FARM MANAGEMENT HANDBOOK OF KENYA

VOL. II

– Natural Conditions and Farm Management Information –

2nd Edition

PART A

WEST KENYA

Subpart A1

Western Province
This project was supported by the German Agency for
Technical Cooperation (GTZ)
 Ministry of Agriculture

FARM MANAGEMENT HANDBOOK OF KENYA

VOL. II

– Natural Conditions and Farm Management Information –

2nd Edition

PART A
WEST KENYA
Subpart A1
Western Province
by

Dr. Ralph Jaetzold

Prof. emeritus of Geography,
University of Trier / Germany

Helmut Schmidt
Former Farm Management Research Officer
from the former German Agricultural Team of the GTZ
in the Ministry of Agriculture, Nairobi

Dr. Berthold Hornetz

Prof. of Agricultural Geography,
University of Trier / Germany

Dr. Chris Shisanya

Prof. of Agroclimatology,
Dept. of Geography
Kenyatta University, Nairobi

Contributions to the 1st Edition by: C.M. Kang´e & J.G.M. Muasya – assessment of farm management data; Dr. Mechthild Kronen – soil require-
ments list; Prof. Dr. H. Kutsch – computing of crop-water relations for yield probabilities; F.N. Muchena, B.J.A. van der Pouw, W. Siderius and
W.G. Sombroek – basic soil maps; H. Ritz – district climate tables; R. Swoboda – execution of Small Farm Survey; C.G. Wenner & S.N. Njoroge
– soil conservation.
Contributions to the 2nd Edition by: G. Awinyo – digitizing of soil maps into GIS; Th. Buettel – support by analyzing remote sensing data; M.
Fiebiger – rainfall data analysis, probability calculations, yield probabilities by simulation programs; Heike Hoeffler – project coordination in GTZ
Nairobi; Philip Karuri – assistance in the Farm Survey; Elizabeth Kimenyi & Anne Njoroge – coordination of farm survey; M. Mueller – calculation
and diagrams of growing periods, ENSO influence; Dr. Anne W. Muriuki & J.N. Qureshi – soil and fertiliser recommendation maps and informa-
tion; Dr. Dorothy Mutisya – crops and fodder list; Birgit Schmidt – basics for maintaining and regaining soil fertility; Joshua Shivachi – analysing
the Farm Survey data using SPSS software; J. Wieczorek – computerization of climatic and fertiliser maps, tables and diagrams for GIS and printing;
W. Zettelmeyer – computing farm data.

4
Farm Management Handbooks of Kenya

VOL. I Labour Requirement Availability and Costs of Mechanisation

VOL. II Natural Conditions and Farm Management Information

Part II/M General Part (Methodology)

Part II/A WEST KENYA

Subpart A1 Western Province
Subpart A2 Nyanza Province

Part II/B CENTRAL KENYA

Subpart Bl Rift Valley Province, Middle and Southern Part
Subpart B2 Central Province

Part II /C EAST KENYA

Subpart C1 Eastern Province, Middle and Southern Part
Subpart C2 Coast Province

VOL. III Farm Management Information - Annual Publications

Part III/A Agriculture Land, Holdings and Farm Statistics
Part III/B Costs and Prices, Gross Margins, Cash Flows and Farm Models

VOL. IV Production Techniques of Livestock Enterprises

VOL. V Production Techniques and Economics of Horticultural Enterprises

In addition, there are District Farm Management Guidelines produced by the District Agricultural Offices

Publisher Ministry of Agriculture, Kenya, in Cooperation with the German Agency for Technical
Cooperation (GTZ)

VOL. II is supplemented by CD-ROMs with the information and maps in a Geographical

Information System. Additionally there are wall maps of the Agro-Ecological Zones per district group
(= the former large districts) for offices and schools.

Vol. II/A Printed by , Nairobi 2005

Design & Layout by Harrison Musyoka, PHV Studios, Nairobi.

5
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
for the Support to the First Edition

In compiling this Handbook, we have relied on the support of many officers from a variety of institutions
too numerous to mention, who made available their data and experience. We would like to thank them for
their invaluable assistance.

I would also like to thank my colleagues, the Research Officers, the District Land and Farm management
Officers, for their cooperation, and a special thank you to those who typed the draft edition.

Our particular thanks go to Prof. Dr. Ralph Jaetzold, University of Trier, for his selfless support in compil-
ing this handbook and for his assessment of the natural conditions including land and population. His deep
understanding of the needs of agricultural extension officers and farmers was a great asset. Our thanks also to
Dr. H. Kutsch, University of Trier, who computerized a large and complex amount of information involved
in establishing the AEZs.

Many thanks also to the staff of the Geographical Department of the University of Trier, Germany, for their
major effort in drawing up maps of outstanding quality, the centrepiece of the work.

Helmut Schmidt
Farm Management Research Officer
Nairobi, May 1982

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
for the Support to the Second Edition

In revising this Handbook, various personalities and institutions were relied upon to provide the necessary
data required to update the previous data sets. In this regard, we would like to sincerely thank them for their
invaluable input in the exercise.

Special thanks go to the Ministry of Agriculture staff who undertook the Farm Surveys to elucidate on the
fundamental changes that have taken place in farming at the household level.

We are indeed very grateful to the people of Germany, who despite their limited financial resources, have
continued to support Kenya. Of importance here is the German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ)
and the German scientists who have been working for Kenya over the years. Last but not least, thanks to Mr.
Reimund Hoffmann, the PSDA Coordinator, Nairobi, whose office ably managed the Handbook revision
project.

Chris Shisanya Elizabeth Kimenyi

Prof. of Agroclimatology Assistant Director of Agriculture
Dept. of Geography FMD, MOA
Kenyatta University, Nairobi Kenya
Nairobi, January 2007 Nairobi, January 2007

6
PREFACE to the Second Edition

Institutional memory is of paramount importance for planning and development. For any research or agricultural extension
to be successful, information on the natural farming potential is equally important.

In an effort to consolidate research - extension work of many years, the first edition of the Farm Management Handbook
(FMHB) of Kenya Vol II (Natural conditions and farm management information), which described the conditions of the
Kenyan farming community at that time, was produced in 1982/83. The handbook was in three parts i.e.:

 A – for Western Kenya (Western and Nyanza provinces)

 B – for Central Kenya (Central and Rift Valley provinces).
 C – for Eastern Kenya (Eastern and Coast provinces)

For more than two decades, the handbook has proved very valuable to researchers, planners, extensionists, developers etc.
This is a document that has been sought for enormously and hence the need to revise it in order to accommodate the changes
that have taken place in our country since the production of the first edition. Some of these include: changes in the admin-
istrative boundaries, opening up of new farming areas due to population pressure, etc.

This second edition has been produced on the basis of Provincial administrative boundaries for the six Provinces i.e. West-
ern, Nyanza, Rift Valley, Central, Eastern and Coast. The information will be availed in hard copies and in CD – ROMS to
facilitate updating any future changes.

It is not possible to acknowledge the contribution of all the individuals who made this edition a reality but I need to men-
tion the following:

Thanks to the Ministry of Agriculture staff, especially the Agribusiness Department formerly Farm Management Division
staff at the headquarters (Mrs. E. W. Kimenyi, Mr. F. N. Nderitu, Mrs. A.W Njoroge, Mrs. A. W. Wanyama and Mr. P. T
Karuri), and the District staff, for their selfless contribution; Prof. Chris Shisanya, leader of the revision team, for his tireless
efforts and guidance; Prof. Ralph Jaetzold for his enormous knowledge on the definition of the agroecological zones and his
great contribution to their mapping; Mr. George Awinyo (German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) – Private Sector Develop-
ment in Agriculture (PSDA)) for his expertise and contribution in the area of Geographical Information Systems (GIS).

I also wish to thank the GTZ who have facilitated the production of this edition both financially and by the use of their
personnel, specifically the late Prof. Werner von der Ohe who supported the idea of the revision, and Mr. Reimund Hoff-
mann (GTZ – Programme Manager Private Sector Development in Agriculture PSDA), for supporting and taking up the
task to completion.

Dr. Wilson Songa, OGW

AGRICULTURE SECRETARY

Nairobi, May 2007

7

7
8
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgement for the Support to the First Edition 5
Acknowledgement for the Support to the Second Edition 5
Preface to the First Edition 6
Preface to the Second Edition 7
List of Abbreviations 11
Introduction to the Second Edition 12
1. G E N E R A L PA RT F O R W E S T E R N P R O V I N C E
1.1 EXPLANATION OF THE EVALUATION OF THE NATURAL POTENTIAL
1.1.1 The Agro-Ecological Zonation for Kenya1) 15
Table I: Agro-Ecological Zones of the Tropics in Kenya 16
Table II: Subzones According to Growing Periods for Annual Crops 18

1.1.2 Major Soils in Western Province 20

Table III: A Broad Estimate of the Dominant Characteristics of the Major Soil
Classification Units in Kenya 22
Table IV: Soil Requirements List for Crops in Western Province 23
1.2 PRESERVING THE NATURAL POTENTIAL FOR THE FUTURE OF WESTERN PROVINCE
1.2.1 Beware of Degrading the Areas of Natural Vegetation in the Agro-Ecological Zones
to Maintain Water, Firewood and Even Medicinal Resources as well as
the Grazing Potential! 28
1.2.2 Maintenance, Replenishment and Improvement of
Soil Fertility in Western Province 29
1.2.3 Physical Soil Conservation 32
1.2.4 The Potential of Agroforestry to Improve and Restore the Fertility of Nutrient-
depleted Soils of Western Province 37

2. WESTERN PROVINCE
2.1 INTRODUCTION 39
Table V: Population Projections for Western Province per District 39
Table VI: Absolute Poor Households and Persons in Western Province Per District 39

2.2 RAINFALL AND AGROECOLOGICAL ZONES OF WESTERN PROVINCE 41

Table VII: Agro-Ecological Zones with approx. rainfall figures and altitudes for those
in Western Province of Kenya 42

2.3 THERMAL BELTS

Limits, Temperature Increase, Temperature Differences 43
Table VIII: Temperatures and AEZ-Belts from Rift Valley Province to
Western Province (except SW) 44

2.4 THE IMPORTANCE OF FERTILISER AND NUTRIENT RECYCLING

IN WESTERN PROVINCE 45
Table IX: The Decrease (%) of pH and Potassium in Typical Soils of Western Province as a
Sample for the Rapid Loss of Nutrients (During 5 Years of Maize
Cultivation at the FURP Experimental Sites) 46

9
 2.5 POSSIBLE CROPS AND VARIETIES 46
Table X: Agro-Climatological Crop List for Western Province of Kenya 47
Table XI: Bioclimatologically Suitable Grasses and Other Fodder Crops for the Agro-
Ecological Zones in Western Province 60

3. D I S T R I C T I N F O R M AT I O N A N D S TAT I S T I C S
3.1 GENERAL REMARKS ON THE LAND USE POTENTIALS AND FERTILISER
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DISTRICTS 65
3.2 BUSIA & TESO GROUP OF DISTRICTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS 67
3.3 BUNGOMA & MT. ELGON GROUP OF DISTRICTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS 141
3.4 BUTERE-MUMIAS, KAKAMEGA, LUGARI & VIHIGA GROUP OF DISTRICTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS 221

1)
System Ralph Jaetzold. Method of calculation of growing periods and yield probabilities out of crop-soil water relations by
Horst Kutsch, Berthold Hornetz and Chris Shisanya see General Part (Methodology) of Vol. II/M

10
List of Abbreviations l = long
LU = Kenyan Livestock unit of 300 kg
AEZ = Agro-Ecological Zone
M = Midland
AEU = Agro-Ecological Unit
m = medium
add. = additional
m. = mid, middle
a. o. = and others
mat. = maturing
a.s.l. = above sea level
max. = maximum
av. = average
min. = minimum
b. = beginning, begin
bl. = black MSS = Marketing Support Services

br = bimodal rainfall NARS = National Agricultural Research Station

C. = Cooperative norm. = normally

ca. = circa, around O. = 2I¿FH

CAZRI = Central
Arid Zone Research Institute p = permanent
(Jodhpur, India)
CL = Coastal Lowland pa = per annum (= per year)

comp. = composite p., per. = period

DLC = Dry Land Composite Maize PET = Potential Evapotranspiration

cv. = cultivar, cultivated variety pl. = planting

e. = end pr. = precipitation

Private Sector Development of
E0 = evaporation of a water surface PSDA =
Agriculture (recent Project of GTZ)
F. = Farmer, Farmers r. = rains, rainy season

FAO = Food and Agriculture Organization of the res. = resistant

United Nations
f. i. = for instance R. = Reserve

For. = Forest s = short

= Fertiliser
Use Recommendation Project sec. = secondary
FURP of the GTZ (1986-91)
GIS = Geographical Information System St., Stn. = Station

gr. = growing; with crop name: green TA = Tropical Alpine

Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammen- TCF = Total crop failure
GTZ = arbeit (the German Agency for Technical
Cooperation with Developing Countries) t = temperature; with yields: tons
H = Highland; with crop name: hybrid tr = trimodal rainfall
h. = heavy U = Upper
ha = hectar u = uncertain
i = intermediate rains ur = unimodal rainfall
i.e. = item est (latin) = it means v = very
IL = Inner Lowland var. = variety
IRACC = Information
Research and Communication
Centre y. = year
ISFM = Integrated Soil Fertility Management < = less than
KARI = Kenya Agriculture Research Institute > = more than
KCB = Katumani Composite Maize B ~ = about, nearly, around
KSS = Kenya Soil Survey & = and
L = Lowland, lower ^ = followed by a...

11
 INTRODUCTION to the Second Edition

1. In general, the Kenyan farmer is well informed as to the potential of his own land, the labour force of
his family and the production techniques to be used when planting crops cultivated for generations. In
the past, this was a perfectly satisfactory situation, but today, the farmer is called on to feed a rapidly
increasing population and earn a major share of vital foreign currency through exports, i.e. he / she has
to shoulder the cost of economic development in Kenya, in particular in the urban areas. Therefore
the farmer is the most important person for the basis and the future of the nation. Traditional farming
methods are no longer capable of meeting all the demands made on the farming community; widespread
application of scientific methods is required, but knowledge of these methods is obtained, compiled and
stored elsewhere, out of reach of the farmer.

The Handbook has been compiled primarily to assist the agriculture field advisor, who often has little
scientific training but who is the most important officer in rural development. Extension work is
organised within political units, i.e. location, division and district, and therefore information has been
compiled according to AEZs per district resp. district groups, which in some cases has led to repetition.
The layout and approach of the book has to be seen in this context.

A large number of officers working in many different Ministries and institutions for rural development
are also increasingly in need of information about farming as their contact with practical farming is often
very low. But the handbook is designed for the interested farmers too, especially the young ones.

On the research side, it is not always clear what the needs of the farming community are. This results
in an increasing amount of research distant to farmers, especially on-station-research, which swallows
resources urgently needed to find answers to more pressing problems; on-farm investigations (together
with the farmers) we therefore need more and more.

Information flow from research to the farmer, and vice versa, and among the various institutions in-
volved in rural development is seriously hampered by the lack of a common source of reference.

Output of agricultural produce could be considerably increased if the knowledge already accumulated
in Kenya is available to the farmer. The work output of the planning officer could also be doubled and
its quality substantially improved if he had this knowledge on hand, which would go a long way towards
improving the welfare of the rural population.

The increasing demand for information and communication calls for increased efforts to make the in-
formation accumulated available.

2. This transfer of “know-how” to those who need it is a major task and can not be achieved by the Farm
Management Division (FMD) of the Ministry of Agriculture alone - it requires a joint effort. The Farm
Management Division has now made a major effort to establish and compile information required by
the farmers and those who work for the farming community.

This information was published in five volumes of the Farm Management Handbook of Kenya of which
Vol. II “Natural Conditions and Farm Management Information”1 is the centrepiece, first published in
1982/83. Now it is a long time out of print but still very much looked for. In spite of very few funds
available for it, a new edition was prepared since 2003.

1
Farm management information which depends largely on financial facts had to be excluded, like gross margins, cash flows, farm models. It is pub-
lished by the FMB occasionally and can be obtained from the Ministry of Agriculture, Kilimo House.

12
3. The Farm Management Approach is the most reliable method yet developed to assist farming. It is
therefore very desirable that other institutions try to make use of the system. The use of the Handbook
is compulsory for all officers of the Ministry of Agriculture. Due to pressure of other work and very few
funds, the new edition of the Handbook had to be done as a sideline job2. Farm management informa-
tion in particular is incomplete and there is much scope of improvement. Assistance and suggestions are
most welcome.

It is of course evident that the information given cannot be blindly applied but requires assessment for
its relevance to the actual case. Much of it, especially fertilizer recommendations, will be replaced within
the next ten to twenty years. It is important to take note of these replacements.

The information is given per district and per subzones of the Agro-Ecological Zones, but the diversity of
the farms in any AEZ and the limitations of the data base make it essential to evaluate the data supplied
i. e. it is most important to read the accompanying explanations and to compare each subzone with the
soil pattern to adjust the information to the different Agro-Ecological Units.

4. The Vol. II of the Farm Management Handbook consists of the following parts:
a) A West, B Central, and C East Kenya, divided in seven smaller, better manageable subparts
by six provinces and a general part
and it is supplemented by
b) Large AEZ maps of the district groups printed in colour (scale mainly 1:250 000) as wall
maps for offices and schools
c) A data bank and CD ROMs with a Geographical Information System (GIS) of all
important agro-ecological information for each spot. All items are kept by the Ministry of
Agriculture.
It was not possible to compile a complete list of authors of the sources used as in most cases they were
unknown. Most information used and/or included was established or compiled by persons working
5. in the Kenyan Civil Service or for the Government; thus the Kenyan Government owns the product of
their work. We all are grateful to them.

The value of these books containing the natural conditions should not be overestimated.The yield poten-
tials of the Agro-ecological subzones are only a rough guide. First of all the soils of the Agro-ecological
6. units in the subzones must be carefully considered to evaluate their suitability and ability to improve
and sustain their fertility, resp. Secondly the marked conditions play an important role in the decision
what is suitable at a certain place at present times. Therefore the agro-economic conditions must always
be considered in analysing the natural potentials of the Agro-Ecological Zones for recommendations
ordecisions.3

2
It was impossible to assess the large amount of statistical data in detail. - Also there was not enough time and money to undertake a new differenti-
ated farm survey. Only a few questions, mainly about the possible increase of yields by good farm management could be placed systematically by the
Agriculture Officers in typical Agro-Ecological Units.
3
Jaetzold, R.: The Agro-ecological Zones of Kenya and their agro-economical dynamics. Materialien zur Ostafrikaforschung, Vol. 6, Geographische
Gesellschaft, University Trier 1987.

13
 One of the examples of reduced economic use of the natural potential of Agro-Ecological Zones by
worsening of the infrastructure is cotton. Mismanagement in the cotton cooperatives and the cotton
board caused long delays and sometimes even reduced payments to the cotton farmers. This discouraged
the planting of cotton very severely, especially where small farmers had often occurred debts of produc-
tion means. So for many years there were large parts of the cotton zone without cotton in Kenya until
a new initiative by the government encouraged cotton planting even beyond the cotton zones. Former
cotton farmers have planted additional maize for market. The maize price has increased considererably
since 1990 due to population increase and famine. It should be kept high by the Government to encour-
age farmers to plant enough to ensure national food security. Famine disasters are occurring, when a low
maize price discouraged planting and then a drought diminished yields.

A general problem is the competition of maize with sorghum and millets, which increase the risk of
famine in marginal areas. A high maize price encourages maize planting in the sorghum and millet zones
instead of the more drought-resistant sorghum and millet varieties requiring less water. Only if the alti-
tude is above 800 m maize outyields sorghum and millets, and only as long as there are at least 250 mm
of well distributed rainfall during the growing season. But the higher risk with maize is taken because
people rely on internationally aided famine relief in case of crop failure.

Due to social change and mobility, a farmer who eats sorghum and millet is considered backward in
many countries. Due to changing nutritional habits, maize flour is also preferred to sorghum and millet
flour, which can be slightly sour, and the demand and price for these small grains is generally dropping.
Finally the loss by birds is less with maize than with most small grain cereal varieties, and the children
who in former times had to chase the birds away have now to go to school. In a situation where maize
fetches at least 50% more money than sorghum or bulrush millet, the advice of the agro-ecologists to
plant more sorghum and millet is not taken up in the marginal foot plains of the highlands of East and
North East Africa. Therefore maize is planted as a staple food also beyond the economic limits of maize
cultivation in the AEZ 5. Partly it would be more realistic to call it Livestock-Marginal Maize Zone
instead of L.-Millet or L.-Sorghum Zone, but we keep to the well known system. In the drier parts of
Zone 5 farmers now realise that grass seeding in fenced plots is profitable.

7. In the first edition of this handbook 1982/83 the main focus was to adjust agriculture to the different
climate conditions in an optimum way. This goal has been achieved to a great part. But in the meantime
the decreasing soil fertility due the agro-mining by overpopulation has become the main problem. Re-
cycling of exploited nutrients is a must for the long term survival of the country.

8. The population pressure has brought about hunger in search for land, even in the risky areas shown in
the first edition of the Handbook. It is now time to demonstrate the risks and chances that exist in these
marginal areas, i.e. “chance -cropping”.

Our best wishes to the hard working farmers of Kenya

The editors and the authors

Nairobi and Trier, June 2006

14
1.1 EXPLANATION OF THE EVALUATION OF THE
NATURAL POTENTIAL

1.1.1 METHOD OF THE AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONATION by Ralph Jaetzold

Simple agro-ecological zones were established by FAO in 19781. They are suited to make decisions in in-
ternational and long term agricultural policy. In order to give advice to farmers in the districts a more dif-
ferentiated system showing yield probabilities and risks as well had to be developed:

1. The zone groups are temperature belts (Table I) defined according to the maximum temperature limits
within the main crops in Kenya can flourish; cashew and coconuts for the lowlands, sugar cane and
cotton for the lower midlands, Arabica coffee for the upper midlands (usually known as “Highlands”
- the term ‘midlands’ is used here to denote their central importance), tea for the lower highlands, py-
rethrum for the upper highlands. The highest zone is high altitude rough grazing i.e. tropical alpine (or
afro-alpine) vegetation. The threshold values of annual mean temperatures have been established along
similar lines to those of H.M.H. Braun2 but supplemented by limiting factors for many crops e.g. mean
minimum temperatures, frost, etc.

2. The main zones (Table I) are based on their probability of meeting the temperature and water require-
ments of the main leading crops i.e. climatic yield potential, calculated by computer (see General Part).
The zones are roughly parallel with Braun’s climatic zones of the Precipitation/Evaporation Index, but
there are differences according to the influence of the length and intensity of arid periods, a factor also
considered by the computer programme. In a first order the average annual precipitation is compared
with the average annual evapotranspiration.The name of the main zones refer to potentially leading
crops, many of them can be grown in some other zones, too:

Maize zones: LH 1-3; UM 1-4; LM 1-4 (+5); L 2-4 (+5)

Hybrid maize in zones: LH 1-3; UM 1-3; LM 1-3
Wheat in zones: UH 2-3; LH 2-4
Unirrigated rice in zones: L 1-3; LM 1-2
Irrigated rice in zones: L 1-6; (7); LM 1-6, (7)
Sorghum in zones: UM (1-3), 4-5; LM (1-3), 4-5; L (1-3), 4-5
Finger millet in zones: LH (1-3); UM (1-3), 4; LM (1-3), 4, (5); L (1-3), 4, (5)
Groundnuts in zones: LM (1-2), 3-4; L (2-3), 4
Cotton in zones: LM (2), 3-4; L (2), 3-4

1
FAO (1978): Report on the Agro-ecological Zones Project. Methodology and Results for Africa. (= World Soil Resources Rep., 48/1), Rome.
2
Kenya Soil Survey, (1982): Exploratory Soil Map and Agro-Climatic Zones Map of Kenya, scale 1:1 000 000, Rep. E 1, Nairobi.

15
16
 ( ) mean that in these zones the crop is normally not competitive to related crops (f.i. dwarf millets to
maize)
Livestock is possible in all zones. Decreasing stocking rates from 1 to 7 (from 0.4 ha up to more than
25 ha per livestock unit of 300 kg)
The colours assigned to the main zones become lighter at cooler higher zones altitudes (Table I). Addi-
tionally they become more red in the drier climates. Rain starts earlier at higher altitudes. This is due to
the fact that with the same amount of water, the production of biomass is still less in cooler altitudinal
climates. Also, the chances to ripe a crop before the end of the rainy seasons become smaller in these
higher belts because of the increasing length of growing periods. Therefore, the Ranching Zone which
covers Zone 6 in the Lowlands occurs already in Zone 5 in the Lower Highlands and even in Zone 4 in
the Upper Highlands.

3. For the necessary information to farmers, these main zones are divided into subzones according to the
yearly distribution and the length of the growing periods on a 60% probability factor i.e. the given
length of the growing period should be reached or surpassed in at least 6 out of 10 years (Table II).
“Growing periods” are defined as seasons with enough moisture in the soil to grow most crops, starting
with a supply for plants to transpirate more than 0.5 ETo, coming up to > ETo (in the ideal case) during
the time of peak demand, and then falling down in the maturity phase again (calculated by the computer
programme WATBAL)3. The length is normally given in decades (i.e. a ten day period) for medium
soils. Figures are also available for heavy and light soils4, and they are also considered in the computer
programmes MARCROP5 and WOFOST6 for the yield potential.
These programmes compare the water requirements curves of almost all the main crops (as provided
by the FAO 19777 and 19798), re-calculated by H. KUTSCH for Kenyan varieties and adapted to the
different agro-climates, with the rainfall occurrences in Kenya from 1930 to 19909, in decades (10 day
periods), and their effects on the water supply to the root zone for 3 soil groups and 3 plant population
densities. On this basis, an ecological land use potential has been drawn up for each subzone, showing
climatic yield expectations and chances.
The length of the growing period is the key to selecting the right varieties of annual crops within an agro-
ecological zone. The symbols used for the length of the growing periods are straightforward:

vl = very long
l = long
m = medium
s = short
vs = very short

3
WATBAL.MODULE 1. It was developed by H. Kutsch and H.J. Schuh (1983): Simplified computer-based modelling of water balance in
defined crop stands.- In: L. Reiner & H. Geidel (eds.) (1983): Informationsverarbeitung Agrarwissenschaft. Miinchen.
4
Heavy soil means heavy loam; clay may have less available water for plants. Light soil means loamy sand.
5
=WATBAL.MODULE 2 & 3. Callibrated for Kenya by B. Hornetz (see Hornetz and Shisanya in General Part), based on the mathematical ap
proach of Kutsch and Schuh , described in the first edition of the Farm Management Handbook of Kenya (1982), Vol. II, Part A, p. 17-28.
6
See R. Rotter (1993): Simulation of the biophysical limitations to maize production under rainfed conditions in Kenya: Evaluation and applica-
tion of the model WOFOST.- (= Materialien zur Ostafrika-Forschung, 12), Geographische Gesellschaft Universitat Trier.
7
FAO (1977): Crop Water Requirements.- (= Irrigation and Drainage Paper, 24), Rome.
8
FAO (1979): Yield Response to Water.- (= Irrigation and Drainage Paper, 33), Rome.
9
If there were enough completely recorded years, the standard period 1961-90 was used. Recent data were not available in reasonable quantities or
too expensive. Only for important stations they were used.

17
 These are further differentiated to give further information for choosing the variety with the most adequate
growing period by the use of combined terms like “short to medium”, “medium to long”, etc. (Table II).
If it is not desirable to subdivide the growing period in this way, the letter “f ” for “fully” occurs before the
symbol for the period.
The growing period formula is put in brackets if there is a weak performance i.e. although the moisture
content is sufficient for growth, the peak demand which is ETo is not satisfied in the right time.
Where there are two rainy seasons per annum (bimodal rainfall areas), this is shown by a plus sign (+) be-
tween the two growing periods to show the yearly pattern.
If there is no distinct arid period of at least three decades (30 days) between humid growing periods, the sign
“A” is introduced i.e. both periods are bridged together. Expressed in words, it means “... followed by”.
TABLE II: SUBZONES ACCORDING TO GROWING PERIODS FOR ANNUAL CROPS

Length of growing periods1 Samples of combination during

Formula Cropping seasons
exceeded in 6 out of 10 yrs. the year in Kenya

p normally permanent more than 364 days

vl very long 285 – 364 days
vl/l very long to long 235 – 284 „
l/vl long to very long 215 – 234 „
l long 195 – 214 „
l/m long to medium 175 – 194 „
m/l medium to long 155 – 174 „
m medium 135 – 154 „
m/s medium to short 115 – 134 „
s/m short to medium 105 – 114 „
s short 85 – 104 „
s/vs short to very short 75 – 84 „
vs/s very short to short 55 – 74 „
vs very short 40 – 54 „
vu very uncertain min. gr. p. < 6 out of 10 y.

Additional information:
ur = unimodal rainfall,
br = bimodal rainfall,
tr = trimodal r.
i = intermediate rains (at least 5 decades more than 0.25 ET0)4
( ) = weak performance of growing period (in most decades less rain than ET0)
+ = distinct arid period between growing periods
A = no distinct arid period between growing periods (“followed by”)
f = full, i.e. no subdivision of growing periods, for inst. fm means 115 - 174 days

1
Growing period = enough moisture for cereals and legumes from seed to physical maturity. Figures show the time in which rain and stored soil
moisture allow evapotranspiration of more than 0.5 ET0 (in medium soils of at least 60 cm depth), enough for most crops to start growing.
During main growing time they need more of course (about full potential evapotranspiration ET0).
2
Lowlands and Lower Midlands, in UM, LH and UH 65 - 74 days
3
Lowlands, in LM 45 - 54 days, in UM 50 - 64 days, in LH and UH 55 - 64 days
4
That means moisture conditions are above wilting point for most crops

18
4. The climatic agro-ecological zones are printed on soil maps, derived from the Kenya Soil Survey Maps
of the Districts in the Fertilizer Use Recomm. Project of the GTZ, to show the mosaic of agro-ecological
units within the zones. In final maps the soil units were roughly shaded where experiments have shown
which inputs are needed for higher fertility (see maps of Fertiliser Recommendations and Farm Survey
Areas).

The soil should be considered as closely as possible. The Fertiliser Use Manual of KARI10 makes the re-
sults of the FURP applicable for farmers. For many areas special reports from the Kenya Soil Survey also
exist. The average yield expectations given for the Agro-ecological Zones of a district only show what is
climatically possible (on prevailing soils) when other conditions are optimized.

5. Therefore, many other factors apart from soil and climate have to be considered such as technologically
standard, possibilities of additional irrigation11 and so on. From the given agro-ecologically land use
potential for each AEZ it has to be chosen carefully what is economically and sociologically reasonable
for the time being12.The agro-ecological zones are illustrated by rainfall and water requirement diagrams.
The curves in the diagrams are calculated or if proper data are not available they are estimated for
optimum water requirements of crops from seeding to physical maturity. Harvest is later according to
ripening stage, but then the plants need little or even no water.

10
A.W. Muriuki and J.N Qureshi: Fertiliser Use Manual. A comprehensive guide on fertiliser use in Kenya. Kari Nairobi 2001.
11
Artificial irrigation possibilities are normally not yet considered in the land use potentials of Agro-ecological Zones, because they go beyond the
climatic natural potential. Nevertheless, we are able to calculate if requested decadically water requirements of irrigated crops for defined sites.
12
R. Jaetzold: The Agro-Ecological Zones of Kenya and their Agro-Economical Dynamics. (= Materialien zur Ostafrika-Forschung, 6), Geogra-
phische Gesellschaft Universitat Trier 1987.

19
 1.1.2 MAJOR SOILS IN WESTERN PROVINCE
According to the international FAO classification
Acrisols
Acrisols are acid soils with a low base status, which are strongly leached but less weathered than Ferralsols.
They are developing mainly on basement rocks like granites, but also on colluvium from quarzites. The base
saturation (BSP) of the B horizon is less than 50 %; thus indicating low fertility.
The most common type is called orthic, but they also appear as humic (with an umbric A horizon, rich
in humic substances), plinthic (containing plinthites) or ferralo-chromic (with ferralitic properties due to
stronger weathering or high chroma).

Arenosols
Arenosols are coarse, weakly developed mostly sandy soils with an identifiable B horizon and a clay content
of less than 18 %. They are developing on colluvial substrates from basement rocks. In Western Kenya
Arenosols appear as ferralic types with high sesquioxide contents.

Cambisols
Cambisols are brown (forest) soils with cambic B horizons as major feature; layers are differentiated and
changing characteristically due to their (relatively) young age. In Western Kenya they are developing
mainly on basement rocks, but also on other various parent materials like igneous and metamorphic rocks.
Cambisols are less weathered than most of the other soils of the humid tropics and contain quite high
amounts of illites and montmorillonites (as clay minerals), minerals (like phosphate, potassium etc.) as well
as juvenile materials.
Usually they appear as ferralic and chromic types, indicating that strong weathering is going on.

Ferralsols
Ferralsols are strongly weathered soils of the humid tropics with oxic horizons. Soil fertility is low to very
low due to low mineral contents, kaolinites (as clay minerals) and a low Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC)
of less than 16 me/100 g of clay. They are developing mainly on basement rocks like granites, gneisses and
quarzites, but also on igneous rocks (like trachytes, syenites, phonolites etc.).
The most common types in Western Kenya are the orthic and rhodic ones (with red to dusky red oxic B
horizons).

Fluvisols
Fluvisols are recent alluvial soils of the floodplains with depositional rather than pedogenetic profiles and
mostly a high fertility due to high amounts of organic/humic and mineral substances as well as loamy and
sandy fractions.

The common eutric type possesses a high base content with a BSP of more than 50 %.

Gleysols
Gleysols are soils of the bottomlands and swamps with hydromorphic properties dominating within the upper
50 cm. They develop on igneous as well as basement rocks, but also on alluvial and colluvial deposits.
Most common is the dystric type with a low base status and a BSP less than 50 %. Mollic Gleysols contain
mollic A horizons, the vertic type has vertic properties.
Histosols
Histosols are organic soils of the bottomlands and swamps (like peats), imperfectly drained and mostly with
a low fertility due to low base saturation of less than 50 %.

20
Lithosols
Lithosols are shallow soils of less than 10 cm depth developed on hard rocks of different origin. Very often
they also appear as a result of strong soil erosion.

