 'soil loss by erosion 4« 2."' Planting too late,

m _ inadequate available moisture. ^ 3. Inadequate fertilizer n Low nutrient status. ' ' ' ' 4. Inadequate 'weed Con-

t Unfavourable topography for irrigation. '__ 5! Inadequate pest/

4 \ '. Diésese control. 5. Refers only to maize (lack of siles ê'tc.) ' 6. ' Late harvest.

8. High transport'costs. •" , """ ' 9» Availability of „ , . • markets.

' •' : ' - ' f ' •

In allocating land suitability classes to CAIA farm blocks the 'sensitivity of land utilization'types to relevant constraints (TableJ3«5) ie'compared with the severity of environmental constraints on individual blocks' as il­lustrated in Table 3.4» Organizational and Management constraints gene­rally apply to all blocks and in allocating land classes we assume the fol­lowing improvement will take place over the next' few years : 1 '•* <

i). The situation in supply of seeds,' fertilizers, pesticides' will improve due to better organization at government' level. Lower demand per unit crop' production by using .rotations will help to alleviate this" situation.

ii)• The recommended investigations outlined- in the Summary, Conclusion and Reoomendations (i.e. soil surveys, topo-graphic surveys, crop trial, training programme etc.)

__ will be implemented. t - . • • • * • . - " • • ' • : . • - . • * , • • ' • ' • •

iii). Adequate conservation measures will be taken.

iv). Although transport can. be improved by additional vehicles, there will still be economic limitations due to the loca-tion of 'Angonia and availability of market's.

J

- 57 -\ - • '

V

On land particularly susceptible to erosion, such as at Domue, Dzenza, Chitambe and Mpulo a maize—cover crop rotation with 10% of the latter could be implemented. The design of these rotation follows the recoil mmendation of Shaxson et al (1977 = for Malawi.' .-"

Surface irrigated wheat (LUT WS) suffers the same 'erósional and topo­graphic limitations as do surface irrigated potatoes and vegetables, but most of these problems could be alleviated by the use of sprinklers (LUTs WT, Vr2, Vr3), which reduce surface run off and are less strin­gent in their topographic and layout requirements, The economic fea­sibility of sprinkler irrigating wheat/ potatoes and vegetables should, be investigated.'

Puelwood plantations (LUT PW) is not 'considered in Table 3«6, as it is only recommended partially as a conservation measure for small areas of land which are not suitable for a more productive land utilization 'type. - -

Table 3.6. shows that the blocks of Mlangeni ar.d Bifolo (Chipole, Cacencha, Matengo Balame and Sede) are the best suited to intensive cropping systems,'but even these areas can only be regarded as margi­nally suitable for maize monocropping due to erosion risks and dif- ' ficulty in controlling'pests. LUTs ML or Mf are recommended as the dominant systems for these blocks. Matiasse, Mongue, Moniquera and Eifolo (Lichinga and Muasabuelera) are best suited to a cropping system which includes at least 40%> perennial cover (e.g. Mf) because of steeper slopes and consequently higher erosion risks, Domue, Dzenza, Chitambe and Mpulo should have an even greater perenial com­ponent in their rotations (around 1C%) although they can be regarded as marginally suitable for the Mf land utilization type.

It must be emphasized that the above land evaluation is provisional and refers only to the dominant soil/land types of each farm block. Within the present CAIA farm limits there are areas with better than average soils and flatter topography which may be suitable for a more intensive form of land use than is indicated"in Table 3.6. Similarly most farm blocks contain areas of poor soils which ere not suited to any type of agricultural production. These areas often occur on lower slopes and could be used for fuelwood plots as a check on e-rosion and as a valuable source of timber. Correct allocation of cropping systems to land areas can only be decided after more detailed surveys have been carried out and land/soil units accurately mapped.

-.58 3»5» Constraints to Expansion.

It is strongly recommended that in the immediate future CAIA should concentrate on rationalizing cropping systems and improving production on existing farm areas as current practices of opening new land to cultivation practices and crops which the land is not capable of sup- : porting inevitably leads to. a waste of valuable resources. However, it is accepted that CAIA will expand in the future and the limitations to opening up new areas must be examined. t" •

The most serious limitation to CAIA's expansion is the availability • of good land which is not presently occupied by the family sector. Table 1.6 in Chapter 1, describes thercharacteristics of the major landscape of the district, and indicates ;that the only areas'suitable • for large scale expansion are in major landscape I and IX9 both of which suffer, from limitations due to topography and the former also > suffers from soil limitations. Clearing costs are also high in these areas due to the dominantly woodland vegetation. Areas of moderately good land, similar to those already farmed at Dorrrae, Moniquera and • Mpulo, do exist in major landscapes I and IX and these can be identi­fied on the reconnaissance landscape/ ecological map which is in pre-^ paration (Voortman and Spiers).- Areas for local expansion,of exist- t ing CAIA farms should be located on aerial photographs and checked in the field prior to clearing and development.

!

f

59 --

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AKD RECOMMENDATIONS

S1 Summary and Conclusions^

CAIA currently farms an area of approximately 9500 hecxares distributed among nine farm "blocks which are developed from old colonial farms.or the.newly cleared areas óf woodland. These "blocks are widely distributed in the Angonia district and"are situated from 2 km to 92 km distance from CAIA headquarters.

The climate of Angonia is_well suited to. the reproductions of a. wide variety of crops under.either rainfed or irrigated conditions* The rainfed growing period varies from.139 - 1T5' days (value excedeed in 15% of years) extending from late November to May and has a mean temperature of around 20°C Cropping in'the re~ mainder. of the year requires supplementary or full irrigation'. , There is. a 7 in 5 year probability of. significant drought accuring during the rainfed-cropping period and.a slight risk of hail d amage at any time. Ground frost can be expected a few times a year during June and July. The potential' agroclimatic yields for maize, potato and sunflower are 10,300 kg/ha, 22,000 kg/ha and 3600 kg/ha res­pectively. . , .. . - , . ' • ' ,

The soils which CAIA presently farms are predominantly red and yellowish red clays, usually with a sandy, clay loam or sandy loam topsoil. Physical properties and,water retention characteristics are generally good although there is an erosion risk which varies in severity according to specific soil and slope factors.. Locally, compact clay^layers in the-root sone may slightly impede root development.. Chemical fertility is generally, adequate but appro­priate levels of fertilizer are needed for high yields.'

CAIA presently cultivate maize, potato and sunflower as major., field-crops. Vegetables are also.grown, both.for local consumption and for; internal export, and orchards of peach, apple and plum -

• trees are maintained. The CAIA operation is planned to be run at a-high level of management with high yielding/varieties, fairly high fertilizer application rates and chemical control of weeds

i .. and pests. In practice, however, due to difficulties in the :.' supply of material inputs, CAIA is not able to .achieve the full

yield potential of its crops. Furthermore, due to poor land use planning, crop-yields are produced-in an extensive manner which is wasteful on land resources and cash inputs.

