Assessment of Farmers’ Perception on Soil Erosion in Central Borno, Northeastern

Nigeria
J. M. Dibal1, M. Iboyi2, N. A. Abubakar3, A. Abdullahi1
1Department of Agricultural and Environmental Resources Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Maiduguri
2Department of Agricultural Technology, The Federal Polytechnic, Damaturu, Nigeria
3 Department of Agricultural and Bio-Resource Engineering Programme, Faculty of Engineering and Engineering Technology,

Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, PMB 0248, Bauchi, Nigeria

Corresponding Author’s E-mail address:michaeliboyi@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT
Soil erosion has remained a serious threat to sustainable agriculture and clean environment. It has been instrumental
to loss of huge productive soil resources, yield reduction and attendant depression in many farmers’ economy. The
fact that most farming activities are still conducted on erosion prone soils is not contestable. Against this backdrop,
this study appraised farmers’ perception and responses to soil erosion on their farmlands in Maiduguri and
its environs, Borno state. A total of 50 questionnaires were administered that solicited the responses of the
farmers on their perception of soil erosion-related questions on their farmlands in the area. Oral interview was
employed in some instances to enhance communication with farmers. Descriptive statistics using frequencies
converted to percentages was used in analyzing the data. The study area covered Maiduguri Metropolitan Council,
parts of Jere, Konduga, and Mafa Local Government Areas. The result shows that most farmers recognized water as
the chief agent of soil erosion relative to other agents of soil erosion. The study further established that a handful of
farmers are totally ignorant of soil erosion, but a large volume of them are aware of soil erosion and its
consequences on their farmlands, and the remedial measures of controlling soil erosion, but raised questions
regarding the contributions of farming profession to erosion. We conclude that there is a need to initiate/step up
programmes that will enlighten farmers on the occurrence, menace and control measures against soil erosion in the
area to avert further loses and environmental degradation.

Keywords: Farmers’ perception, soil erosion, Borno central, northeastern Nigeria, semi-arid
region

INTRODUCTION
Soil is one of the essential natural resources upon which the sustenance of life directly or
indirectly depend (Mohammed, 2014). Soil erosion can be described as the process by which
rock fragments and soil are detached from their original sites, transported, and eventually
deposited at some new locality (Adediji, 2000). Soil erosion was reported to have caused
tremendous damage to about one-third of the world’s cropland (Hudson, 1989). It leads to soil
degradation, obstructs development of projects, and has direct bearing to environment and
human health (Osore and Moges, 2014). The processes of soil erosion carries away the top
nutrient-rich soil thereby depressing the soil’s productivity and this process paves way to
farmers’ economic losses. Pimentel (2000) showed that on an annual basis, an estimated 75
billion tons of fertile topsoil is lost worldwide from agricultural farms and also nearly 10 million
ha of cropland worldwide is abandoned due to soil erosion-related problems. This problem is
more pronounced in the arid and the semi-arid regions of the world that covers about 40 % of the
earth’s surface (Iguisi, 2002). In Nigeria for instance, over 80 % of cropland were devastated by
erosion, and the mean annual loss of crop productivity through erosion has been estimated to be
25 million tons (Adediji, 2000).
The severity of soil erosion is a function of many factors, prominent among which are soil
characteristics, intensity of eroding forces, and land slope among others. It is however most
influenced by anthropogenic factors, through actions such as land cultivation (Dibal et al., 2014).
Maiduguri and environs has suffered high incidence of flood with soil erosion as one of the

1
major problems emanating there from (Dibal et al., 2014). Splash, sheet, rill, gully, and stream
bank erosions are the commonly recognized forms of water erosion (Dressing 2003). But it has
been proposed that increasing food and fiber production to feed the current and next generation
requires more efficient use of production resources such as land and water (Al-Uzairy, 2015).
Apparently, understanding and addressing issues of soil erosion therefore becomes necessary to
mitigate its adverse consequences on socio-economic status of farmers and environmental
quality. Despite the foregoing, a good number of farmers can hardly perceive the onset or extent
and the negative impacts of erosion on their farmlands. Thus soil erosion flourishes effortlessly,
and its effects manifest negatively on the farmers. The farmers thus need to be brought
up-to-date regarding soil erosion problems in their farms to enable them accept and adopt
appropriate techniques of addressing soil erosion to avert or mitigate the negative consequences
of erosion and improve their living standards. The crusade of struggling against soil erosion
should start with the farmers. This study was therefore conceived to appraise farmers’
perception and responses to soil erosion on their farmlands in Maiduguri and its environs,
Borno state.
Materials and Methods
Study area.
The study area covered Maiduguri Metropolitan Council, parts of Jere, Konduga, and Mafa
Local Government Areas. Maiduguri, the capital of Borno State, lies between latitudes 11o 45’N
and 11o 51N’ longitudes 13o 2’E and 13o 9’.It is located in the Ngadda Basin, a seasonal stream
that flows through Maiduguri. Most of the people living along the flood plain in the study area
are peasant farmers. The predominant rainfed cultivation of grain crops such as sorghum and
millet characterizes land uses at the study area punctuated by dry season FADAMA cultivation in
some points using various technologies of irrigation system. Also cultivations are usually carried
out right to the edge of gullies. Other land use activities include sand mining, grazing, urban
house construction, garden and orchards. The climate of the study area is generally semi-arid,
with moderate variation in temperatures. The study area is the principal trading hub for north-
eastern Nigeria. The soils are sand-dominated and nutrient-deficient making them exceptionally
susceptible to erosion especially when subjected to the heavy rains that reach their peak between
June and September every year (Areola, 1989).