Luvisols
Luvisols are strongly leached soils (lessivés), having argillic B horizons with a relatively high base status and
BSP of more than 50 %. In Western Kenya they normally develop on basement rocks like granites, but also
on igneous rocks and colluvium. Most common is the orthic type.

Nitosols
Nitosols develop on tertiary and even older basic igneous rocks (like basalts, tuffs etc.) and contain emerging
argillic horizons with prominent shiny clay skins. They are soils with normally high fertility due to high
contents of montmorillonites (as dominating clay minerals), minerals and available soil water as well as a
high Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC).
The dystric type has a moderate fertility with a relatively low base status and a BSP of less than 50 %; the
mollic type is more fertile and has a mollic A horizon.

Planosols
Planosols are soils with an albic E horizon, hydromorphic properties and a slowly permeable B horizon,
developing on different parent materials of the bottomlands.
They appear as dystric (with a low base status and BSP of less than 50 %) and eutric types (high base status
and BSP more than 50 %).

Regosols
Regosols are weakly developed soils from unconsolidated materials like igneous and basement rocks, often
combined with Lithosols. Dystric types with a low base status and BSP less than 50 % are as common as
eutric ones with a high base saturation of more than 50 %.

Solonchaks
Solonchaks are saline soils located on beach ridges along Lake Victoria. They are infertile due to an imperfectly
drainage, salinity and sodicity.

Vertisols
Vertisols (“Black Cotton Soils”) are dark montmorillonite-rich, poorly drained cracking clays of the
bottomlands with peloturbation processes. The clay content is higher than 30 %. They develop on alluvial
and colluvial materials (so called “secondary Vertisols”) as well as on basic rocks (like basalts; so called
“primary Vertisols”). Usually they contain high amounts of CaCO3 and other minerals with a high CEC due
to the montmorillonitic clay minerals.
The predominant pellic type is characterized by a low chroma of less than 1.5.

Reference:
Landon, J.R. (Ed., 1991): Booker Tropical Soil Manual.-Longman Group, London, New York

21
22
TABLE III: A BROAD ESTIMATE OF THE DOMINANT CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MAJOR SOIL CLASSIFICATION UNITS IN KENYA

Major soil Texture Texture Org.matter Water

class,unit subsoil topsoil Depth Content of pH (water) Drainage Workability Fertility holding Remarks
topsoil capacity
Ferralsols Clay clay variable variable variable good moderate to good low moderate
Luvisols Clay variable variable variable above 5.5 moderate moderate to good low to moderate moderate
Acrisols Clay variable variable variable below 5.5 moderate moderate to good low moderate
to good
Arenosols Sand sand variable low variable good good low to very low low to very
low
Nitosols Clay clay deep moderate to variable good good moderate to high moderate to Kikuyu Red
high high loam
Phaeozems Clay variable variable high above 5.5 good good high high Prairie soils
Andosols Clay clay deep moderate to variable good good high high Volcanic Ash
high soils
Rendzinas Clay clay variable high above 5.5 good good high high

Cambisols Variable variable variable variable variable moderate moderate to good moderate to high variable young soils
to good
Fluvisols Variable variable variable variable variable variable variable moderate to high variable Alluvial soil
low to Black Cotton
Vertisols Clay clay variable moderate variable poor poor moderate to high high soils cracking
clay
Planosols Clay variable variable low to variable poor moderate to poor low to moderate moderate to Vlei soils
moderate low
non saline or
Xerosols Clay variable variable variable above 5.5 variable variable variable variable sodic soils of dry
region.
Solonchaks Clay variable variable variable above 7 variable variable variable variable saline soils
Solonetz Clay variable variable variable above 7 poor poor low variable sodic
(alkali)soils
Regosols Clay variable variable moderate to variable variable variable variable variable
high
Rankers Clay variable variable variable below 5.5 variable variable variable variable
Lithosols Rock variable very variable variable variable variable variable very low very shallow
shallow soils
Gleysols Clay clay variable moderate to variable poor poor variable moderate to poorly drained
high high soils
Greyzems Clay variable variable moderate to variable moderate moderate moderate to high
high to poor moderate
H.M.H. Braun
variable = more than 3 classes
TABLE IV: SOIL REQUIREMENTS LIST FOR CROPS IN WESTERN PROVINCE

Crops Preferred texture pH Drainage Remarks

GRAIN CROPS
Not on very acid soils,
Maize Free draining not on water logged soils
light to medium 5.5-8.0
(Zea mays) soils at least moderately fertile
soils.
In waterlogged conditions
Moderately well
Wheat light to medium 6.5-8.0 to well drained very poor yields,
(Triticum aestivum) moderately to highly
soils
fertile soils.
Durum wheat Well drained Moderately drought
(Triticum durum) light to medium 6.5-8.0 soils. tolerant.
Tolerates salinity,
Triticale
medium to heavy 6.5-8.0 Well drained soils moderately drought
(Triticum x secale) tolerant
Intolerant in
Barley medium 6.5-8.0 Well drained soils waterlogging, tolerates
(Hordeum vulgare) salinity (-1%),
moderately fertile soils

Oats medium 6.5-8.0 Moderately Also on poor soils

(Avena sativa) drained soils

Foxtail millet Quickly growing but not

(Setaria italica) medium 5.0-8.0 Well drained soils very drought tolerant

Proso millet medium 5.0-8.0 Well drained soils Some varieties drought
(Panicum miliaceum) tolerant

Bulrush millet light to medium 5.0-8.0 Well drained soils Drought tolerant and
(Pennisetum typhoides) tolerates salinity

Finger millet medium 6.5-8.0 Moderately Turcana varieties drought

(Eleusine coracana) drained soils tolerant

Sorghum Moderately well Low to moderately fertile

medium to heavy 4.5-8.5 to well drained
(Sorghum vulgare) soils soils

LEGUMINOUS
CROPS

Tepary beans
(Phasolous acutifolius) medium 6.0-7.5 Well drained soils Drought tolerant

Cow peas light 5.0-7.5

Free drainage
Drought tolerant
(Vigna unguiculata) soils

Moth beans
medium to light 6.0-7.5 Well drained soils Drought tolerant
(Vigna aconitifolia)

Green grams medium 6.0-7.5 Well drained soils Drought tolerant

(Vigna aureus)
Black grams medium 6.0-7.5 Well drained soils Drought tolerant
(Vigna mungo)

23
 TABLE IV: Continued

Crops Preferred texture pH Drainage Remarks

Chick peas = Yellow heavy (“Black 5.0-7.5 Moderately to Fairly drought tolerant
grams (Cicer arietinum) Cotton soils “) well drained soils

Not drought tolerant,

Beans Free draining need moist soil
medium 6.0-7.5
(Phaseolus vulgaris) soils throughout the growing
period.

Bonavist beans=Njahi Very drought tolerant

medium 6.0-7.5 Well drained soils
(Dolichos lablab)

Trop.lima beans Grows well also on

(Phaseolus lunatus) various 6.0-7.0 Well drained soils infertile soils

Horse beans medium 5.5-7.5 Moderately to Drought tolerant

(Vicia equine) well drained soils

Horse grams Moderately to

medium 5.5-7.5 Drought tolerant
('ROLFKRVXQLÀRUXV) well drained soils

Well drained Until harvesting the

soil must be moist, but
Groundnuts light 6.2-7.5 to somewhat sensitive to impeded
(Arachis hypogea) excessively drainage; moderately
drained soils
fertile soils.

Soil aeration must be

adequate, not on heavy
Bambarra nuts light 6.2-7.5 Well drained soils soils with pans; thrive
(Voandzeia subterranea)
better than groundnuts on
poor soils.

5.5-7.5
Garden peas Some Fertilizer good for
(Pisum sativum) medium (see Well drained soils start
beans)
Pigeon peas 5.0-7.5
(Cajanus cajan) light No info. Free drainage Fairly drought tolerant

5.5-7.5 Moderately well

Soya beans medium (opt.6.0- to well drained Moderately fertile soils
(Glycine max.) 6.5) soils

OIL SEED CROPS

6XQÀRZHU medium (heavy) 6.0-8.0 Moderately Very drought tolerant

(Helianthus annuus) drained soils

Linseed Moderately
(Linum usitatissium) medium 5.5-7.5 drained soils Drought tolerant

Rai Moderately
medium to heavy 6.0-8.0 Drought tolerant
(Brassica juncea) drained soils
Rapeseed Moderately
(Brassica napus) medium 5.5-7.0 drained soils Not drought tolerant

24
TABLE IV: Continued

Crops Preferred texture pH Drainage Remarks

Simsim (Sesamum light to medium 6.0-7.5 Free draining Moderately drought
indicum) soils tolerant

Tolerates salinity,
6DIÀRUCarthamus medium 6.0-8.0 Moderately moderately drought
tinctorius) drained soils
tolerant

Moderately drought
Castor Free draining
medium 6.0-7.5 tolerant, not on saline
(Ricinus communis) soils
soils.

TUBER CROPS

Sweet potatoes various (well Various but Drought tolerant, need

various planted on ridges
(Ipomea batatas) drained areas)) moderately fertile soils
in swamps

Irish Solanum Free draining Not so drought tolerant,

light to medium 4.5-8.0 need good supply of
(Dolanum tuberosum) soils nutrients

Very drought tolerant,

not on very stony or
Cassava light to medium various Free drainage shallow soils, sensitive to
(Manihot esculenta) soils impeded drainage, thrives
also on less fertile soils

Taro-Cocoyam Tolerates Grows especially well on

light to medium 4.5-8.0 riverbanks, demands a
(Colocasia antiquorum) waterlogging fertile soil
Moderately to
White Guinea yam medium 4.5-7.0 weakly drained Moderately fertile soils.
(Dioscorea rotundata) soils
Greater yam “ “ “ “
(D.alata)

Yellow Guinea yam “ “ “ “

(D.cayenensis)

FIBRE CROPS

Well drained Tolerates salinity (0,5-

Cotton =0,6%); moderately to
(Gossypium hirsutum) medium to heavy 6.0-8.0 soils, sensitive to high fertile soils; should
impeded drainage
contain bor

25
 TABLE IV: Continued

Crops Preferred texture pH Drainage Remarks

Flax Moderately
(Linum usitatissimum) medium 5.5-7.5 drained soils

1HZ=HDODQGÀD[ Moderately
medium 5.5-7.5
(Phormium tenax) drained soils

On heavy soils it is
Well to
necessary to form
Sisal (Agave sisalana) medium 5.5-7.5 moderately cambered beds or to dig
drained soils
ditches for drainage.

OTHER CASH CROPS AND FRUITS

Avocadoes
medium 6.0-7.5 Well drained soils Not on saline soils
(Persea americana)

Best places are fertile

Well to volcanic or alluvialsoils.
Bananas 7ROHUDWHVKRUWÀRRGV
light to medium 5.0-7.0 moderately well
(Musa paradisiaca) drained soils. soil aeration must be
adequate, moderately to
highly fertile soils.

Soil aeration must be

adequate, sensitive
Citrus light to medium 5.0-7.0 Well drained soils to impeded drainage,
(Citrus spp.)
moderately to highly
fertile soils.

Soils must allow

reasonable water
retention; very sensitive
Coffee/Arabica medium 5.3-6.0 Free drainage to CaCO3 (more than
(Coffea arabica) soils RIWKH¿QHHDUWK
DQG!RIWKH¿QH
earth)moderately to
highly fertile soils

Grows well in a wide

range of various soils if
Coffee/Robusta
they are well drained;
(Coffea canephora var. medium 5.0-6.0 Well drained soils
robusta ) sensitive to CaCO3 and
CaSO4 like Arabica
coffee.

Deciduous fruit trees If the soil is deep they

(apples, peaches, pears) medium 4.5-7.0 Well drained soils tolerate also lighter or
heavier soils.

Macadamia nuts Free drainage

(Macadamia spp.) medium 5.0-6.0 soils

Pyrethrum
(Chrysanthemum medium 5.6-7.5 Well drained soils
cinerariaefolium)

26
TABLE IV: Continued

Crops Preferred texture pH Drainage Remarks

Sensitive to water
logging;groundwater
should be below1m
Moderately well
Sugarcane depth. On heavy soils
light to medium 5.0-7.0 to well drained
(Saccharum spp.) soils cambered beds, ditches or
furrows must be formed
for drainage. Moderately
fertile soils

Soil with good water

retaining capacity is
4.0-6.0 Free draining essential, very sensitive
Tea (Camellia sinensis) medium
(4.5-5.5) soils to CaCO3 (0%) and
CaS04 (0%),grows also
on less fertile soils

Not on heavy or/and

saline soils, very sensitive
Tobacco (Nicotiana medium
(5.0)5.5-
Well drained soils to CaCO3 (>1% of the
tabacum) 6.5 ¿QHHDUWKDQG&D624
!RIWKH¿QHHDUWK

Tung Oil
(Aleurites fordii) medium 4.5-6.5 Well drained soils

27
 1.2 PRESERVINGTHENATURALPOTENTIALFORTHEFUTUREOFWESTERN
PROVINCE

1.2.1 BEWAREOFDEGRADINGTHEAREASOFNATURALVEGETATIONINTHEAGRO - ECO-

LOGICALZONESTOMAINTAINWATER,FIREWOODANDEVENMEDICINALRESOURC-
ES AS WELL AS THE GRAZING POTENTIAL!

The Agro-Ecological Zones 0-3 are originally zones of forest according to the natural vegetation. AEZ 0
corresponds to ever wet evergreen rainforest, AEZ 1 to evergreen rainforest, 2 to seasonal rainforest because of
one or two dry months. AEZ 3 has three to five dry months, it corresponds to seasonal semi-deciduous moist
forest or a high grass - broad leaved trees savannah which might be caused edaphically on waterlogging soils
(mbugas) or very poor leached senile soils, both unsuitable for most trees; on other soils it might be a sec-
ondary vegetation caused by fire. The grass - tall as a man - is supressing young trees, and if it is set ablaze,
it produces a lot of heat that kills most of the trees.

AEZ 4 corresponds to woodland, it is either deciduous in subzones with unimodal rainfall as in West Kenya
and in Tanzania, or hard-leaved evergreen in bimodal rainfall subzones with two dry seasons as in East Kenya,
where plants by hard or hairy leaves try to avoid loosing them two times a year. The grass grows to about
1 m tall. Forests (and woodlands) are necessary also for the agriculture outside, because they minimize quick
surface-runoff and store water in their deep, unhardened soils to supply it to wells, creeks and streams dur-
ing the dry seasons. Therefore Mt. Elgon Forest must be conserved. Forest protection is necessary for other
reasons too: Firewood collection (not cutting!), timber, medical plants and genetic resources. Therefore
Kakamega Forest has to be conserved too apart from the biological reasons. A network of forest reserves is
necessary to conserve biodiversity.

A network of protected areas is also a must for the drier Agro-Ecological Zones 4-6.The corresponding
natural vegetation in AEZ 5 is a short grass savannah with small leaved thorny trees and bushes. There is more
grass on fine coarsed soil of volcanic ashes as found on the Laikipia Plateau, and more bush on red loams
or stony soils. Zone 6 is bushland with very short but still perennial grass, therefore it is suitable for ranching
- if the grass (the standing hay for the dry season) is not eradicated by overgrazing. In Zone 7 only annual
grasses and herbs grow, it can only be used nomadically with a base in Zone 6.

Good management of the remaining natural vegetation by farmers especially herders is important: In AEZ 3
it is necessary to avoid burning which kills the regrowth of trees and ecologically valuable bushes. But the
main danger here is overgrazing which puts the balance between grass and bushes to the bush side. Bush en-
croachment can finally finish the grazing potential. This is the same danger in AEZ 4 and 5 but with shrubby
species (shrub encroachment, thorny in AEZ 5). In the first stage, poisonous or bitter herbs not eaten by
livestock thrive abundantly, leading to some sort of ‘’green degradation’’.
In AEZ 6 the eradication of grass by overgrazing promotes at first dwarf shrubs (dwarf shrub encroachment),
then in the better subzones thorny low shrubs grow up. The grazing potential has severely decreased, only
goats as browsers remain. In a final stage, due to overuse and soil denudation, the shrubs disappear and
desertification becomes evident. Reseeding fenced plots before it is so bad is now practised. Originally semi-
desert indicates Zone 7, full desert Zone 8.

Zones 5-8 are not existing in Western Province, therefore their problems do not need further discussion here.
But in Zone 3 and 4 where grazing is still common, another problem is aggravating the soil degradation. The
animals return the nutrients through their dung, which can be used to fertilise the fields once more.

28
1.2.2 MAINTENANCE,REPLENISHMENTANDIMPROVEMENTOFSOILFERTILITYIN
WESTERN PROVINCE

Soil fertility depletion has been described as the major biophysical root cause of the declining per-capita
food availability in smallholder farms in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), with a decline from 150 to 130 kg per
person over the past 35 years in production1. In the densely populated Western Province it went down to 60
kg for cereals! Emerging evidence attributes this to insufficient nutrient inputs relative to exports, primarily
through harvested products, leaching, gaseous losses and soil erosion. This results in yields that are about
2-5 times lower than potential. Adequate and better solutions to combat nutrients depletion where known,
are often limited in application because of the dynamics and heterogeneity of the African agro-ecosystems
in terms of biophysical and socio-economic gradients. This calls for system-specific or flexible recommenda-
tions, rather than monolithic technical solutions such as blanket fertilisation recommendation.

Despite diversity of approaches and solutions and the investment of time and resources by a wide range
of institutions, soil fertility degradation continues to prove to be a substantially intransigent problem, and
as the single most important constraint to food security in the continent2. For example, soil loss through
erosion is estimated to be 10 times greater than the rate of natural formation. Return to investment in
soil fertility has not been commensurate to research outputs3. Farmers are only likely to adopt sound soil
management if they are assured of return on their investment. Integrated soil fertility management (ISFM)
is now regarded as a strategy that helps low resource endowed farmers, mitigate many problems and the
characteristics of poverty and food insecurity by improving the quantity and quality of food, income and
resilience of soil productive capacity.

Essentially, ISFM is the adoption of a systematic conscious participatory and broad knowledge intensive
holistic approach to research on soil fertility and that embraces the full range of driving factors and conse-
quences such as biological, physical, chemical, social, economic and political aspects of soil fertility degra-
dation. The approach advocates for careful management of soil fertility aspects that optimise production
potential through incorporation of a wide range of adoptable soil management principles, practices and
options for productive and sustainable agroecosystems. It entails the development of soil nutrient manage-
ment technologies for adequate supply and feasible share of organic and inorganic inputs that meet the
farmers’ production goals and circumstances. The approach includes other important aspects of the soil
complex; soil life, structure and organic matter content. The approach integrates the roles of soil and water
conservation; land preparation and tillage; organic and inorganic nutrient sources; nutrient adding and
saving practices; pests and diseases; livestock; rotation and intercropping; multipurpose role legumes and
integrating the different research methods and knowledge systems. The approach also includes a social and
economic dimension.

The increasing adoption of ISFM as a long-term perspective and holistic approach derives its success on the
emergence of a consensus on its guiding principles. This paradigm is closely related to the wider concepts
of Integrated Natural Resources Management (INRM), thereby representing a significant step beyond the
earlier, narrower concept and approach of nutrient replenishment/recapitalization for soil fertility enhance-
ment. ISFM thereafter embraces the full range of multiple options (MPOs) and driving factors and con-
sequences (namely: biological, physical, chemical, social, economic and political), of soil degradation in
different farming systems and land types. The ISFM MPOs may include:
a) Integrated Nutrient Management (INM), which is the technical backbone of ISFM approach. It
entails integrated use of organics as well as in-organic sources of plant nutrients; as well as the en
tirety of possible combinations of nutrient-adding practices and nutrient saving techniques. The
latter INM is perceived as the judicious manipulation of nutrient inputs, outputs and internal
flows to achieve productive and sustainable agricultural systems4.
b) Integrating the beneficial and deleterious effects of the relationship between abiotic factors (includ
ing tillage, soil and water management) and biotic stresses (including integrated pest and disease
management; integrated crop management).

29
 c) Integration of crop and livestock production.
d) Integration and greater productive use of local and indigenous knowledge, innovations,practices
and resources and science knowledge based-management system.
e) Integration of policy and institutional framework, as well as on-site and off-site (landscape)
effects.

Fertiliser is a term used to refer to any inorganic or organic material, natural or synthetic in origin that is
added to soil or other growing media to supply plant nutrients. Inorganic or mineral fertilisers originate
from ores, air, sediments or ashes. Organic fertilisers originate from organic materials such as animal or hu-
man waste and compost. Fertilisers may be in solid, liquid or gaseous forms. The mineral nutrient content
and solubility of a fertiliser in water determines its efficiency. Plant fertiliser use efficiency is influenced by
climate (e.g. temperature and rainfall) and soil factors such as soil pH, mineral content and humus5. Gener-
ally, the nutrient content of organic fertilisers is usually lower than that of inorganic fertilisers but it is more
stable and not so much endangered by outwash or insoluble fixation (phosphorus to iron).

Most inorganic fertilisers are mined from ores or sedimentary deposits, except for those that contain nitro-
gen (N) which is synthesized with high energy input from the air. Because of the high element concentration
and high solubility of the inorganic fertilisers, their beneficial effects on plant growth are quick and easy to
recognise. There are two types of mineral fertilisers on the Kenyan market: straight and compound. Straight
fertilisers contain one nutrient while compound fertilisers contain two or more nutrients. Every inorganic
fertiliser has a particular grade. The fertiliser grade refers to the percent nutrient content of nitrogen, phos-
phorus and potassium. Nitrogen is expressed in % N, phosphorus as % phosphate (P2O5) and potassium as
% potassium oxide (K2O). It is mandatory that this N-P-K (i.e. N-P2O5-K2O) information be displayed on
the outside of each fertiliser bag. For example, the fertiliser 17:17:17 contains 17% nitrogen, 17% P2O5 and
17% K2O in every 100 kilograms of fertiliser. The remaining 49 kilograms in the fertiliser is filler material.
Important inorganic fertilisers found in the Kenyan market include: Ammonium sulphate (SA), Calcium
ammonium nitrate (CAN), Urea, Single Super Phosphate (SSP), Triple Super Phosphate (TSP), Phosphate
rock, Muriate of Potash (MOP), Sulphate of Potash, Lime (calcium carbonate).

Some common organic fertilisers used in replenishing soil fertility in Kenya include bone meal, crop resi-
dues (e.g. maize stover, bean trash, napier grass trash, tree/hedge cuttings) animal manure (e.g. cattle, sheep,
goat, pig, poultry) and compost6. The nutrient contents in manure vary enormously depending on the
source, method of processing, application and storage. Herbaceous legumes too are commonly used as green
manure in Kenya. Usually, the legume is grown in pure stand and cut just before full bloom (or flowering
stage), while the N content is at or near the maximum. After wilting the leaves, the green manure is incorpo-
rated with the soil to facilitate decomposition. Grain legumes can also contribute to a soil’s nitrogen budget
when included as part of the rotation because of the nitrogen left behind in the roots and residue remaining
after removal of the seed. In addition to herbaceous legumes, several tree species also fix nitrogen thereby
substantially increasing the nitrogen capital of the soils. The most notable ones used for agroforestry are fast
growing and belong to the following genera: Leucaena, Calliandra, Erythrina, Gliricidia and Sesbania. Slow
growing nitrogen fixing fixing trees include: Albizia, Inga, Acacia and Faidherbia albida. Some soils need
inoculation with the nitrogen fixing bacteria which make nodules on the roots of the Leguminosae family.
Another green manure shrub worth mentioning is Tithonia diversifolia. Although not a legume itself, Titho-
nia is considered an excellent green manure because of its ability to accumulate plant nutrients quickly, its
rapid decomposition.

Improved fallow systems offer a quick way to regenerate soil fertility because they require shorter fallow pe-
riods than natural fallow and the only investment required is seed. The plant species of choice should be fast
growing high nitrogen fixers. Where soil fertility has declined tremendously, the performance of improved
fallow can be increased by supplying the other limiting nutrients (other than nitrogen e.g. potassium and
phosphorus) to the improved fallow. In Western Kenya, it has been proved scientifically that fields sown to
maize and beans in which the improved fallow was Crotolaria gramiana or Tephrosia vogelii was used had

30
higher economic return than where natural fallow was used or the continuous cropped fields6. The improved
fallow was most beneficial when phosphorus (a limiting nutrient in the region) was applied at the time of
planting the fallow. Extending improved fallow systems for soil fertility improvement should be reasonably
easy in Kenya given that many smallholder farmers know the value of leaving land to fallow naturally. But
with small and diminishing acreage per farm in Western Province, for example, there is almost no land left
to regenerate in a fallow period.

Conventional wisdom maintains that food security in Africa and Kenya in particular will be achieved by
presenting smallholder farmers with a “basket” of crop and land management options from which they may
choose the practices that best suit their site-specific needs and socio-economic conditions7. Several different,
and often competing, soil fertility management “recommendations” for maize-legume intercrops are offered
to farmers in Kenya through a variety of outreach activities.

These options include “Green Revolution” fertiliser technologies (FURP), soil nutrient replenishment
with rock phosphate (PREP), fortified composting (COMP), relay intercropping with Lablab purpureus
(LABLAB), staggered-row intercropping (MBILI) and short-term improved Crotolaria grahamiana fallows
(IMPFAL). These management options have been examined in western Kenya along with maize control re-
ceiving no external inputs over three growing seasons7. Data were collected on crop yield, input costs, labour
requirements and crop returns. Averaged over three seasons, production costs were (PREP = $119/ha1) >
(FURP = $101) > (MBILI = $98) > (COMP = $95) > (LABLAB = $74) > (IMPFAL = $67) > (No inputs
= $62). Average maize yield (LSD0.05 = 0.2) ranged between 1.5 tha1 (No inputs) and 2.8 tha1 (MBILI).
Average legume yields (LSD0.05 = 27) ranged between 203 kg ha1 (No input bean) to 500 kg ha1 (MBILI
bean). Overall benefit cost ratios (LSD0.05 = 0.17) were FURP (2.22) = No inputs (2.28) < COMP (2.48)
= LABLAB (2.52) < IMPFAL (3.03) < MBILI (3.44). Clearly all these “recommended” technologies offer
potential to many farmers in West Kenya, and Kenya at large, but the ability of farmers to provide the neces-
sary input costs and labour remains uncertain. Perhaps it is time we focussed attention upon how farmers’
“basket of options” is filled rather than how full it has become.

NOTES:
1
Nandwa, S.M. (2003): Perspectives on soil fertility in Africa. In: Gichuru ET AL. (Eds.). Soil fertility Management in Africa: A Regional Perspec-
tive. Academy Science Publishers (ASP) & Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility of CIAT (TSBF), Nairobi, pp. 1-50.
2
Sanchez, P.A. and Leaky, R.R.B. (1997): Landuse transformation in Africa: Three determinants for balancing food security with natural resource
utilization. European Journal of Agronomy, 7: 1-9.
3
African Highlands Initiative (AHI) (1997): Phase 1 Report. ICRAF, Nairobi.
4
Smaling, E.M.A., Fresco, L.O. and De Jager, A. (1996): Classifying, monitoring and improving soil nutrient stocks and flows in African Agricul-
ture. Ambio, 25: 492-496.
5
Humus can store the given nutrients 25 times better than a senile tropical soil, thus preventing the outwash by heavy rains.
6
Muriuki, A.W. and Qureshi, J.N. (2001): Fertiliser Use Manual: A comprehensive guide on fertiliser use in Kenya. Kenya Agricultural Research
Institute (KARI), Nairobi, p. 149.
7
Woomer, P.L. (2004): Cost and return on soil fertility management options in western Kenya. Abstracts of the International Symposium of the
African Network for Soil Biology and Fertility (AfNET) of TSBF institute of CIAT, Yaounde, Cameroon, May 17-21, 2004,
pp. 147-148.

31
 1.2.3 PHYSICAL SOIL CONSERVATION
By C. G. Wenner and S.N. Njoroge

Classification of land
The land of a farm can be classified as to slope and soil, with the different classifications needing different
considerations:
1) Flatland, sloping less than 2%, can usually be farmed without any special soil conservation mea-
sures except contour farming.
2) On gentle slopes between 2 and 12% terracing is not obligatory according to the present Agricul-
ture Act, but terracing is usually desirable on slopes exceeding 5%. In semi-arid areas and in areas with
erodible soils, even slopes less than 5% (2 – 5%) usually need to be terraced.
3) On slopes exceeding 12%, but not exceeding 55%, terraces (preferably developed bench terraces)
should be used if the depth of the soil is more than about 0.75m. For very steep slopes modified bench
terraces are recommended, i.e. narrow ledges cut into the slope, suitable for fruit trees, fodder trees, forest
trees and coffee.
4) Slopes exceeding approximately 55% should be covered with grass and/or forest. Under certain
conditions it might be permissible to cultivate tea, sugar cane or bananas with a layer of trash on the
ground.
5) Soils which are rocky, stony or shallow, should be used as pasture or for forest or they should have
stone terraces.

Soil conservation in general

The basic protection of soil against erosion is good farm management:
1) Ploughing and planting along the contour
2) Rotation of crop and grass
3) Manure favouring the growth of crops
4) Leaving crop residue on the ground
On slopes, good farm management by itself is not sufficient and it has to be combined with terraces.

Terraces
Terraces can be made by machinery or, usually, by hand.

Terraces made by machinery

Mechanised soil conservation can only be used on slopes which are not too steep (preferably 2 – 12%). Two
types of terraces are used:
1) The channel terrace
2) The ridge terrace
The V-shaped terrace, on one or both sides of a ridge, will usually be filled up by sediment and will thus
develop into a bench terrace. But this could as well have developed from a grass strip.

Terraces made by hand

Terraces can develop from:
1) unploughed strips
2) Grass planted in one or two rows
3) Trash lines laid along the terrace line
In the strips, water flows will be distributed between the grass stems and most of the water will be infiltrated
into the ground.
To hasten the formation of a bench terrace you can make a ridge by digging a channel (2 feet wide, 2 -3 feet
deep) and throwing the soil uphill, using the so-called “Fanya Juu” method.
Bench terraces are usually preferable to channel terraces, as the benches change the degree of slope. They also
retain eroded soil, moisture and nutrients.

32
Length of terraces
Terraces should not, if possible, be many hundreds of metres long. More than 400 m should be avoided.

Gradient of terraces
Terraces can be level or graded. Level terraces should be constructed on gentle slopes in permeable soils in
dry areas. For graded terraces the following gradients are recommended: in erosion resistant soils (clay) 1%,
normally 0.5% and in erodible soils (silty, sandy) 0.25%.

33
 Vertical interval between terraces
The vertical interval (V.I.) between terraces depends on the slope and has been calculated in three different
ways in Kenya:

A/ The ordinary formula-V.I. (in m) = ( (% of slope/4) + 2) ) x 0.3

B/ The bench formula-V.I. (in m) = ( (% of slope/ 8) + 4) ) x 0.3

C/A constant V.I. of 1.5-1.8 or 0.75-0.90m (5-6 or2.5-3 feet) .

The method selected depends on the slope:

5-12% A, B or C,
but the horizontal interval is preferably not greater than 24m (80 feet) on erodible soils.
12-35% B or C
35-55% C or modified bench terraces.
As shown above, a constant vertical interval (method C), corresponding to the eye height of a man can be
used on slopes between 5% and 55%. The vertical interval will vary with the eye height of the person setting
out of the terraces, i.e between 5 and 6 feet (1.5 and 1.8m). Such variation can be disregarded in setting out
terraces. If terraces are needed on slopes between 2% and 5%, see table. The vertical intervals will then be
less than the height of a person, because the horizontal interval should be a maximum of 24 m (80 feet):

Slope Vertical interval Horizontal interval

% in meters in feet in meters in feet

2 0.5 1.7 24 80

3 0.7 2.3 24 80

4 1.0 3.3 24 80

5 1.2 4.0 24 80

Horizontal interval between terraces

The horizontal interval (H.I.) between terrace edges (grass strips) is calculated as H.I. =(V.I. x 100)/% of
slope
If the V.I. is expressed in feet, the H.I. will be in feet.
If the V.I. is expressed in meters, the H.I. will be in meters.

CUTOFF DRAINS
In general
Large water flows coming from outside a farm have to be diverted from the farm by a cut off drain, e.g.
collecting water from a hillside, or preventing water from a plateau from flowing down a terraced slope, or
taking care of water from a roadside ditch .
Cutoff drains should be dug only when there is evidence of large water flows which cannot be stopped
through normal terracing. Below the banks of terraces channels can be excavated instead of making cutoff
drains.

In the survey of a cutoff drain, you should start with the outlet point. If you cannot discharge the water in a
safe way do not dig any cutoff drain. Before measuring and setting out the pegs, you should walk along the
proposed cutoff drain, checking that the drain is properly sited regarding houses, cultivation, rocky ground
etc.
Do not dig any cutt off drain if the farmers do not agree to do terracing below the drain and to maintain

34
the channel by removing the soil sedimentation. Special forms should be used.

Length of cutoff drains

As in terracing cutoff drains should usually not be larger than 400m. If it is difficult to find a natural wa-
terway within 400m, it might be better to make the cutoff drain essentially longer than 400 m instead of
digging an expansive artificial waterway.

35
 1.2.4 THEPOTENTIALOFAGROFORESTRYTOIMPROVEANDRESTORETHEFERTILITYOF
NUTRIENT-DEPLETED SOILS OF WESTERN PROVINCE

The fertility and productivity of the soils in the densely populated western Kenya is low and on the decline
in most of the Agroecological Zones. Deficiencies of N, P and Potassium are widespread. Because of this,
crop yields are low and on the decline. Maize yields (the staple food crop) are generally less than 1ha-1 in a
season1. With declining soil N, the build up of Striga hermonthica, a parasitic weed of many cereals including
maize, increases2. The net effect of all this has been the decline in production of crops and food shortages in
western Kenya which has the potential to produce enough for its increasing population.

Overcoming soil fertility depletion is fundamental to increasing maize yields in western Kenya. Over the
last fourteen years, the World Agroforestry Centre (WAC) and its national collaborators in western Kenya,
the Kenya Forestry Research Institute (KEFRI) and the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) have
been evaluating several technologies that could restore soil fertility and improve productivity. From the
various technologies evaluated thus far, improved fallows (synonymous with planted fallows) of fast grow-
ing leguminous trees and shrubs has emerged as a technology that can improve soil fertility and crop yields
remarkably. These have spawned enthusiasm among researchers, extension staff and farmers in the region.
Consequently, wide-scale testing, experimentation and adaptation of this technology by farmers is going
on3.