• > * ' • - , . - , • - :

t The. success of CAIA's production is limited by a number of physical

: and organizational constraints," the most important-of which'are

• v listed'belowj- • ." •„' --> - if -: ,-. .". .'. li.' :•-. . • . . * i - . • . . . " ' -. -' h l - - y '- . ,-•• •

- 60 -

i) Lack of supplies? of Eöeds fertilizers etc, on time. This deficiency, which must be corrected at government level, is primarily responsible for yield losses due to late planting, inadequate or inefficient fertilizer application and inadequate pest control.

ii) Incidence of Stalk Borer on maize. Even with adequate supplies . of pesticides, current practices are insufficient to control this pest»

iii) Lack of drying/storage facilities leading to late harvest and additional losses due to pests as maize dries in the field.

iv) Soil loss by erosion. This is both an immediate and'a medium -long term problem which can'only be alleviated by correct land use planning, use of suitable rotation and auxiliary physical measures. ' -

v) Lack of basic data for farm planning. This includes soil, topographic and hydrological data of importance for'conservation and irrigation planning and also data from crop trials on optimum crop varieties, planting times, spacing, fertilizer inputs etc. . , " ' * ' "

vi) Lack of adequate infrastructure (poor roads, communication etc) and high transport costs due to wide distribution of farms.

vii) Available markets for high value crops. This is a problem for future planning. In theory, Mozambique urban markets should decline following the development of "Zonas Verdes'8

around major cities, viii) Lack of trained staff resulting in poor record keeping and

inadequate crop management.

A preliminary land evaluation for 'individual CAIA farm blocks based on the effect of the above constraints on existing and proposed cropping systems is made in Chapter 3« The principle underlying this evaluation is that cropping systems should be allocated to specific land areason the.basis of the land's ability to'support them over a prolonged period. On this basis the blocks Ijf Mlangeni and Bifolo (Chiphole, Cacen$ha, Matengo, Balame and Sede) are the most suitable for intensive cropping systems. Dcmue and Mpulo blocks, in spite of*teh high maize yields on the former in the current season, are only suitable for relatively low intensity systems (e.g. rotations with at least 60% perëinnii'lcover crops) due" to severe erosion hazards. The remaining blocks have intermediate suitability. Local 'steeplands, particularly on the lower slopes, should be planted with trees to serve as protection against erosion'and~&a a source of fuelwood.

Possibilities for expansion of CAIA blocks are limited by availability of good land which is not already*farmed by the family'sector. The remaining limited areas of moderately good land-which are .available for development can be identified from the Angonia reconnaisance map of '£^O/MOZ/75/011 s 11^ we recommend that priority should be given to optimizing crop production on existing cultiva-tsd, areas rather than to further rapid expansion.

:- 61 -

I

In spite of the above constraints, CAIA is at present one of the most successful state farms in Mozambique. However, its comparative success'in crop production is achieved at the expense of considerable degradation of land resources. This'is at least partially due to excessive pressure • at government 'level to achieve pradizction targets and, more partioularlljj targets, for area cutivated., This latter demand leads to-wasteful and destructive use of,land.. The «continued success, of CAIA depends on minimizing the-effect of acting constraints and optimizing the productivity of the land7ori|a sound,, environmental and economic "basis. .This can only he. achieved by i-r

- Correct land use planning, in which cropping systems are related to"the suitability of the land'for their sustained production.

r/ - Improving thé supply of essential'inputs to ensure they arrive * " on'time and in'sufficient quantities. - ' ' . , - Carrying but the necessary adaptive4 research^ to implement recommended new cropping system. An experimental station should be established to carry out crop trials.

- Strengthening the tecnical capability of CAIA by.staff training, recruitment.. '" ' : •* •

- Ensuring adequate}possibility for marketing produce whether inside Mozambique'or for export. -

• <- • ' • . j .• i . ' j , t .. ., :

S»2. A CAIA Development Strategy/ v ' * ' Sound development'planning calls for a clear definition of objectivest a recognition of present and possible future constraints, and a strategy designed to counteract as far as possible the effect of

. these constraints 'and achieve an aconomically and 'env5~om3entally viable sustained agricultural-production.

- " ' " ' ' - . . ! • • To .'. . t . 1:. ./-.

The présent decade of' 1980-199Q has be"en earmarked for the-conquest of underdevelpment'. 'As agriculture is ..the bsse''of Mozambique's economy and Angonia is a priority development area, CAIA has a significant role to play in this period and it iü :essential -.that its continued productivity is assured. CAIA's objectives are defined from government policy, as expressed in the Directives of the Third Congress of' MtELIMO aa ;follows:-; , j ' lti, . ... •i) .to- contribute isó- the, self sufficiency of-Mozambique .jin

essential foodstuffs and oilseeds, ii) to produce high value crops for distribution to urban .

centres or for export. iii') .to ensure conservation of soil and water -resources for .*>> continued productivity , ... : . »•

*•• -i " iv) "' to form a' base for- the overall development of Angonia t JV

district., .'.. • * ". • •< -; -r • 'j n .

« 62

Correct planning and pliasing of investigations and activities is essential to the success of the development plan» The following, must be kept -. in mind in formulaxing the development strategy»

- The constraints to present production and future development (described" in Chapter 3) 'including both physical and management constraints. 3Techinical 'objectives should be defined'with'a

•I • I I I IMII •! I» I .HI*II I I tammiV • • «ml. m i l * lx^mm

view to'minimizing 'the effect of constraints .and optimizing the use Óf both natural and human resources» '•".o„

- The need for coordination of activities between relevant « , government^ departments at a. national and provincial level

and between government and PAO, thebulgarian team and groups of consultants carrying out investigations;relevant to,the development;of CAIA. This coordination is necessary to i) ensure the smooth and timely flow of .inputs such as seed

and fertilizer and outwit produce to and from CAÏA: and ii) to ensure rapid* distribution of information which can be

used to make specific recommendations. . - The establishment of a body to carry out required field

experiments. We recommend that an experimental station should be set up with permanent specialist staff under the control of INIA. The station should be sited with reference to the Angonia reoonnaisance map (Voortman and Spiers, in preparation) and out,field trials should be.sited on different farm blocks.

j

' • ' • : . . . ' < • • • r ' •

The details of such a development plan can only be decided by the government in consultation with specialist agencies such as FAO or the Bulgarian team. Table S.1, however, indicates a scheme based on a breakdown of technical objectives and the investigations and direct action -required for their realization. Many of these technical objectives are stated.government policy (PRELIMO, 1976). /Table S.1, in fact, summarizes the conclusion of the present study in terms of:-,

K ' . " • ' ' ' >

- Defining objectives-based on'minimizing the effect of the constraints identified "in Chapter'3. '..'•< . t

- Indicating the further studiesaad investigations necessary for continued CAIA development.

- Showing at' what level appropriate action can be taken.

Most of the recommended aotions at government and farm level' listed in Table S-1 are self explanatory. 'However, some comments on the recommended studies and investigations which fall within the' competance of the PAO team may help to clarify the development plan;

I

P o

Table S.1 - Technical Objectives for CAIA Development»

. _, . A. , . •___ - -Action ; . . , • J Objective — r— — '—~ r ^

i • Survey/lnvestigstion+' Government Level CAIA

-Soil - "-Fly new'aerial photography! " Plan and supply in- Implement recommended Conservation (Semi) detailed soil surveys puts for proposed agricultural systems,

exisiting, proposed farms! agricultural systems and auxiliary physical Prepare land suitability maps, ,- conservation measures.