Data Collection
A structured questionnaire was used in collecting information used to assess the farmers’ degree
of understanding on soil erosion on their farmlands. A total of 50 questionnaires were
administered that solicited respondent (farmers) to express their views on soil erosion-related
questions. Open interview with demonstrations were also employed to facilitate communication
with some of the illiterate respondents. Descriptive statistics using frequency converted to
percentages was employed in analyzing the data obtained.

Results and Discussion

From Table 1, it is clear that majority of the respondents (68%) cited water as the major agent of
soil erosion; this may be probably as a result of poor drainage system around their farmlands,
soil type, nature of the topography and the climatic condition. About 32% opted wind as the
main agent of soil erosion on their farmland, this may be probably be due to the nature of the
soil, climatic condition and geological rate under natural vegetation.

2
Table 1: Farmers’ responses on agent of soil erosion in their farmlands
Agent Frequency Percentage
Water 34 68%
Wind 16 32%
Others 00 00
Total 50 100%

In support of the findings above, the United Nation Environmental Programme (UNEP, 1993),
also attributed the causes of soil erosion, desertification, etc, to poor drainage system and poor
initial planning. There many other factors, but the above are the commonest in the area of study.
On whether they are aware of the consequences of soil erosion on their farmlands, the
respondents’ views are indicated in Table 2. The Table shows that majority of the farmers (78 %)
had observed the consequence of soil erosion on their farmlands via reduction in yield and losses
in economic returns. This implies that the farmers are aware of the consequence of soil erosion
on their farmlands. This could probably be because of added effort and cost of controlling soil
erosion. Long et al. (2006) reported similar observation in China. But 22 % of the respondents
exhibited ignorance on soil erosion, and it is not regarded as a threat. This is attributed to
possible high level of illiteracy and poverty among others, that made them to contain with the
little produce and they saw no reason to judge what accounts for the variation or decline in their
harvest. This is similar to Barr (1985)’s findings that indicated the insidious nature of the
pervasive hazard of soil erosion, farmers misperceive either the existence or extent of erosion on
their own farmland.

Table 2: Farmers’ awareness of the consequence of soil erosion

Perception Frequency Percentage
Aware 39 78%
Not aware 11 22%
Total 50 100%

Table 3 reveals that 58 % of the farmers admitted to have experienced reduction in yield
consequential to soil erosion on their farmland. Hence, this could be as a result of severe effect
of the erosion or as a result of poor farm management. This supports the view of Longtau et al.
(2002) that farmers see the relationship between erosion and crop yield, but are reluctant to
believe erosion as an individual problem on their own farms. On the hand, 22% of the
respondents complained that soil erosion accounted for loss of soil nutrients, and had over a
decade noticed the escalating trend of cost of inorganic fertilizers and transportation of farmyard
manure to restore lost nutrients. This fact was supported by (Junge et al., 2007) that soils could
either be water or wind eroded depending on the external dynamic agent. Fourteen percent (14
%) of the farmers expressed decline in the total cultivated area due to washing away of part of
the farm by overland flow. This resulted into a shift to marginally arable lands and/or depression
in their annual grain yield. Further, the study found that 6 % held ‘other factors’ responsible for

3
progressive decline in yields. The factors included poor farm management system, poor soil
erosion control structures, and inadequate supply of inorganic fertilizer by the government,
among others. Thus, this shows that a greater proportion of the farmers perceive reduction of
crop yield potential as the main effect of soil erosion in the study area.
Table 3: Adverse Effect of Soil Erosion Individual Farmland
Effects Frequency Percentage
Reduction in yield potential 29 58%
Loss of soil nutrient 11 22%
Reduction of arable land 7 14%
Others 3 6%
Total 50 100%

The results in Table 4 revealed that central Borno is worst hit by rill erosion as indicated by 44 %
of the respondents. This could probably be a product of the physical characteristics of the soil
and mode of cultivation adopted by the majority of farmers. About 28% of the respondents opted
raindrop as their major form of erosion. But 26% reported sheet erosion as the problem erosion.
A particular group of farmers called it silent killer. This could be as a result of the nature of sheet
erosion which is unnoticeable by the farmers, because it occurs gradually and there is no
appreciable change which may easily be visible. Gully erosion seemed to be rare in the study
area as only 2% reported gully erosion as the common type of erosion in their farm. This shows
that a greater fraction of the farmers perceive rill erosion as the common type of erosion in the
study area. The fact was supported by Ologe (1988) that rill erosion is common in northern
Nigeria.
Table 4: Common Type of Soil Erosion on Individual Farmlands
Type Frequency Percentage
Rill 22 44%
Raindrop 14 28%
Sheet 13 26%
Gully 1 2%
Total 50 100%