While improved fallows can improve crop yields in N-limited soils, its effects are little in P limited soils that
cover a large area of the region4. Unlike N, trees do not obtain P from the air. For P-limited soils, therefore,
input of P is necessary to integrate with improved fallows technology to improve crop yields. The options for
P sources are either inorganic P fertiliser or direct application of reactive phosphate rock (PR). This chapter
provides some highlights on the processes by which improved fallows may improve soils fertility in western
Kenya and highlights their effects on crop yields.

Natural fallows for one to two seasons generally do not improve soil fertility and crop yields significantly in
western Kenya although this effect is likely to be site and fallow specific. Natural fallows can, however, be
improved by introduction and planting of fast growing leguminous trees and shrubs. Improved fallows of
leguminous trees or shrubs accumulate N in their biomass through biological N2 fixation, capture of subsoil
nitrogen unutilised by crops, and interception of nitrogen leached beyond the crop rooting zone5. Legumi-
nous trees and shrubs such as Sesbania sesban have been reported to fix large quantities of nitrogen6. This N
can benefit crops through the recycling of tree leaf and root litter. Nutrients captured by trees from below
the rooting zone of annual crops can also become an input when transferred to surface soil in the form of leaf
litter, roots and prunings of tree leaves and branches7. Additionally, tree fallows can increase labile fractions
of soil organic matter, which supply nutrients to crops after fallows8.

Among the various processes by which trees may improve soil nutrients, deep uptake of N from the subsoil
has received considerable investigation. Nitrate-N accumulates in soils with acid subsoil rich in iron oxides
and low organic matter. These soils can have appreciable anion sorption capacity, which enables the reten-
tion of leached nitrate-nitrogen9. An accumulation of nitrate at a depth of 0.5 to 2 m has been observed
under unfertilised maize on acid soils in western Kenya10. The accumulation of subsoil nitrate in soils of
western Kenya is attributed to greater formation of nitrate by mineralization of soil organic matter (SOM)
than uptake of N by unfertilised maize11. The excess nitrate can then leach to the subsoil where it is sorbed
on positively charged soil surfaces10, which act as a “chemical safety net” retarding the downward movement
and leaching loss of nitrate. Unfertilised maize because of shallow rooting and poor growth is not able to
take up this subsoil nitrate.

It has been shown that S. sesban improved fallow grown in rotation with maize in western Kenya can rap-
idly root into this “chemical safety net” and take up the sorbed nitrate that was inaccessible to unfertilised
maize10,11. Nitrate at a depth of 4 m was 51 kg N ha-1 for a 15-month S. sesban fallow, as compared to 199

36
kg N ha-1 for unfertilised maize. The maximum rooting depth was 1.2 m for maize, whereas roots in the
15-month old S. sesban extended below 4 m. Sesbania sesban was also more effective than a natural grass
fallow in extracting subsoil water, suggesting less leaching loss of nutrients under S.sesban than uncultivated
fallows.

On acidic soils in western Kenya without chemical and physical barriers to rooting in the top 4 m, the exis-
tence of a direct relationship between the demand of trees for N and the magnitude of nitrate uptake from
the subsoil12. Fast-growing trees such as Sesbania sesban and Calliandra calothyrsus reduced soil nitrate in the
top 2 m by about 150 to 200 kg ha-1 by eleven months after establishment12.

The choice of species for planted fallows and systems depends on adaptation of the species to the biophysical
and socio-economic conditions of a given site. Several species with potential for planted fallows in western
Kenya have been identified and appropriate management practices for their integration into the farming
system developed13. Some of the promising species are: Crotolaria grahamiana, Tephrosia vogelii and Sesbania
sesban. Sesbania is native to the region and is particularly popular with farmers because of its soil fertility
improving properties and for firewood. The other two species are recent introductions. These species are
relay-sown in standing maize during the long rainy season (May), 4 to 5 weeks after sowing.

Relay cropping minimises negative effects of the trees on the crops and allows the trees to benefit from crop
husbandry practices such as fertiliser application and weeding. It also permits tree growth to be extended for
two seasons. When the crop is harvested at the end of the first season (July-August), the trees are left to grow
during the second season (six-months long) until they are cut in February or March and the cropping cycle
is repeated. The cycle is repeated as long as necessary to improve the fertility and productivity of the soil.
Once the trees are cut, wood is removed and the leaf and small twigs are left on the field and incorporated
into the soil during land preparation. Depending on how much weed control was achieved during the fallow
period, it is possible to plant the crop with no or minimum tillage when the fallows are cut.

Several studies in western Kenya suggest that improved fallows of one-to-three seasons can increase soil fer-
tility and improve yields. In one on-station study1 at an NPK-deficient site, a six-month fallow of Sesbania,
Tephrosia, Crotolaria, and Cajanus cajan increased maize yield by 35 to 128% compared with continuous
maize with no fertiliser application. This indeed, has exciting prospects for many farmers in the area with
fewer other options for improving crop yields. Maize yield was highest after fallows of Sesbania (3.5 t ha-1)
and Tephrosia (3.6 t ha-1) and similar for fallows of Crotolaria, Cajanus and natural fallow (2.7 t ha-1). Maize
yield was lowest for the continuous cropping systems (2.0 t ha-1), although it was higher than the typical
yield of 1.0 t ha-1 or less for such a system. The fallows showed considerable residual effects on the subse-
quent crops, which ranged from 36% for natural fallow to 44% with sesbania. This could have important
implications on the economic evaluation of the technology.

The potential of short-duration improved fallows has also been assessed on farm, under farmer’s own man-
agement conditions. In a study1 on N and P-deficient sites, six-month fallows of Crotolaria and Tephrosia in-
creased maize yields by 31 to 36% compared with continuous cropping without addition of N and P. Maize
yield from non P addition soil was similar for that from Crotolaria and Tephrosia fallows (2.5 vs 2.3 t ha-1)
but higher than the farmers’ no-input control (1.6 t ha-1). With the addition of P as a Triple superphosphate
(TSP) at the rate of 20 kg ha-1, maize yield of all systems increased considerably for Crotolaria (0.9 t ha-1) for
Tephrosia (1.2 t ha-1) and for the control (0.6 t ha-1) compared to non P addition. Although short duration
improved fallows are promising, the magnitude of their effect on crop yield depends to a large extend on
how much leaf biomass and the fallow species produce and the quantity of nutrients recycled with it. More
leaf biomass means more nutrients recycled and generally increased yields in nutrient limited soils.

In conclusion, improved fallows with leguminous species are a promising technology for improving maize
yields in nutrient-depleted soils of western Kenya. There are, however, three major concerns that need to
be noted. First, they cannot overcome the severe soil P deficiency that limits crop yields in the yields in the

37
 area for which the use of inorganic P is inevitable. Phosphorus can be supplied either through commercially
available P sources such as TSP or direct application of reactive phosphate rock such as Minjingu rock from
northern Tanzania. Once P deficiency is overcome, then the N required for moderate crop yields could be
met through the improved fallows of Sesbania, Crotolaria and Tephrosia. Besides N, improved fallows (espe-
cially with Sesbania) can also overcome K deficiency, especially if it becomes a limiting factor when N and
P deficiencies are ameliorated.

NOTES:
1
Swinkels, r.a., Franzel, s., Shepherd, k.d., Ohlsson, e. and Ndufa, j.k. (1997): The economics of short rotation improved fallows: evidence
from areas of high population density in western Kenya. Agricultural Systems 55: 99-121.
2
Oswald, a., Frost, h., Ransom, j., Kroschel, j.k., Shepherd, k.d. and Sauerborn, j. (1996): Studies on the potential for improved fallow using
trees and shrubs to reduce Striga infestations in Kenya. Proceedings of the 6th Parasitic Symposium. Cordoba.
3
Rao, m.r., Niang, a., Kwesiga, a., Duguma, b., Franzel, s., Jama, b. and Buresh, r.j. (1998): Soil fertility replenishment in sub-Saharan Africa:
new techniques and the spread of their use on farms. Agroforestry Today 10(2): 3-8.
4
Braun, a.r., Smaling, e.m.a., Muchugu, e.i., Shepherd, k.d. and Corbett, j.d. (eds.) (1997): Maintenance and improvement of soil produc-
tivity in the highlands of Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar and Uganda. An inventory of spatial and non-spatial survey and research data on natural
resources and land productivity. AHI Technical Report Series 6. ICRAF, Nairobi.
5
Buresh, r.j. and Tian, g. (1997): Soil improvement by trees in sub-Saharan Africa. Agroforestry Systems 38: 51-76.
6
Rao, d.l.n., Gill, h.s. and Abrol, i.p. (1990): Regional experience with perennial Sesbania in India. In: Macklin, b. and Evans, d.o. (eds.).
Perennial Sesbania species in Agroforestry. NFTA, Waimanalo, Hawaii, USA, pp. 189-198
7
Schroth, g., Kolbe, d., Pitty, b. and Zech, w. (1995): Searching for criteria for the selection of efficient tree species for fallow improvement,
with special reference to carbon and nitrogen. Fertiliser Research 44: 87-99.
8
Barrios, e., Kwesiga, f., Buresh, r.j. and Sprent, j. (1997): Light fraction soil organic matter and available nitrogen following trees and maize.
Soil Science Society of America Journal 61: 826-831.
9
Cahn, m.d., Bouldin, d.r. and Cravo, m.s. (1992): Nitrate sorption in the profile of an acidic soil. Plant and Soil 143: 179-183.
10
Hartemink, a.e., Buresh, r.j., Jama, b., and Janssen, b.h. (1996): Soil nitrate and water dynamics in Sesbania fallows, weed fallows and maize.
Soil Science Society of America Journal 6: 568-574.
11
Mekonnen, k., Buresh, r.j. and Jama, b. (1997): Root and inorganic nitrogen distributions in Sesbania fallow, natural fallow and maize fields.
Plant and Soil 188: 319-327.
12
Jama, b.a., Buresh, r.j., Ndufa, j.k. and Shepherd, k.d. (1998): Vertical distribution of roots and soil nitrate: tree species and phosphorus effects.
Soil Science Society of America Journal 62: 280-286.
13
Niang, a., Gathumbi, s. and Amadalo, b. (1996): The potential of short-duration improved fallow for crop productivity enhancement in the
highlands of western Kenya. In: Mugah, j.o. (ed.). People and Institutional Participation in Agroforestry for Sustainable Development. Proceedings
of the 1st Kenya Agroforestry Conference. KEFRI, Nairobi, pp. 218-230.

38
2. WE STE RN P ROVI N C E
2.1 INTRODUCTION

Western Province consists of eight districts namely: Bungoma, Busia, Mt. Elgon, Kakamega, Lugari, Teso,
Vihiga and Butere-Mumias. With a total land area of 8,264 km2, it is one the most densely populated re-
gions in Kenya. Following the 1999 household census1), average population density stood at 406 persons/
km2, with Vihiga district registering the highest population density of 886 persons/km2, while Mt. Elgon
had the least population density of 143 persons/km2. According the government projections2) using logisti-
cal regression functions, population pressure will still remain a significant characteristic in Western province
(Table V). Therefore exhaustion of land as well as its fragmentation will continue being common and as such
leading to extreme poverty3) (Table VI).

TABLE V: POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR WESTERN PROVINCE PER DISTRICT

(Source: CBS, 1999: 33)
District 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
BUNGOMA 932,817 964,910 997,357 1,030,126 1,063,180 1,096,486 1,129,037 1,162,203 1,195,989 1,230,395 1,265,425
BUSIA 391,668 401,859 412,069 422,286 432,498 442,692 452,468 462,381 472,433 482,622 492,948
MT. ELGON 141,399 143,509 145,564 147,561 149,496 151,366 153,036 154,698 156,352 157,997 159,632
KAKAMEGA 641,539 662,824 684,322 706,009 727,863 749,861 771,315 793,164 815,409 838,052 861,093
LUGARI 229,559 237,176 244,868 252,628 260,448 268,320 275,996 283,814 291,774 299,876 308,121
TESO 191,008 195,023 199,009 202,961 206,874 210,743 214,379 218,046 221,746 225,476 229,237
VIHIGA 527,135 540,735 554,355 567,980 581,594 595,180 608,199 621,399 634,781 648,343 662,085
BUTERE-
500,076 508,347 516,454 524,385 532,128 539,671 546,534 553,398 560,262 567,124 573,981
MUMIAS
WESTERN 3,532,944 3,604,850 3,676,133 3,746,697 3,816,448 3,885,290 3,949,742 4,014,702 4,080,160 4,146,107 4,212,532

TABLE VI: ABSOLUTE POOR HOUSEHOLDS AND PERSONS IN WESTERN PROVINCE

PER DISTRICT 6RXUFH0RGL¿HGDIWHU&%6
District Households below poverty3) line 1999 Individuals below poverty3) line 1999
BUNGOMA 78,547 453,836
BUSIA 36,703 191,896
MT. ELGON 11,469 69,918
KAKAMEGA 56,562 312,444
LUGARI 18,783 111,801
TESO 17,200 93,974
VIHIGA 47,487 258,315
BUTERE-MUMIAS 48,323 246,947
WESTERN 315,074 1,739,131

1)
Population and Household Census (1999), Counting Our People for Development: Population Distribution by
Administrative Areas and Urban Centres, Volume I, Republic of Kenya.
2)
Analytical Report on Population Projections (Vol. VII), Kenya 1999 Population and Housing Census
3)
$FFRUGLQJWR3DUWLFLSDWRU\3RYHUW\$VVHVVPHQWUHSRUWRIGH¿QHGSRYHUW\³DVWKHLQDELOLW\>IRUKRXVHKROGVDQGRU
individuals] to meet their basic needs including land, employment, food, shelter, education, health etc” cited from Poverty
Reduction Strategy Paper (September, 2001) p.13, CBS.
According to the Central Bureau of Statistics categorisation of agricultural land potential, the entire Prov-
ince falls under high potential given that its annual rainfall average is above 857.5 mm. Considering the

39
 Agro-Ecological Zones and soils, not all have high potential. The Marginal Cotton Zone has a medium
potential and the senile depleted soils a low one.

The statement “high potential” of the CBS also does not consider the rainfall distribution. Considering it,
the Funyula and Budalangi Division fall under ASAL ecosystems with erratic rainfall in the second rainy
season.

Because of the more or less continuous rainfall in the wetter Agro-Ecological Zones, it is difficult to decide
when the short rains start and planting occurs both before and after their onset. There is no reason to divide
the growing time into two defined periods, but nevertheless it is possible to plant two early maturing crops
instead of one late maturing. To express this in the tables, “or two” is written after the symbol of the length
of the growing period (Table 4), in some wet areas with trimodal rainfall even “or three” (see Kakamega
District).

The soils are generally not fertile because there is very little volcanic or other young parent material. Most
are senile, diluted, some, as in Busia, even with latertite horizons. The soil maps and descriptions are derived
from the soil maps of the Kenya Soil Survey1). The symbols are simplified to make it easier for non-specialists
to use them and an introduction is given to the soils of each districts.

Because of the soil problem, it must be remembered that the average yield expectations given for the AEZ
show only what is climatically possible (on prevailing soils) when other conditions are optimized. In most
places in West Kenya therefore, a lot of manure and fertiliser is needed to reach these yield figures, and weed-
ing is also a big problem because of heavy witchweed (Striga) infection. Good husbandry, crop protection
and rotation are also essential for combating diseases (especially fungus in the wet climate) and insect pests.
Many nematodes in the soil reduce growth and yields of crops, especially of bananas. Phytosanitary aspects
can only be touched here, more information is necessary by a special handbook about pests and diseases.2)

A further difficulty is that West Kenya is far from the markets. Therefore one has to select carefully from
the list of given ecolgical land-use possibilities what is economically reasonable. The annual crops are listed
in the following order: cereals; pulses; tubers; oil seed; real cash crops; fruits and vegetables3). The perennial
crops are listed more or less according to their importance. Some crops may not fit into the traditions. This
has to be considered when trying innovations.

Very little information exists about pasture and forage apart from the real rangeland (Pratt and Gwynne
1977) 4), which is scarce here. Therefore all recommendations given are only a very rough guide, and fodder
cultivation depends on may factors besides climate and soil. Livestock units (LU) in our estimated stocking
rates are 300 kg, which is for smallholders with partly indigenous cattle more realistic and understandable
than the former Standard Stock units (SSU) of 1000 lb (450 kg) introduced by the British.

1)
The soil maps have the same base of KSS as those used in the FURP and in Muriuki, A.W. and Qureshi, S.N.: Fertiliser Use
Manual. KARI, Nairobi 2001.
2)
Some information can be found in the Small Holder Farming Handbook, published by the IRACC and Marketing Support
Services Ltd., Nairobi 1997.
3)
It was impossible to list all vegetables which may be grown in each AEZ. Information abou vegetables not mentioned may be
found in Vol. V of the handbook or required from Simlaw Seed Company, Box 40042, Nairobi.
4)
Pratt, D.J. and Gwynne, M.D. (Eds.): Rangeland Management and Ecology in East Africa. London 1977.

40
2.2 RAINFALL AND AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES OF WESTERN PROVINCE

Western Province has the most evenly rainfall distribution of Kenya. The annual averages range between
900 and 2200 mm. The reason is that after the convectional rainfall of the first rainy season (March - May),
the normally long dry season (June - October) receives heavy rains too with a peak in August - September.
They are caused by a convergence of the daily Lake winds, attracted by the daily heating up of the land, with
the Trade winds from the East. This circulation has also a downward and therefore dry component near the
Lake, but the effect in diminuing the rainfall is much smaller than in Nyanza Province because the shore is
stretching mainly parallel to the Trade winds.

These middle rains may be called already second rainy season. The eastern type of it with the main rainfall in
November-December is almost disappearing in West Kenya, only a small peak remains. But here the rain-
fall and the stored moisture in the soil are generally so high that in most areas we have permanent growing
conditions (see Zone 1, Diagrams of Kakamega) or almost permanent ones (Zone 2). Near the Lake shore,
in the Northwest and in the Northeast, the rains from October to December are small and unreliable. This
may cause semiarid conditions up to February, changing Zone 3 even to Zone 4.

The soil conditions have to be considered very closely. For instance in the Sugar cane Zone, only the Agro-
Ecological Units with suitable soils give profitable results. Generally under humid conditions, the perma-
nent leaching of the soils is a serious problem aggravated by the high population densities and therefore
overuse of the land for food production over the years.

41
42
2.3 THERMAL BELTS

Limits
In West Kenya the altitudinal limits are about 200 m higher than in East Kenya because it is situated at the
leeward side of the central highlands regarding the trade winds from the ocean, and due to the heating up
of the big elevated land-mass of the Victoria Basin.
The thermal belts of the Agro-Ecological Zones have no sharp limits here. The threshold temperatures and
the corresponding altitudes are generalized figures in order to establish the zonal system. In reality there are
variations: For instance the Sugar Cane Zone in Western Province has an upper limit in the AEZ-system at
21°C annual average, which means at an altitude of about 1460 m. However, it can be planted up to 1600
m in favourite places where other positive factors compensate the lower yield and sugar content of increasing
altitudes. Ecologically it may grow up to 2000 m, but the general economic limit is around 1500 m.

Temperature Increase
A new observation for W-Kenya is that since the first edition of the Farm Management Handbook (1982,
data up to 1980) the upper altitudinal limits have risen ca. 90 m due to the global warming. Partly bad is,
that the lower limits of some crops like coffee or wheat have risen too, therefore some farmers in these areas
run into difficulties due to lower quality or more crop diseases.
The temperature there has risen 0.5°C during 20 years; for instance the annual mean at Eldoret Met. Station
as a typical sample west of the Rift Valley was 16.6°C in the period 1956 - 80, it rose to 17.1° in 1981 - 98,
and the warming process is still continuing. Considering an average temperature gradient of 0.65°C per 100
m as typical for Northwest Kenya, the corresponding altitude difference of 0.5°C is ca 75 m, and adding the
temperature increase of the last years we have more than 90 m uplift of thermal crop limits since the time
before 1981. Especially in Kakamega District it has resulted in a shift of AEZ boundaries.

Temperature Differences
Some differences visible in Table VIII between the belt limits in different Agro-Ecological Zones are explain-
able by vegetation differences: The limits are higher outside forests or dense perennial crops (like tea) because
of more heating up of the atmosphere by a higher percentage of bare soil; The stations in LH 3 (maize and
grass) have 55 m higher limits than the stations in LH 1 (forest or tea), and even 75 m compared to the
forest stations in UM 3. The open field UM 4 station Kitale shows even 110 m higher limits of the Upper
Midland Belt than those UM 3 stations. The upper limit of the Lower Midland Belt is in the Cotton Zone
about 60 m higher than in the Sugar Cane Zone. This has to be considered in making local land use recom-
mendations.

43
 TABLE VIII: TEMPERATURES AND AEZ – BELTS FROM RIFT VALLEY TO WESTERN
PROVINCE (except SW)
Altitude Ann. Mean1
Station No. Name AEZ – Belt
m °C
Kericho Hail
9035279 2182 16.9 LH 1 2000 – 2470 m
Res. Station
Kericho Timbilili
9035244 2134 16.1 LH 1 1875 – 2300 m
Tea Res. Station
Kapenguria
8835033 2134 16.32 LH 1 1975 – 2400 m3
Chewoy.
Av. LH 1 1950 – 2390 m
Eldoret, Institute
8935133 2134 17.3 LH 3 2020 –2480 m
of Agriculture
Eldoret
8935181 Met. Station 2084 17.1 LH 3 1950 – 2410 m

Av. LH 3 1985 – 2445 m

Turbo Forest
8935170 1859 18.3 UM 3 1450 – 1910 m
Nursery
Nzoia Met. Site
8934138 (Forest Station) 1840 18.42 UM 3 1450 – 1910 m3

Av. UM 3 1450 – 1910 m4

Kitale
8835024 1890 18.8 UM 4 1560 – 2020 m
Met. Station
Mumias
8934133 1302 22.1 LM 1 10105 – 1465 m
Sugar Company
Chemilil
9035274 1269 22.2 LM 1 10005 – 1450 m
Sugar Company
Busia Alupe
8934161 1220 22.22 LM 1 10055 – 1470 m3
Cotton Res. Station
Kibos
9034105 Sugar Res. Station 1214 22.5 LM 1 9805 – 1440 m

Av. LM 1 10005 – 1460 m4

Ahero Kano
9034086 1219 22.8 LM 3 10305 – 1490 m
Irrig. Scheme
Kibos
9034081 1173 23.2 LM 3 10455 – 1505 m
Cotton Res. Station
Kadenge
8934140 1168 23.3 LM 3 10605 – 1520 m
Yala Swamp
Bunyala
8934139 Irrig. Scheme 1145 22.8 LM 3 10305 – 1490 m

Av. LM 3 10405 – 1500 m

1
Records since 1981 unless otherwise stated.
2
Up to 1981
3
> 0.5°C upwarming since 1981 is considered in rising of the belt.
4
Forest stations have lower temperatures.
5
Theoretical figure, actual lowest altitude in West Kenya is 1135 m.

44
2.4 THE IMPORTANCE OF FERTILIZER AND NUTRIENT RECYCLING
IN WESTERN PROVINCE

Except for the volcanic deposits around Mt. Elgon and an old volcanic layer near Kakamega Town, soils in
Western Province have mainly developed on basement rocks, which are normally not rich in nutrients. The
heavy rains of the humid and semi humid climates there have leached the soils considerably for millions
of years. Today a dense population needs to cultivate continuously; thus the nutrient content of the soils is
diminishing at a dangerous rate concerning the sustainability of human nutrition basis (see Table IX).
Fallow years or even forest periods for the partial restoration of the nutrients are normally not possible due
to the high population pressure.

Artificial fertilization can increase the yields of food crops considerably, as the Fertilizer Use Recommendation
Project (FURP, 1987-1992) and the Fertilizer Extension Project (FEP, 1993-1994) have shown. But for sus-
tainable farm management it is necessary to combine it with nutrient recycling by any kind of farm manure,
crop residues, even human excrements (under hygienic control!) and ashes of cooking fires. The addition of
cost-effective microbiological substrates like EM (Effective Microorganisms), rhizobia and mycorrhizae to
farm manure or soils directly is delivering reasonable results to soil fertility (see e.g. Hornetz/Shisanya/
Gitonga, 2000) 1).

The figures in Table IX (and also others from the FURP experiments) demonstrate that continuous cultiva-
tion is depressing the pool of macro- and micronutrients like potassium in the soil. PH-figures are lowered
too by the exhaustion of calcium, magnesium and other micronutrients by crop roots; thus enabling herbs
and forbs to penetrate cultivated areas/shambas more and more. Artificial fertilizers seem to accelerate the
decrease of pH as well as the diminution of the other nutrients because of the intensification of crop growth
(Table IX). During the FURP experiments the loss of potassium, for instance, was five times higher with
NP fertilizer than without (see Control). Potassium could be given artificially too (if payable by the small-
holders), but - as recent experiments and potassium studies in Western Kenya demonstrate - a fertilisation
with K is only resulting in profitable maize yields on volcanic soils (like Nitisols; Table IX) (see Kanyanjua/
Ayaga/Keter/Okalebo, 2005)2). However, it was also found out that the increase of K fertiliser on soils
developed on basement rocks is not profitable due to lack of Ca and Mg (as well as the high infestation of
Striga harmonthica in maize fields) (see Kanyanjua/Ayaga/Keter/Okalebo, 2005). Other vanished micro-
nutrients normally cannot be added because most of them are not yet known or measured consequently. Al-
together the permanent cultivation without nutrient recycling means finishing of the vital natural resources
by agromining.

Additional farm yard manure diminishes the decrease in some cases, but not enough. In other cases it in-
creases the loss due to its high N content, which favours crop growth too. In any case manuring must be
supplemented as much as possible by other organic materials and ashes for recycling the nutrients.

45
 TABLE IX: THE DECREASE (%) OF PH AND POTASSIUM IN TYPICAL SOILS
OF WESTERN PROVINCE AS A SAMPLE FOR THE RAPID LOSS OF
NUTRIENTS (during 5 years of maize cultivation at the FURP experimental sites)

Decrease of pH Decrease of K
FURP Site Soil AEZ
Contr.1 Fert.2 Contr.1 Fert.2
Kakamega
Western Agric. Dystric-mollic
Res. Station UM 1 -2.6 % -10.2 % -4.3 % -20.5 %
Nitisol
(Kakamega
District)
Mwihila
(Kakamega Dystric Nitisol LM 1 -2.7 % -4.2 % -16.7 % -38.1 %
District)
Vihiga-Maragoli Chromic to
UM 1 -7.8 % -7.8 % -15.0 % -23.8 %
(Vihiga District) orthic Acrisols
Bukiri-Buburi Rhodic to orthic
LM 3 -6.0 % -9.5 % -25.0 % -33.3 %
(Busia District) Ferralsols
1
Control: without fertilizer and/or manure
2
Fertilization: 75 kg N and 75 kg P per ha and year
1)
see: Hornetz, B., Shisanya, C.A. and Gitonga, N.M. (2000): Studies on the ecophysiology of locally suitable cultivars of food crops and soil
fertility monitoring in the semi-arid areas of Southeast Kenya.- (= Materialien zur Ostafrika-Forschung, Heft 23), Trier
2)
see Kanyanjua, S.M., Ayaga, G.O., Keter, J.K. and Okalebo, J.O. (2005): Effects of Potassium use on land under pressure. Farmers change
attitude towards fertiliser.- The East African, 16th - 22nd of May 2005, page 10

2.5 POSSIBLE CROPS AND VARIETIES

To have the right seed at the right time on the right place is the basis of agriculture development. Therefore
many crops and varieties are listed here. Most of them are commercially available, although this means they
are very difficult to get for the poor farmers in areas far from big centers. Many seed centers with credit
facilities are necessary.

In Table X the differentiation of the growing period in physical maturity and in harvest was only made for
the main food crop maize because for other crops the data are unknown or scattered. The chapter includes
additionally a Table XI with fodder crops. As natural grazing becomes scarce and the rest is destroyed by
overuse, planting of grasses, legumes, fodder trees and shrubs is an essential task for survival.

Several listed crop varieties are in experimental stage, not yet available. Others are mentioned here as
possibilities for the future. They are either already successful in other countries or have a promising potential
so that experiments with them should be done or repeated. One of these is the wild native tuber crop
Marama bean (Tylosema esculentum) of the Kalahari which has also edible seeds.

Very early maturing foxtail and hog millets and moth beans are bred in the Central Arid Zone Research
Institute (CAZRI) in Jodhpur, India, as well as rai (Brassica juncea), an oil seed crop related to rapeseed.
These are crops growing with 150 – 180 mm in two months or less. The yield potential cannot be high with
such a short vegetative cycle, but they are security crops if the 2nd rainy season becomes too short which is
possible in zone LM 4 near the Lake.

In the AEZ-potentials of the districts, such new crops are printed in italics to indicate that something still
has to be done for their introduction resp. distribution.

46
 TABLE X: AGRO-CLIMATOLOGICAL CROP LIST FOR WESTERN PROVINCE OF KENYA
Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed rain-
to harvest (m asl)2) fall in growing
(Range according period resp. p. yr.
to altitudes) (mm; min.-opt.)3)

GRAIN CROPS
Short MAIZE/e.mat.: KCB 85 – 105 / 100 – 120 700 – 1500 260 – 450 3 500 kg/ha
Maseno Double Cobber; Maseno77 85 – 105 / 105 – 125 1000 – 1600 500 – 750 4 000 kg/ha
Double 78 Cobber
PH 1 80 – 110 / 100 – 130 1000 – 1500 400 – 700 4 500 kg/ha
PH 4 80 – 115 / 110 – 135 1000 – 1500 450 – 750 5 400 kg/ha

Short to medium MAIZE/e.mat: KH634A 90 – 110 / 110 – 130 1400 – 1800 450 – 700 5 000 kg/ha

Medium MAIZE/m.mat.: H 511 100 – 130 / 100 – 150 1000 – 1800 450 – 700 5 200 kg/ha
H 515 “ – “ / “ – “ “ – “ 480 – 750 5 850 kg/ha
EMCO 92 SR5), H 513 120 – 150 / 135 – 165 1200 – 1800 450 – 700 5 500 kg/ha
PAN 52436); PAN 677) 120 – 150 / “ – “ 800 – 1800 500 – 750 7 500 kg/ha
MAIZE/m.mat.: PHB 30H83 135 – 165 / 150 – 180 1000 – 2000 500 – 1600 8 000 kg/ha
MAIZE/m.mat.:
MAIZE/ PAN 5195; PAN 5355 120 – 150 / 135 – 165 1000 – 1800 500 – 700 5 000 kg/ha
(Pannar PTY); C 5051 (Monsanto PYT)
MAIZE/m.mat: H622 140 – 155 / 160 – 190 1200 – 1700 550 – 880 5 400 kg/ha
MAIZE/m.mat: PAN 99; WH 501 140 – 155 / 160 – 180 1000 – 2000 500 – 800 7 500 kg/ha

MAIZE/m.mat:
MAIZE/ WH 904;WH509; H519; 150 – 180 / 170 – 200 1000 – 1700 500 – 750 6 000 kg/ha
MAIZE/m.mat: H623 150 – 165 / 170 – 195 1200 – 1700 600 – 950 6 300 kg/ha
MAIZE/l.mat: H612; 613 160 – 180 / 190 – 220 1500 – 2100 600 – 950 6 000 kg/ha
H614; H625 150 – 180 / 180 – 205 1500 – 2100 650 – 1000 8 000 kg/ha
H6210, H62138) 150 – 180 / 180 – 205 1500 – 2100 680 – 1050 10 500 kg/ha
MAIZE/l. mat. H 7801 165 – 185 / 195 – 220 1500 – 2100 700 – 1100 7 800 kg/ha

Medium to long
g MAIZE //l.mat: H614D; H626 165 – 190 / 190 – 230 1500 – 2100 600 – 950 8 500 kg/ha
H627, H628, KH600 -11D “ – “ / “ – “ “ – “ “ – “ 9 000 kg/ha
H6212 “ – “ / “ – “ “ – “ “ – “ 10 500 kg/ha
PAN 691; PAN 683; H611D; WH699 180 – 230 / 230 – 270 1700 – 2400 700 – 1100 7 000 kg/ha
MAIZE/l.mat: H629; H6211 170 – 220 / 220 – 250 1500 – 2100 600 – 950 9 500 kg/ha
MAIZE/l.mat: H613D 180 – 230 / 230 – 270 1500 – 2100 700 – 1100 8 000 kg/ha

Long to medium MAIZE/l.mat: H611 180 – 200 / 225 – 245 1800 – 2100 600 – 900 5 900 kg/ha

47
48
Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed rain-
to harvest (m asl)2) fall in growing
(Range according period resp. p. yr.
to altitudes) (mm; min.-opt.)3)

Short to medium FINGER MILLET/m.mat: P224; Gulu E; 90 – 120 1150 – 1750 380 –800 2 000 kg/ha
Lanet/FM 1
Local 100 – 160 0 – 2400 500 – 900 3 500 kg/ha

Very short to short PROSO MILLET/v.e.mat. Serere 55 – 65 800 – 1300 200 – 280 2 800 kg/ha

Short to very short FOXTAIL MILLET/e.mat. 1 Se 285 65 – 80 800 – 1300 220 – 320 3 000 kg/ha

Short to medium FOXTAIL MILLET/m.mat: Kat/Fox-1 90 – 120 250 – 1500 380 – 800 1 800 kg/ha

Short to very short SORGHUM/v.e. mat. 1S 8595 75 – 105 0 – 1500 200 – 430 3 800 kg/ha

Short SORGHUM/e.mat. Serena 85 – 110 0 – 1500 220 – 480 3 500 kg/ha

SORGHUM/e.mat.
SORGHUM/ Seredo 90 – 105 250 – 1750 320 – 590 2 700 kg/ha
KARI Mtama-1 90 – 105 250 – 1800 230 – 450 3 400 kg/ha
Gadam 90 – 115 0 – 1500 230 – 450 2 000 kg/ha
SORGHUM/m.mat:2K 17;IS 76 90 – 120 250 – 1500 230 – 450 2 300 kg/ha

Medium to short SORGHUM/m.mat.:IS

IS 8193 120 – 145 500 – 1600 320 – 590 2 500 kg/ha
ISZ 1955 120 – 145 500 – 1600 330 – 600 2 800 kg/ha
Medium to long SORGHUM/l.mat.: E 1291 (stock feed) 160 – 180 0 – 1500 400 – 800 9 000 kg/ha