.,..-, . Devise, cropping systems appro- •' .. NBs priate„to land suitability'»- . . _ . .... - Cropping systems Pit cropping systems to land/ ' - Planting time soil units. Proposed ' - Cover crops

• '"-•• , .-.- 'auxiliary physical conservation •• * - Mulches ',*"* -" T"Z;~ "" ' ' 'measures'.*'" Study economic "" • • - •• • - -.Bunds, bush strips

.".,'.. feasibility of, proposed systems, etc. ^ also possible inclusion of ••/ livestock.' _ „ „ . . . _ ; _ . . _ . . . . _ — . . ' - -•

Optimize time Crop trials ^Ensure,timely, Implementing planting of planting, f , ;arrival seeds, ' as recommended, plantsspacing. .. ^fertilizer ect.

Achieve" most - Crop trials " ----- [Ensure adequate ' Ensure correct and economic ferti- .... - • - and timely " timely applications." lizer inputs • . , , (supplies

Weed control Crop trials _ _._._. . {Ensure supply . . . Early planting (rain-.herbicides as fed crops). Use herbi-j '

•-• * .. -required cide or timely weeding»

_ *cont."Table" S.1'

Objective_ Action Survey/Investigation* Government Level CAIA

Pest'and-Dis- Screen crop varieties for Ensure supply pesti- Early planting (maize). ease-Control- • resistance.* Investigate " " ' "ciders,fungicides, 'as "Apply pesticides ect. as

-, optimum spraying times, .required, supply recommended . . , feasibility of aerial protective clothing ;:•• .

spraying.^ ._.__.,._-- .. - -etc.. _ .. .. - - - — -

Reduce'late Economic feasibility of . Secure finance if Harvest earlier (30$ season losses' providing drying, facilities. -feasible. moisture) if feasible, inisrtaize. t , *-'.'•••.-•?.'.•

Control Storage Test fumigation methods Supply chemical and Impisment as recommended Pests. '•"'•*: equipment, protective "'

• ' -•'"-•, J „ clothing ect. L

Reduce Transport Economic feasibility road Improve roads, ensure Economic use of transport, Costs construction etc. .lt adequate transport &nd transport-and road •

spare parts. Improve maintenance. >t ....„...:•'•' • ' communications, better ' ' . . . '.,••'. infrastructure.etc . -_ - ,-

Intensify pro New aerial photography, - - :Secure finance and Implement as recommended ducticn by topographic survey,- Soil procure equipment Irrigation survey1. Evaluation of land .*

and water resources.1 Design • - -of cropping systems,1 Techni-

... , cal- and .economic feasibility; • Marketing of produce.

ON

Marketing of produce.

Table S.1 continued

Objective

Canning or freezing of f ru i t s and vegetables

Action Survey/lnye st i gat ion+ Government Level CAIA

Processing / Economic feasibility Technical feasibility of factory construction etc. Investigation of marketing^

Secure finance Secure markets (internal or export). „

Implement as recommended.

OA

Staff Training Arrange courses (Mozambique or abroad)

Select candidates.

+ (Tp be carried out by FA0/M0Z/75/011 t Bulgarian Team ÏENIA, or consultants as appropriate, 1 Could be carried out by PAO.' * . . . . .

66 -

i) The proposed soil survey should "be cai-ried outoon exisiting or proposed farms at semi detailed scale (ide. c. 1 soil observation per 10-25 ha overall density). Mapping should be at 1:20,000 scale. New aerial photography should be flown at this scale as soon as possible, otherwise accuracy of the maps will be much reduced. Field tests and laboratory analysis Should be carried out specifically to define properties important to soil manage­ment. Land suitability maps should be produced relating suggest­ed aropping paterns to specified land areas, togehter with recommended agronomic practices, immediately. The order of priority areas can be decided in consultation with CAIA management.

ii) Crop trials should be carried out at a central Agricultural Experimental Station (which could be ;sited from the Angonia Reconnaisance Map in preparation by PAO/MOZ/75/011 and on out­reach sites selected on1"representative soil types of the various farm blocks. ïissghasis. should be placed on adaptive research (i.e. adapting crop varieties, optimum input levels ate. to the conditon of Angonia). The aim of these trials will be to test alternative crops and varieties, to determine the feasibility of suggested cropping systems and to determine optimum cultural practices for crops and cropping systems on major soil types in Angonia. These crop trials are obviously a long term excercise and there should be a steady flow of recommendations from the trials to the farms. In the immediate term however, full use should be made of the useful trial data from Malawi and Zimbabwe and official contacts with counterparts research stations should be established as soon as possible.

iii) Por proposed irrigation development, semi detailed soil surveys should be carried out as described in i) but mo're attention must be paid to soil-water relationships. Infiltration and p<srmiabi-lity tests must be carried out in the field. Por surface irrigation, accurate topigraphic survey is required, and hydro-logical survey should be carried out prior to any'form of irriga­tion development. "*

iv) The most immediate need for training is &i'. the intermediate level. Suggested specialization topics are F--?.rm Mechanization, Crop Specialization (e.g.Wheat at CIMMYT, Mexico), Agricultural Management and Book Keeping/Accounting.

The above development plan is far from complete. In particular it is lacking in the non agricultural infrastruetural requirements such as health centres, schools etc. which are necessary to ensure a truly integrated and stable development is achieved. The -purpose of the pro­posed plan is to form a basis for discussion among interested parties and, more importantly, W help achieve the coordinated action required to ensure the success of CAIA.

- 67 -

SUMARIO...Ö0NCLDS0ES E RECOMENDACOES y

S1 Sumario e Conclusoes

CAIA cultiva normalmente uma area "de aproximadamente 9.500 hectares, distribufdos por 9 blocos de machambas, que foram de­senvol vi das a partir de velhas machambas coloniais ou de pedacos de floresta recentemente desbravada. Esses'blbcos estao ampla-mente espalhados pelo distrito de Angónia e localizam-se entre 2 a 92 km de distancia da sede de CAIA. .. s

0 clima de Angónia.ê apropriado para a producao de uma '....• larga variedade de culturas, quer* s ob conUcöes de'sequeiro, quer de irrigacao. 0 perfodo crescente^de sequeirp varia tfe 139 a 175 dias (valor ultrapassado em 75$ dos anos), "in--1 o desde os fins de Novembro até* Maio e apresenta uma temperatura média a volta de 20° C, As culturas no resto do ano exigem irrigacao suplementar ou total.*. Em cada. 5 anos hd uma probabilidade de'grave seca du­rante o periodo de crescimento de1 sequeiro e urn pequeno risco de saraivaclas, em qualquer altura. Alguma veaes durante o ano, es-pecialmentè.-; durante Junho e Julho pode acontecer que o solo fl«s que gelado.' Os rendimentos agro-climdticos 'potenciais para milho, batatas e girassol saö 'de -10,-300 kg/ha, 22,000 kg/ha e 3600 kg/ha respectivamente. , . .•