The results in Table 5, shows that 42% of the farmers used mulching material to control soil
erosion on their farmland. This could be because it is readily available in large quantity, cheap
(sometimes free), and easily transported. This counters the findings of Erenstein (1991) that
reported mulch materials are expensive and difficult for the farmers to adopt. About 28% opted
waterways system, this could be probably because of irrigation method practiced, while about
24% said they used green vegetative materials such as grasses because of their effective nature in
retarding erosion. While only 4% of the respondents said they used contour terrace, this could be
as a result of rainwater saturation of the ground

4
Table 5: Farmers Method of Controlling Soil Erosion
Method Frequency Percentage
Mulching material 21 42%
Waterways system 14 28%
Vegetative material 12 24%
Contour terrace 2 4%
Others 1 2%
Total 50 100%

The content of Table 5 re-echoes Iguisi (2002) findings that most farmers particularly the
untrained ones decide on how to use their land in line with their objectives and understanding
about soil, and often disagrees with scientific evaluation of erosion condition by professional soil
scientist and engineers.
Conclusion
In the course of examining farmers’ understanding on soil erosion, our study revealed that some
farmers in central Borno are aware and have suffered the effect of soil erosion, but considerable
numbers of them are still totally ignorant of it, and are not ready to adopt any soil conservation
measure. This poses a threat to all efforts geared toward pulling them out of poor socio-economic
circle and improving their standard of living. Soil erosion control should therefore firstly focus
on farmer enlightenment campaign to educate them on soil erosion and its menace. Appropriate
methods of applying different measures for soil conservation should also be extended and
implemented according to farmers’ socio-economic differences in order to cut back the menace
of soil erosion especially on slopping farmlands. It is also essential to introduce ecological
agriculture such as crop rotations, intercropping, bio-engineering, among others and
introduce/improve irrigation technologies at subsidized rates to complement yield losses
occurred during the rain fed farming systems.

References
1 Adediji, A. (2000),The politics on erosion issues.InJimoh,H.I and Ifabiyi, I.P
(2000),Contemporary issues in environmental Studies, Haytee press and publishing
comp. Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria.
2 Al-Uzairy Bahar Nader 2015 The Effectiveness of Two Soil Amendments: Gypsum and
Polyacrylamide on Soil Erosion under Saline Conditions in Australia. International
Journal of Environmental Science and Development, 6,(5) :375-380
3 Areola, O. (1983),Soil and vegetation Resources: A Geography of Nigeria Development
Heinemann, Ibadan.
4 Dibal J. M., Ali U. Bashir, B. G. Umara and B. Baraya (2014) Variability of Soil
Erodibility Factor With Some Soil Management Practices In A Semi-Arid

5
 Agroecological Condition, Nigeria ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
9 (11): 2206-2211
5 Dressing, S. A. (2003). National Management Measures to Control Nonpoint Pollution
from Agriculture-USEPA Agricultural Sciences, 2014, 5, 958-963 Published Online
September 2014 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/as
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/as.2014.511103
6 Erenstein, O. C. A. 1999. The Economics of Soil Conservation in Developing Countries:
The Case of Crop Residue Mulching. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University,
Wageningen, The Netherland. Extent of Gully Erosion and Farmer’s Perception of Soil
Erosion in Alalicha Watershed, Southern Ethiopia
7 Hudson N. W (1989), Soil Conservation, B.T Brantford limited, London.
8 Iguisi E. O. (2002), An Assessment of temporary variation in Soil Loss within
Hydrological year. The Zaria Geographer, 15(1):125-133.
9 Junge, B., Abaidoo, R., Chikoye, D., Alabi, T. and Stahr, K. (2007). Assessment of
past and present soil conservation initiatives in Nigeria, West Africa, Conference on
International Agricultural Research for Development 4p
10 Long H. L., G. K. Heilig, J. Wang, X. B. Li , M. Luo, X. Q. Wu et al. (2006) Land Use
And Soil Erosion In The Upper Reaches Of The Yangtze River: Some Socio-Economic
Considerations On China’s Grain-For-Green Programme Land Degrad. Develop. 17:
589–603
11 Longtau, S.R., A.C. Odunze, and B. Ahmed. (2002). Case study of soil and water
conservation in Nigeria. In Rethinking Natural Resources Degradation in Sub-Saharan
Africa, ed. T. Slaymaker and R. Blench, III 2:1-42, London: Overseas Development
Institute and Tamale: University for Development Studies.
12 Onu, F.M. and Mohammed, A. (2014) Competency Improvement Needs of Farmers in
Soil Erosion Prevention and Control for Enhancing Crop Production: Case Study of Kogi
State, Nigeria. Agricultural Sciences, 5, 958-963.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/as.2014.511103
13 Osore A. and Moges A. (2014). Extent of Gully Erosion and Farmer’s Perception of Soil
Erosion in Alalicha Watershed, Southern Ethiopia Journal of Environment and Earth
Science 4, (15):74-81
14 Pimentel, D. (2006). Soil erosion: A food and environmental threat. Environ. Dev.
Sustain. 8: 119- 137