Medium RICE/ m.mat: Basmati 217 * 120 – 160 < 1300 800 – 2000* 4 600 kg/ha
Faya S.L. 120 – 160 < 1300 800 – 1200* 9 000 kg/ha
Basmati 370 120 – 160 < 1300 800 – 2000* 5 300kg/ha
IR 2035 –25-2, IR 8, IR 22 * 120 – 160 < 1300 800 – 2000* 5 500 kg/ha
IR 2793- 80-1, IT 257 * 120 – 160 < 1300 800 – 2000* 6 400 kg/ha
BW 96 120 – 160 < 1300 800 – 2000* 9 000 kg/ha
UP 254 120 – 160 < 1300 800 – 2000* 6 400 kg/ha
AD 9246 120 – 160 < 1300 800 – 2000* 5 100 kg/ha
IR 19090 120 – 160 < 1200 800 – 2000* 5 800 kg/ha
* resistant to Blast
Medium to long RICE/m.mat: Ci cong Ai; TGR 78; 120 – 180 < 1200 800 – 2000* 5 000 kg/ha
BW 196; WaBis 675 (all in lowland swampy areas) *incl. irrigation water

Short to long GRAIN AMARANTH/ 90 – 180 0 – 2900 190 – 800 3 000 kg/ha
diff. species
 Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed rain-
to harvest (m asl)2) fall in growing
(Range according period resp. p. yr.
to altitudes) (mm; min.-opt.)3)

LEGUMINOUS CROPS
Very short to short BEANS/v.e.mat.: Katheka 60 – 65 900 – 1600 230 – 430 1 200 kg/ha
Short to very short BEANS/e.mat.: Rosecoco (GLP 2) 70 – 90 1000 – 2000 250 – 450 1 800 kg/ha
Mwitemania (tol. to halo blight) 60 – 90 900 – 1600 230 – 430 1 200 kg/ha
New Mwezi Moja9) 75 – 90 1000 – 1500 230 – 430 1 000 kg/ha
KK 8, KK 14; KK 15; KK 20, KK 2210) 75 – 90 1500 – 1800 250 – 450 1 800 kg/ha

Short BEANS/m.mat.: Canadian Wonder 90 – 105 1200 – 1800 250 – 450 1 300 kg/ha
(GLP-24 / TBC21)

Short to medium Pinto Bean (GLP- 92) 90 – 115 1000 – 1500 200 – 270 1 200 kg/ha
Cuarentino 90 – 110 800 – 1500 250 – 450 2 500 kg/ha

Medium to short Cuarentino 110 – 135 1500 – 1800 250 – 450 2 500 kg/ha

Very short to short MOTH BEANS (CAZRI Jodhpur) 11) 60 – 90 0 – 1500 180 – 400 1 600 kg/ha

Short to medium HORSE BEANS 100 – 140 0 – 1800 400 – 750 2 500 kg/ha

Very short to short COWPEAS/v.e.mat. Katuli 70 – 90 0 – 1500 200 – 400 1 900 kg/ha

Medium COWPEAS/m.mat.: Emma 120 – 150 0 – 1500 250 – 500 2 300 kg/ha

Long to very long HORSE GRAMS 210 – 240 0 – 1500 180 – 350 1 500 kg/ha

Short to medium DOLICHOS BEANS/m.mat:KAT/ DL-2 105 – 120 0 – 2000 200 – 700 2 500 kg/ha
AT/DL –3 105 – 120 0 – 2000 230 – 730 2 800 kg/ha

Medium to long CLIMBING BEANS/ m.mat:Flora; 120 – 150 1500 – 2200 450 – 1500 2 000 kg/ha
Vuninikingi; Umubano, Ngwiuinurare

Short to medium PIGEON PEAS/e.mat: 422; 423 110 – 130 0 – 1500 370 – 600 1 400 kg/ha

Medium to short PIGEON PEAS/m.mat: Composite 120 – 140 0 – 1500 400 –650 2 000 kg/ha

Short to medium FIELD PEAS 90 – 120 1800 – 2300 250 – 450 3 000 kg/ha

49
50
Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed rain-
to harvest (m asl)2) fall in growing
(Range according period resp. p. yr.
to altitudes) (mm; min.-opt.)3)

Short CHICK PEAS = YELLOW GRAMS 85 – 100 0 – 1500 200 – 390 1 500 kg/ha

Short to very short SOYA BEANS//e.mat.: Nyala, Gazelle 75 – 100 800 – 1500 350 – 500 2 500 kg/ha

Short SOYA BEANS/e.mat.: Black Hawk 80 – 110 0 – 1200 350 – 600 2 300 kg/ha

Short to medium SOYA BEANS/e.mat.: Black Hawk 110 – 130 1200 – 1800 350 – 600 2 300 kg/ha
SOYA BEANS /e.mat.: Magoye12), 100 – 120 0 – 1800 450 – 700 3 900 kg/ha
TGX 1869, TGX 1893

Medium SOYA BEANS/m.mat.:Hill 130 – 150 0 – 2000 400 – 750 2 000 kg/ha
Perry – 41 130 – 150 0 – 2000 400 – 750 1 800 kg/ha
Red Tanner 130 – 150 0 - 2000 400 – 750 1 800 kg/ha

Short to medium BAMBARRA GROUNDNUTS/e.mat.: 100 – 120 800 – 1500 300 – 600 1 500 kg/ha
from Zambia 13)

Medium GROUNDNUTS/m.mat.:Homa Bay 120 – 150 0 – 1500 500 – 700 770 kg/ha
GROUNDNUTS/m.mat.:Selere 116 (white) 120 – 150 0 – 1500 500 – 700 1 250 kg/ha
GROUNDNUTS/m.mat.:
GROUNDNUTS/ Altika 120 – 150 0 – 1500 500 – 700 900 kg/ha
GROUNDNUTS/l.mat.: Mwitunde 130 – 160 0 – 1500 350 – 650 2 500 kg/ha
(partly rosette resistant)

Medium to very long TARWI (Lupinus mutabilis) 14) 150 – 330 1800 – 3600 450 – 1500 2 800 kg/ha

OIL SEED CROPS

Short SUNFLOWER/e.mat. Hybrid S 345 85 – 110 0 – 1500 280 – 550 1 900 kg/ha

Medium SUNFLOWER/m.mat: H 067 130 – 140 1500 – 2400 350 – 650 2 000 kg/ha
Kenya Fedha; Kenya Shaba 130 –135 1000 – 2300 300 – 600 3 000 kg/ha
H 894 125 – 135 1500 – 2400 350 – 650 2 000 kg/ha
H 893; H 898; H 903 130 –135 1500 – 2400 350 – 650 2 000 kg/ha
PAN 7352 120 – 150 1000 – 2200 300 – 600 1 900 kg/ha

Medium to long SUNFLOWER/m.mat: Kenya White 140 – 175 1500 – 2300 350 – 700 2 200 kg/ha
 Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed rain-
to harvest (m asl)2) fall in growing
(Range according period resp. p. yr.
to altitudes) (mm; min.-opt.)3)

Medium LINSEED 120 –150 1800 – 2700 300 – 600 1 400 kg/ha

Medium to short RAPESEED/m.mat: Midas, SV 69/1229; 125 – 140 1800 – 2700 300 – 600 1 850 kg/ha
SV Gulle

Medium RAPESEED/l.mat: Nilla, SV 71/1225 140 – 155 1800 – 2700 350 – 700 2 100 kg/ha

Medium SAFFLOR 120 – 150 1200 – 1800 250 – 400 2 000 kg/ha

Medium CASTOR/Dwarf 130 – 170 500 –1500 350 – 800 1 200 kg/ha

Perennial CASTOR/C-15 more than 365 0 –2100 400 – 650 1 200 kg/ha

Medium SIMSIM/m.mat: White 120 – 140 0 – 1500 400 – 500 750 kg/ha
Morada 120 – 140 0 – 1500 400 – 500 900 kg/ha

ROOTS/TUBER CROPS
Very short to short SWEET POTATOES/v.e.mat. local 60 – 90 0 – 1800 350 – 650 8 000 kg/ha

Medium to per. “ “ /m.mat. local 120 – 180 0 – 1800 500 – 900 18 000 kg/ha

Short to medium SWEET POTATOES/e.mat.: KSP 20 90 –120 250 – 1750 500 – 900 20 000 kg/ha
(Wanjugu); KSP 11; CIP 42
SPK 004 90 – 120 1300 – 2000 500 – 900 13 000 kg/ha
Kembo 10 90 – 120 1300 – 2000 500 – 900 16 000 kg/ha

Medium (per.) SWEET POTATOES/m.mat.: SPK 013 120 – 150 1200 – 1400 500 – 900 21 000 kg/ha
Mugande 120 – 150 1300 – 2000 500 – 900 15 000 kg/ha

Very long to per. “ “ /l.mat.: local 270 and more 0 – 1700 750 – 1250 35 000 kg/ha

Perennial “ /l.mat. local 540 – 720 0 – 1500 1100 – 3000 40 000 kg/ha

51
52
Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed rain-
to harvest (m asl)2) fall in growing
(Range according period resp. p. yr.
to altitudes) (mm; min.-opt.)3)

Perennial CASSAVA/l.mat.: Kaleso (4610/27) 365 – 540 < 1500 500 – 1000 25 000 kg/ha
I 2200; Tereka; Serere; CK 1
TMS 60142; BAO
KME 1; Muchericheri 365 – 420 250 – 1500 500 – 1000 20 000 kg/ha
KME 61 365 – 420 250 – 1500 500 – 1000 35 000 kg/ha
SS 4 and Migyera15) “ “ “ “
MM 96/1871, MM 96/4466, MM 96/ 5280, “ “ “ “
MM 95/018316)

Short POTATOES/e.mat. Annet 75 – 90 1500 – 1800 350 – 600 30 000 kg/ha

Medium POTATOES/m.mat.:Desiree; Dutch robijn 120 – 150 1600 – 2600 350 – 630 35 000 kg/ha

Short to long YAM BEAN (Mexico) 90 – 270 0 – 1800 500 – 1500 60 000 kg/ha

Long to very long TARO, COCOYAMS/Colocasia esculenta 180 – 300 900 – 1800 1250 – 2000 15 000 kg/ha

Perennial TARO / perennial var. more than 365 0 – 1800 1300 – 2300 20 000 kg/ha

Long to perennial WHITE GUINEA YAM 180 – 300 0 – 1800 1000 – 1500 30 000 kg/ha

Very long to perennial GREATER YAM 240 –300 0 – 1800 1400 – 1800 45 000 kg/ha

“ “ YELLOW GUINEA YAM 300 and more 0 – 1800 1200 – 1800 40 000 kg/ha

FIBRE CROPS
Medium to long COTTON/ e.mat.: UKA 59/240 120 – 150 0 – 1400 500 – 700 1 945 kg/ha
COTTON/ e.mat.: BPA 75 120 – 150 0 – 1400 500 – 700 2 150 kg/ha
COTTON/ e.mat.: KSA 81M; HART 89M 120 – 150 0 – 1400 500 – 700 2 000 kg/ha
ROSELLE 130 – 180 0 – 1500 1000 – 1800 3 500 kg/ha

Long COTTON/ unimodal var.long staple 170 – 210 0 – 1450 550 – 950 2 000 kg/ha
 Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed rain-
to harvest (m asl)2) fall in growing
(Range according period resp. p. yr.
to altitudes) (mm; min.-opt.)3)

HORTICULTURE CROPS
Very short FRENCH BEANS/e.mat.:I.Kutuless (J12) 45 – 60 1000 – 1800 350 – 680 5 000 kg/ha
Monel;Maasai; Coby; Nerina; Vernadon; 42 – 56 1000 – 2100 350 – 680 4 000 kg/ha
Morgan; Samantha; Gloria; Amy; Paulista;
Claudia; Supper Monel; Espada;
Bobby (Groffy and Skill)

Very short to short CABBAGES/e.mat.:Golden acre 56 – 70 800 – 2000 500 40 000 kg/ha
Copenhagen market; Red acre 63 – 70 800 – 2000 500 50 000 kg/ha
Sugar loaf; 77 – 91 800 – 2000 500 60 000 kg/ha
Gloria F1 (Hybrid); Glory of Enkhuizen 70 – 84 800 – 2000 500 50 000 kg/ha

Short to medium CABBAGES/m.mat. Fortuna; K – Y cross; 91 – 112 800 – 2000 500 100 000 kg/ha
Red rock
Prize drumhead 105 – 112 800 – 2000 500 60 000 kg/ha
Tristar 98 – 119 800 – 2000 500 90 000 kg/ha

Very short to short LETTUCE/e.mat.: Butter Head; Leaf Lettuce; 45 – 90 800 – 2300 400 – 600 10 000 kg/ha
Romaine Lettuce

Medium to long ONIONS/l.mat.:Red Creole; Red Tropicana; 150 – 180 0 – 1900 500 – 700 17 000 kg/ha
Tropicana F1 Hybrid; White Creole;
Texas Early Grano; Green Bunching;
Bombay red; Yellow Granex F1 Hybrid

Short to medium TOMATOES/ e.mat.:Roma VF; 90 – 120 500 – 2000 300 – 500 34 000 kg/ha
Rubino; Parmamech; Parma VF; Nema 1401; 350 – 600 100 000 kg/ha
Picardor; Spectrum; Nema 1400; Nema 1200;
Sun Marzano; Rutgers 10X Hybrid; Roma Nova;
Rio Grande; Ponderosa; Hot Set; Best of all;
BWN 21; Zawadi; Fortune Maker a.o.

Short to medium CARROTS/m.mat.:Chantenay 90 – 120 500 – 2000 300 – 500 4 000 kg/ha
Nantes 90 – 120 500 – 2000 300 – 500 8 000 kg/ha
Oxheart 90 – 120 500 – 2000 300 – 500 20 000 kg/ha

53
54
Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed rain-
to harvest (m asl)2) fall in growing
(Range according period resp. p. yr.
to altitudes) (mm; min.-opt.)3)

Very short to short GARDEN PEAS/e.mat.: Green feast; 56 – 84 > 750 400 – 500 4 000 kg/ha
Alderman; Onward; Earlicrop

Short MAIZE BABY CORN/e.mat.:Panar; 90 up to 2400 > 250 10 000 kg/ha

Baby Asian; Kalahari; Silver queen;
Early extra sweet; Early Sunglow; Kandy Corn

OTHER CASH CROPS AND FRUITS

Perennial MACADAMIA/ MRG –20 Dur. to 1st harvest: 5yrs 1400 – 1550 750 – 1200 46 kg/tree/year
“ MACADAMIA/EMB – 1 Dur.to 1st harvest: 5yrs 1500 – 1750 750 – 1200 42 kg/tree/year
“ MACADAMIA/EMB – 3 Dur. to 1st harvest; 5yrs 1750 – 1900 750 – 1200 42 kg/tree/year
“ MACADAMIA/KRG- 15 Dur. to 1st harvest: 5yrs 1500 – 1750 750 – 1200 40 kg/tree/year
“ MACADAMIA/ MRG 2; KMB 4; Dur. to 1st harvest: 5 yrs 1500 – 1650 750 – 1200 40 kg/tree/year
MRG 25; TTW 2
“ MACADAMIA/ MFU 2; MRU 24; Dur. to 1st harvest: 5 yrs 1650 – 1900 750 – 1200 40 kg/tree/year
KMB 25; MRU 25

“ TEA/AHP S15/10 Dur. to 1st harvest: 4yrs 1100 – 2200 1250 – 1800 5 000 kg/ha
“ TEA/TRF 6/8; 7/14; 11/4; 303/178 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 3 500 kg/ha
“ TEA/TRF 7/3 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 3 000 kg/ha
“ TEA/TRF 12/12 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 3 800 kg/ha
“ TEA/TRF 12/19 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 3 900 kg/ha
“ TEA/TRF 31/8; 303/259 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 4 200 kg/ha
“ TEA/AHP PMC 61; 2; 3; 45; 46; 51; 59 Dur. to 1st harvest: 4yrs 1100 – 2200 1250 – 1800 3 000 kg/ha
AHPCG 29E30; AHP KP 47/7
AHP MN 11/96
“ TEA/AHP PMC 67; AHP CA 609 Dur. to 1st harvest: 4yrs 1100 – 2200 1250 – 1800 2 000 kg/ha
AHP MN 11/96; AHP CG 17/81
AHP MN2 10/51
“ TEA/AHP SKM 30/52; AHP SC 12/28; Dur. to 1st harvest: 4yrs 1100 – 2200 1250 – 1800 5 000 kg/ha
AHP CHM 61/60; AHP SF 186
AHP SC 12/29; 20/13; 31/37; 11/1; 11/9
“ TEA/TRF 31/11 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 3 200 kg/ha
 Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed rain-
to harvest (m asl)2) fall in growing
(Range according period resp. p. yr.
to altitudes) (mm; min.-opt.)3)

Perennial TEA/ TRF 303/259; 56/89; 303/999 Dur. to 1st harvest: 1600 – 2300 1250 - 1800 3 000 kg/ha
TRF 303/179; 303/186; 337/138; 337/3 3-4yrs
TRF 338/13; 347/26; 347/314
“ TEA /TRF 7/9; 303/178 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 3 600 kg/ha
“ TEA/TRF 108/82; 100/5; 54/40; 303/152 Dur. to 1st harvest:.3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 3 100 kg/ha
“ TEA/AHP CG 28U864; 28V929 Dur. to 1st harvest: 4yrs 1100 - 2200 1250 – 1800 4 000 kg/ha
“ TEA/AHP S 1/99 Dur. to 1st harvest: 4yrs 1100 - 2200 1250 – 1800 2 000 kg/ha
“ TEA/ TRF 303/216 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 3 900 kg/ha
“ TEA/TRF 303/577 Dur. to 1st harvest:.3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 - 1800 4 300 kg/ha
“ TEA/TRF 303/231; 303/1199 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 3 400 kg/ha
“ TEA/ TRF 303/156 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 3 300 kg/ha
“ TEA/GW EJULU-LGWK6/8; TRF 301/5 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 4 000 kg/ha
“ TEA/TRF 301/4 Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1600 – 2300 1250 – 1800 4 100 kg/ha

“ COFFEE/Arabica K7; SL28; Dur. to 1st harvest:.2-3yrs 1400 – 2000 > 1150 2 000 kg/ha
SL 34; Ruiru 11
“ COFFEE/Robusta Dur. to 1st harvest: 3–4 yrs 600 – 1500 1100 – 2000 3 000 kg/ha

“ SUGAR CANE/ CO 421, CO 467 Dur. to 1st harvest. 1100 – 1600 1250 – 1800 100 t/ha
20 – 24 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ CO 617 Dur. to 1st harvest 1100 – 1600 1250 – 1800 100 t/ha
16 – 20 months
SUGAR CANE/ CO 945 Dur. to 1st harvest 1100 – 1600 1250 – 1850 110 t/ha
20 – 24 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ EAK 69-47 Dur. to 1st harvest 1300 – 1600 1250 – 1800 95 t/ha
20 – 22 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ EAK 71 - 402 Dur. to 1st harvest 1300 – 1600 1250 – 1800 98 t/ha
over 20 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ KEN 82 - 216 Dur. to 1st harvest >20m. 1100 – 1600 1300 – 2000 124 t/ha
“ SUGAR CANE/ KEN 82 - 219 Dur. to 1st harvest >20m. 1100 – 1600 1300 – 2000 109 t/ha
“ SUGAR CANE/ KEN 82 - 401 Dur. to 1st harvest >20m. 1100 – 1600 1300 – 2000 112 t/ha
“ SUGAR CANE/ KEN 82 - 808 Dur. to 1st harvest >20m. 1100 – 1600 1300 – 2000 118 t/ha
“ SUGAR CANE/ KEN 83 - 737 Dur. to 1st harvest 1200 – 1600 1300 – 2000 113 t/ha
18 – 20 months

55
56
Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed
to harvest (m asl)2) rainfall in
(Range according growing period
to altitudes) resp. per year
(mm; min.-opt.)3)

Perennial SUGAR CANE/ CO 1148 Dur. to 1st harvest 1100 – 1600 1250 – 1800 110 t/ha
20 – 22 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ N 14 Dur. to 1st harvest 1100 – 1600 1400 – 2000 112 t/ha
20 – 24 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ CO 945 Dur. to 1st harvest 1300 – 1600 1400 – 2000 90 000 kg/ha
18 – 20 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ KEN 82-401 Dur. to 1st harvest 1100 – 1600 1400 – 2000 85 000 kg/ha
15 – 19 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ KEN 82-808; 82-216 Dur. to 1st harvest 1100 – 1600 1400 – 2000 95 000 kg/ha
15 – 19 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ KEN 82-247 Dur. to 1st harvest 1100 – 1600 1400 – 2000 87 000 kg/ha
15 – 19 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ KEN 82-219 Dur. to 1st harvest 1100 – 1600 1400 – 2000 84 000 kg/ha
15 – 19 months
“ SUGAR CANE/ KEN 82-737 Dur. to 1st harvest 1100 – 1600 1400 – 2000 97 000 kg/ha
15 – 19 months

PYRETHRUM/4743 Duration to peak prod. 1800 – 2100 950 – 1300 600 kg/ha
9 – 10 months
“ PYRETHRUM/3092 Duration to peak prod. 1900 – ? 950 – 1300 600 kg/ha
9 – 10 months
“ PYRETHRUM/Ks/71/96; Ks/71/6; 72/43 Duration to peak prod. 1700 – ? 950 – 1300 900 kg/ha
Mo/74/122; K218 9 – 10 months
“ PYRETHRUM/Sb/65/58 Duration to peak prod. 1900 – ? 950 – 1300 1 350 kg/ha
9 – 10 months
“ PYRETHRUM/Ma/71/423; L/75/477 Duration to peak prod. 2200 – ? 950 – 1300 1 000 kg/ha
Mo/74/443 9 – 10 months
“ PYRETHRUM/Ks/75/313; 75/336 Duration to peak prod. 1700 – ? 950 – 1300 1 100 kg/ha
9 – 10 months
“ PYRETHRUM/Ks/70/64 Duration to peak prod. 1700 – ? 950 – 1300 1 000 kg/ha
9 – 10 months
9 – 10 months
“ PYRETHRUM/K235 Duration to peak prod. 1700 – ? 950 – 1300 600 kg/ha
9 – 10 months
 Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed
to harvest (m asl)2) rainfall in
(Range according growing period
to altitudes) resp. per year
(mm; min.-opt.)3)

Perennial PAWPAW/Honey Dew; Kifu; Mountain; Dur. to 1st harvest: 1 yr 0 – 1000 1000 – 1500 35 000 kg/ha
Solo; Sunrise Solo; Waimanalo

“ PINEAPPLE/Wild Cayenne; Dur. to 1st harvest: 1350 – 1800 750 - 1800 100 000 kg/ha
Smooth Cayenne 18 - 24 months

“ AVOCADO/ Fuerte, Haas, Wabal, Puebla Dur. to 1st harvest: 1500 – 2000 1000 – 1500 27 000 kg/ha
3 yrs., to full yield 10 yrs.

“ APPLE/e.mat: Winter Banana; Rome Dur. to 1st harvest: 7yrs 2000 – 3000 1000 – 1800 20 000 kg/ha
Beauty; King of Thompkin County

“ PEACHES/ Texas; Hall’s Yellow 13-17; Dur. to 1st harvest: 1600 – 2300 1000 20 000 kg/ha
Babcock; Frandkin; Florida Sun 3-4 yrs

“ BANANAS/Uganda Green (Matoke)(Cook.); Dur. to 1st harvest: 0 – 2000 1000 17 000 kg/ha
Valery; Lacatan; Giant Cavendish (Sweet) 15 – 18 Months
Paz; Dwarf Cavendish; Wanjare (Sweet);
Uganda Red; Muhato; Mukubu: Gitigi (Sweet)

“ SWEET ORANGE/Washington Navel; Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1000 – 1800 > 900 26 000 kg/ha
Hamlin; Valencia; Pineapple

“ GRAPE FRUIT/ March Seedless; Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 0 – 1500 > 900 26 000 kg/ha
Red blush
Duncan; Thomson Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1000 – 1500 > 900 26 000 kg/ha

“ MANDARIN/Satsuma; Kara Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 0 – 1500 > 900 26 000 kg/ha

“ LIME/Mexican; Tahiti; Bears Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 0 – 1500 > 900 26 000 kg/ha

“ LEMON/Eureka; Lisbon; Villafranca Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 1000 – 1500 > 900 30 000 kg/ha
Rough Lemon Dur. to 1st harvest: 3-4yrs 0 – 1500 > 900 30 000 kg/ha

57
58
Growing period Crop/variety 1) (or place of breeding) Av. No. of days to Altitudes according Required well Opt. yields 4)
(approx.) phys. maturity/ to growing periods distributed
to harvest (m asl)2) rainfall in
(Range according growing period
to altitudes) (mm; min.-opt.)3)

Perennial GUAVA/ Malherbe; Fan Retief; Dur. to 1st harvest: 1- 3yrs 0 – 2000 > 900 47 000 kg/ha
Hong Kong Pink; Ruby X Supreme;
Beautmont; WK-11-26; Kahua Kula

“ MANGOES/ Ngowe; Borible; Batawi; Dur. to 1st harvest: 4–5yrs 0 – 1500 650 – 1500 15 000 kg/ha
Apple; Kessington; Haden Dodo;
Vandyke; Tommy Atkins

Short WATERMELON/Charles Gray; Congo; 80 days up to 1500 400 – 600 20 000 kg/ha
Fairfax; Sugar Baby; Chilean Black;
Tiffan Hybrid; Honey Dew; Cresso F1;
Crimson Sweet

Short to medium TOBACCO/ e.mat)OXHFXUHG9LUJLQLD ±GD\VWR¿UVWSLFNLQJ±    NJKD

Speight G 28; E2; NC95
“ TOBACCO/ e.mat:/Fire-cured/ 60 – 75 days “ < 1400 380 - 400 1 000 kg/ha
Heavy Western

NOTES:

1)
v.e.mat. = very early maturing variety For some crops, esp. wheat, it is wise to use several varieties to spread the risk
e.mat. = early “ “ (see recommendations of Nat. Research Stations)
m.mat. = medium “ “
l.mat. = late “ “
v.l.mat. = very late “ “
2)
Most suitable altitudes. Growing periods increase upwards and decrease downwards beyond the noted ranges until ecological limits are reached.
3)
/RZHU¿JXUHIRUIDLUUHVXOWVKLJKHUIRUYHU\JRRGUHVXOWVZLWKVRPHFRUUHFWLRQVGXHWRUDLQIDOOGLVWULEXWLRQHYDSRUDWLRQDQGUXQRIIORVVHV7KLVUDLQIDOOVKRXOGEH
UHDFKHGLQDWOHDVWRXWRI\HDUVDPRUHUHOLDEOH¿JXUHWKDQWKHDYHUDJH
4)
$SSUR[LPDWH¿JXUHVRQZHOOVXLWDEOHVRLOVZLWKPDQXUHUHVSIHUWLOLVHUDQGJRRGKXVEDQGU\ORZHUVLGHRIWKHRSWLPXPLQH[SHULPHQWVLWPD\EHKLJKHU
5)
Resistant to Streak
 6)
Tolerant to Grey Leaf Spot, resist. to lodging, good husk cover.
7)
Resistance to Maize Streak Virus, tolerant to low Nitrogen levels, drought tolerant, good husk cover.
8)
Resistant to Folia diseases and pests. Good husk cover hence good storage. Sweet for roasting and ugali. Very popular.
9)
Lower yields but more resistance.
10)
All these 5 varieties are resistant to bean root rot and bean stem maggot.
11)
Gives also very good fodder or hay (7-10 t hay/ha, see Nat. Ac. of Sc.: Trop. Legumes. Washington 1979, p. 77. Increases nitrogen in the soil
12)
Nodulates well with indigenous soil bacteria.
13)
Major germplasm center at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture/Ibadan, Nigeria. Drought tolerant and thrive in poor soils.
14)
Information see Nat. Ac. of Sc.: Trop. Legumes. Washington 1979, p. 86-92
15)
Both varieties are resistant to ACMD.
16)
All these MM varieties were in 2005 still experimental but promising for resistance.

59
 TABLE XI: BIOCLIMATOLOGICALLY SUITABLE GRASSES AND OTHER FODDER CROPS FOR
THE AGRO- ECOLOGICAL ZONES IN WESTERN PROVINCE

1. UPPER HIGHLAND ZONES (above 2300 ma.s.l.)

Here Forest Reserve

2. LOWER HIGHLAND ZONES (in W. Province between 1 900 and 2 300m.a.s.l.)

Grasses:
Kikuyu grass (Pennisetum clandestinum) LH 1,2
Nandi setaria ( Setaria sphacelata) LH 1,2,3
Rhodes grass (Chloris gayana) up to 2050 m
Var. Pokot Rhodes LH 1,2
Var. Mbarara Rhodes LH 2,3
Var. Masaba Rhodes LH 2,3
Var. Elmba Rhodes LH 2,3,4
Var. Boma Rhodes LH 2,3,4
Teff (Eragrostis tef) LH 2,3,(4)
Guatemala (Tripsacum laxum) LH 1, 2,3
Napier (Pennisetum purpureum)
cv. Clone 13 LH 1,2
cv. Bana LH 1,2,3,(4)
Giant setaria (Setaria splendida) LH 1,2,3
Andropogon (Andropogon gayanus) LH 2,3
Rye grass (Lolium perenne) LH 1,2,3

Root crops:
Sweet potato vines (Ipomea batatas) LH 1, 2,3
Fodder beets (Beta vulgaris)/var. alba DC LH 1,2
Fodder radish (Raphanus sativus) LH 1,2
Yam bean (Pachyrhizus tuberosus) not above 2000m LH 1,2,3 (4)

Legumes:
Louisana white clover (Trifolium repens) LH 1,2
Green leaf desmodium (Desmodium intortum) LH 1,2
Silver leaf desmodium (Desmodium uncinatum) LH 1,2,(3)
Lotononis (Lotononis bainesii) LH 2,3, (4) not domesticated in
Kenya yet
Subterranean clover (Trifolium subterraneum) LH 3,4
Shrubby stylo (Stylosanthes scabra)
cv. Seca LH 1, 2,3
cv. Fitzroy LH 1, 2,3
Calopo (Calopogonium mucunoides) LH 3
Lucerne (Medicago sativa)
cv. Hunter river LH 1,2
FY+XQWHU¿HOG        /+
cv. Trifecta LH 1,2
Purple vetch (Vicia benglanesis) LH 2,3
Glycine (Neonotonia wightii)
cv. Cooper LH 3, 4,5
cv. Tinaroo LH 3, 4,5
Winter (Australian) LH 3
Alsike clover (Trifolium hybridum) LH 3
Velvet bean (Mucuna pruriens) LH 3,4
Lablab bean (Lablab purpureus)
cv. Rongai LH 3,4

60
cv. K1002 LH 3,4
Jack bean (Canavalia ensiformis) LH 3,4
Sunhemp (Crotalaria ochroleuca) LH 3,4
Lupins (Lupinus albus) cv. Ultra LH 1,2
Lupins (Lupinus angustifolia) LH 1,2

Trees
Calliandra (Calliandra calothyrsus) LH 2,3
Leucaena (Leucaena leucocephala)
cv. K8 LH 1,2,3
cv. Peru LH 1,2,3
cv. Cunningham LH 1,2,3
0H[LFDQZLOGÀRZHUTithonia diversifolia) LH 2,3

3. UPPER MIDLAND ZONES (between 1 500 and 1 900m)

Grasses:
Napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum)
Clone 13 UM 1,2,3
cv. Bana UM 1,2,3,4
Nandi setaria ( Setaria sphacelata) in higher places UM 1,2,3
Rhodes grass (Chloris gayana) in higher places
Var. Pokot Rhodes UM 1,2
Var. Mbarara Rhodes UM 2,3
Var. Masaba Rhodes UM 2,3, (4)
Var. Elmba Rhodes UM 2,3,4
Var. Boma Rhodes UM 2,3,4
Star grass (Cynodon dactylon) UM 1,2,3
Sudan grass (Sorghum sudanense) UM 2,3, (4)
Maasai love grass (Eragrostis superba) UM 3,4
Guinea grass (Panicum maximum) UM 1,2,3
Giant panicum (Panicum maximum)/var. Makueni UM 3,4
Columbus grass (Sorghum halepense) UM 1,2, 3,
Enteropogon (Enteropogon macrostachyus) UM 4,5
Plume chloris (Chloris roxburghiana) UM 4,5
Buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaris) cv. Marigat UM 4,5
Rye grass (Lolium perenne) UM 1,2,(3)
Andropogon (Andropogon gayanus) UM 4,5

Root crops:
Sweet potato vines (Ipomea batatas) UM 1, 2,3,4
Flemingia vestita UM 1,2 (3)
Yam bean (Pachyrhizus tuberosus) UM 1,2,3,4
Psoralea patens / P.cinerea UM 3,4

Legumes:
Siratro (Macroptilium atropurpureum) UM 2,3,4
Common stylo (Stylosanthes guanensis)
cv. Alupe Composite UM 1,2 (3)
cv. Cook UM 1,2 (3)
Green leaf desmodium (Desmodium intortum) UM 1,2
Silver leaf desmodium (Desmodium uncinatum) UM 1,2,(3)
Glycine (Neonotonia wightii)
cv. Cooper UM 2,3,4
cv. Tinaroo UM 2,3,4
%XWWHUÀ\SHDClitoria ternatea) UM 1,2,(3)
Townsville lucerne (Stylosanthes humilis) UM 2,3,(4)

61
 Barrel medic (Medicago truncatula) UM 3,4,(5)
Moth bean vines (Vigna aconitifolia) UM 4,5
Tropical kudzu (Pueraria phaseoloides) UM 1,2,3
Lucerne (Medicago sativa)
cv. Baronet UM 3, 4,5
FY+XQWHU¿HOG        80
cv.Vernal UM 4,5
Stylo (Stylosanthes scabra) UM 1, 2, 3, 4 (5)
Carribean stylo (Stylosanthes hamata) cv. Verano UM 3,4
Shrubby stylo (Stylosanthes scabra)
cv. Fitzroy UM 4
cv. Seca UM 4
Stylo (Stylosanthes scabra) cv. fruticosa 41219A UM 4
Lablab bean (Lablab purpureus)
cv. Rongai UM 3,4
cv. K1002 UM 3,4
Archer axillaris (Macrotyloma axillare) cv. Archer UM1, 2, 3
Velvet bean (Mucuna pruriens) UM1, 2,3,4
Calopo (Calopogonium mucunoides) UM 3,4
Purple vetch (Vicia benghalensis) UM 3,4
Lupins (Lupinus albus cv. Ultra) UM 1,2,3
Lupins (Lupinus angustifolia) UM 1,2,3
Centro (Centrosema pascuorum) (under experiment)
cv. cavalcade UM 4
cv. virginianum UM 4
Aechynomene americana cv.Glenn (under experiment) UM 4
Macrotyloma (Macrotyloma africanum) UM 3,4,5
Alsike clover (Trifolium hybridum) UM 4,5
Cassia (Chamaecrista rotundifolia cv.Wynn) UM 2,3 (4)
Alysicarpus rugosus CPI 14384 (under experiment) UM 3,4
Jack bean (Canavalia ensiformis) UM 3,4
Sunnhemp (Crotalaria ochroleuca) UM 3,4
Desmanthus virgatus CPI 144576 (under experiment) UM 3, 4

Trees and shrubs:

Leucaena (Leucaena leucocephala)
cv. Peru UM 1,2,3,4
cv. K8 UM 1,2,3,4
cv. Cunnigham UM 1,2,3,4
Saltbush (Atriplex nummularia) UM 4,5,(6)
Gao tree (Acacia albida) UM 4,5,(6)
Sesbania (Sesbania sesban) UM 1,2, 3(4)
Mulberry (Morus alba) UM 1,2,3 (4)
Calliandra (Calliandra calothyrsus) UM 1,2,3
0H[LFDQZLOGÀRZHUTithonia divesifolia) UM 2,3
Mesquite (3URVRSLVMXOLÀRUD) UM 5,6
Algarrobo (Prosopis chilensis) UM 5,6

4. L0WER MIDLAND ZONES (between 900 and 1500m a.s.l)

Grasses:
Napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum) LM 1,2,3,(4)
Maasai love grass (Eragrostis superba) LM 3,4
Guinea grass (Panicum maximum) LM 2,(3)
Giant panicum (Panicum maximum)/var. Makueni LM 3,4
Buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaris) LM 3,4,(5)

62
Enteropogon (Enteropogon macrostachyus) LM 5,6
Guatemala (Tripsacum laxum) LM 1,2,3
Plume Chloris (Chloris roxburghiana) cv. horse tail LM 3, 4,5,6
Columbus grass (Sorghum halepense ) LM 2, 3, 4

Root crops:
Sweet potato vines (Ipomea batatas) LM 2,3,4
Flemingia vestita LM 1,2,3, (4)
Psoralea patens/P.cinerea LM 3,4,(5)

Legumes:
Common stylo (Stylosanthes guianensis)
cv Alupe Composite LM 1,2,3
cv. Cook LM 1,2,3
%XWWHUÀ\SHDClitoria ternatea) LM 1,2,(3)
Siratro (Macroptilium atropurpureum) LM 2,3,4
Glycine (Neonotonia wightii)
cv. Cooper LM 1,2,3,4
cv. Tinaroo LM 1,2,3,4
Townsville stylo (Stylosanthes humilis) LM 2,3,(4)
Moth bean vines (Vigna aconitifolia) LM 4,5
Cow pea (Vigna unguiculata) LM 4,5
Sunnhemp (Crotalaria ochroleuca) LM 2,3
Velvet bean (Mucuna pruriens) LM 2,3,4
Lablab bean (Lablab purpureus)
cv Rongai LM 2,3,4
cv K1002 LM 2,3,4
Lupins (Lupinus albus) cv. Ultra LM 2,3
Jack bean (Canavalia ensiformis) LM 2,3,4
Stylo (Stylosanthes scabra) cv. Fruticosa 41219A LM 4,5
Desmanthus virgatus CPI 144576 LM 4,5
Centro (Centrosema pascuorum)
cv. Cavalcade LM 4,5
cv. Virginianum LM 4,5
Centro (Centrosema pubescens) LM 2,3,4
Aeschynomene americana cv.Glenn LM 4,5
Macrotyloma (Macrotyloma africanum) LM 3,4,5
Cassia (Chamaecrista rotundifolia cv.Wynn) LM 4,5

Trees and shrubs

Leucaena (Leucaena leucocephala)
cv Peru LM 3,4
cv. K8 LM 3,4
cv. Cunnigham LM 3,4
Saltbush (Atriplex nummularia) LM 4,5,(6)
Gao tree (Acacia albida) LM 4,5,(6)
Mesquite (3URVRSLVMXOLÀRUD) LM 5,6
Algarrobo (Prosopis chilensis) LM 5,6
0H[LFDQZLOGÀRZHUTithonia diversifolia) LM 1, 2,3
Sesbania (Sesbania sesban) LM 1,2,3,4
Gliricidia (Gliricidia sepium) LM 2,3,4
Leucaena diversifolia LM 2,3,4

Sources: Kenya National Crop Variety List, Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service (KEPHIS) 2003;
Kenya Agricultural Research Institutes’ Annual Reports.