Os solos que CAIA presentemente cultiva sao constituidos predominanteraente por argilas vermelhas e vermelho-amareladas, sen^o geralmente a sua parte superior de marga argilosa siliciosa ou *de marga siliciosa. As propriedades fïsicas e as suas carac-terfsticas de retencao' de dgua sao 'geralmente boas, embora haja um risco de erosao que varia de gravidade .segun^o a qualidade do solo.e os factores de declive. Localmente, a existência de ca-"madas de argila,'? compacta na zona rlas ralzes podem impedir ligei-ramente o esenvolvimento-das raizes. A fertilizaöab qufmica é* geralmente* aconselhavel, mas- sao necessdrios nfveis apropriados 'de adubo para. atingir'um ren^imento alto. . ,

- i - > . . " . . ' _ • , , . ' • '*

CAIA tem presentemente-,no milho, na batata.'e no girassol as 'suas maiores culturas. Cultiva também'vegetais,. tanto para. con-• -sumo local, como para expórtacao interna e mantêm igualmente po-'mares de peras, macas-e ameixas. 0 trabalho' de CAIA estd plani-ficado para- ser feito com um. alto nfvel; *e direccao, com varie-dades de grande ren^imento, tabelas'de aplicacao de adubos sufi-cientemente altas e controle qufmico <ie ervasPdaninhas e de pra-gas. Na practica, contudo, ^evido adificul^ades no fornecimento de aportes'materials, CAIA nao tem possibilidades de alcancar o

0 potencial" ^e: ren^imento total- de suas culturas. Para alen disso, devido a fraca planificacao do uso da terra, os rendimentos das colhéitas sao obtidos de'uma forma extensiva, que1 I ruinosa para os recursos da terra e para os factores de producao cash.

'. •<"'' -0 sucesso.da producao de CAIA e3t& dep entente de um numero de limitantes ffsicos e,- organizacibnais, dos quais os.mais. im-portantes sao os seguint.es ; • • ', •'. '•"'••' ... ; ° • • ' --£•• •' r > :• ->•• i. «••• .'• - . , , •

• °' ' "'"' 1): falta de fornecimento de sementes, -adubos, f/. "•*'• ' r' . ' '"' ~: etc,- no.,prazo. Esta deficiência, que'deye'; C( " "" k* ' "''. ." . r,xq.ser c3rTigTdST"a nfvel 'de ;gbverno, r.ê a principal

responsavel pelas percas "de"'rendiinento devido ' a sementeiras tardias, a aplicacao de adubos "''•

c;.-,. -• : :. '„inadèquados e-ineficientes e ,a um. controle *rr : .. •,: ineficaz das pragas, ^ ,-.' ' ... l . '

c .. . -.,. u II). incidência der'fbr.oca^'no milho. ..Mesmbj.com' f ornecimentos' adequa'dos'.de pesticidas^ as pr^cticas usadas ainda nao sao suficientes para controlar esta praga.

- 68 -

III) falta de facilidades'dé seóagem e de armazenagem, onginan^o colheitas tardias e perdas adicionais devido a pragas como a seca de milho no campo.

IV) perca de solo por erosao. Esse ê urn problema a medio-longo prazo, que somente po-'era' ser mino-

" rado pela planificapao do uso^correcto da:terra, , , ;Uso ^e r ot ap'óe s? convenient'es e "me di das ffsicas

auxiliares. ' •• '• : <" • i

V)"falta de dadbs b&sicos para a-planificapao das culturas, 1sto incluf o solo, dados topógra- i ficos.je hidrolÓgicos^importantes para a plani-fica9ao da conservaca'o e da irriga^ao'e também dados- obtidos de experiêneias em culturas, de

r var'iedades melhoradas, prazbs de planta9ao, in-• ;- . tervalos, aportes de aduboP etc»

; ."' ';. VI) falta de infra-^estrutüras adequadas (estradas „ mds, comunicagóes, etc) e elevados custos de transporte devido a arapla- distribuiijao das machambas. • .

•VII) mercados disponfveis .para .produtos de, alt o valor. Est e' é'um problema que exige planifi-caqao futura. Em teoria, os mercados urbanos de Mocambique deveriam declinar, seguindo o desenvolvimento das ".zonas verdes'e em re dor das maiores cidades. - •

• - * • * - ' . <

VTII) falta *de_ pess'oal "treinado,, resultant o na con-servap'ao" de um registo pobre e numa administra-pao inadequada de culturas.

*> • ' } ' • ' ' '' • * •

Uma avalia9ao preliminar de blocos de machambas CAIA, ba-*seada no facto dos limitantes acima apóntados nos sistemas de culturas 3& existentes e propostos ê' feita no Capftulo 3.0 prin-cfpio norteadör dessa avalia9ao 4 o de que os sistemas de cultu­ras deveriam ser atribufdos a areas especfficas de terra, na base da capacidade da terra para os' suportar durante um'.perf odo prolongado. Nesta base, os blocos de^Mlangeni e Bifolo (Chipole, Cacencha, Matengo, Balame e Sede) sao os mais convenientes para sistemas intensivos de culturas. Os blocos Domue e'Mpulo, a-pesar do alto rendimento em milho do primeiro na presente estac.io, sao apenas convenientes para sistemas de intensidade relativa-mente baixa (por exemplo, rotacbes com pelo menos 60$ de cultu-

. ras dé cobertura perene), devido aos riseos de grave erosao. Os ' .restantes blocos têm uma aptidao intermedia. Locais de terras fn-gremes, especialmente em baixos declives, deveriam ser plantados com drvores para seryir como p'rotecpao contra a erosao e como fonte de lenha*

. T As possibilidades de expansao dos blocos CAIA saoylimitadas para disponibilidade da existencia'de terras boasrque nao estejam jê, ser cultivadas pelo sector familiar. As limitadas areas que sobram de terra relativamente boa e que 'estao disponfveis para o desenvolvimento podem ser identificadas a partir do mapa de reconhecimento da Ang6nia, da JFAO/MOZ/75/011, iuas' recomendamos que a prioridade seja dada ao melhoramento da produ9ao de cul­turas em -areas, ja1 cultivadas, em vez de a uma'.rapida expansao posterior. . ' -

Apesar dos limitantes 3& referidos, CAIA ê neste momento uma das mais bem sucedidas machambas estataisrde Mocambique. Contudo, o seu sueesso comparativo na producjao de colheitas ê >.«.. conseguido a "custa de considëravel- degradapao^dosfrecursos da terra. " ". ' -'•'

_-6? -

Isto é, pelo menos, parcialmentè 'devido a, exces^iva pressao a nfvel de governo para alcazar metas de p/rodu9ao e? mais par­ti cularmente, metas para area cultivada, Esta ultima exigência conduz a uma utiliza9ao ruinosa e destrutiva da terra» A conti-nua9ao do sucesso de CAIA depende da minimiza9ao do efeito dos limitantes existentes e da optimiza9ao da produtividade da terra,, numa base sadia'em relacao' ao ambient e e a economia.

Isto poder£ ser conseguido atraves de :

- uma. planifica9ao correcta. do us o da terra, na qual os sistemas de cultura estejam relacionados com as possibilidades dakterra para a sua produpab permanente.

- melhoria no fornecimento dos pro dut os essenciais, de forma a a,ssegurar que cheguem em tempo e em quantidade-suficiente.

' • -J * • . '. ' • -o

- continua9ao das.pesquizas de adpta9ao necessarias para a implementa9ao do novo sistema de culturas, jd recomendado. Deverd ser instalada uma nova es-ta-9ao experimental, para levar a cabo experiências em culturas. ' -'• J

- refor90, da capacidade 'téchica de CAIA pelo recrutamento e treino de pessoal.

- garantia de.possibilidades adequadas de coraercializapao dos produtos, quer dentro de Mocambique, quer para ex-porta9aoi >• •• -. u ..

S.2, • Estratêgia .do ,desenvolvimento de CAIA ,

UmaJplanifica9ao.correcta do desenvolvimento exige uma clara defirii9ao ,de-objectivos, um, reconhecimento dos limitantes presentes e' dos-que. poderao existir no futuro, e uma, estratêgia tra9ada para corabater -' tanto quanto possfvel - o efeito desses limitantes e alcazar uma^prod^ao agrfcola permanente, que se ja económica e ambientalmente viaveï. '

• ' ' '

A presente dêcada de 1980/1990 foi apontada para ser a década da vitória s.obre o subdesenvolvimento, Como a agricultura ê a base da economia de Mocambique -e AngÓnia I uma area de desenvol­vimento prioritario,; CAIA .terd um,, importante pap el a desempenhar nestè perfodo.e ê essencial' que ,a sua p'rodutividade contfnua se ja assegurada. Os objectivos de CAIA sap defenidos a partir da po­litica do governo, tal -como foi formuiada nas directives do III Congresso da Prelimo, e que sab ï

1) contribufr para a auto süficiência de -. Mocambique em gênerps alimentfci os e • .. em ,sementes oleaginosas.

o 2)'produzir culturas de alto valor, para distribui9ab em centros urbanps, ou para exporta9aoi '*

3) assegurar a conserva9ao do solo e dos recursös de &gua, com vista a uma pro­dutividade constante.

4) formar uma base para o desenvolvimento global do' distrito de Angónia.

0 sucesso do plano,de desenvolvimento depende essencial-mente de uma planifica9ao correcta e da gra,dua9ao das investi-ga9oes e das actividades.

, . i • Deve-se ter na ideia, para a formulacao de uma estratêgia .de désenvolvimento, es seguintes ïactos % . . . ' l

' . ' ' - . r _ ..j •[•

- os limitantes a presente produ9ao e ao desen~ volvimento futuro \ descritos no Cap» 3 8 e neles se incluem tanto os limitantes ffsicos como os limitantes dó administra^ao, ' Os ob-jectiyos rtlcnicos deverao, ser definidos tendo

1 em "vTsfa a "mïnïmizacao dó efeito'dos limitantes .e a optimizaoao- do uso dos recursos humanoö e naturals,. ,. ^

- a necessidade de coordenacao de activldades entre os departamentos relevantes do Governo, a nfvei nacional e provincial, e entre o Go-vemo e a FAO, a equipe billgara e "os sgrupos de consulto^es que .realizam investiga9Öes im~ portarïtes para o désenvolvimento da CAIA,

Esta coordena9ao e necèssariapara : : ' - • • ƒ , , • ' • -<> i'

1, assegurar um fluxo constante e.regular de aportes, tais como sementês e adubos, e

,: • _.*;,. a safda de .pro dut os ds e para CAIA. 2. assegurar a rapida*distribui9a0.de infor-

ma90es que podem ser utilizadas para fazer recomenda9oes especfficas.

' . ' . • ' J > •

~ 0 estabelecimento de um corpo para levar a cabo as necessdrias experiências de camp o, . Recomendamos que seoa instalada uma esta,9ao experimental, com um qUadro permanente de pessoal especializado, sob controle do-IHIA, .A estagao

- deverd ser situada^em referência ao mapa de re-conhecimento de Angónia (Voortman e Spiers, em prepara9ao) e deverao ser realizadas experiências no campo, em diyersos blocos de machambas,

Os detalhes de um tal, plano de désenvolvimento só poderao ser decididos pelo Governo,- em colabora9ao com as agêneias es-pecializadas, como a da FAO.-ou da equipe bdlgara,- 0 Mapa S1, contudo, incüea um esquema/baseado numa quebra*:de objectivos têcnicos e das investiga9Óès e ac9oés -directas necessdrias a sua realiza9ao'. Muit'ós désses objectivos téenicos.'constituem politica de Governo jd 'ëstabelecida (Frelimo, 1976)* 0 Mapa S1, com èfeito, resume as conclusoes'do presente estudo, êm' ! t e r m o s d e ; ' • '. •••,.' .<• • ;' '. -

- defini'fcao de objectivos,'com base na mininrzapao ; do.efeito d03 ïimitantes, identificados no Cap.3» - indica9'ao de estudós e Jde investiga9Öes posteriores,

com'vista ao continuo désenvolvimento de CAIA. '- indica9"ao acerca'do n£vel a que podem ser tomadas

as ac9Öes necessdrias.

OBJECTIVOS TECNICOS PARA O DESENVOLVTMENTO -rffcin g—O.'•*#»»

DE CAIA

Objec t ivo Ac 9a o /

+ Levantaméntos/lnvestiga9ao Nfvel do Go-

verno .-CAIA

3-IT

Tirar novas fotos aéreas» levantamento (semi) deta -lhado do solo, que exista, e machambas propostas» Preparar mapas acer.ca da capacidade da terraJ .. Fornecer sistemas de sa-fras apropriadas a capa- v cidade da terra, j Preparar sistemas de cul­turas apropriadas para .uni-dades terra/solo, . Prdpór médidas auxiliares de *conserva9a'o ffsica. Estudar a viabilidade*'ec'on6-mica..dos sistemas propostos/ e tamblm a ppssfvel inclusao 'de' gado.

Planificar e fornecer mate­rials para sis­temas agrfcolas propostos.

Implementar os sistemas agrfcolas recomenda-dos e as medidas au­xiliares de conserva9ao ffsica, NB ; - sistemas de culturas -" tempos de planti o' - culturas de cober-tura - mulches - valas de escoaraento faixas de arbüstos, etc. .

Melh'óra- .j mento ,(opti- -miza9ao) do tempo,e interva-* lo de plantio

< : :

Experiências de

culturas

Assegurar. a regdlarieda-de das entra-das de-semen-tes, adubos, etc.

Implementar a planta-9ao, como for reco-' mendado.

Conseguir aportes de adubo mais economieos

Experiências ' de1"--' *:

culturas

Assegurar 'for-riecimentos ade-quados e regu-lares.

V J

Assegurar aplica9oes correctas e nos pra-zos devi-dos»

Controle de k . ervas^&aninhas *

Experiências de

culturas

L

Assegurar 0 for-necimento dos herbicidas que forem pedidos.

1.

Planti 0 antecipado (culturas de. sequeio) Usè herbi-cida ou

| , * * * arranque periódica-mente ' „•

1"' .*' r,

as ervas daninhas•

Controle de pragas" e de doen9as

Proteja as variedades de culturas para .re-sist ência. -Investïgue qual o melhor tempo para pulverizar e' a possibilidade de pul-veriza9ao aêrea.

Assegurar o fornecimento de pestici'das fungi ei das, 'de* acordo com os, pedidos. For­necer roupas protectoras, 1 -••M ~"ofr

Plantio antecipa-do(milho). Aplicar os :pesticidas, etc, segundo recomenda-9Öés.