63
64
3. DISTRICT INFORMATION AND STATISTICS
3.1 GENERAL REMARKS TO THE LAND USE POTENTIALS AND FERTILIZER
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE DISTRICTS
The land use potentials given in the following pages are climatically based. Good husbandry, crop protection
and rotation are also essential, especially for combating diseases (for instance fungus in the wet climates)1)
and insect pests. The yield expectations given in the AEZ are only valid if these farm management standards
are optimal and the soils are suitable and well manured resp. fertilised.

It must be remembered that the classification of yield potentials in > 80 % = very good, 60–80 % = good,
40-60 % = fair and 20-40 % of the optimum = poor (under field conditions) is still a rough calculation or
even only an estimate (for those crops for which exact water requirements are not yet available).

The growing seasons and yield potentials are calculated for medium textured soils, if not otherwise stated.
For heavy soils they are roughly 1-2 decades longer (if the agro-humid period is not weak), on light soils
about one decade shorter.2) There are very good volcanic soils in this region but also very poor ones which
need considerable improvement. The soil maps and descriptions are derived from the district soil maps of the
Kenya Soil Survey in the Fertiliser Use Recommendation Project of the GTZ. The symbols are simplified to
make it easier for non-specialists to use them. An introduction is given to the soils of each district group.

The crop potentials are basically calculated by the computer program MARCROP (name from MARginal
CROPs) of Berthold Hornetz 3). The annual crops in the potentials are listed in the following order: cereals;
pulses; tubers; oil seed; real cash crops; fruits and vegetables4). The perennial crops are listed more or less
according to their importance. Detailed Tables for the (by computer simulation calculated) yield potentials
are prepared only for the marginal and semiarid zones near the fringe of rainfed cultivation (because of
limited funds, space and time). The calculation could not include cotton because there exists no specific
water requirement profile for the bimodal variety. The calculation of the growing periods for the subzones
and diagrams is done by the basically, more related program WATBAL (name from WATer BALance) of
B. Hornetz and H. Kutsch. As a more zonal climatic program, it does not consider the deep rooting of
specific crops. Therefore it can be possible, that even with a too short growing period a specific crop can yield
something due to deep roots still reaching moisture.

Some new crops are recommended, e.g. the early and very early maturing varieties of foxtail millet or
bambarra groundnuts, or the perennial drought resistant crops buffalo gourds and Marama beans5). The
information available about them is still limited but they may be suitable for drier areas beyond the limits of
reliable maize cultivation. Although these new crops may not fit into the present nutrition patterns, customs
will change due the population pressure on food supplies.

Very little information exists about pasture and forage apart from real rangeland (Pratt and Gwynne 1977)6).
The recommendations given are therefore only a very rough guide, and fodder cultivation depends on many
factors besides climate and soil. The main problems outside the largescale farming area and Maasailand
are overgrazing and soil erosion, which are destroying the means of livelihood of coming generations. The
livestock unit (LU) in our estimated stocking rates is 300 kg liveweight (a local bull or nine sheep or eleven
goats). This is for smallholders with partly indigenous cattle a more realistic figure nowadays than the
Standard Stock Unit (SSU) of 1000 lb (450 kg) introduced by the British. The LU corresponds to the
Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU) which means a local cow of the Tropics (250 kg).

Some remarks to the Fertiliser Recommendation Tables: The increase of yield by the two fertilising elements
Nitrogenium and Phosphorus is not sustainable. For such a productivity, for instance, every 1,000 kg of
maize need a replacement7) of 25 kg N (partly naturally: H2NO3 synthesis by lightning, N fixing nodulation
of rhizobias on beanroots), 4 kg P and 24 kg Potassium (K2CO3), additionally Calcium, Magnesium, and

65
 Micronutrients like Bor, Copper, Cobalt, Molybdenium and others. If in the tables these elements are
not marked, it means they were not yet in deficit during the years of the experiments of the Fertiliser
Use Recommendation Project of the GTZ and KSS 1987-92. But since this time, continuous cultivation
without sufficient fertilising and manuring may have caused deficiencies.
Cassava which is now spreading at the exhausted soils still needs for sustainability of yields per 10,000 kg7)
30 kg N, 10 kg P, 70 kg K, 20 kg Ca and 10 kg Mg. Groundnuts are a demanding crop, 1,000 kg of
unpeeled nuts need 60-70 kg N, 5-6 kg P, 40-50 kg K, 20-30 kg Ca and 8-17 kg Mg plus micronutrients.

Higher fertiliser rates as recommended may become uneconomic, at least after some years, because enforced
production by two fertilisers only brings the others more quickly to the yield limiting minimum content in
the soil. Recycling of taken nutrients by any way (even excrements) is the final answer to achieve sustainable
soil fertility for coming generations.

1)
Phytosanitary aspects could not be considered here, see special handbooks like that from IRACC mentioned below or the Crop
Protection Handbook.
2)
Heavy soil means heavy loam, clay may have less available water for plants.
3)
Details see Hornetz, B., Shisanya, Chr. & Gitonga, N.: Crop water relationships and thermal adaptation of kathika beans
(Phaseolus vulgaris) and green grams (Vigna radiata) with special regard to temporal patterns of potential growth in the drylands
of SE-Kenya.- Journal of Arid Environments 48, 2001,
4)
It was impossible to list all vegetables which may be grown in each AEZ. Information about vegetables not mentioned may
be found in Vol. V of the Handbook, or obtained from IRACC: Small Holder Farming. Handbook for Self Employment.-
Marketing Support Services Ltd., Nairobi 1997.
5)
Buffalo gourds and Marama beans produce big tubers after some seasons. Bitter substances may be washed out by salty water.
Seeds contain protein and oil but there is little or no flowering in the Inner Tropics. Marama beans see Nat. Academy of
Sciences: Tropical Legumes. Washington, D.C. 1979; Buffalo gourds see Nat. Academy of Science: Underexploited Plants with
Promising Economic Value. Washington 1975. New information is obtainable in the internet. Seeds may be ordered from the
experimental stations: Very early mat. millet from Central Arid Zone Research Institute (C.A.Z.R.I.) in Jodhpur, India; buffalo
gourds from University of Tuscon, USA; Marama beans from Botanical Garden in Windhoek, Namibia.
6)
Pratt, D.J. and Gwynne, M.D. (Eds.): Rangeland Management and Ecology in East Africa. London 1977.
7)
Figures by chemical analyzis of the crop, averages printed in international handbooks. They are approximates, depending on
varieties too.

66
 BUSIA & TESO 1

3.2 BUSIA AND TESO DISTRICTS GROUP

TABLE OF CONTENTS District Page

3.2.1 Natural Potential 3

Introduction 3
Average Annual Rainfall Map 4
Table 1: Rainfall figures 5
Table 2: Temperature Data 5
66% Reliability of Rainfall of Firts Rainy Season 6
66% Reliability of Rainfall of Middle Rains and Second Rainy Season . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Table 3: Average Potential Evapotranspiration 8
Table 4: Climate in the Agro-Ecological Zones 8
Agro-Ecological Zones and Subzones Map 9
Agro-Ecological Zones and Subzones (=Legend to the AEZ Map), with Land Use
Potentials and Water Availability &Requirement Diagrams 10
Busia and Teso Districts Soils Map 14
Soil Distribution, Fertility and Major Characteristics of Busia and Teso Districts 15

3.2.2 Population and Land 19

Busia District
Table 5: Population in Busia District Per Division and Location 19
Table 6: Composition of Households in Busia District Per Division and Location 20
Table 7: Available Land Area in Busia District per AEZ and Household 20

Teso District
Table 8: Population in Teso District Per Division and Location 21
Table 9: Composition of Households in Teso District Per Division and Location 22
Table 10: Available Land Area in Teso District per AEZ and Household 22

3.2.3 Agricultural Statistics 23

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Busia District 23
Table 11: Busia District Sugarcane Area, Production and Yield Trends 23
Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Teso District 23
Table 12: Teso District Cotton Area, Production and Yield Trends 23
Distribution of Farming Activities During the Year Per Week and Agro-ecological Zones 24
Tables 13 a-m: Farming Activities in the Agro-Ecological Zones 24-29

3.2.4 Farm Survey in Busia and Teso Districts 31

Table 14: Farm Survey Areas in Busia and Teso Districts 31
Busia and Teso DistrictsFarm Survey Areas and Fertiliser Recommendations Map 32
Tables 15 a-h: Assets, Land Use, Farming Intensity and Inputs 33-39

67
 BUSIA & TESO 2

Tables 16 a-h: Cropping Pattern 41-47

3.2.5 Introduction to the Actual Land Use Systems and Potential Intensification
by Better Farm Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Busia District
LM1 l^m i of the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone 49
Tables 17 a-d: Increase of Yields by Better Farm Management 50 - 56
LM2 l^(m/s) i of the Lower Midland Marginal Sugarcane Zone 51
LM3 m/l^(s/sv) of the Lower Midland Cotton Zone 53
LM4 (m/s) + vu of the Lower Midland Marginal Cotton Zone 55

Teso District
LM1 l^m i of the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone 57
Tables 17 e-h: Increase of Yields by Better Farm Management 58 - 64
LM2 l^(m/s) i of the Marginal Sugarcane Zone 59
LM3 m/l^(s) of the Lower Midland Cotton Zone 61
LM3 m/l^(s) of the Lower Midland Cotton Zone 63

3.2.6 Fertiliser and Manure Recommendations for Important Agro-Ecological Units 65

Busia and Teso Districts Maps of Important Agro-Ecological Units 66
Tables 18 a-h: Fertiliser and Manure Recommendations: 67 - 74
LM1 p or two, UIG1 of the Sugarcane Zone 67
LM1 l^m i, UIS1 & UISA of the Sugarcane Zone 68
LM1 l^m i, UID1 of the Sugarcane Zone 69
LM2 l^(m/s) i, UIGA1 of the Marginal Sugarcane Zone 70
LM3 m/l^(s) & m^(s or s/vs), UlIA & UlI1 of the Cotton Zone 71
LM2 l/m^(s/m) & LM3 m/l^(s), PnG1 & UmG2 of the Marginal Cotton Zone 72
LM4 (m/s) +(vu), SA2 with UlIA of the Marginal Sugarcane and Cotton Zone 74

68
 BUSIA & TESO 3

3.2.1 NATURAL POTENTIAL

INTRODUCTION

The agro-ecological zonation of the Busia and Teso district group is typical for the districts around the
eastern part of Lake Victoria. The daily heating of the land causes raising of the air. The deficit near the
ground is filled by wind from the cooler lake carrying moisture inland. Rainstorms in the raising air
develop during the afternoon. This lifted air in high altitude streams back to the lake and drops already
near the shore. Falling air means dry air. Therefore the difference concerning rainfall between the lake shore
and the interior is 900 to 1500 mm when comparing the annual averages. Regarding the 66% reliability,
it is 400 to 900 mm in Budalangi and Funyula in Zone LM 4, during the first rainy season and from less
than 150 to 800 mm during the second rainy season, dropping again slightly in the northern parts.

In the wetter areas it is difficult to divide the seasons (see Diagram of Butula) because there is no clear gap
between them. If we write in zone LM 1 l^m this means that “a long cropping season is followed by a
medium one”, it is one possibility to divide the more or less continuing growing period provided that
second planting is intended to start in beginning of September. The planting may start earlier if fields are
already empty, or it starts later if crops of the first rainy season continue into the second rains. In the wetter
subzone of LM 1 this is usual, therefore “or two” is written to express the various possibilities of growing
cycles included.

Busia is the most westerly district of Kenya but no longer remote due to the tarmac roads from Kisumu
and Eldoret. There are large sugar cane zones to be developed1 and potential cotton areas.
The poor soils are the main problem, often underlain by hard-pans. There is need to grow commercail tree
species like Casuarina, Grevillea and Mangoes to help break the hard pans. Cassava, which is now very
common, should not be the only answer to the poor soil conditions. More legumes, for instance bambarra
groundnuts which grow on very poor soils and accumulate nitrogen, more cattle manure and compost are
essential. For the recycling of human sewage, use of filter matter from sugarcane factories as a way must be
found in future to fully utilise these alternatives.

Nematodes are a serious danger to bananas. There are important, well suited crops resistant to nematodes,
i.e. roselle of the herbiscus family. Striga (witchweed) is a problem for cereals. A chance to fight it is by more
ploughing in order to sow a trap crop (sorghum) and to plough it in with the ungerminated Striga plant.
Research has already come up with herbicide treated Imazarytil resistant (IR) maize and KSTP 94 that are resis-
tant to Striga. The best cereals that could be grown here without any problem are: finger millet varieties P224,
U15 and Gulu-E.

The differences in the annual average rainfall and in the 66% reliability of rainfall can also be seen in the
reliability of the duration of the growing periods (see Table 4): The Marginal Cotton Zone (LM 4) has
a growing period of 130 days and a very uncertain one. Only 45 days are fairly sure. The wetter subzone of
the Sugar Cane Zone (LM 1), however, has a growing period of 215 days or more followed by a 130 - 150
days period.

The annual average temperature is between 21.0° and 22.7°C. Humidity of the air is relatively high due to
the lake. The potential evapotranspiration is 1 800 - 2 030 mm per year for both districts.

1
LM 1 and 2 on suitable soils, see J.P.Mbuui: A preliminary evaluation on the suitability of the area of Busia District for Sugar cane development.
Kenya Soil Survey P. 18, Nairobi 1975.

69
 BUSIA & TESO 4

70
 BUSIA & TESO 5

BUSIA and TESO Districts

TABLE 1: RAINFALL FIGURES

from selected typical stations having at least 15 years of records
Agro Ecol. Annual
Monthly rainfall
No. and Name of Zone& Kind of rainfall
in mm
altitude Station Subzone records mm
J F M A M J J A S O N D
8933026 Port Bunyala LM 4 Average 947 48 59 134 191 136 48 33 48 47 68 90 44
1250 m L. Viet. Cath. M. (m/s)+(vu) 66%1 830 14 40 115 162 120 40 22 36 37 55 70 30
8934030 Nangina LM 3 Av. 1420 47 49 127 213 178 84 78 113 126 144 144 71
1219 m Cath. Mission m^(s) 66%1 1278 17 38 115 190 161 65 56 93 105 124 111 52
8934037 Lukoli LM 2 Av. 1613 38 58 143 241 234 116 96 118 106 140 214 110
^ 1
1225 m Dispensary lmi 66% 1473 12 11 103 179 130 101 73 41 88 126 133 57
8934039 Butula LM 1 Av. 2016 65 126 159 290 315 177 124 178 169 164 146 108
1
1295 m Cath. Mission p or two 66% 1790 34 54 115 263 241 132 82 132 120 121 116 68
8934105 Busia, Farmers LM 1 - 2 Av. 1690 62 79 141 267 236 111 68 128 151 164 173 80
1220 m Training Centre l^m i 66%2 1585 32 37 100 205 132 100 54 49 105 120 125 50
8934110 KolanyaBoy‘s LM 2 Av. 1522 60 121 156 202 219 98 121 134 132 124 137 59
^ 2
1505 m Sec. School 1/m (s/m) 66% 1360 25 50 110 155 121 83 90 60 95 98 105 40
8934111 Angorai LM 3 Av. 1354 45 66 133 220 191 89 83 103 89 135 108 56
1501m Chief‘s Centre m/l^(s) 66%2 1220 18 25 90 165 105 75 60 35 70 102 85 39
8934116 Amukura LM 2 Av. 1597 50 83 107 229 218 120 95 112 126 150 136 71
1262 m &KLHIµV2I¿FH 1^(m/s) i 66%2 1315 20 30 75 170 120 102 70 40 95 128 105 47
8934155 Amagoro LM 3 Av. 1428 56 75 156 201 208 101 85 119 96 121 132 60
1220 m 'LVWULFW2I¿FH m/l^(s) (14y.only)
8934156 Nambale LM 1 Av. 1885 68 92 186 278 307 116 87 124 157 157 173 92
1190 m $JULF2I¿FH ^
lmi 66% 2
1690 34 40 120 250 245 101 68 80 110 115 120 55
8934161 Alupe Cotton LM 1 Av. 1901 69 105 190 297 292 111 99 156 169 158 179 87
^ 2
1220 m Research Stat. lmi 66% 1700 35 42 125 260 250 100 75 105 125 120 120 53
8934191 Port Victoria LM 4 Av. 1027 48 67 148 152 133 50 46 63 61 68 87 64
2
1240 m Forest Station (m/s)+(vu) 66% 900 15 48 130 120 118 40 31 48 45 55 68 47

1
7KHVH¿JXUHVRIUDLQIDOOUHOLDELOLW\VKRXOGEHH[FHHGHGQRUPDOO\LQRXWRI\HDUV
2
Estimate of this reliability by correlation, no detailed data available for enough years.

TABLE 2: TEMPERATURE DATA

No. and Name of Kind of Temperature in°C Belt

AEZ1
altitude Station records J F M A M J J A S O N D Yr. limits

Busia Alupe Mean max. 30.0 30.4 30.0 28.7 27.9 27.4 27.2 27.7 27.0 29.1 28.4 29.3 28.6
1470 m
8934161 Cotton Mean temp. 23.0 23.1 22.9 22.6 22.1 21.6 21.4 21.6 20.9 22.6 22.2 22.6 22.2
LM 1 LM 2
1220 m Research. Stn.
Mean min. 15.9 15.7 15.7 16.5 16.3 15.8 15.6 15.5 14.7 16.0 15.9 15.8 15.8 1000 m
(data - 1980)
Abs. min. 10.6 8.5 8.5 9.0 9.0 8.0 6.3 6.7 7.2 6.2 7.5 7.8 6.2

1
AEZ = Agro-ecological zone
2
The upwarming of ca. 0.5°C since 1981 is considered in rising the limits.

71
 BUSIA & TESO 6

72
BUSIA & TESO 7

73
 BUSIA & TESO 8

BUSIA and TESO Districts

TABLE 3: AVERAGE POTENTIAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
Average Potential Evapotranspiration ET0 in mm Av. Rainfall
1
No. and Type Year %
altitude Name of Station AEZ J F M A M J J A S O N D Year in of
mm ET0

8934161 Alupe Cotton calc. 175 159 169 146 140 129 128 141 143 164 149 167 1811 1901 105%
1220 m Research Stn. LM 1

8934105 Busia Farm. interp. 176 158 173 149 148 128 133 143 149 160 149 165 1831 1690 92%
1220 m Training C. LM 1-2

8934037 Lukoli interp. 176 160 175 153 148 127 133 146 150 163 153 168 1853 1613 87%
1225 m Dispensary LM 2

8934030 Nangina Cath. interp. 187 170 184 159 150 135 138 151 158 174 162 176 1944 1420 73%
1219 m Mission LM 3

8934111 Angorai interp. 180 163 179 157 149 129 134 148 152 166 155 170 1883 1354 72%
1501 m Chief´s C. LM 3

8933026 Port Bunyala L. interp. 197 181 195 163 151 141 142 157 165 186 171 184 2033 946 47%
1250 m Vict. Cath. M. LM 4

1
Type of eruation: calc. = calculated by formula of Penman & McCulloch (1965) with albedo for green grass 0.2; interp. = interpolated from
neighbouring stations, considering altitude and rainfall difference.
AEZ = Agro-Ecol. Zone, explaining table see general part.

TABLE 4: CLIMATE IN THE AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES

66% reliability 60% reliability of cereal and
Agro- Ann. mean Ann. av.
Altitude1 of rainfall 2 legumes growing period
Ecological Subzone temperature rainfall
in m
Zone in°C 3
in mm 1st rainy s. 2nd rainy s. 1st rainy s. 2nd rainy s. Total4
in mm in mm in days in days in days
LM 1 p or two 1800-2000 800-900 650-800 215 or more 130 - 150 345 - 365
L. Midland
1200-1440 22.2 – 21.0
Sugar Cane
Zone l^m i 1650-2000 750-900 550-750 195 or more 120 - 130 315 - 325

LM 2 l^(m/s)i 1550-1800 650-800 480-650 190 or more 110 - 120 300 - 310
Marginal
l/m^(m/s)i 1200-1350 22.3 - 21.4 1450-1650 650-700 550-580 180 or more 105 - 120 285 - 300
Sugar
Cane Zone l/m^(s/m) 1420-1450 600-650 460-480 170 or more 105 - 115 275 - 285
m/l^(s) 1200-1420 500-650 400-460 155 - 175 85 - 104 240 – 270
LM 3
m^(s or
L. Midland 1140-1500 22.7 - 21-0 1200-1450 530-650 300-550 150 - 170 80 - 90 230 – 260
s/vs)
Cotton Zone
m+(vs/s) 1100-1200 480-530 200-300 135 - 155 55 - 80

LM 4
Marginal (m/s)+(vu) 1135-1200 22.7 – 22.3 900-1100 <400-480 100-220 115 - 135 <55
Cotton Zone

1
If less than the potential, suited elevations towards the limits are lacking in the zone here.
2
Amounts surpassed normally in 10 of 15 years, falling during the agro-humid period which allows growing of
most cultivated plants.
3
More if growing cycle of cultivated plants continues into the period of second rains.
4
Only added if rainfall continues at least for survival (>0.25 ET0) of most long term crops.

74
BUSIA & TESO 9

75
 BUSIA & TESO 10

AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES AND SUBZONES

LM = LOWER MIDLAND ZONES
LM 1 = Lo we r Mid la n d S u g a r C ane Zone
LM 1 = Lower Midland Sugar Cane Zone with permanent cropping possibilities, dividable in two
p or two variable cropping seasons.
Potential see Butere-Mumias District because main area is there.

LM 1 = Lower Midland Sugar Cane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a medium one and
l^m i intermediate rains
Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. > 8 0 % o f t h e o p t i m u m ) 1
1st rainy season, start norm. F. but reliable end of March: Early & med. mat. sorghum; m. mat.
VXQÀRZHU OLNH .HQ\D )HGKD 6KDED +  RU  P PDW VR\D EHDQV OLNH +LOO VZHHW
potatoes, yam beans
Whole year , best planting time March: Pawpaws, guavas
G o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. 6 0 - 8 0 % o f t h e o p t i m u m ) 1
1st rainy season: M. mat.maize H 622, 623 or 625 - 29 (60-70%) 2, late mat. sorghum like E 1291
IRUVWRFNIHHG¿QJHUPLOOHWULFHPPDWEHDQVOLNH&XDUHQWLQRSLJHRQSHDV0DUFK)
yellow yams (F.-O./N.); sweet pepper, kales, Chinese cabbage, spinach, cabbage, chillies,
egg plants (to 2nd rainy season), pumpkins
nd
2 rainy season , start undistinctly end of Aug.: Maize H 513 & 515, m. mat. sorghum; e. mat.
EHDQVFRZSHDVVZHHWSRWDWRHVPPDWVR\DEHDQVHPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH+6NDOHV
Chinese cabbage, spinach, onions
Whole year: Sugar cane, bananas (nematodes danger) 3, tea in upper places (70-80%, but
medium to low quality), Robusta coffee 3, avocadoes, late mat. cassava

76
 BUSIA & TESO 11

F a i r y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. 4 0 - 6 0 % o f t h e o p t i m u m ) 1
1st rainy season: Cotton (med. quality)
2ndUDLQ\VHDVRQ0DL]H+¿QJHUPLOOHWODWHPDWJURXQGQXWVOLNH0ZLWXQGHLQOLJKWVRLOV
and late mat. bambarra groundnuts (in light soils, and even in poor ones); cabbage
Whole year: Mangoes 4, taro, citrus 4
Pasture and forage
Around 0.5ha/LU on sec. pasture where originally there has been a moist submontane forest;
down to 0.1 ha/LU feeding Napier (Bana) grass, banana leaves and Siratro (start of planting
middle - end of Feb.: fair yields, start beginning - end of March: good yields).

LM 2 = Ma rg i n a l S u g a r Ca n e Zone
LM 2 = Marginal Sugar Cane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a (weak) medium to short
l^(m/s) i one and intermediate rains

Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l
1st rainy season, start norm. mid. F. to b. of March: Early mat. sorghum like Serena (March
±-XQHPPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH.HQ\D)HGKD6KDED+RUHPDWVR\DEHDQVOLNH
Black Hawk; sweet potatoes, onions, yam beans, e. mat. cassava
Whole year: Pawpaws
Good yield potential
1st rainy season: M. mat. maize like H 623 2ODWHPDWVRUJKXPOLNH(VWRFNIHHG¿QJHU
millet; m. mat. beans 5 like Cuarentino, pigeon peas (March-F.), late mat. rosette resistant
groundnuts like Mwitunde (in light soils); cotton (med. quality); sweet pepper, tomatoes,
cabbages, kales roselle
2nd rainy season , start Aug.: Bulrush millet, m. mat. sorghum, ratoon sorghum (S.-Aug.); e. mat.
beans like Rosecoco (GLP 2), green grams; onions, kales, tomatoes
Whole year: Bananas (nematodes danger) 3, pineapples, sisal
Fair yield potential
1st rainy season: rice, bambarra nuts (in light soils, even in poor ones), cowpeas; tobacco
2nd rainy season: Maize H 513 & 515; pigeon peas (Sep.-July), cowpeas, m. mat. groundnuts like
Serere 116; sweet potatoes; simsim; cabbages; cotton (July-Feb.) 6HPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH
HS 345
Whole year: Sugar cane (on less suitable soils marginal), Robusta coffee, citrus, mangoes

Pasture and forage

0.5-0.7 ha/LU on high grass savanna with Hyparrhenia and Panicum dominating; down to about
0.15 ha/LU feeding Napier (Bana) grass and banana leaves. Siratro and Desmodium for soil and
pasture improvement, Leucaena additionally.

LM 2 = Marginal Sugar Cane Zone with a long to medium cropping season followed by a (weak)short
l/m^ to medium one and intermediate rains
(s/m) i
Small and transitional. Crop potential like LM 2 l^(m/s) i but m. mat. sorghum in 2nd rainy
season and bananas only fair, maize H 513 & 515 in 2nd rainy season and sugar cane (also on
good soils) only marginal. Ratooning or late mat. sorghum from 1st to 2nd rainy season good.
Stocking rates ~10% less

LM 3 = Lo we r Mid la n d Co t to n Z one
LM 3 = Lower Midland Cotton Zone with a medium to long cropping season followed by a (weak) short
m/l^(s) one and intermediate rains
Potential similar to the next subzone but a little bit better.

77
 BUSIA & TESO 12

LM 3 = Lower Midland Cotton Zone with a medium cropping season followed by a (weak) short or
m^(s or short to very short one
s/vs) (see Diagram Nangina)
Good yield potential
1st rainy season, start norm. begin of March: M. mat. maize like H 511, 513 or 515 (~60%), e.
mat. Sorghum like Serena (70-80%), e. mat. millets; m. mat. beans, green grams, cowpeas,
groundnuts (in light soils); simsim7; sweet potatoes; cotton, e. mat. soya beans like Hawk,
PPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH.HQ\D)HGKDRU6KDEDFKLFNSHDVRQKHDY\EODFNVRLOVGZDUI
castor8; tomatoes, onions, muskmelons.
nd
2 rainy season, start norm. e. of Aug.: Simsim, green grams, tomatoes
Whole year, best pl. time March: Cassava (~60%), sisal
Near swamps with water regulation resp. add. irrigation: rice, bananas (on dams), Chinese
cabbage (on ridges) and other vegetables.
Fair yield potential
1stUDLQ\VHDVRQ0PDWPDL]HOLNH+¿QJHUPLOOHWSLJHRQSHDV0DUFK)
tobacco (on sandy soil, higher places); yam beans
2nd rainy season: E. mat. maize like PH 1 or PH 4, early mat. proso millet (O.-N.), ratoon of
sorghum, dwarf sorghum, e. mat. bulrush millet (bird rejecting awned var. best); Katheka
beans, e. mat. bambarra groundnuts (in light soils, also in poor ones); sweet potatoes in
swampy places; cotton (July-F., ~40%)6
Whole year: Pawpaws, mangoes, citrus, pineapples
Poor yield potential (av 20-40% of the optimum)1
2nd rainy season: Medium. mat. maize

78
 BUSIA & TESO 13

Pasture and forage

0.7-1.0 ha/LU on mixed savanna with star grass (Cynodon dactylon); down to about 0.18 ha/
LU feeding Napier grass, Bana; Desmodium or Stylosanthes for fodder resp. soil improvement,
Leucaena additionally
LM 3 = Lower Midland Cotton Zone with a medium and a (weak) very short to short cropping
m + (vs/s) season
Good yield potential
1st rainy season like LM 3 m^(s/vs) except cotton, maize H 511, 513 & 515, m. mat. sorghum
(60-70%)
Whole year: Sisal
Fair yield potential
1stUDLQ\VHDVRQ0DL]H+¿QJHUPLOOHWFRWWRQSLJHRQSHDV0DUFK)
2nd rainy season, start norm. Sept.: V.e. mat. foxtail millet, dwarf sorghum(~40%); green
grams, simsim; sweet potatoes near water
Whole year: Cassava
Pasture and forage
0.9-1.2 ha/LU, ~0.25 ha/LU feeding Bana grass and Stylosanthes, some Leucaena

LM 4 = Ma rg i n a l Co tt o n Zo ne
LM 4 = Marginal Cotton Zone with a (weak) medium to short cropping season and a very uncertain
(m/s)+(vu) weak second rainy season
Good yield potential
1st rainy season, start norm. mid March: E. mat. sorghum like Serena (~60%), e. mat. foxtail
or proso millet (60-70%); e. mat. beans like Katheka (~60%), green grams, cowpeas, chick
SHDVRQKHDY\EODFNVRLOVHPDWVXQÀRZHUVLPVLP
Whole year: Sisal
Near swamps: Like LM 3
Fair yield potential
1st rainy season: E. mat. maize like PH 1 or PH 4 (40-50%), e. mat. bulrush millet; grain
DPDUDQWKSLJHRQSHDVaHPDWVXQÀRZHUVR\DEHDQVHPDWJURXQGQXWV
and e. mat. bambarra groundnuts (both in light soils); tomatoes, onions; sweet potatoes
near water
Whole year: Cassava, mangoes
Poor yield potential
1st rainy season: Cotton, m. mat. maize
2nd rainy season: Simsim
Pasture and forage
1-2 ha/LU; Leucaena, Saltbush (Atriplex nummularia) and other palatable shrubs to plant in
order to improve fodder situation during dry season.

1
All these percentages are climatical, assumed that the place has suitable soil and is well fertilized and manured.
2
Spreaded planting dates are advised in order to minimize the risk of wilting during dry spells in February and stress by early stopping of rains end
of June, the time of maximum water need when early planted. Other suitable varieties see crop list.
3
Windbreaks against the daily winds from the lake, light shade and mulching or compost are necessary to re-establish the former forest eco-system,
otherwise bananas and coffee grow poorly. Hardpan soils should be avoided.
4
Danger of Fungus disease
5
Should be intercropped with maize because of higher yields and minimizing occasionally hail storm damage.
6
Although nearly marginal, cotton is mainly planted in 2nd rainy season because of more labour availability. It can be interplanted in maize already
during July.
7
Planting towards the end of the long rainy season.
8
Good for rotation because of its resistance against Striga and nematodes

79
 BUSIA & TESO 14

80
 BUSIA & TESO 15

SOIL DISTRIBUTION, FERTILITY AND MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS OF BUSIA AND

TESO DISTRICTS

The districts are characterized by undulating terrain with higher lands intersected by numerous valleys. The
main river is the Sio which drains into Lake Victoria. Rock exposures are common between Bunyala and Sio
and consist of Precambrian gneisses and granites. The majority of the soils are moderately deep (soil depth
50-80 cm to murram or parent materials) and have a low fertility.

Soils on the hills are shallow (units HG and Hl 1). They are generally rocky and/or stony. Soils of the up-
lands (units UmG, Ul) have a low natural fertility, in most of both districts they are moderately deep.

On the uplands, soils of unit UmG 1 also occur with a little higher natural fertility than soils of the unit
UmG 2. The topsoils of these units vary, but in general they are darker in the higher areas because of a higher
humus content.

In the flood plains soils of unit BXC and VXC occur, complexes of agriculturally unsuitable and suitable
soils. They may additionally include soils which show great differences in texture and fertility depending on
depth.

Very dark cracking clay soils occur in the neighbouring plains around the Yala swamp (unit SA 2). In the
swamp, soils tend to have a very high (unit AA 1) to moderately high organic matter content; sandy soils,
having developed on beach ridges, occur along the Lake (ZA 1). All these soils are agriculturally difficult.

LEGEND TO THE SOIL MAP OF BUSIA AND TESO DISTRICTS

1. Explanation of the first character (physiography)

H Hills and Minor Scarps (hilly to steep; slopes predominantly over 16%; relief intensity up to 100
(Minor Scarps) to 300 m (Hills) altitudes difference per km)

F Footslopes (at the foot of Hills and Mountains; gently undulating to rolling; slopes between 2 and
16%; various altitudes)

U Uplands

Um Lower Middle-Level Uplands (gently undulating to undulating; slopes between 2 and 8%;
altitudes between 1200 and 2200 m)

Ul Lower-Level Uplands (very undulating to undulating; slopes between 2 and 8%; altitudes be-
tween 1200 and 2100 m)

P Plains

Pn Non-Dissected Erosional Plains (very gently undulating to undulating; slopes between 0 and 8%;
various altitudes; seasonally flooded or ponded)

A Floodplains and River Terraces (almost flat to gently undulating; slopes between 0 and 5%; vari-
ous altitudes; seasonally flooded or ponded)

B Bottomlands (flat to gently undulating; slopes between 0 and 5%; various altitudes; seasonally
ponded)

81
 BUSIA & TESO 16

S Swamps (almost flat; slopes between 0 and 2%; various altitudes; permanently waterlogged if not
reclaimed)

V Minor Valleys (V or U-shaped valleys; slopes mainly up to 16%, exceptionally up to 30%; width
mainly 250-500 m, up to about 1000 m; various altitudes)

Z Lake-side Beach Ridges (very gently undulating; slopes between 2 and 5%; altitude approximately
1200 m; along Lake Victoria)

2. Explanation of second character (lithology)

A Recent Alluvial Sediments from various sources

D Mudstones and Claystones
G Granites and Granodiorites
I Intermediate Igneous Rocks (andesites, phonolites, syenites, etc.)
S Sandstones, Grits and Arkoses
X Undifferentiated or various Rocks

3. Soil description

HGC Complex of:

Somewhat excessively drained, shallow, stony and rocky soils of varying colour, consistency and
texture: Dystric REGOSOLS and RANKERS, with ferralic and humic CAMBISOLS, lithic,
rocky and stony phases, LITHOSOLS and Rock Outcrops

HI1 Somewhat excessively drained, very shallow to shallow, yellowish red to dark reddish brown, stony
and rocky, gravely clay loam to sandy clay; in places moderately deep: LITHOSOLS, stony phase,
with dystric REGOSOLS and CAMBISOLS, lithic, stony and rocky phases

FG2 Well drained, moderately deep to deep, dark yellowish brown, friable sandy clay; in many places
with an acidic humic topsoil, rocky and/or stony: Dystric and humic CAMBISOLS, stony and
rocky phases

FI2 Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark red to dark yellowish brown, friable, gravely clay
loam to clay; in places stony and rocky; in places over petroplinthite: Ferralic CAMBISOLS, lithic
or petroferric phase, partly stony phase and LITHOSOLS; with Rock outcrops

UmG1 Well drained, deep, reddish brown, friable, gravely sandy clay to clay, with an acid humic topsoil:
Humic ACRISOLS, with humic CAMBISOLS

UmG2 Well drained, deep, dark yellowish brown to dark brown, friable sandy clay to loam ; in places
gravely in deeper subsoil: Ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS

UmG6 Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark yellowish brown, friable sandy clay:
Orthic ACRISOLS

UlD1 Well drained, moderately deep to very deep, dark red to strong brown, friable clay; in many places
shallow over petroplinthite: Chromic and orthic ACRISOLS and rhodic FERRALSOLS, partly
petroferric phases, and dystric phases, with dystric NITISOLS

82
 BUSIA & TESO 17

UlG1 Well drained, deep to very deep, yellowish red to strong brown, friable clay; in places moderately
deep, over petroplinthite or rock; in places rocky: Orthic ACRISOLS; with Rock Outcrops

UlG3 Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark yellowish brown to strong brown, friable sandy
clay; over petroplinthite; or rock; in places very shallow, stony or rocky: Orthic and ferralo-orthic
ACRISOLS, petroferric and partly stony phase, with LITHOSOLS and Rock Outcrops

UlGA1 Association of:

well drained, deep to very deep, dark yellowish brown to strong brown, friable clay loam to clay;
in places with an acidic humic top soil; in places stony; on straight side slopes (50%):
Orthic ACRISOLS, with humic ACRISOLS, partly stony phases
and:
Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark yellowish brown to brown, friable sandy clay
loam; over petroplinthite; in places excessively drained and sandy; on interfluves, convex slopes
and near fringes to bottomlands (50%):
(Ferralo-)orthic ACRISOLS, petroferric phase, with ferralic ARENOSOLS

UlI1 Well drained, deep, red to dark red, friable clay; in places (mainly on interfluves) shallow to mod-
erately deep over petroplinthite: Chromic ACRISOLS, partly petroferric phase

UlIA Association of:

Well drained, deep, strong brown to dark brown, friable clay; on side slopes (50%):
Orthic ACRISOLS
and:
Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, yellowish red to dark redish brown, friable, gravely
sandy clay to clay; over petroplinthite; in places stony or rocky; on interfluves (50%): Orthic
ACRISOLS and dystric and ferralic CAMBISOLS, petroferric and partly stony phases; with Rock
Outcrops

UlS1 Well drained, moderately deep to deep, dark reddish brown to strong brown sandy clay loam to
clay, over petroplinthite; in places shallow: Orthic ACRISOLS, with orthic FERRALSOLS, partly
petroferric phase

UlSA Association of:

Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark reddish brown to yellowish red, friable sandy clay
loam to clay; over petroplinthite; on interfluves (60%): Orthic ACRISOLS with dystric
CAMBISOLS, petroferric phases
and:
Imperfectly drained, moderately deep, dark yellowish brown to reddish brown, mottled, friable
sandy clay; over petroplinthite; in places shallow; on slopes and fringes to bottomlands (40%):
Gleyic ACRISOLS and dystric GLEYSOLS

PnG1 Imperfectly drained, deep to very deep, dark brown to dark greyish brown, mottled, friable to
firm clay: Gleyic ACRISOLS and dystric GLEYSOLS

AA1 Well to moderately well drained, deep, dark greyish brown to yellowish brown, friable, stratified,
sandy clay loam to clay; in places mottled, firm clay; in places slightly saline or sodic; on river le-
vees eutric FLUVISOLS, with vertic FLUVISOLS and vertic and eutric GLEYSOLS, partly
saline sodic phases

83
 BUSIA & TESO 18

AA2 Imperfectly to poorly drained, deep, greyish brown to very dark grey, mottled, very firm, saline
and sodic, cracking clay; in river backswamps: Pellic VERTISOLS and vertic GLEYSOLS, saline
and sodic phases

BXC1 Complex of:

Imperfectly to poorly drained, deep to deep, very dark grey to brown, mottled, firm to very firm,
sandy clay to cracking clay, in many places abruptly underlying a topsoil of friable sandy loam to
sandy loam; in places saline and sodic: Dystric PLANOSOLS, dystric and vertic GLEYSOLS and
pellic VERTISOLS; partly saline-sodic phases

SA2 Very poorly drained, very deep, dark grey to black, half ripe clay, with an acidic humic or dystric
histic topsoil; in many places peaty: Humic GLEYSOLS and dystric HISTOSOLS

SAC1 Complex of:

Imperfectly to poorly drained, deep to very deep, greyish brown to very dark grey and black, mot-
tled, firm to very firm clay to cracking clay; in places with a saline and sodic subsoil: Eutric
GLEYSOLS and pellic VERTISOLS, partly saline-sodic phase
and:
Very poorly drained, deep, dark grey to black, half ripe clay, with a humic or histic topsoil; in
many places peaty: Mollic GLEYSOLS and dystric HISTOSOLS

VXC Complex of:

Well drained, shallow to deep soils of varying colour, consistency and texture (on valley sides):
CAMBISOLS, ACRISOLS and FERRALSOLS, partly lithic phases, with Rock Outcrops
and:
Imperfectly to poorly drained, deep, mottled soils with predominantly greyish colours, firm
consistence and fine textures (in valley bottoms)

ZA1 Well drained, very deep, brown to dark yellowish brown, loose, sand to loamy sand, with inclu-
sions of imperfectly drained, greyish brown, friable to firm sandy loam to sandy clay of varying
salinity and sodicity: Cambic ARENOSOLS, with gleyic SOLONCHAKS, partly sodic phase.

NOTES for definitions (of underlined words):

mollic Nitisols and chromo-luvic Phaeozems: soils are equally important
mollic Nitisols, with chromic-luvic Phaeozems: Nitisols are prevalent
in places: in < 30% of the area
in many places: in 30-50% of the area
predominantly: in > 50% of the area
deeper subsoil: below 80 cm

84
 BUSIA & TESO 19

3.2.2 POPULATION AND LAND

BUSIA DISTRICT
2
Population of Busia District in the 1999 census was 370,608 people residing in an area of 1,124.3 km
2
(Table 5). An estimated 27 km2 of this is under water. Agricultural land was estimated at 924 km (92,400
ha), representing 82.2% of the total land area. Most of the district lies within the AEZs LM 1 and LM 2
which are suitable for sugar cane growing (Table 7).
2
The population density of the district in 1999 was 330 persons per km ranging from 280 persons in Fun-
yula to 389 persons in Butula Division. The available agricultural land per person has diminished consider-
ably since 1979. It was 2.75 ha per household of 4.9 persons in 1979, compared to 1.1 ha per household of
4.5 persons in 1999, which translates to 0.25 ha per person (Tables 6&7).

The estimate for 2005 is 432,000 people, it means 0.18 ha per person. This trend continuously exerts pres-
sure on already exhausted soils. How can people survive under such an exhausted soil resource? This requires
urgent intensification in the use of manure and fertilisers to improve the productivity of the land.

TABLE 5: POPULATION IN BUSIA DISTRICT PER DIVISION AND LOCATION

(Source: Census 1999)

DIVISION/LOCATION Male Female Total Area in km2 Density

BUSIA TOWNSHIP 12,268 12,890 25,158 22.2 1,133
MATAYOS 25,954 29,232 55,186 173.7 318
Bukhayo West 10,978 12,324 23,302 72.1 323
Busibwabo 3,712 4,200 7,912 32.5 243
Nasewa 3,524 4,072 7,596 22.7 335
Lwanya 3,160 3,611 6,771 18.2 372
Nangoma 4,580 5,025 9,605 28.2 341
NAMBALE 32,269 35,275 67,544 232.5 291
Bukhayo North 3,533 3,811 7,344 26.2 280
Walatsi 3,688 3,980 7,668 35.1 218
Bukhayo East 7,896 8,688 16,584 58.2 285
Bukhayo Central 6,491 7,412 13,903 47.4 293
Namable township 10,661 11,384 22,045 65.6 336
BUTULA 43,929 51,560 95,489 245.2 389
Bumala 3,575 4,302 7,877 15.1 522
Bujumba 6,841 8,087 14,928 37.6 397
Marachi Central 10,893 12,919 23,811 57.7 413
Elugulu 6,636 7,824 14,460 41.9 345
Elukhari 4,589 5,236 9,825 25.8 381
Marachi East 11,395 13,193 24,588 67.1 366
FUNYULA 34,610 39,265 73,875 264.2 280
Nambuku 4,316 5,093 9,409 32 294
Namboboto 5,993 6,599 12,592 37.3 338
Odiado 3,500 4,133 7,633 21.9 349
Nangosia 4,031 4,808 8,839 26.6 332
Agenga 5,257 6,002 11,259 45 250
Nanguba 4,472 4,982 9,454 38.4 246
Bwiri 7,041 7,648 14,689 63 233
BUDALANGI 25,338 28,018 53,356 186.5 286
Bunyala West 6,145 6,517 12,662 14.9 850
Bunyala North 4,975 5,542 10,517 27.7 380
Bunyala East 5,189 5,749 10,938 42.1 260
Bunyala Central 3,852 4,581 8,433 46.9 180
Khajula 2,695 3,134 5,829 18.3 319
Bunyala South 2,482 2,495 4,977 36.6 136
BUSIA DISTRICT 174,368 196,240 370,608 1,124.3 330

85
 BUSIA & TESO 20

TABLE 6: COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLDS IN BUSIA DISTRICT PER DIVISION AND

LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)

Households Family Relatives & Persons per

DIVISION/LOCATION
total >15years < 15years others household
TOWNSHIP DIVISION 5,992 1.7 1.5 0.8 4.0
Township 5,992 1.7 1.5 0.8 4.0
MATAYOS DIVISION 11,727 1.9 1.8 1.0 4.7
Bukhayo West 4,939 1.9 1.8 1.0 4.7
Busibwabo 1,616 1.9 2.0 1.0 4.9
Nasewa 1,601 1.9 1.9 0.9 4.7
Lwanya 1,441 1.9 1.8 1.0 4.7
Nangoma 2,130 1.9 1.7 0.9 4.5
NAMBALE DIVISION 13,572 2.0 2.0 0.8 4.8
Bukhayo North 1,472 2.1 2.1 0.8 5.0
Walatsi 1,502 2.0 2.2 0.9 5.1
Bukhayo East 3,339 2.0 2.0 0.9 4.9
Bukhayo Central 2,888 1.9 2.0 0.8 4.7
Nambale Township 4,371 2.0 1.9 0.9 4.8
BUTULA DIVISION 21,425 1.8 1.7 0.9 4.4
Bumala 1,940 1.7 1.4 0.9 4.0
Bujumba 3,422 1.8 1.6 1.0 4.4
Marachi Central 5,429 1.8 1.6 1.0 4.4
Elugulu 3,185 1.8 1.7 1.0 4.5
Elukhari 2,207 1.8 1.8 0.8 4.4
Marachi East 5,242 1.9 1.9 0.9 4.7
FUNYULA DIVISION 15,673 1.9 1.6 1.2 4.7
Nambuku 1,956 1.9 1.6 1.1 4.8
Namboboto 2,659 2.0 1.6 1.1 4.7
Odiado 1,623 1.9 1.8 0.9 4.6
Nangosia 1,819 1.9 1.6 1.2 4.7
Agenga 2,450 1.9 1.6 1.1 4.6
Nanguba 2,049 1.9 1.5 1.2 4.6
Bwiri 3,117 2.0 1.7 1.0 4.7
BUDALANGI DIVISION 12,677 1.8 1.3 1.0 4.1
Bunyala West 2,965 1.8 1.4 0.9 4.1
Bunyala North 2,265 2.0 1.5 1.1 4.6
Bunyala East 2,503 1.9 1.2 1.1 4.2
Bunyala Central 2,227 1.8 1.1 0.9 3.8
Khajula 1,461 1.8 1.1 1.1 4.0
Bunyala South 1,256 1.8 1.1 1.1 4.0
BUSIA DISTRICT 81,066 1.9 1.7 0.9 4.5

TABLE 7: AVAILABLE LAND AREA IN BUSIA DISTRICT PER AEZ AND HOUSEHOLD
(Source: Calculated from DAO’s Annual Reports)

in ’00 ha = km2 in ’00 ha = km2 in ha

Non-agricultural land Area in Agricultural
agro-ecological zones (total) land per
DIVISION Forest Others Agricultural
Unsuitable reserve, (roads,
steep lakes, homesteads,
land LM 1 LM 2 LM 3 LM 4 House- hold Person
slopes swamps rivers)
NAMBALE 44.00 10.00 174 182.40 45.60 1.28 0.27
MATAYOS 14.00 151 99.00 66.00 1.29 0.27
BUTULA 16.00 249 251.75 13.25 1.16 0.26
FUNYULA 48 6.20 8.80 210 25.60 204.80 24.60 1.34 0.28
BUDALANGI 50 135.00 15.00 112 76.80 115.20 0.09 0.22
TOTAL AREA 98.00 185.20 63.80 896.00 533.15 150.45 281.60 139.80 1.11 0.25

86
 BUSIA & TESO 21

TESO DISTRICT

During the 1999 population census, the population of Teso District was 181,491 persons who resided in
2
an area of 559.1 km of land (Table 8). Agricultural land that supports crop and livestock production is 441
2 2
km (44,100 ha). Over 88% (338 km ) of this land lies within the AEZs LM 1 and LM 2 that are mostly
2
suitable for sugarcane growing. Population density in 1999 stood at 325 persons per km as opposed to 159
in 1979, reflecting an increase of 104% (Table 8).

Agricultural land available per household of 4.5 persons (Table 9) stood at 1.16 ha and this translates into
0.25 ha of land per person (Table 10). The estimate for 2005 is 210,750 people, it means 0.18 ha per person,
which is an extremely low figure for any economic production of the land!

TABLE 8: POPULATION IN TESO DISTRICT PER DIVISION AND LOCATION

(Source: Census 1999)

DIVISION/LOCATION Male Female Total Area in km2 Density

ANGURAI 21,423 23,078 44,501 145.60 306
Kakapel 3,002 3,317 6,319 21.60 293
Angurai 3,628 4,021 7,649 25.60 299
Moding 4,419 4,638 9,057 30.00 302
Chemasiri 1,874 2,031 3,905 12.80 305
Changara 2,562 2,622 5,184 13.50 384
Kolanya 1,454 1,691 3,145 10.10 311
Katakwa 2,459 2,586 5,045 14.80 341
Aboloi 2,025 2,172 4,197 17.20 244
AMAGORO 16,751 17,203 33,954 91.70 370
Amoni 2,388 2,459 4,847 9.50 510
Akadeyewai 3,786 3,534 7,320 3.70 1,978
Kamuriai 1,153 1,241 2,394 7.90 303
Osajai 1,938 2,019 3,957 14.90 266
Okuleu 1,615 1,720 3,335 15.00 222
Kocholia 2,160 2,356 4,516 15.50 291
Kokare 1,479 1,537 3,016 13.40 225
Amagoro 2,232 2,337 4,569 11.80 387
AMUKURA 23,183 24,884 48,067 181.90 264
Akoreet 2,428 2,624 5,052 23.20 218
Aremit 2,919 3,070 5,989 18.40 325
Amukura 2,238 2,249 4,487 12.90 348
Kamolo 2,732 2,962 5,694 22.00 259
Kotur 1,636 1,802 3,438 15.80 218
Kwangamur 2,852 3,116 5,968 26.2 228
Kaujakito 4,373 4,798 9,171 32.2 281
Kaliwa 4,005 4,263 8,268 30.8 268
CHAKOL 2,659 28,400 54,969 139.9 393
Amongura 3,762 3,738 7,500 25.2 298
Asinge 3,588 3,749 7,337 29.5 249
Apegei 2,823 3,251 6,074 18.9 321
Okame 3,337 3,644 6,981 18.3 381
Ochude 3,483 3,873 7,356 26.2 281
Angorom 9,576 10,145 19,721 21.8 905
TESO DISTRICT 87,926 93,565 181,491 559.1 325

87
 BUSIA & TESO 22

TABLE 9: COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLDS IN TESO DISTRICT PER DIVISION AND

LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)

Households Family Relatives & Persons per

DIVISION/LOCATION >15 years < 15years
total others Household
ANGURAI 8,645 2.2 2.1 0.8 5.1
Kakapel 1,276 2.1 2.1 0.8 5.0
Angurai 1,537 2.1 2.0 0.8 4.9
Moding 1,735 2.2 2.2 0.8 5.2
Chemasiri 733 2.2 2.1 1.0 5.3
Changara 1,010 2.2 2.2 0.7 5.1
Kolanya 579 2.2 2.1 0.9 5.2
Katakwa 986 2.2 2.0 0.9 5.1
Aboloi 789 2.2 2.3 0.8 5.3
AMAGORO 7,536 1.9 1.7 0.8 4.4
Amoni 1,184 1.9 1.5 0.7 4.1
Akadetewai 1,931 1.6 1.2 0.7 3.5
Kamuriai 454 2.3 2.1 0.9 5.3
Osajai 767 2.2 2.2 0.8 5.2
Okuleu 668 2.1 2.3 0.6 5.0
Kocholia 874 2.1 2.0 1.0 5.1
Kokare 603 2.1 2.1 0.8 5.0
Amagoro 1,055 1.9 1.7 0.7 4.3
AMUKURA 10,091 2.0 2.0 0.7 4.7
Akoreet 1,164 1.9 1.8 0.6 4.3
Aremit 1,310 2.0 1.9 0.7 4.6
Amukura 921 2.0 1.8 0.9 4.7
Kamolo 1,164 2.2 2.0 0.7 4.9
Kotur 679 2.1 2.1 0.9 5.1
Kwangamur 1,211 2.0 2.1 0.8 4.9
Kaujakito 1,945 2.0 2.0 0.7 4.7
Kaliwa 1,697 2.0 2.1 0.8 4.9
CHAKOL 11,805 1.9 1.8 0.9 4.6
Amongura 1,506 2.1 2.1 0.8 5.0
Asinge 1,614 1.9 1.8 0.8 4.5
Apegei 1,324 1.9 1.9 0.8 4.6
Okame 1,380 2.0 2.0 0.9 4.9
Ochude 1,499 2.0 2.1 0.8 4.9
Angorom 4,482 1.8 1.6 1.1 4.3
TESO DISTRICT 38,031 2.0 1.9 0.8 4.7

TABLE 10: AVAILABLE LAND AREA IN TESO DISTRICT PER AEZ AND HOUSEHOLD
Census 1999

in ha in ’00 ha = km2 in ha
Area in Agricultural
Non-agricultural land
agro-ecological zones (total) land per
DIVISION Forest Others Agricultural
Unsuitable reserve, (roads, land House-
steep lakes, homesteads, LM 1 LM 2 LM 3 hold Person
slopes swamps rivers)
AMAGORO 1,293.00 183.20 414.40 7,310.30 43 49 0.97 0.22
AMUKURA 2,487.60 350.80 797.30 14,064.30 22 153 2 1.39 0.30
ANGURAI 2,094.00 295.70 671.20 11,839.50 85 64 1.38 0.27
CHAKOL 1,925.40 271.50 617.10 10,885.90 81 53 0.99 0.21
TOTAL AREA 7,800.00 1,101.20 2,500.00 44,099.0 103 337 115 1.16 0.25

88
 BUSIA & TESO 23

3.2.3 AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS:

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Busia District
The agricultural potential in the district lies in the LM 1 and LM 2 (sugarcane zones) and LM 3 (cotton
zone) that covers approximately 89,600 ha. Smallholder farmers cultivate sugarcane on 5,540 ha only be-
cause of increasing land shortage for food crops and poor market opportunities for sugarcane, this is a third
of the acreage levels 15 years ago that stood at 17,000 ha. The yields average 80 mt per hectare, that is more
than double compared to 20 years ago. The area planted with cotton has reduced considerably from 27,000
ha in the 1980s to approximately 3,500 ha over the last five years, even if we add the cotton area in Teso
district since 1995 (see Table 12).

TABLE 11: BUSIA DISTRICT SUGARCANE AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD TRENDS
(Source: DAO’s Annual Reports)
Year
Area Production Yield
(until 1995, Teso district ha tons tons/ha
included)
1980/81 8,497 319,500 38
1981/82 11,345 309,700 27
1982/83 12,000 310,800 26
1983/84 15,530 319,900 21
1984/85 14,154 945,900 67
1986/87 18,356 1,340,100 72
1987/88 15,697 1,142,700 73
1988/89 17,136 1,456,500 85
1989/90 15,392 1,231,300 80
1990/91 15,030 1,196,400 80
1991/92 13,055 979,100 75
1992/93 12,794 1,024,00 80
1993/94 10,284 822,700 80
1994/95 7,184 574,700 80
1996/97 7,380 627,300 85
1997/98 7,500 637,500 85
1998/99 8,000 640,000 80
1999/00 7,950 675,800 85
2000/01 7,967 637,400 80
2001/02 7,010 560,800 80
2002/03 6,930 561,300 81

TESO DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS:

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops
Teso district was created in 1995 from the larger original Busia district. The agricultural potential in the
district comprise the LM 1 and LM 2 (sugarcane zones, 440 km2) and LM 3 (cotton zone). But 378 ha only
were cultivated with sugarcane. The reason is the same as for the low acreage of cotton. In the last decade,
cotton production has declined from 1,980 ha in 1995/96 to 600 ha in 2002/2003 because of land short-
age for food crops and low returns to the farmers due to poor marketing strategies. Yields have however
remained constant at an average of 650 kg/ha of seed cotton.
TABLE 12: TESO DISTRICT COTTON AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD TRENDS
(Source: DAO’s Annual Reports)
Year Area Production Yield
(district created in 1995) ha tons kg/ha
1995/96 1,980 1,188 600
1996/97 1,800 1,170 650
1997/98 1,710 975 570
1998/99 1,507 1,055 700
1999/00 1,500 1,065 710

89
 BUSIA & TESO 24

DISTRIBUTION OF FARMING ACTIVITIES DURING THE YEAR PER WEEK AND

AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES

90
BUSIA & TESO 25

91
 BUSIA & TESO 26

92
BUSIA & TESO 27

93
 BUSIA & TESO 28

94
BUSIA & TESO 29

95
 BUSIA & TESO 30

96
 BUSIA & TESO 31

3.2.4 FARM SURVEY IN BUSIA AND TESO DISTRICTS

The Farm Survey (FS 2004) was carried out in eight sites covering the AEZs (LM 1 – 4) with different
Subzones (Table 14). The size of the farms included in the survey ranged between 1 ha and 9 ha. This can
be compared to the overall farm size in Busia and Teso districts of 1.6 ha and 1.3 ha (Table V), respectively.
The reduced proportion of pasture and fallow land (< 30%) indicates that land is increasingly becoming
scarce in these districts. The first Farm Survey 1977 recorded still averages of 7.3 ha in LM 1 and 4.7 ha in
LM 2 & 3 per farm.

The stocking rate of 0.8 – 5.1 LU/ha reflects the high rainfall in these districts. Only between 5-10% of
the cattle are improved dairy stocks. Sheep and goats play a less important role among the grazing livestock
units (Table 15). The farmers grow a variety of crops in any one given season and use comparatively minimal
amounts of crop management inputs (Table 15). Maize growing dominates the farming enterprise (Table
16). It is usually intercropped with a legume (e.g. beans, cowpeas and soyabeans). The low maize yields re-
ported in these districts, i.e. less than 1 t/ha in a season, are a reflection of insufficient usage of manure and
different fertilisers to improve the nutrient-depleted soils. In 1977 the average maize yields were 3.8 t/ha in
LM 1 and 2.5 t/ha in LM 2-3 with inputs of 2 kg N/ha and 15 resp. 8 kg P2O5 /ha. In 2004 10 kg N/ha
and 5 kg P2O5 /ha were given and the result is about a third only! Nitrogen is just pushing the growth, high
yields need many macro- and micronutrients plus insecticides. Farmers must go into ways of recycling the
nutrients, and they need small credits to buy additional fertilisers and insecticides. Only the farmers with
high inputs incl. 5 t of manure/ha (Table 17) get almost the same yields as in 1977 which means sustain-
ability. The soils of the Lower Midlands (LM) are not fertile, but by selecting suitable crops, which demand
fewer nutrients like sweet potatoes, cassava, Napier grass, etc., high and reliable yields can be achieved here
as well, which would go a long way to ensure food security. Infact, the growing of cassava should be en-
couraged as an insurance against food insecurity at the household level. There is great potential in the two
districts for increased food production if farmers are correctly advised to increase the application of fertilizers
on the farms.