VV-IOV.:T r

Mapa S1 (continuapao)

ï

.- 72

Reduc'ao de Possibilidade económica Assegurar o Colheita ''"porcas de firn • de providenciar.facili- financlamento, adiantada de estacaV' no dades de secagem, se for.pos- (30$ de

'xmilho, f *- • + ' . ' « '' . . " ïo ''• s f y e l , • - • humi dade), i~ •' ) . ' < . . . >/«: •* ' '" " • • , < - . * ?> v i ' . se for

' • ' , ' . "

. • • • . • . .' O J T possfvel.

•Controle das Testar osmêtodos _; .Forneceromaté"- Imple- , 'jpragasude-. de fumiga9ao. - I •; rrias -quimicas 3 mentacao. ^.armazé'iiu1 •. J '."' equipamento, conforme

.' XC .„ 'Vestu^rio pro- for re-

.•/ ' • ' ":: -s.tector,- etc.

-p, •-.. . comendadOo

' -Redu9ao vdos Viabilidade econ&-,-• * Mèlnorar"tas.- Uso eco-custos de mica da cönstru9ab * . ;' -, estradas', .'as- nómico transporte de estradas, etc, :-• "j '• segurar trans- dos trans­

. . > . • i ' -^, ',-'" '." ., ;p'ortês"i adequa- port es 5 .- *i, • -rtj- • j v s - i H d 0 S ' e > s P e c a s s o" " manuten^

, "bres sal ent es. 9ao de • . Kelhorar as estradas

, • . , ; . • ' comunica9oes, e de melïiorar a in­ trans-

Ï ' •

fra estrutura. portes»

Aumentar a produ9ao a t r a -ves da i r r i g a - ' 9S10» '

Novas fotografias alreas. Assegurar o Leyantamento topogrdfico. financiaraento Levantamento do solo. 1 e procurar Ayalia9'ao dos recursos da equipamento» terra e da £gua.

Imple-méhtar •de a-; . cordo coin as recomen-da9Öes«

r^Ësb09Ö &Ó3 'éist'emas "\ de culturas. Viabi­lidade-técni ca e . ecón6mica« Comercia-liza^ao do produto.

Processo; de -prepara9a'o de ' conservas/ou, • de córigela9ao; de f rut as e de. végetais.

Viabilidade eco--nÓmica,'> Viabilidade tëcnica de constrÜ9ao dè fdbrica, etc. Investiga9ao do mercado.

Assegurar o Iraple-financiament o 9:... ment a-Assegurar mer- - 9"ao\ de

rcados (internos acordo ou para expor- com as tac'So). recomen-

da9Öes.

Treinamento' de pessoal'..

Organizar -•:•-. ;--v.~Selecio-cursos (em Mo- nar os cambique ou no Candida-e s t r ange i ro ) . t o s .

•+• Para Wer -levado a e f e i t j ) 'pela-FAp/MOZ,/75/011, equipe •bdlgara, In ia -ou-consultor.es,"conforme for aprcpriado. • -

. ^ ' " r* '^ ' 't '•' • % ^ r ' f ' ' • .

h l ' . -.1

FAO. Os it"eris' marcados com.1 poderao ser realizados pela

-- 73 -

A maior parte das ac9oes recomendadas a nfvel local e de governo apontadas no Mapa S1 sao, por si mesmas, elucidativas. Contudo, certoscoment'arios acerca rdos estudos e das investiga­tes recomendadas, e que caiem sob a al9ada de competëncia do grupo da FAO, podem ajudar a esclarecer o plano de desenvolvi-mento %

1) os levantamentos de solo que foram propostos de­verao ser realizados em machambas existentes ou propostas, numa escala semi-detalhada (isto £, a densidade média de uma observa9ao do solo para 10/25 hectares);.1 Os mapas deverao ser desenhados

• a escala de 1:20.000. ^ :.. As novas fotografias aêreas deverao ser tiradas nessa mesma, escala, logo que seja, poss£vel, pois se assim nao acontecer a exactidab dos mapas fi-cardV-muito reduzida.

. .*.-.±v .. 1 ^ .. - ,

As experiências no campo e as andlises .de.labora-'. tório deverao ser conduzidas especificamente para

">- definir-propriedades: que'interessemao manejamento dó solo. /'J'. ',.••'* -v -<

' • . > - ' , - . - - .j , .J

Os mapas acerca da aptidao da terra ..deverao ser desenhados,em rela9ao a metas de culturas' sugeridas para determinadas areas de -terra, conjuntamente ^ com prdcticas agronómicas, concÜ9oes de manuten9ao, etc. . ' J

. Estes levantamentos deverao ser iniciados imedia-* tamente. A disposi9ao ém areas prioritdrias deve ser decidida em conjunto com a direc9ab da CAIA,

2) as experiências de culturas deverao ser levadas a efeito numa Esta9ao Experimental Agrfcola Central (que poderd ser localizada a partir do Ifepa de Reconhecimento de Angónia, em prepara9'ao pela. FAO/MOZ/75/OII) e em outros locais de expansao selecionados com diversos tipos de solos que sejam representa-tivos dos vdrios blocos de ma­chambas.

Devera" ser dado um ênfase especial a pesquiza adap-tdvel (isto é, adaptando variedades de culturas, nfveis óptimos de aportes, etc, a condi9ao de Angónia). O objectivo destas experiências serd 0 de testar culturas e variedades alternativas, para determinar a viabilidade dos sistemas de cul­turas sugeridos e para determinar as melhores prdc-ticas de cultura (óptimas), para culturas e para sistemas de culturas, na maior parte dos tipos de solo de Angónia.

Estas experiências em culturas constituem óbvia-mente um trabalho a longo prazo, e devera" existir um fluxo regular de informa90es acerca destas experiências a ser canalizado para as machambas. ^

Contudo devera" ser feita imediatamente uma utilizagJao completa dos mapas de experiências ilteis que foram ^ realizadas no Malawi e em Zimbabwe e para tal deverao ser estabelecidos contactos oficiais com as esta90es de pesquiza da contraparte, logo que isso seja pos-sfvel.

\ -J

3) para. 0 proposto desenvolvimento da irriga9ao, de­verao ser levados a efeito levantamentos semi-de talhados do solo, conforme se descreve em 1), mas tendo o cuidado de prestar a maior aten9ab ao rela-cionaraento entre a terra e a dgua. Devem ser rea­lizados no campo alguns testes de infiltra9'ao e de permeabilidade.