TABLE 14: FARM SURVEY AREAS IN BUSIA AND TESO DISTRICTS

District No. in Agro-Ecological Unit Farm Survey Area

Kenya AEZone Subzone Soil Unit
^
BUSIA 1 LM 1 lmi UlS 1 Busia Township Division, Mayenje Sub-location
^
2 LM 2 l (m/s) i U1SA Matayos Division, Esikulu Sub-location
3 LM 3 m^(s/vs) UlIl Funyula Division, Bukiri Sub-location
4 LM 4 (m/s) + (vu) SA2 Budalangi Division, Bulemi Sub-location
TESO 5 LM 1 l^m i BXC Amukura Division, Akobwait Sub-location
^
6 LM 2 l (m/s) i U1G3 Amukura Division, Amukura Sub-location
^
7 LM 3 m/l (s) PnGl Amagoro Division, Kamolo Sub-location
^
8 LM 3 m/l (s) UmG2 Angurai Division, Katelepai Sub-location

97
 BUSIA & TESO 32

98
 BUSIA & TESO 33

TABLE 15a: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 1 OF
BUSIA DISTRICT

Subzone: l^m i, Soil Unit: UlS 1 Survey area 01 (Mayenje)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers
Range Land Family Casual Number of children
ha Sheep & Adults Labourers under 14 years
Dairy Zebu Poultry Pigs
Goats
Avg.0 2.71 1.2 2.63 2.7 45.43 0.93 5.5 1.03 4.23
Avg.1 2.71 4 4.94 4.76 52.42 3.5 5.5 1.94 4.54
Up. Qu. 3.26 2.25 5.25 4.25 50 1 7.25 2 6
Lo. Qu. 1.66 0 0 0 5.25 0 2.75 0 3

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.36 0.13 0.38 0.06 0.84
Avg.1 1.36 0.15 0.50 0.8 0.97
Up. Qu. 1.65 0.2 0.4 0 1.01
Lo. Qu. 0.66 0.05 0 0 0.15

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 7.3 1.5 0.5 1.0 11.3 3.5 7.0 24.8
Avg.1 7.3 - 1.2 1.8 - 7.0 10.4 61.3
Up. Qu. 9 - 0.8 1.6 - 5.6 11.7 24.7
Lo. Qu. 6 - 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 17.91 14.4 30.4 15.4 32.4 - - 1.6 16.4 0.05 0.52 0.05 0.53
Avg.1 31.60 28.9 52.8 30.8 56.2 - - 2.3 21.3 1.48 13.47 0.76 6.90
Up. Qu. 20.18 12.9 21.2 12.9 21.2 - - 0.4 3.4 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

99
 BUSIA & TESO 34

TABLE 15b: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 2 OF
BUSIA DISTRICT

Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UlSA 1 Survey area 02 (Esikulu)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual Permanent children
ha Sheep & Adults Labourers Labourers under
Dairy Zebu Poultry Pigs
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 1.18 0.03 2.37 0.9 11.5 0.53 4.07 4.27 0.07 3.67
Avg.1 1.18 1 3.94 3.86 12.32 2 4.07 9.14 2 3.79
Up. Qu. 1.6 0 3 0.5 15.25 1 5.25 4.25 0 5
Lo. Qu. 0.38 0 0 0 3.75 0 2 0 0 1.75

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.82 0.0 0.06 0.22 0.32
Avg.1 0.82 0.1 0.33 0.09 0.42
Up. Qu. 0.85 0 0 0 0.53
Lo. Qu. 0.29 0 0 0 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 4.4 2.1 0.03 2.0 45.2 0.7 43.0 1.25
Avg.1 4.6 - 0.9 3.4 - 3.3 12.0 25
Up. Qu. 5.3 - 0 1.9 - - - 0
Lo. Qu. 4 - 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 4.47 7.9 - 9.1 - - - 4.3 - 0.02 - 0 0
Avg.1 22.34 25.5 - 26.5 - - - 7.8 - 0.49 - 0 0
Up. Qu. 0 2.9 - 4.1 - - - 1.2 - 0 - 0 0
Lo. Qu. 0 0 - 0.0 - - - 0 0 - 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

100
 BUSIA & TESO 35

TABLE 15c: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 3 OF
BUSIA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^(s or s/vs), Soil Unit: UlI 1 Survey area 03 (Bukiri)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Sheep Family Casual children
ha B/ Adults Labourers under
Dairy Cross Zebu & Poultry Rabbits Pigs
hives 14 years
Goats
Avg.0 2.28 0.13 0.03 2.57 2.7 7.9 0.33 0.3 0.07 3 3.4 2.07
Avg.1 2.28 4 1 7 4.26 13.94 5 4.5 1 3 4.25 4.77
Up. Qu. 3.24 0 0 4 5 15 0 0 0 4 5 1
Lo. Qu. 1.28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.42 0.21 0.55 0.06 0.09
Avg.1 1.42 0.39 0.57 - 0.30
Up. Qu. 1.93 0.25 0.9 - 0.16
Lo. Qu. 0.8 0 0.16 0.32 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Cross Zebu Dairy Cross Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 7.5 1.3 0.06 0.02 1.1 5.5 0.3 0.06 4.7 0.59
Avg.1 7.5 - 1.93 0.5 3.1 - 7.7 1.8 12.3 6.55
Up. Qu. 9 - 0 0 1.4 -- 0 0 4.4 0
Lo. Qu. 6.8 - 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 7.9 1.2 8.1 12.2 80.9 - - 0.2 1.6 0 0 0.43 2.9
Avg.1 23.8 36.5 - 73.0 - - - 0.4 1.3 0 0 0.65 2.3
Up. Qu. 23.3 0 0 0 0 - - 0.2 1.4 0 0 0.52 4
Lo. Qu. 0 0 - 0 - - - 0 - 0 0 0 -

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

101
 BUSIA & TESO 36

TABLE 15d: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 4 OF
BUSIA DISTRICT

Subzone: (m/s) + (vu), Soil Units: SA 2 & UlIA Survey area 04 (Bulemia)
Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers
Range Number of
Land Sheep Family Casual
B/ children under
ha Dairy Zebu & Poultry Pigs Adults Labourers
hives 14 years
Goats
Avg.0 2.61 0 4.27 2.3 5.47 0.13 0.57 7.47 0.43 6
Avg.1 2.61 0 9.14 4.06 10.93 4 5.67 7.47 2.6 6.21
Up. Qu. 2.6 0 3.25 4.25 10.25 0 0 8 0 7
Lo. Qu. 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.55 0.06 0.38 0.06 0.64
Avg.1 1.55 0.14 1.15 0.6 1.13
Up. Qu. 1.6 0.08 0.25 0.27 0.4
Lo. Qu. 0.7 0 0.3 0 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 4.2 1.7 0 1.7 - 0 11.2 0
Avg.1 4.2 3.6 0 3.5 - 0 8.0 -
Up. Qu. 5 1.4 0 1.3 - 0 13 0
Lo. Qu. 3 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 13.0 0 0 0 0 - - 0.1 3.0 0 0 0 0
Avg.1 32.4 0 0 0 0 - - 0.9 9.9 0 0 0 0
Up. Qu. 19.2 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 - 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

102
 BUSIA & TESO 37

TABLE 15e: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 1 OF
TESO DISTRICT

Subzone: l^m i, Soil Units: BXC & UlS 1 Survey area 05 (Amukura)
Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Sheep Family Casual Permanent children
ha Dairy Zebu & Poultry Pigs Adults Labourers Labourers under
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 2.11 0.27 3.2 3.1 9.23 0.17 5.17 2.07 0.07 4.03
Avg.1 2.11 2.67 5.33 4.65 17.31 2.5 5.17 4.43 2 4.48
Up. Qu. 3.3 0 4 4.25 22.5 0 7 3 0 6
Lo. Qu. 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.03 0.11 0.56 0.22 0.26
Avg.1 1.03 0.11 0.65 0.22 0.23
Up. Qu. 1.11 0.1 1.53 0.23 0.33
Lo. Qu. 0.6 0 0 0.03 0.1

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.2 1.7 0.14 1.5 8.10 1.67 6.54 7.8
Avg.1 5.2 - 1.4 2.5 - 0.17 10.91 77.8
Up. Qu. 6.3 - 0 1.2 - - 4.32 0
Lo. Qu. 4 - 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 6.59 3.9 6.8 5.0 8.5 - - 0.4 3.4 0.17 1.51 0.16 1.36
Avg.1 19.8 9.6 17 10.0 17.6 - - 0.7 5.9 0.87 7.57 0.94 8.17
Up. Qu. 6.2 9.0 20 9.0 20 - - 0.4 4.8 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 0 0 - 0 - - - 0 - 0 - 0 -

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

103
 BUSIA & TESO 38

TABLE 15f: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 2 OF
TESO DISTRICT

Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UlG 3 Survey area 06 (Akobwait)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers
Range Number of
Land Family Casual
Sheep children under
ha Dairy Zebu Poultry Pigs Adults Labourers
& Goats 14 years
Avg.0 2.61 0.27 4.07 2.27 25.47 0.93 4.73 0.9 2.97
Avg.1 2.61 8 6.1 3.24 27.29 2 4.73 2.25 3.42
Up. Qu. 3.38 0 6.25 4.25 40 2 6 1.25 4
Lo. Qu. 1.4 0 0 0 4.75 0 3 0 1.75

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.11 0.38 0.49 0.47 0.16
Avg.1 1.11 0.67 1.12 0.70 0.23
Up. Qu. 1.4 0.64 0.4 0.74 0.2
Lo. Qu. 0.6 0 0 0 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.6 1.8 0.1 1.6 9.4 0.6 8.4 6.22
Avg.1 5.6 - 3.4 2.3 - 7.8 12.4 72.73
Up. Qu. 7 - 0 1.9 - 0 15.6 0
Lo. Qu. 4 - 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 22.7 5.4 15.8 5.2 15.2 - - 1.2 3.6 0 0 0.1 0.3
Avg.1 52.5 13.5 22.3 13.0 21.6 - - 2.5 4.1 0 0 1.4 2.2
Up. Qu. 30.1 7.1 15.6 7.1 15.6 - - 1.2 2.6 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 0 0 - 0 - - - 0 - 0 0 0 -

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

104
 BUSIA & TESO 39

TABLE 15g: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 3 OF
TESO DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: UmG 2 Survey area 07 (Kamolo)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers
Range Number of
Land Family Casual
Sheep children under
ha Dairy Zebu Poultry B/hives Adults Labourers
& Goats 14 years
Avg.0 2.60 0.23 2.33 2.47 24.8 0.27 5.53 4.63 3.93
Avg.1 2.60 2.33 3.68 4.11 28.62 2.67 5.53 8.18 4.21
Up. Qu. 3.76 0 4 4 31.75 0 7 7.5 5
Lo. Qu. 1.38 0 0 0 7.75 0 3 0 2

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.12 0.11 0.26 0.97 0.14
Avg.1 1.12 0.15 0.30 1.53 0.18
Up. Qu. 1.43 0.16 0.34 1.6 0.23
Lo. Qu. 0.8 0.01 0.1 0.43 0.04

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 6.1 1.1 0.1 0.9 10.7 1.0 8.8 8.65
Avg.1 6.1 - 1.0 1.4 - 8.4 12.1 66.67
Up. Qu. 8 - 0 1.2 - 0 11.8 0
Lo. Qu. 5 - 0 0 - 0 0 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 27.2 13.5 - 19.5 0 - - 0.14 1.4 0.06 0.6 0.6 5.5
Avg.1 32.7 19.3 - 26.7 0 - - 0.3 2.1 0.6 4.5 1.1 8.4
Up. Qu. 37.3 14 - 28.1 0 - - 0.2 2.1 0 0 0.7 6.5
Lo. Qu. 11.9 0 - 0 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

105
 BUSIA & TESO 40

TABLE 15h: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 3 OF
BUSIA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: PnG 1 Survey area 08 (Katalepai)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Sheep Family Casual children
ha Fish ponds Adults Labourers under
Dairy Zebu & Poultry Pigs Rabbits
¿VKHV 14 years
Goats
Avg.0 2.98 0 3.5 2.8 12.93 0.33 0.17 80 4.33 0.1 4.37
Avg.1 2.98 0 5.83 4 13.86 1.67 5 2400 4.33 1 4.52
Up. Qu. 4 0 6.25 5 20 0 0 0 6 0 6
Lo. Qu. 1.75 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 3 0 2

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.70 0.07 1.02 0.11 0.08
Avg.1 1.70 0.17 1.21 0.53 0.28
Up. Qu. 1.98 0.1 1.49 0.33 0.1
Lo. Qu. 0.9 0 0.2 0 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.9 1.3 0 1.2 3.7 0 3.4 0
Avg.1 5.9 - 0 2.0 - 0 5.0 0
Up. Qu. 6.3 - 0 1.6 - 0 4.2 0
Lo. Qu. 5 - 0 0 - 0 0 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 38.52 11 - 14 - - - 0.09 1.99 0.02 0.45 0 0
Avg.1 72.22 33 - 30 - - - 0.33 3.23 0.29 2.89 0 0
Up. Qu. 21.58 5 - 10 - - 0.04 0.72 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 0 0 - 0 - - - 0 - 0 - 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

106
 BUSIA & TESO 41

TABLE 16a: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 1 OF BUSIA DISTRICT

Subzone: l^m i, Soil Unit: UlS 1 Survey area 01 (Mayenje)
First Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.02 0.18 0 0 0.7 1.81
Cassava 0.29 0.45 0.4 0 8.6 22.22
Cotton 0.07 1.05 0 0 2.1 5.43
Maize 0.11 0.49 0.05 0 3.4 8.79
Maize & beans 0.59 0.71 0.8 0.2 17.7 45.74
Maize & soyabeans 0.03 0.4 0 0 0.8 2.07
Monkey nuts 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.26
Popcorn maize 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.26
Simsim 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.26
Sorghum 0.06 0.21 0.2 0 1.9 4.91
Soyabeans 0.04 0.18 0 0 1.1 2.84
Sweet potatoes 0.06 0.14 0.1 0 1.7 4.39
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.13 0 0 0.4 1.03
Total Sample Area 1.28 38.7 100
Second Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Arrow roots 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.18
Beans 0.02 0.11 0 0 0.45 1.61
Cassava 0.18 0.31 0.2 0 5.5 19.71
Cow peas 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.72
Ground nuts 0.04 0.15 0.1 0 1.2 4.30
Maize 0.11 0.38 0.13 0 3.4 12.19
Maize & beans 0.36 0.47 0.5 0.15 10.9 39.07
Maize & soyabeans 0.03 0.4 0 0 0.8 2.87
Monkey nuts 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.72
Sorghum 0.05 0.23 0 0 1.4 5.02
Soya beans 0.03 0.17 0 0 1.0 3.58
6XQÀRZHU 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.72
Sweet potatoes 0.07 0.18 0.13 0 2.1 7.53
Indigenous vegetables 0.02 0.13 0 0 0.5 1.79
Total Sample Area 0.94 27.9 100
Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.01 0.17 0 0 0.17 4.42
Bananas 0.10 0.12 0.2 0.01 3.07 79.74
Coffee 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.1 2.60
Lemons 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.26
Pineapples 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 2.60
Sugarcane 0.01 0.4 0.4 10.39
Total Sample Area 0.13 3.85 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms; Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

107
 BUSIA & TESO 42

TABLE 16b: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 2 OF BUSIA DISTRICT

Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UlSA 1 Survey area 02 (Esikulu)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bambara nuts 0.02 0.3 0 0 0.6 2.49
Cassava 0.11 0.18 0.2 0 3.25 13.50
Ground nuts 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.23 0.96
Maize 0.10 0.48 0 0 2.85 11.84
Maize & beans 0.45 0.61 0.4 0 13.35 55.44
Maize, soyabeans & bambara nuts 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.66
Sorghum 0.05 0.25 0 0 1.5 6.23
Sweet potatoes 0.06 0.14 0.1 0 1.7 7.06
Tomatoes 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.21
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.15 0.62
Total Sample Area 0.82 24.06 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bambara nuts 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.92
Cassava 0.10 0.18 0.2 0 3.05 14.64
Ground nuts 0.02 0.14 0 0 0.55 2.64
Maize 0.08 0.39 0 0 2.35 11.28
Maize & Beans 0.43 0.62 0.53 0 12.95 62.17
Maize, soyabeans & bambara nuts 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.92
Sorghum 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.92
Sweet potatoes 0.02 0.10 0 0 0.58 2.78
Tomatoes 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.24
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.48
Total Sample Area 0.68 20.83 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Coffee 0.003 0.1 0 0 0.1 100
Total Sample Area 0.003 0.1 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

108
 BUSIA & TESO 43

TABLE 16c: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 3 OF BUSIA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^(s or s/vs), Soil Unit: UlI 1 Survey area 03 (Bukiri)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.03 0.44 0 0 0.88 2.06
Cassava 0.38 0.41 0.51 0.2 11.49 26.93
Cotton 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 0.94
Finger Millet 0.02 0.15 0 0 0.6 1.41
Ground nuts 0.03 0.09 0.06 0 0.79 1.85
Maize 0.12 0.51 0.05 0 3.6 8.44
Maize & Beans 0.54 0.55 0.8 0.2 16.06 37.64
Millet 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.23
Sorghum 0.22 0.27 0.30 0.09 6.56 15.37
Sweet potatoes 0.07 0.12 0.1 0 2.19 5.13
Total Sample Area 1.42 42.67 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.02 0.3 0 0 0.6 3.33
Cassava 0.11 0.13 0.2 0.04 3.32 18.44
Cotton 0.07 0.37 0 0 2.24 12.44
Finger Millet 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 1.11
Ground nuts 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.04 0.22
Maize 0.08 0.35 0.02 0 2.48 13.78
Maize & Beans 0.27 0.33 0.4 0.1 8 44.44
Sweet potatoes 0.04 0.09 0.1 0 1.12 6.22
Total Sample Area 0.6 18.0 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.03 0.12 0.05 0 0.94 14.94
Citrus (Valencia) 0.08 0.42 0 0 2.5 39.75
Coffee 0.09 0.54 0 0 2.7 42.93
Mangoes 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.15 2.38
Total Sample Area 0.2 6.29 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

109
 BUSIA & TESO 44

TABLE 16d: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 4 OF BUSIA DISTRICT

Subzone: (m/s) + (vu), Soil Units: SA 2 & UlIA Survey area 04 (Bulemia)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annualCrops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.03 0.27 0 0 0.8 1.72
Cassava 0.58 0.79 0.8 0 17.3 37.17
Finger millet 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.21
Groundnuts 0.02 0.15 0 0 0.45 0.97
Kales 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.43
Maize 0.02 0.2 0 0 0.6 1.29
Maize & beans 0.54 0.60 0.6 0.2 16.1 34.59
Maize, beans & sorghum 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 0.86
Sorghum 0.28 0.33 0.4 0.1 8.5 18.26
Sorghum & beans 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 0.86
Sorghum & cowpeas 0.01 0.3 0 0 0.3 0.64
Sweet potatoes 0.04 0.18 0.01 0 1.29 2.77
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.21
Total Sample Area 1.55 46.54 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Maize & beans 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 60
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.1 20
Tomatoes 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 20
Total Sample Area 0.02 0.5 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.56
Bananas 0.03 0.20 0 0 1.01 56.11
Citrus 0.01 0.02 0.00 0 0.16 8.89
Mangoes 0.02 0.08 0.02 0 0.67 37.22
Paw paws 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.02 1.11
Total Sample Area 0.06 1.87 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

110
 BUSIA & TESO 45

TABLE 16e: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 1 OF TESO DISTRICT

Subzone: l^m i, Soil Units: BXC & UlS 1 Survey area 05 (Amukura)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.04 0.12 0.1 0 1.1 3.57
Cassava 0.29 0.31 0.43 0.1 8.65 28.04
Cotton 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.65
Finger millet 0.03 0.13 0 0 0.8 2.59
Ground nuts 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.3 0.97
Maize 0.30 0.48 0.4 0 9.1 29.50
Maize & beans 0.13 0.35 0.2 0 3.9 12.64
Napier grass 0.07 1.1 0 0 2.2 7.13
Pineapples 0.03 0.13 0.01 0 0.9 2.92
Sorghum 0.02 0.15 0 0 0.6 1.94
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.4 1.30
Tobacco 0.07 0.2 0.2 0 2.2 7.13
Tomatoes 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.65
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.3 0.97
Total Sample Area 1.03 30.85 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.4 6.25
Cassava 0.04 0.22 0 0 1.1 17.19
Cotton 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.2 3.13
Ground nuts 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.1 1.56
Kales 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 3.13
Maize 0.09 0.25 0.13 0 2.7 42.19
Maize & beans 0.03 0.3 0 0 1.0 15.63
Sorghum 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.2 3.13
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 3.13
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 4.69
Total Sample Area 0.22 6.4 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.07 0.13 0.1 0 2.02 61.21
Coffee 0.01 0.14 0 0 0.28 8.48
Sugarcane 0.03 1 0 0 1 30.30
Total Sample Area 0.11 3.3 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

111
 BUSIA & TESO 46

TABLE 16f: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 2 OF TESO DISTRICT

Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UlG 3 Survey area 06 (Akobwait)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bambara nuts 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.62
Cassava 0.35 0.39 0.4 0.18 10.4 32.22
Finger millet 0.11 0.23 0.2 0 3.2 9.91
Groundnuts 0.02 0.18 0 0 0.7 2.17
Maize 0.19 0.36 0.4 0 5.8 17.97
Maize & beans 0.32 0.56 0.6 0 9.5 29.43
Pineapples 0.03 0.13 0 0 0.78 2.42
Sorghum 0.03 0.15 0 0 0.9 2.79
Tobacco 0.03 0.4 0 0 0.8 2.48
Total Sample Area 1.09 32.28 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bambara nuts 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 1.32
Cassava 0.05 0.21 0.03 0 1.5 9.88
Groundnuts 0.02 0.15 0 0 0.6 3.95
Maize 0.09 0.34 0.13 0 2.7 17.79
Maize & beans 0.22 0.38 0.4 0 6.5 42.82
Simsim 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 1.32
Sorghum 0.11 0.23 0.2 0 3.4 22.40
Sweet potatoes 0.00 0.08 0 0 0.08 0.53
Total Sample Area 0.51 15.18 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.01 0.07 0 0 0.34 2.84
Sugarcane 0.39 0.77 0.65 0 11.62 97.16
Total Sample Area 0.4 11.96 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

112
 BUSIA & TESO 47

TABLE 16g: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 3 OF TESO DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: UmG 2 Survey area 07 (Kamolo)
First Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cabbages 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.60
Cassava 0.20 0.23 0.4 0.1 5.98 18.08
Cow peas 0.00 0.07 0 0 0.14 0.42
Finger millet 0.03 0.33 0 0 1 3.02
Ground nuts 0.04 0.22 0 0 1.3 3.93
Kales 0.01 0.13 0 0 0.4 1.21
Maize & beans 0.38 0.5 0.4 0.15 11.5 34.76
Maize, beans & ground nuts 0.11 0.68 0 0 3.4 10.28
Onions 0.01 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.12
Pineapples 0.01 0.03 0 0 0.06 0.18
Soyabeans 0.01 0.17 0 0 0.34 1.03
Sweet potatoes 0.04 0.09 0.1 0 1.3 3.93
Tobacco 0.24 0.45 0.4 0 7.22 21.83
Tomatoes 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.60
Total Sample Area 1.1 33.08 100
Second Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.03 0.3 0 0 0.9 8.93
Cotton 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.4 3.97
Cow peas 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.24 2.38
Ground nuts 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.40
Kales 0.02 0.13 0 0 0.64 6.35
Maize 0.01 0.12 0 0 0.24 2.38
Maize & beans 0.15 0.32 0.4 0 4.5 44.64
Maize, beans & ground nuts 0.03 0.45 0 0 0.9 8.93
Onions 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.40
Pineapples 0.00 0.03 0 0 0.06 0.60
Simsim 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 1.98
Sorghum 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.99
Soyabeans 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.40
Sweet potatoes 0.03 0.10 0.04 0 0.78 7.74
Tomatoes 0.03 0.33 0 0 1 9.92
Total Sample Area 0.33 10.08 100
Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.00 0.09 0 0 0.09 2.66
Bananas 0.09 0.12 0.10 0 2.66 78.70
Coffee 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.09 2.66
Sugarcane 0.02 0.14 0 0 0.54 15.98
Total Sample Area 0.11 3.38 100
NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms; Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

113
 BUSIA & TESO 48

TABLE 16h: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 3 OF TESO DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: PNG 1 Survey area 08 (Katalepai)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.02 0.17 0 0 0.5 0.98
Capsicum 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.39
Cassava 0.29 0.38 0.4 0.08 8.74 17.14
Cow peas 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 0.78
Finger millet 0.10 0.26 0.2 0 2.9 5.69
Ground nuts 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.20
Kales 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.39
Maize 0.12 0.51 0.05 0 3.6 7.06
Maize & beans 0.79 1.03 0.8 0.15 23.8 46.68
Pineapples 0.10 0.25 0.1 0 3.04 5.96
Simsim 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 0.78
Sorghum 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 0.59
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.4 0.78
Tobacco 0.21 0.53 0.4 0 6.4 12.55
Total Sample Area 1.69 50.98 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.04 0.26 0 0 1.3 3.86
Cassava 0.04 0.6 0 0 1.2 3.57
Cotton 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.19
Kales 0.02 0.25 0 0 0.5 1.49
Maize 0.02 0.23 0 0 0.7 2.08
Maize & beans 0.8 1 0.8 0.1 24 71.34
Pineapples 0.10 0.25 0.1 0 3.04 9.04
Simsim 0.03 0.8 0 0 0.8 2.38
Sorghum 0.02 0.23 0 0 0.7 2.08
6XQÀRZHU 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.59
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 0.89
Tomatoes 0.01 0.3 0 0 0.3 0.89
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.59
Total Sample Area 1.12 33.64 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.06 0.17 0.05 0 1.9 83.70
Coffee 0.01 0.17 0 0 0.17 7.49
Sugarcane 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.2 8.81
Total Sample Area 0.08 2.27 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

114
 BUSIA & TESO 49

3.2.5 INTRODUCTION TO THE ACTUAL LAND USE SYSTEMS AND POTENTIAL

INTENSIFICATION BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT

More detailed information can be found together with calculations of profitability in the Farm Management
Guidelines of each district and in the KARI Fertiliser Use Manual.

In terms of aerial expanse, the dominant Zones are LM 1, LM 2 and LM 3 but towards the Lake Victoria
the poorer Zone LM 4 has been considered too. An additional important reference material is “Small Holder
Farming Handbook for Self-employment”. First published in 1997 by Information Research and Commu-
nication Centre (IRACC) & Marketing Support Services Ltd, Nairobi.

BUSIA DISTRICT

Subzone LM 1 l^m i of the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone

This is the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a medium one and inter-
mediate rains as typified by Mayenje Sub-Location in Busia district. It is dominated by soils of lower-level
uplands. The soils are well drained, moderately deep to very deep (in places shallow over petroplinthite) and
of low fertility because of low content of nutrients (orthic Acrisols with orthic Ferralsols). The rainfall vari-
ability in this Subzone is high, but it is almost always raining. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of
at least 900 – 1000 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons; the second rainy season 500 – 700 mm. The 60% reliability
of the growing period during the 1st and 2nd seasons is > 200 and approximately 165 days, respectively.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still the most dominant food crop,
but yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil infertility related problems. Maybe sweet po-
tatoes planted on ridges in the valley bottoms can help to avert hunger! Apart from maize, sorghum and
finger millet are important components of the food diet. The dominant legume crops in order of importance
include: beans, groundnuts, simsim, cowpeas and of late soybeans. It should be pointed out here that cow-
peas are more susceptible to pest infestation and as such require high inputs of insecticides, which unfortu-
nately are beyond the reach of a majority of smallholder farmers. The dominant fruit crops are: cooking and
sweet bananas, pawpaws, and to some extent oranges. Fruit production in this Subzone could be improved
through the use of improved tissue culture and grafted seedling material (which take only 18 months to give
first fruits). This would greatly improve the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for
the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes and onions,
mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres. The
current cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: sugar cane, sunflower and cotton. The
proposed Busia Sugar Factory has encouraged many smallholder farmers to grow more sugar cane at the
expense of food crops which may cause a critical problem if marketing opportunities are not conducive to
the farmers.

Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone include: compost manure and the use
of effective microoganisms (EM) technology, which enhances the bio-degradation of compost. If the above
listed conservation measures are well implemented, the sustainability of land and eventually the livelihoods
of the smallholder farmers in this Subzone will significantly improve. Attempts should be made to explore
the possibility of applying treated sewage on crop fields to replenish soil fertility. The present yield increase
at three levels of inputs and the yield potential on the predominant soil of this Subzone is shown inTable
17a.

115
 BUSIA & TESO 50

TABLE 17a: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 1, l^m i, UlS 1
Subzone: l^m i, Soil Unit: UlS 1 Survey area 01 (Mayenje)
AEZ: LM 1 SUGARCANE ZONE
Subzone: l^m i
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 200 or more, 2nd rainy season approx. 165)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UIS 1 = orthic ACRISOLS with orthic FERRALSOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 500 - 700 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 900 - 1000 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha 600 2079 2340 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha - 17.0 17.3
P2O5 kg/ha - - -
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 1.0 5.4 18.6
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - ca. 3000 5727 7000
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 17.3 42.5
P2O5 kg/ha - -
K2O kg/ha. - -
Manure t/ha 13.6 18.6
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) Kg/ha * 550 1631 1671 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 0 4.3 5.4
P2O5 kg/ha 0 4.3 5.7
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0.5 1.4 5.8
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 1154 1277 1481 4000
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 0 27 33
P2O5 kg/ha 0 27 35
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0 0.9 3.6

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

116
 BUSIA & TESO 51

Subzone LM2 l^(m/s) i of the Lower Midland Marginal Sugarcane Zone

This is the Marginal Sugarcane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a (weak) medium to short one and
intermediate rains as typified by Esikulu Sub-Location in Busia district. It is dominated by soils on lower-
level uplands. 60% of the soils are well drained, moderately deep to very deep with a low content of nutri-
ents (orthic Acrisols); 40% are imperfectly drained (gleyic Acrisols). The rainfall variability in this Subzone is
fairly high, and hence the reliability is low, but still not bad. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of
at least 800 – 1000 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons; the second rainy season 500 – 700 mm. The 60% reliability
of growing periods during the 1st and 2nd seasons is more than 180 and 115 –140 days, respectively.

Maize is still the current most dominant food crop, followed by sorghum, finger millet and cassava. The
dominant legume crop is common bean. The dominant fruit crops are: bananas and water melons. Fruit
production in this Subzone could be improved through the use of improved tissue culture and grafted seed-
ling material. This would greatly improve the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for
the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes indigenous
vegetables and onions, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby
market centres. The current cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: sunflower, tobacco
and cotton. Due to the poor income returns from these crops, their acreage has declined. As the conditions
for sugarcane are marginal and marketing strategies poor, it is not important in this Subzone.

Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone includes: inorganic and organic fer-
tilisers. There is need to promote the use of effective microoganism (EM) technology, which enhances the
bio-degradation of compost. If the above listed measures are well practiced and more recycling of nutrients
is attempted, the soil fertility status would be greatly enhanced.

The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on the predominant soil of this
subzone is shown in Table 17b.

117
 BUSIA & TESO 52

TABLE 17b: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 2, l^(m/s) i, UlSA 1
Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UlSA 1 Survey area 02 (Esikulu)
AEZ: LM 2 MARGINAL SUGARCANE ZONE
Subzone: l^(m/s) i (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season >180, 2nd rainy season 115 - 140)
Unit with predom. Soil: UISA 1 = association of orthic ACRISOLS with dystric CAMBISOLS
Crop Yields3) and
and gleyic ACRISOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 500 - 700 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 800 - 1000 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - 3584 - 6000 - 2190 -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 26 8.0
P2O5 kg/ha 26 9.3
K2O kg/ha. - -
Manure t/ha 3.6 4.4
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) Kg/ha * *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize Hybrid
intercropped with maize
beans not
Yields3) kg/ha - 826 1225 4000 - 424 559 suited
Fertilizer: in the
N kg/ha 6.0 14 5.0 15 2nd
P2O5 kg/ha 9.0 16 7.0 17 rains
K2O kg/ha - - - - here
Manure t/ha 2.6 7.7 2.0 7.9

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

118
 BUSIA & TESO 53

Subzone LM 3 m/l^(s or s/sv) of the Lower Midland Cotton Zone

This is the Cotton Zone with a medium to long cropping season followed by a (weak) short to very short one as
typified by Bukiri Sub-location in Busia district. It is dominated by soils on lower-level uplands. The soils
are well drained to moderately well drained, deep to shallow of varying but mainly low fertility (chromic
Acrisols). The rainfall variability in this Subzone is moderate in the first season and high in the second, and
hence the reliability is low then. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of between 430 – 700 mm in
10 out of 15 seasons; the second rainy season 200 – 350 mm. The 60% reliability of growing period during
the 1st and 2nd seasons is 145 – 155 and 75 – 85 days, respectively.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still the current most dominant food
crop, even though yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil exhaustion related problems of
decreasing soil fertility. Apart from maize, sorghum, finger millet, sweet potatoes and protein deficient cas-
sava constitute important components of the food diet. The dominant legume crop is common beans. The
dominant fruit crop is the cooking bananas type. Banana production in this Subzone could be improved
through the use of improved tissue culture banana seedling materials (which take only 18 months to bring
first fruits). This would greatly improve the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for
the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes and onions,
mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres. More
vegetables, particularly the indegenous types and fruits are possible (see crop list). The current cash crops
grown in this Subzone include: sunflower, tobacco and cotton. Very little or no fertiliser is allocated to the
food crop farmlands. The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on the pre-
dominant soil of this Subzone is shown in Table 17c.

119
 BUSIA & TESO 54

TABLE 17c: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 3, m/l^(s or s/vs), UlI 1
Subzone: m/l^(s or s/vs), Soil Unit: UlI 1 Survey area 03 (Bukiri)
AEZ: LM 3 COTTON ZONE
Subzone: m/l^(s or s/vs) (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 145 - 155, 2nd rainy season
75 - 85)
Crop Yields3) and Unit with predom. Soil: UlI 1 = chromic ACRISOLS, partly petro-ferric phase
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 200 - 350 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 430 - 700 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - 2700 5500 - 2100 4818 5000
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 14 0 40
P2O5 kg/ha - - -
K2O kg/ha. - - -
Manure t/ha 7.2 4.1 18.0
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 1423 1494 1733 3500 1395 1710 1733 3500
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 1 2 3 1 3 6
P2O5 kg/ha 0 0 31 0 0 16.3
K2O kg/ha - - - - - -
Manure t/ha 0.2 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.9

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

120
 BUSIA & TESO 55

Subzone LM 4 (m/s) + (vu) of the Lower Midland Marginal Cotton Zone

This is the Marginal Cotton Zone with a (weak) medium to short cropping season and a very uncertain (weak)
second one, as typified by Bulemi Sub-Location in Busia district. The higher western parts are dominated by
soils on lower middle-level uplands. The soils are well drained, deep to very deep, but of low fertility, partly
due to their salinity (ferralo-orthic Acrisols). The lower parts have mainly swampy soils (humic Gleysols)
with a potential for swamp rice. The rainfall variability in this Subzone is high, and hence the reliability is
low. The first rainy season can rely only on an amount of 350 – 450 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons; the second
rainy season from less than 150 to 200 mm only. The 60% reliability of growing periods during the 1st and
2nd seasons is 115-135 and less than 45 days, respectively. Nevertheless farmers are able to get an average
yield not too bad in the second rainy season, although the reliability of the growing period is low, but there
are many small rains before and after it under which the local maize race has adapted through many genera-
tions and local sorghum too.

This Subzone is really marginal for most of the crops. Even though maize is still the current most dominant
food crop, the yields per hectare are dismally very low due to the vagaries of weather and by the mere fact
that almost no fertiliser inputs are applied during planting. This can be explained simply in terms of the
high poverty levels prevalent in the area. The occasional flooding in the area has also made most farmers
to become dependant on food aid, thus becoming less interested in farming activities. Apart from maize,
sorghum, proso millet, simsim and cassava constitute important components of the food diet. Cotton that
used to be the main cash crop in this Subzone has diminished considerably due to poor market prices. There
are, however, market incentives in place at the moment that could see the growing of cotton revamped.

There is an urgent need to promote soil fertility replenishment efforts in this Subzone if any meaningful crop
production is to be achieved. Such efforts could concentrate on the use of organic fertilisers using locally
available resources. The low nitrogen content can already be enriched by common beans legume as higher
yields of intercropped maize show (Table 17d). Other severe problems responsible for low yields are nema-
todes and Striga. An indication of the present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on
the Acrisols in this Subzone is given in Table 17d.

121
 BUSIA & TESO 56

TABLE 17d: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 4, (m/s) + vu, SA 2 & UlIA
Subzone: (m/s) + (vu), Soil Units: SA 2 & UlIA Survey area 04 (Bulemia)
AEZ: LM 4 MARGINAL COTTON ZONE
Subzone: (m/s) + vu (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 115 - 135, 2nd rainy season 45 or less)
Crop Yields3) Unit with predom. Soils: SA 2 & UII A = humic GLEYSOLS and ferro-orthic ACRISOLS
and Inputs 2nd rainy season: 150 - 200 mm in at least 10 out
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 350 - 450 mm
15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local I= II = III = AEU I= II = III =
AEU Pot.6)
pure stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5)
Yields3) kg/ha Second
Fertilizer: rainy season
N kg/ha inadequate
P2O5 kg/ha for maize
K2O kg/ha here
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize Second
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 2600 - - - rainy season
Fertilizer: inadequate
N kg/ha for maize
P2O5 kg/ha here
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local Second
intercropped rainy season
with beans inadequate
Yields3) kg/ha 1045 1317 1349 * - - - for maize
Fertilizer: here
N kg/ha 0 0 0
P2O5 kg/ha 0 0 0
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0 0 0.3
Hybrid maize Second
intercropped rainy season
with beans inadequate
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 2500 - - - for maize
Fertilizer: here
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

122
 BUSIA & TESO 57

TESO DISTRICT

Subzone LM 1, l^m i of the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone

This is the Sugarcane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a medium one and intermediate rains as
typified by Akobwait Sub-Location in Teso district. Here it is dominated by the difficult soils on bottom-
lands. The soils are a complex of imperfectly drained to poorly drained ones and a few higher places (dystric
Planosols; with pellic Vertisols, vertic and humic Gleysols and plinthic Acrisols).People need the bordering
upland soils too. The rainfall is high and the variability in this Subzone is moderate, and hence the reliability
is not a problem. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of at least 900 – 1000 mm in 10 out of 15
seasons; the second rainy season on 500 – 700 mm. The 60% reliability of growing periods during the 1st
and 2nd seasons is more than 190 and 140 –165 days, respectively.