• • -. - 7 4 .-•

:.• .. ' • , ; ' "" • ' * j ' • •

Para a irrigacao da supérficie I necesstCrio urn. le-vantamento.topogr&fico exactó e antes que se inicie . qualquer forma de desenvolvimento da irrigacao de-verd ser levado a efeito urn levantamento hi.drológico,

. 4) constata~se uma necessidade mais imediata de treino a 'n£vvel Intermldioo

! „" ' • r ' • • • ' ' • ~ j _ . /

•) : Os topicos sugerido'S' para especializacao sao Meca-nizaeaV das machambas, Especializacao em culturas

'.'* (por exemplo, a do trigova ser feitavna CYMMEP, no México), Administra^ao agrfcola e Guar da livros/ Contabilidade* '>. r.; • ,v .. c

0 plano de desenvolvimento'acima descrito esta" muito longe de ser completo. ' .... .o • •» . . r>r,

Nomeadamente-temvfalta de infra-estrutura nao agricola, tais como Centros de Sadde, escolas, etc, as quais sao necessdrias para assegurar aue^sé.alcance urn desenvolviraento yerdadeiramente integra&o'-e.'.estavelï . ','

AVfinalidade ,'do ' .plano*,'que aqui sé'propoe ê a de estabelecer uma base para discussao entre as^partés' inx-eressadas e, o que^é" ainda, mais importante, de ajudar a conseguir alcancar as accoes coordenadas que sejam necessarias para, assegurar o sucesso de CAIA. .. • : ' • t

• r

r

i i

r

1 : 1 ^

. *.

c.

O *j

^' r •> , M'-

l

}<

o/v. * • •

' • . • , ' • 0 '

•~ o ; .

' • „ ' • ' - • .» *t >-, s ..

• r~ * j ; . n '

..i.C-

- 75 -APPENDIX A

Guidelines for Erosion Control.

1. Soil erosion is a natural process which is normally in-equilibrium with processes of rock weathering and soil formation.» Cultivation usually disturbs this equilibrium and results in accelerated soil erosion.

- ' ' ' • , , - '

2. Soil erosion is caused by the direct impact-of raindrops and by f:' effects of water run off.-Resistance (or conversely susceptibility) to erosion is determined by : : > . .

r - Intensity of Rainfall• '• - - — Slope (Gradient and length)

- Soil Characteristics (mainly texture, structural properties and organic

' 7 • matter content) • .

Erosion control depends on reducing raindrop impact by maintaining • maximum soil- cover and reducing occur'by chanelling 'of runoff.

3. In cultivated systems the level of soil erosion can be_controlled by :

- Correct Land Use -Planning. - Biological' (land management) practices. '

' ' —' Supplementary' Physical Measures. - ' • ' • . *. - - v . , ,

The* aim of erosion control is to limit erosion loss averaged over a specified' period tö the average rate''of soil formation which is esti­mated to'1 be 12.5 tons/ha/ 'year (Shaxson et'al, 1977) for central Africa. '"'' ; ; ; ' '•»-'- ' "' : ''''"•' ;

4» Correct land use planning'aims to optimize land use in accordance with the;.land's: suitabilrity fqrrsustained.agricultoi.ral production. "Following, completion of the. proposed,semi detailed soil surveys • and preparation of land suitability maps, for each farm block, cropping systems should be designed according to land suitability

. and fitted to mapped land areas. , ,,<-r

. j i . i w .> . . .

cropping systems,, offering various degrees of „protection against , erosion are" suggested inrChapter 3.- Generally speaking, the systems with least.risk of erosion are the least productive and therefore suited to -the,more marginal land. The more productive cropping systems should only be applied to land capable of supporting them.

. - 7 6 -

5» "Biological* conservation measures aim to minimise the length of time "bare soil is exposed to erosive rains» These measures, which are essentially management practices, include early planting, application of surface mulches (which can have soil losses according to experiments in Zimbabwe, Shaxson et al 1977) timely land preparation and growingi cover crops. , • -> - -

6. Physical erosion control methods should be combined with the,practi-

c ivces outlined above. They cannot and raust not be used as a substitute

for correct land use planning.}• Physical methods comprise building of

.•structures or snapping of) land, so as to reduce the scour aspects of

erosion by either : ; ' , • • .

- holding rain*water until it is absorbed,or,

- carrying off excess;water at a non erosive 1 velocity for safe disposal.

7. Planning and construction'-of physical conservation work requires

rather specialist knowledge. The concept of the catchment must be 'kept in mind when' safely disposing of excess water. .Slopes more than 12$ are not, recommended for cultivation and slopes of 2% re­quire little physical erosion control, although ploughing relative to the contour is desirable. On slopes of 2-12$ which dominate in'the area farmed by CAIA the following structures are recommended :

- Cross slope channels or bunds_ with a gradient of ^ , about .0.15-0,2$.

The spacing of these bunds can calculated from slope, soil and run-off'data. They can normally

,. ' be constructed using tractor mounted equipment. -. . These bunds are presently used by CAIA, but chey ,. are often poorly aligned relative to the contour and are not combined with other necessary physical and biological erosion control practices. They are therefore ineffective., ( t, ••» . \

' - Bunds should drain into waterways' which may be natural or artificial.' These waterways"should be grassed to protect them from -gullying'-'and1 should

-;.." be prepared^ one year in advance of cropping to'

allow the grass to become firmly established. When new land is cleared and time is insufficient for construction of .grassed waterways, bush strips should be al'igned at right angles to the contour. Width, and distance of grassedcwaterways and bush strips can be calculated from run off data.

/

-11 -

8. Consideration should be given to using tied ridges to increase in­filtration and thereby reduce' run-off» . Tied ridging can be carried out using tractor mounted equipment.

9» Adequate conservation measures must be taken around building areas etc, and roads should be aligned as far as possible along crests. Where this is not possible a gentle gradient is prefered, or alter­natively straight up or down the slope when^this is not too steep for traffic. In practice a combination of these alignments is common, requiring a properly gradedacross section and adequately protected side drainage.

10.Irrigation, particularly by surface methods, inevitably creates further problems of excess water disposal and thereby increases the erosion hazards. Surface irrigation should be limited there­fore to slopes of less than 5$ and extreme care must be excercised in the,.alignment of water distribution and drainage channels. Sprinkler or drip irrigation minimize the additional erosion ha­zards of surface irrigation methods.

K--~-"

:r .>

- 78 -.

APPENDIX B.

CHECK LIST ••••:- -EGGLOG-lCAOCr SUITABLE': -CROPS.

1 ||T1 f H i Till IE M « P l W l 1 l l •lllBHIHlll III

r Possible cropping.Periods

Scientific name I

English Portuguese Ï' '

1 ->2 • 3

Zea mays

>

Maize Milho . .;; > ' + .

Triticum aestivum Wheat Trigo t-

+

Hordeum vulgare' • • i

Oryza sativa

• iBarley

Rice

* Cevada -y

Arroz

Helianthus anuus Sunflower 'Girassol 't

Glycine max Soya benn , - Soja +

Brassica campestris Rape j - +

Brassica juncea Mustard + +

Arachis hypogea Groundnut Amendoim +

Phaeseolus spp.

Vigna unguiculata

Beans

Cowpea

Peijao +

+

Cajanus cajan Pigeon pea Perennial

Crotolaria juncea Sun hemp +

Solanum tuberosum Potato Batata + + +

Ipömea batatas Sweet potato Batata doce +

Solanum melongena Auberigne + +

Beta vulgaris Beetroot Beterraba + + +

Brassica oleracea var. capitata

Capsicum annuun var. grassum

Daucus carota

Brassica oleracea var borrytis

Apium graveolens

Brassica chinensis

Cabbage ^

Capsicum

Carrot

Repolho +

Pimenta verde +

Cenoura +

+

+

Cauliflower Couveflor

Celery Aipo

Chinese Cabbage

f

- 79 -

Possible cropping Periods

Scientific name English Portuguese

Cucumis sativus

Phaeseblus vulgaris

Allium satiuum

Lactuca sativa

Cucumis melo

Hibiscus sabdariffa

Allium cepa

Petroselinum crispum

Pisum sativum :» r

Cucurbita maxima ,

Raphanus sativus

Lycopersicon esculentum

Citrulus lanatus

Cucumber Pepino

French beans Peijao

Garlic Alho

Lettuce Alface

Musk Melon Melao

Okra

Onion Cebola

Parsley- Salsa

Pea Ervilha

• Pumpkin

Aböbora

Radish Rabanete

Tomato Tomate

''Vfeter Melon Melancia

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

Capsicum frutescens Chili Piripiri

Coriandrum"sativum Coriander

Cuminum cyminum Cumin K

Anethum graveolens -."' Dill

Mentha sp. Mint

Nicotiana tabacum Tobacco Tabaco

Pyrus malus Apple Maca

Prunus a '" '"* Apricot Damasco

Persea americana Avocado Avocado

Vitis vinifera Grape Uva

Citrus limon Lemon Limao

Citrus avrantifolia Lime • * Lima

Prunus persica Peach PCssego

Pyrus communis Pear Pera

Prunus domestica • Plum Amelia

Pragaria vesca •'"'' Strawberry ! Morango

Perennial

+

+

+

+

+

+

Perennial

tr

1•= November - April (Rainfed)

.2 = March - June (~ Supplementary .Irrigation)

3 = July - October (Irrigated)

- 80 ~

R E F E R E N C E S • i -

AF0NS0, R,S.

BERGER, J.M,

+ MBIN, B,

DAVIDSON, B.

DOORENBOS, J.' KASSAM, A„H. et al

FAO

FAO/UNESCO

FRELIMO

ISAACMAN, A.

KAUFFMAN, J.

KOWAL, J.

1976. A Geologia de Mocambique. ' Direcc'ao r1os Servicos de ' -0

Geologia e Minas, R.P.M.

1964, Interpretation -les rêsultats des analyses des échantillons

r. de terre pour le centre de la CSte d'lvoire. Ministère de 1'Agriculture„^ ; Republique de C6te de d*Ivoire.

1961. Les facteurs de la fertilitê des sols des regions tropicales

. . en culture irriguê., .• • :* Bulletin Special AFES» 108-130

r ' •> l ' . . . ' "

1967. The Growth of African Civili­sation ï East and'Central' }

Africa to the late Nineteenth Century» Longman, London. •

1978. Yield Response to Water, . n FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No.33.

1976. A framework for land evaluation. " Soils Bull. No. 32o FAO.

1974. Soil Map of the World 1 : 5.000.000. V01...1 Legend. FAO/UNESCO Rome/Pari a.

A. .

.19.76. Direccivas Econ6mleas e Socials Documentos do Ter'ceiro Congresso da FRELIMO, Maputo. <f

1978. A Luta Continua, Creating a New Society in Mozambique. Southern Africa Pamphlets .No; 10 Joint Publication Unions,

V New York State/Cornell/Eduardo Mondlane.

;1978. Metereological Data, Angónia, Mozambique.

T . FAO/MOZ/75/011 Working Paper No. 2, Maputo.

1977. Agro-Ecological Zoning for the Assessment of Land Potentiali-• zation for Agriculture.

'•'- ' ' PV 13-23 in- teLan.d- Evaluation Standards for Rexnfed Agricul­ture^. ..

• ' .Worlfl Soil Resources Report • " • No. 49 FAO, Rome.

- • \

- 81 -

MACLEAN, A.H. and YAGERj T-.V. '

Ministry of Agriculture and National Resources (Malawi)

MORAIS DA SILVA, "A.

MOHR, P.J. and DICKINSON, E.B.

pp 13-23; in :,Land Evaluation Standards for Rainfed Agri­culture". World Soil Resources ;Report No. 49 PAO, Rome.

1972. Available Water Capacities in Zambian Soils in Relation to Pressure Plate Measurements and Particle Size Analysis. Soil Science 113 23-29.

1978. Sunflower Extension Aids Circular No. 4/78 MANR, Lilongwe.

1975.~-r Casa' Agrf cola, LDA. .: Report on Fruit Growing and Agricultural Section. Ministry of Agriculture, Maputo.

1979. Mineral Nutrition in Maize in 'Maize*, Ciba-Geigy Agro-chemicals, Basle.

MOURIK, D. van and RADCLIFFE, D.J.

PURNELL, M.F. 1977.

Soils of Angónia. PAOAlOZ/75/011 Working Paper, in prep., Maputo.

Progress and Problems in the Application of Land Evalua­tion in FAG Field Projects in Different Countries.

RADCLIFFE, D.J.

RADCLIFFE, D . J . -*:,id MOURIK, D, van

pp 81-88 i n vrLand Eva lua t ion Standard f o r Rainfed Agricul­t u r e " World S o i l Resources Report No. 49, FAO, Rome.

The Growing Period in Ang6-nia. An Ecological basis for Crop Selection. FAO/MOZ/75/011 Working Paper in prep., Maputo.

Monitoring the Maize Crop for Land Evaluation. FAO/MOZ/75/oll Working Paper in pre., Maputo.

SHAXON, T.F. ; HUNTER, N.D. JACKSON, T.R. ; ALDER, J.R. 1977. A Land Husbandry Manual,

MANR, Malawi.

K; THATCHER,' Ë.G.

VÏETMAYEa/.N.I»,

VOORTMAN, R . L .

••••jt-'-o; " ' f ! ' » ' "

• \ I

- 8?

f963, ïb.e Geology of the Dedza Area, uororn-nient Printer, (Malawi)»

.1979. Tropical Tree' Legume3» A front Line Against "De­forest rationv

Ceres 21 PP 38-81 PAO, Rome,

Reconnaissance -Land. Eyalaa,-<• f -.tiori of.Angónia.

FAO/MOZ/75/011 Working Paper, in prep., Maputo.

VOORTMAN, RiL.' and;SPIERS,-v* ; B . ' ' " . - • • ' / v r r > o ' = - ; « •

<I* .•: 'f ' o -,* '• r ? ; ' '

Angónia Landscape Ecological Reconnaissance Survey. MO/MOZ/75/011 Working Paper, in p r e p . , Maputo.

,,,3.. i" i . : , :

: •.Ou'.b,">

V . . ' • " I '

T . /•

r , - r •

i

- 83 -

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The project would like to thank to the following persons and organizations for facilitating the present study.

Sr. Daniel de Sousa, National Director of Agriculture, for interest and helpful comments, and Mr. Albert Jansen and Sra. Paula Costa also of DINA for facili­tating contacts in the field.

Sr. Rui Valadarez, Provincial Director of Agriculture.

The Management and staff of CAIA. for cooperation in

supplying data and undertaking field visits with the

PAO Team. Particularly thanks are due to Sr. Lourenco

Sfutaca, Director, Sr. Zdrafco Popgevrilov, Agronomist

and Sr. Carlos Carneiro, Field Manager.

The team leader and other experts of PA0/M0Z/75/011

for supplying useful data and for helpful comments

cm the manuscript.