The zone is climatically well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still the most dominant
food crop, but yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil fertility decline and continuing ex-
haustion. Together with the diminished land availability per head, there is a growing danger of shortage if
the yields are not increased. Apart from maize, other important components of the food diet are cassava, sor-
ghum and finger millets. Cassava is considered here as an important food security crop. Cassava has recently
overtaken maize in importance. Infact homesteads without any cassava crop are considered to belong to the
poor wealth ranked class. For oil seed, simsim is planted. The legume crops consist of beans and pigeon peas.
It should be pointed out here that cowpeas are more susceptible to pest infestation and as such require high
inputs of insecticides, which unfortunately are beyond the reach of a majority of smallholder farmers. The
dominant fruit crops are: cooking and sweet bananas and to small extent oranges. Fruit production in this
Subzone could be improved through the use of improved tissue culture and grafted seedling material (which
take only 18 months to bring first fruits). This would greatly improved the quality of the produce and hence
fetch more cash income for the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of
kales, tomatoes and onions, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in
nearby market centres. The current cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: sugarcane
and tobacco. The proposed Busia Sugar Factory has encouraged many smallholder farmers to grow more
sugar cane at the expense of food crops.

The dominant soil conservation structure at the higher parts is Fanya juu, which is usually fortified with Na-
pier grass. Besides serving as an erosion control measure, it serves as fodder for animals, since many farmers
do practice zero grazing in this Subzone. Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone
include: Compost, manure and the use of effective microoganisms (EM) technology, which enhances the
bio-degradation of compost. If the above listed conservation measures are well implemented, the sustain-
ability of land and eventually the livelihoods of the smallholder farmers in this Subzone will significantly
improve. The lower parts need drainage and ridging to become an arable outlet for the pressure on cropland.
Chick peas would grow on the vertisols, and sweet potatoes on the ridges. The present yield increase under
three levels of inputs and the potential on the predominant soil of this Subzone is shown in Table 17e.

123
 BUSIA & TESO 58

TABLE 17e: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 1, l^m i, BXC & UlS 1
Subzone: l^m i, Soil Units: BXC & UlS 1 Survey area 05 (Amukura)
AEZ: LM 1 SUGARCANE ZONE
Subzone: l^m i (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season >190, 2nd rainy season 140 - 165)
Crop Yields3) Unit with predom. Soils: BXC = dystric PLANOSOLS & UIS 1 = bordering orthic ACRISOLS
and Inputs 2nd rainy season: 500 - 700 mm in at least 10 out
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 900 - 1000 mm
15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local I= II = III = AEU I= II = III =
AEU Pot.6)
pure stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5)
Yields3) kg/ha - 1427 1474 * - 924 1370 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 2.4 5 8.2 16
P2O5 kg/ha 3.2 5 10.8 16
K2O kg/ha - - - -
Manure t/ha 1.2 1.2 3.8 4.1
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 6000 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 3094 3414 * - - 4114 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 19 20 14
P2O5 kg/ha 17 20 16
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 2.4 2.9 12
Hybrid maize
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 4200 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

124
 BUSIA & TESO 59

Subzone LM 2 l^(m/s) i of the Marginal Sugarcane Zone

This is the Marginal Sugarcane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a (weak) medium to short one and
intermediate rains as typified by Amukura Sub-Location in Teso district. It is dominated by soils on lower-
level uplands. The soils are well drained, moderately deep to very deep and of low fertility (orthic Ferralsols
and orthic Acrisols). The rainfall variability in this Subzone is fairly high, and hence the reliability is low a
bit but still not bad. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of at least 700 – 950 mm in 10 out of 15
seasons; the second rainy season 400 – 650 mm. The 60% reliability of growing periods during the 1st and
2nd seasons is more than 180 and 115-140 days, respectively.

Maize is still the current most dominant food crop, followed by sorghum, finger millet and cassava. The
dominant legume crops are common beans and pigeon peas. The dominant fruit crops are: cooking and
sweet bananas. Fruit production in this Subzone could be improved through the use of improved tissue
culture and grafted seedling material (which take only 18 months to bring first fruits). This would greatly
improved the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for the farmers. Vegetable produc-
tion in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes and onions, mainly for home consumption.
In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres. The current cash crops grown in this
Subzone in order of importance are: sugarcane and tobacco. Due to the poor income returns from these
crops, their acreage has declined.

Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone include: inorganic and organic fertilis-
ers. There is need to promote the use of effective microoganisms (EM) technology, which enhances the bio-
degradation of compost. If the above listed conservation measures are well practiced, the soil fertility status
would be greatly enhanced. The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on the
predominant soil of this Subzone is given in Table 17f.

125
 BUSIA & TESO 60

TABLE 17f: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 2, l^(m/s) i, UlG 3
Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UlG 3 Survey area 06 (Akobwait)
AEZ: LM 2 MARGINAL SUGARCANE ZONE
Subzone: l^(m/s) i (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season >180, 2nd rainy season 115 - 140)
Unit with predom. Soils: UIG 3 = orthic and ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS, surrounds BXC complex
Crop Yields3) of dystric PLANOSOLS, dystric and vertic GLEYSOLS and
and Inputs pellic VERTISOLS
2nd rainy season: 400 - 650 mm in at least 10 out
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 700 - 950 mm
15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local I= II = III = AEU I= II = III =
AEU Pot.6)
pure stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5)
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha 2813 4229 6000 - - not suited in
Fertilizer: the 2nd rains
N kg/ha 25 31 here
P2O5 kg/ha 25 30
K2O kg/ha. - -
Manure t/ha 4.1 7.1
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 1170 1224 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 25 28
P2O5 kg/ha 25 27
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 4.1 6.3
Hybrid maize Hybrid maize
intercropped not suited in
with beans the 2nd rains
Yields3) kg/ha - 2145 3405 4000 - here
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 17 19
P2O5 kg/ha 17 18
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 2.7 4.3

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

126
 BUSIA & TESO 61

Subzone LM 3 m/l^(s) of the Lower Midland Cotton Zone, Soil Unit PnG1

This is the Cotton Zone with a medium to long cropping season followed by a (weak) short one as typified by
Kamolo Sub-Location in Teso district. It is dominated by soils on non dissected erosional plains. The soils
are a complex of imperfectly drained to poorly drained clays of low fertility (gleyic Acrisols and dystric Gley-
sols). The rainfall variability in this Subzone is moderate in the first season and higher in the second one, and
hence their reliability is lower. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of at least 500 – 800 mm in 10
out of 15 seasons; the second rainy season on 230 – 400 mm. The 60% reliability of growing periods during
the 1st and 2nd seasons is 155 - 175 and 85 - 105 days, respectively.

The Subzone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize has been the most dominant food
crop, but yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil fertility related problems. Cassava has now
become the most important food and cash crop. Apart from maize, finger millet, sweet potatoes and a lot
of cassava constitute important components of the food diet. The dominant legume crops include common
beans, cowpeas, groundnuts green grams and pigeon peas, which are usually grown on higher ground. The
dominant fruit crop is the cooking banana type that is grown in valley bottoms. Banana production in this
Subzone could be improved through the use of improved tissue culture banana seedling material (which
takes only 18 months to mature fruits). This would greatly improve the quality of the produce and hence
fetch more cash income for the farmers. Vegetable production in this Agro-Ecological Unit of the Subzone
is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes and onions, mainly for home consumption but it could be more
varied and increased. There is great potential for indegenous vegetables in this zone too. The current cash
crops grown in this Subzone include: sunflower, tobacco and cotton. However, the returns from cotton and
sunflower are very minimal because of poor marketing outlets; their area is decreasing while that of tobacco
is increasing.

Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone are mainly through the use of crop
residues. Very little or no fertiliser is applied to the food crop fields. There is need to promote the use of ef-
fective microoganisms (EM) technology, which enhances the bio-degradation of compost and crop residues.
If the above listed measures together with more manuring are well practiced, the soil fertility status would be
greatly enhanced. The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on the predomi-
nant soil of this Subzone is shown in Table 17g.

127
 BUSIA & TESO 62

TABLE 17g: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 3, m/l^(s), UmG 2
Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: UmG 2 Survey area 07 (Kamolo)
AEZ: LM 3 COTTON ZONE
Subzone: m/l^(s) (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 155 - 175, 2nd rainy season 85 - 105)
Crop Yields3) Unit with predom. Soils: UmG 2 = ferralo - orthic ACRISOLS
and Inputs 2nd rainy season: 230 - 400 mm in at least 10 out
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 500 - 800 mm
15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local I= II = III = AEU I= II = III =
AEU Pot.6)
pure stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize Hybrid
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 4300 - maize not
Fertilizer: suited in
N kg/ha the 2nd rains
P2O5 kg/ha here
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 878 1557 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 5.0 10.1
P2O5 kg/ha 10.0 14.6
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 0.8 1.1
Hybrid maize Hybrid maize
intercropped not suited in
with beans the 2nd rains
Yields3) kg/ha - 1898 2520 3200 - here
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 39 40
P2O5 kg/ha 5.7 10
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 0.4 0.8

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

128
 BUSIA & TESO 63

Subzone LM 3 m/l^(s) of the Lower Midland Cotton Zone, Soil Unit UmG2

This is the Cotton Zone with a medium to long cropping season followed by a (weak) short one as typified by
Katalepai Sub-Location in Teso district. It is dominated by soils on middle-level uplands. The soils are well
drained, deep to very deep and of moderate to low fertility (ferralo-orthic Acrisols). The rainfall variability
in this Subzone is moderate in the first rainy season and higher in the second one, and hence their reliability
is lower. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of at least 500 – 800 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons; the
second rainy season only on 230 – 400 mm. The 60% reliability of growing periods during the 1st and 2nd
seasons is 155 – 175 and 85 – 105 days, respectively.

Although it receives less rainfall than zones 1 and 2, this Subzone is still well suited for the production of a
variety of crops. The cotton area has decreased considerably due to low cash returns to the farmers, tobacco is
increasing instead. Maize is the most dominant food crop, but the average yields per hectare have consider-
ably declined due to soil exhaustion and fertility related problems from 2500 kg/ha to 1800 kg/ha in spite of
higher inputs of N and K , but other nutrients are almost finished. Apart from maize, cassava is increasingly
becoming an important component of the food diet because it still gives some amount of yield on degraded
soils; finger millet is still important as a staple food and sweet potatoes are becoming important. The domi-
nant legume crops include common beans, cowpeas, groundnuts, green grams, pigeon peas and soybeans,
which are usually grown on higher ground. The dominant fruit crops are citrus, mangoes and cooking ba-
nana that is grown in valley bottoms. Fruit production in this Subzone could be improved through the use
of improved tissue culture seedling materials which take only 18 months to bring first fruits. This would
greatly raise the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for the farmers. Also the planted
area of only 2% of the crop land could be increased. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the
growing of kales, cabbages, tomatoes and onions, mainly for home consumption. There is great potential for
the cultivation of indigenous vegetables.

Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone are mainly through the use of crop resi-
dues. Very little or no fertiliser is applied to the food crop fields. There is need to promote the use of effective
microoganisms (EM) technology, which enhances the bio-degradation of crop residues and compost. If the
above listed measures and manuring are well practiced, the soil fertility status would be greatly enhanced.
The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on the predominant soil of this
Subzone is shown in Table 17h.

129
 BUSIA & TESO 64

TABLE 17h: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 3, m/l^(s), PnG 1
Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: PnG 1 Survey area 08 (Katalepai)
AEZ: LM 3 COTTON ZONE
Subzone: m/l^(s) (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 155 - 175, 2nd rainy season 85 - 105)
Crop Yields3) Unit with predom. Soils: PnG 1 = gleyic ACRISOLS and dystric GLEYSOLS
and Inputs 2nd rainy season: 230 - 400 mm in at least 10 out
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 500 - 800 mm
15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local I= II = III = AEU I= II = III =
AEU Pot.6)
pure stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - * - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize Hybrid
Yields3) kg/ha maize not
Fertilizer: suited in
N kg/ha the 2nd rains
P2O5 kg/ha here
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha 919 1453 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 13 24
P2O5 kg/ha 25 30
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 0.1 0.2
Hybrid maize Hybrid maize
intercropped not suited in
with beans the 2nd rains
Yields3) kg/ha 1806 1808 1827 3600 here
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 0 13 24
P2O5 kg/ha 0 25 30
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0.1 0.1 0.2

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

130
 BUSIA & TESO 65

3.2.6 FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPORTANT

AGRO-ECOLOGICAL UNITS

The Fertiliser Use Recommendation Project of the GTZ (1986 - 92) had two trial sites in the former Busia
district, one at Alupe in Zone LM 1 and the other in Bukiri-Buburi in LM 3. For the other zones, subzones
and units MURIUKI and QURESHI showed which results from other districts could be representative (see
map of Fertiliser Recommendations and Farm Survey Areas) and made curves for fertiliser response1.
The trial site at Alupe was placed in a hitherto uncultivated plot where the natural fertility was not yet
depleted. Because of the unexhausted soil, the results after fertilizing and manuring were not significantly
higher and it seemed not economic to apply it, and therefore KARI gave no quantified recommendations.
But it was mentioned already that for depleted soils it might become necessary to apply fertiliser plus ma-
nure as the results of the Farm Survey 2004 showed.

Recommended rates of an AEU increase towards the wetter Subzone and decrease into a drier one if the
soil unit extends there (see the small maps). We have tended to lower the rates due to the low financial
base of the smallholder farmers. The optimum can be calculated from the curve formulas in MURIUKI &
QURESHI Fertiliser Use Manual, KARI, Nairobi 2001. In the long run a sustained amount must be given
to maintain the nutrient content of the soil. Some quantities for this can be seen in the chapter 3.1 under
the General Remarks section.

Higher recommendations are given in the Smallholder Farming Handbook of the IRACC and MSS, Nai-
robi 1997, but the economic investment and risk is too high for the local farmers here. A rural small credit
system for the inputs could help a lot. Where scientific sources for quantifying the rates are lacking, some
conclusions can be drawn from the difference of inputs and yields between the low and high production
levels of the Farm Survey 2004. The empty column of the Table “Other Nutrients Recommended”does not
mean that there is no application necessary. It is simple because of lacking of trial results. Symptoms of nu-
trient deficiencies and for the methods of addressing them see Muriuki, A.W. and Qureshi, J.N. (2001),
Table 1&2, p. 22-23.

Finally it must be mentioned again that fertilising alone will increase the yields only for some few years.
The micronutrients that are not included in the fertiliser become exhausted with time. The application of
manure to required levels is a must in order to have a stable agrobiological system with continuous produc-
tion2.

1
Muriuki, A.W. & Qureshi, J.N.: Fertiliser Use Manual. Nairobi kari .

131
 BUSIA & TESO 66

132
 BUSIA & TESO 67

TABLE 18a: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNIT LM 1 p or two, UlG l
Recommended Average Yield
Crop varieties and Increase if this Average Yield
Fertiliser Rates Increase if Other Nutrients
Season Rate is Applied 1
kg/ha kg/ha Manure is Applied Recommended
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 20 N + 10 P2O5 900 5t/ha o ca. 800 kg 500 kg of Lime/ha
Local maize & beans * * 3t/ha o ca. 300 kg Potassium
Hybrid maize & beans 20 P2O5 800 (maize) 5t/ha o ca. 500 kg Potassium
Sorghum, medium mat. 20 P2O5 750 * Lime
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize 20 P2O5 450 3t/ha o ca. 400 kg Lime
Local maize & beans * * 2t/ha o ca. 200 kg Potassium
Biseasonal (or more)
Cassava 20 N + 35 P2O5 ca. 5000 * -
Semi-permanent
350 CAN + 250 Lime soil 4 t/ha at
Sugarcane 2 Superphosphate, ca. 30000 planting, 250 kg/ha
*
ratoons 650 CAN Muriate of Potash
+ 400 Superphos. for 3rd ratoon

Sources: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 94, 97 & 106; conclusions from the Farm Survey
$UHD6XJDUFDQH3URY)DUP0DQ2I¿FHUJ. IMBIRA; Inform. Research and Communication
Centre (IRACC): Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997, p. 167
1
Double rates on cereals will yield almost double if climate is suitable and there are no pests and diseases; * data not available
2
The Prov. Farm Man.O. J. Imbira recommends (for practical reasons) lower amounts than the IRACC: 4 bags/ha DAP or 9 bags/ha SSP and
2 bags/ha potash at planting time, 7 bags/ha CAN or 4 bags/ha urea as topdressing; 9 bags/ha CAN or 5 bags/ha urea for the ratoon.

133
 BUSIA & TESO 68

TABLE 18b: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1 LM 1 l^m i, UlS l & UlSA
Recommended Average Yield
Increase if this Average Yield
Crop varieties and Fertiliser Rates Increase if Other Nutrients
Season Rate is Applied 1 Recommended
kg/ha kg/ha Manure is Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 25 N + 15 P2O5 1000 5t/ha o ca. 800 kg Lime + Mg. +
Local maize & beans * * 3t/ha o ca. 500 kg potassium
Hybrid maize & beans 20 P2O5 800 (maize) 5t/ha o ca. 800 kg together
Second rainy season
Local maize * * 4t/ha o ca. 700 kg “
Local maize & beans * * 4t/ha o ca. 700 kg “
Semi-permanent
Lime mixed with
350 CAN. + 250
soil 4 t/ha at
Superphosphate,
Sugarcane 2 ratoons 650 CAN + ca. 30000 * planting, 250 kg/ha
Muriate of Potash
400 Superphos.
for 3rd ratoon

6RXUFHV&RQFOXVLRQVIURPWKH)DUP6XUYH\DUHD6XJDUFDQH3URY)DUP0DQ2I¿FHUJ. IMBIRA;
Inform. Research and Communication Centre (IRACC): Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self
Employment.-Nairobi 1997, p. 167
1
Units with soils not significantly different. Extend into LM 2, l^(m/s) i, where the rates and yields decrease ca. 20% due to lower rainfall, esp. in
the 2nd rainy season; * data not available
2
The Prov. Farm Man.O. J. Imbira recommends (for practical reasons) lower amounts than the IRACC: 4 bags/ha DAP or 9 bags/ha SSP and
2 bags/ha potash at planting time, 7 bags/ha CAN or 4 bags/ha urea as topdressing; 9 bags/ha CAN or 5 bags/ha urea for the ratoon.

134
 BUSIA & TESO 69

TABLE 18c: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNIT LM 1 l^m i, UlD l
Average Yield
Recommended Increase if this Average Yield
Crop varieties and Season Fertiliser Rates Rate is Applied Increase if Other Nutrients
Manure is Recommended
kg/ha kg/ha Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 50 N + 10 P2O5 675 5t/ha o ca. 900 kg Lime + Mg. +
Hybrid maize & beans 25 790 (maize) 3t/ha o ca. 500 kg potassium
Sorghum, m. mat. 20 P2O5 845 * together
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize 50 N 300 * “
Hybrid maize & beans 25 N 620 (maize) 4t/ha o ca. 700 kg “
Sorghum, m. mat. 20 P2O5 510 * “
Semi-permanent
Lime mixed with
350 CAN. + 250
soil 4 t/ha at
Superphosphate,
Sugarcane 1 ratoons 650 CAN ca. 30000 * planting, 250 kg/ha
Muriate of Potash
+ 400 Superphos.
for 3rd ratoon

Sources: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 90&94; conclusions from the Farm Survey 2004,
DUHD6XJDUFDQH3URY)DUP0DQ2I¿FHUJ. IMBIRA; Inform. Research and Communication Centre
(IRACC): Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997, p. 167
1
The Prov. Farm Man.O. J. Imbira recommends (for practical reasons) lower amounts than the IRACC: 4 bags/ha DAP or 9 bags/ha SSP and
2 bags/ha potash at planting time, 7 bags/ha CAN or 4 bags/ha urea as topdressing; 9 bags/ha CAN or 5 bags/ha urea for the ratoon; * data not
available

135
 BUSIA & TESO 70

TABLE 18d: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1 LM 2, l^(m/s) i, UIGA 1 with BXC 1 (mbugas)
Average Yield Average Yield
Recommended Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
Crop varieties and Season Fertiliser Rates
kg/ha Rate is Applied Manure is Recommended
kg/ha Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 25 P2O5 600 WKDĺFDNJ 500 kg lime/ha
Local maize & beans * - WKDĺFDNJ Lime + Mg. +
Hybrid maize & beans 50 P2O5 - WKDĺFDNJ potassium
Sorghum, m. mat. 25 P2O5 650 (maize) * together
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize 20 P2O5 400 4t/ha o ca. 500 kg “
Local maize & beans - - 2t/ha o ca. 500 kg “
Hybrid maize & beans - - * “
Sorghum, m. to e. mat. - - * “
Semi-permanent
Lime mixed with
300 CAN + 250
Superphosph., soil 4 t/ha at
Sugarcane 2) ratoons 600 CAN
ca. 25 000 * planting, 250 kg/ha
Muriate of Potash
+ 400 Superphos. for 3rd ratoon

Sources: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 90&97; conclusions from the Farm Survey 2004,
DUHD6XJDUFDQH3URY)DUP0DQ2I¿FHUJ. IMBIRA; Inform. Research and Communication Centre
(IRACC): Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997, p. 167, reduced due
to less rainfall.
1
A complex of peneplains and broad bottomlands (valley mbugas), recommendations are for the higher places; * data not available
2
The Prov. Farm Man.O. J. Imbira recommends (for practical reasons) lower amounts than the IRACC: 4 bags/ha DAP or 9 bags/ha SSP and
2 bags/ha potash at planting time, 7 bags/ha CAN or 4 bags/ha urea as topdressing; 9 bags/ha CAN or 5 bags/ha urea for the ratoon.

136
 BUSIA & TESO 71

TABLE 18e: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1) LM 3 m^(s or s/vs), UlIA & UlI 1

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
Crop varieties and Season Fertiliser Rates
Rate is Applied Manure is Recommended
kg/ha kg/ha Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 25 P2O5 700 5t/ha o ca. 500 kg Lime + Mg. +
Local maize & beans * * * potassium
Hybrid maize & beans 50 P2O5 975 (maize) 5t/ha o ca. 460 kg together
Sorghum, m. mat. 25 P2O5 950 * “
Cotton (to 2nd r.s.) 15 P2O5 or 150 DSP 140 5t/ha o ca. 900 kg “
Second rainy season
Maize KCB 1 25 P2O5 660 5t/ha o ca. 400 kg “
Maize KCB & beans * * 5t/ha o ca. 300 kg “
Biseasonal (or more)
Cassava 30 P2O5 2200 * “

Sources: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 93 & 94; FURP of GTZ and KARI: Fertiliser Use
Recommendations, Vol. 9, BUSIA District, Nairobi, 1995. Trial Site Bukiri-Buburi; Inform. Research
and Communication Centre (IRACC): Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi
1997, p. 155
1)
Units with soils not significantly different; * data not available

137
 BUSIA & TESO 72

138
 BUSIA & TESO 73

TABLE 18f: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1) LM 2 l/m^(s/m) & LM 3 m/l^(s), PnG 1

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
Crop varieties and Season Fertiliser Rates
Rate is Applied Manure is Recommended
kg/ha kg/ha Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 20 N + 10 P2O5 800 WKDĺFDNJ Lime + Mg. +
Local maize * * WKDĺFDNJ potassium
Local maize & beans * * WKDĺFDNJ together
Hybrid maize & beans 20 N, 20 P2O5 1 000 (maize) WKDĺFDNJ “
Cotton (to 2nd r.s.) 150 DSP * * “
Second rainy season
Local maize & beans 10 P2O5 500 (maize) 4t/ha o ca. 400 kg “
Biseasonal (or more)
Cassava 30 P2O5 2200 * “

Sources: Conclusions from Farm Survey area 7 (approximate estimates); Inform. Research and Communication
Centre (IRACC): Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997, p. 155
1)
Rates and yields are for LM 2; in LM 3 they are about 10% less,in the 2nd rainy season; * data not available

TABLE 18g: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNIT LM 3 m/l^(s), UmG 2
Average Yield Average Yield
Recommended Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
Crop varieties and Season Fertiliser Rates
kg/ha Rate is Applied Manure is Recommended
kg/ha Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 25 N + 10 P2O5 850 * Lime + Mg. +
Local maize * * * potassium
Local maize & beans - - * together
150 Double
Cotton (to 2nd r.s.) Superphosphate
* * “
Second rainy season
Due to the short and weak No fertiliser is Manuring is in any
2nd rainy season recommended FDVHSUR¿WDEOHWR
because of the increase Nitrate
climatic and and the humus
economic risk content and to
increase the
moisture storage
capacity of the soil

Sources: Muriuki & Qureshi: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 90&94; conclusions from the Farm
Survey 2004, area 8; Inform. Research and Communication Centre (IRACC): Small Holder Farming
Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997, p. 155; * data not available

139
 BUSIA & TESO 74

TABLE 18h: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1) LM 4 (m/s) + (vu), UlIA with SA 2
Outside the swampy places in soil unit SA 2
Average Yield
Recommended Increase if this Average Yield Other
Crop varieties and Season Fertiliser Rates Increase if Manure Nutrients
kg/ha Rate is Applied is Applied Recommended
kg/ha
First rainy season
Maize H 511 or 512 25 N + 20 P2O5 410 WKDĺNJ *
Local maize & beans 25 N 325 (maize) WKDĺNJP -
Sorghum, m./e. mat 25 N 320 WKDĺNJ -
Second rainy season
Due to the short and weak No fertiliser is Manuring is in any
2nd rainy season recommended FDVHSUR¿WDEOHWR
because of the increase Nitrate and
climatic and the humus content
economic risk and to increase the
moisture storage
capacity of the soil,
also for the next
season
First to second rainy seas.
Cotton 100 DSP “

Sources: Muriuki & Qureshi: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 90 & 93; conclusions from the Farm Survey
2004, area 4.
1)
For the rates and yields at higher located soils UlIA, see Table 19e excluding the 2nd rainy season; * data not available

140
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 1

3.3 BUNGOMA AND MT. ELGON GROUP OF DISTRICTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS DistrictPage

3.3.1 Natural Potential 3

Introduction 3
Average Annual Rainfall Map 4
Table 1: Rainfall Figures 5
Table 2: Temperature Data 5
66% Reliability of Rainfall in Agrohumid Period of First Rainy Season 6
66% Reliability of Rainfall in Agrohumid Period of the Second Rainy Season . . . . . . . . . 7
Table 3: Average Potential Evapotranspiration 8
Table 4: Climate in the Agro-Ecological Zones 9
Agro-Ecological Zones Map 10
Agro-Ecological Zones and Subzones (=Legend to the AEZ Map), with Land Use
Potentials and Water Availability &Requirement Diagrams 11
Bungoma and Mt. Elgon Soils 17
Soil Distribution, Fertility and Major Characteristics with Legend to the Soil Map 18

3.3.2 Population and Land 22

Bungoma District
Table 5: Population in Bungoma District Per Division and Location 22
Table 6: Composition of Households in Bungoma District Per Division and Location 23
Table 7: Available Land Area in Bungoma District per AEZ and Household 24
Mt. Elgon District
Table 8: Population in Mt. Elgon District Per Division and Location 25
Table 9: Composition of Households in Mt. Elgon District Per Division and Location 26
Table 10: Available Land Area in Mt. Elgon District per AEZ and Household 26

3.3.3 Agricultural Statistics 27

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Bungoma District 27
Table 11: Bungoma District Coffee Area, Production and Yield Trends 27
Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Mt. Elgon District 28
Table 12: Mt. Elgon Coffee Area, Production and Yield Trends 28
Table 13: Mt. Elgon Maize Area, Production and Yield Trends 28
Distribution of Farming Activities During the Year Per Week and Agro-ecological Zone 29
Tables 14 a-k: Farming Activities in the Agro-Ecological Zones 29

3.3.4 Farm Survey in Bungoma and Mt. Elgon Districts 35

Table 15: Farm Survey Sites in Bungoma and Mt. Elgon Districts 35
Farm Survey Areas and Fertiliser Recommendations Map 36
Tables 16 a-i: Assets, Land Use, Farming Intensity and Inputs 37

141
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 2

Tables 17 a-i: Cropping Pattern 46-54

3.3.5 Introduction to the Actual Land Use Systems and to the Potential Intensification
by Better Farm Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Bungoma District
LM2 l^(m/s) of the Lower Midland Marginal Sugarcane Zone 55
Tables 18 a-g: Increase of Yields by Better Farm Management 56 - 68
LM3 m/l^(s) of the Lower Midland Cotton Zone (Valley Bottomlands) 57
LM3 m/l^(s) of the Lower Midland Cotton Zone (Undulating Peneplains) 59
UM1 m/l^m/s of the Coffee-Tea Zone 61
UM2 m/l^s i of the Main Coffee Zone 63
UM3-4 l/vl i of the Marginal Coffee Zone 65
UM4 l/vl or two of the Maize-Sunflower Zone 67

Mt. Elgon District

LH1 l/m^mi of the Tea-Dairy Zone 69
Tables 18 h-i: Increase of Yields by Better Farm Management 70 - 72
LH2 vl i of the Wheat/Maize-Pyrethrum Zone 71

3.3.6 Fertiliser and Manure Recommendations for Important Agro-Ecological Units 73

Maps of Important Agro-Ecological Units 75
Tables 19 a-e: Fertiliser and Manure Recommendations: 77 - 80
LM2 l^(m/s) i & l^(s) i & LM3 m/l^(s), UIGA 1 & UIG3, UIGA & BXC1
of the Marginal Sugarcane & Cotton Zones 77
UM1 m/l^m/s i & UM2 m/l^s/m & s i, UM 3-4 l/vl i, UIN1&3 of the Tea-Coffee,
Main Coffee & Marginal Coffee Zones 78
UM 3-4 l^vl i or m^s i & UM4 l/vl or two, UIRA & UlGA1 of the Marginal Coffee &
Maize-Sunflower Zones 79
LH1 l/m^m & LH2 vl i or two, RB2 of the Tea and Coffee & Wheat/M.-Pyr. Zones 80

142
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 3

3.3.1 NATURAL POTENTIAL

INTRODUCTION

The Bungoma and Mt. Elgon districts are mainly situated on the slopes and foothills of Mt. Elgon, and its
natural potential is partly related to the natural potential of the districts in Central or East Kenya also situ-
ated on the slopes of a volcanic mountain: forest, tea and coffee zones, fertile volcanic soils, enough water.

However, the climate shows differences. Here, the foot plains featuring well-distributed annual average
rainfall of 1200 – 1800 mm, are generally wetter due to local rains caused by winds from Lake Victoria. This
allows sugar cane cultivation (except in western areas); for the same reason, differentiation in rainy seasons
during the years is much less. It is very difficult to say what the second rains are because of more or less
continuous rainfall.

Therefore, the growing periods given in the Subzones are only one possibility of dividing the normally very
long period. The symbol for the second cropping season indicates here the remaining time for cultivation
after the first maize crop is harvested. Of course the second period may be longer if plantings starts earlier,
but then the first one is shortened (Table 4).

The average annual rainfall in the districts ranges from 1 000 to 1 800 mm; the seasonal distribution is
500 – 1 000 mm during 1st rains and 430 – 800 mm during 2nd rains in 10 out of 15 years (66% reli-
ability). The Agro-Ecological Zones stretch from Tropical Alpine Zones to Lower Midland Zones with tea,
wheat/maize-pyrethrum, coffee, maize-sunflower, sugar cane and cotton zones. The potential for tea is not
yet really developed. Annual crops may be late maturing ones. The total amount for the 60% reliability of
growing periods ranges from more than 360 days (LH 1) to about 230 days (LM 3 or UM 3/UM 4).

On the other hand it means we have in zone UM 3-4 a dry period of about 135 days with a very low rainfall
reliability, lasting from October to February. This is insufficient for coffee. In spite of the relatively high an-
nual rainfall, the climate is very marginal regarding coffee cultivation, therefore the zone is named three to
four. It means that for coffee growing, there must be a deep soil with very good moisture storage conditions
which occurs locally only.

In the southern part of the district (especially in LM 3) the annual mean temperature is about 21-22°C
in the northern part, however, because of the altitude, 5 –10°C (in TA I and TA II). Evapotranspiration is
relatively low in the agricultural zones and increases from less than 1 400 mm (in LH 1) to 1 800 mm (in
UM 1/UM 2). In the southern part of the district only, potential evapotranspiration may reach more than
1 800 mm per year.

143
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 4

144
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 5

TABLE 1: RAINFALL FIGURES

from selected typical stations having at least 15 years of records
Agro Ecol. Kind Annual Monthly rainfall in mm
No. and Name of
Zone & of rainfall
altitude Station Subzone records mm J F M A M J J A S O N D

8934023 Sangalo Inst. of LM 2 Average 1553 51 64 120 220 236 138 117 131 137 130 110 76
1370 m Science & Tec. l ^ (m/s) i 66%1 1330 22 50 55 165 200 125 100 115 108 105 80 25

8934060 Kimilili UM 2-1 Av. 1549 41 62 118 209 238 148 125 141 156 144 105 55
1676 m Agric. Dept. m/l ^ s/m 66%1 1300 12 55 56 160 198 139 105 115 123 120 78 18
8934082 Bungoma LM 2 Av. 1536 52 78 122 220 218 127 108 148 117 142 128 66
1433 m Agric. Dept. l ^ (m/s) i 66%2 1310 23 59 60 165 180 82 90 100 95 118 80 24
8934098 Kimilili LH 1 Av. 1681 56 69 116 350 215 105 140 150 149 155 116 46
2073 m Forest Stn. p or l/m ^ m 66%2 1425 17 58 59 250 182 95 115 120 125 130 87 16

8934113 Kapsakwony UM 1 Av. 1656 54 79 126 222 218 144 129 162 168 167 121 54
1829 m Chief´s Office p or l/m ^ m 66%2 1405 15 65 68 170 185 135 107 125 128 127 90 17

8934118 Sirisia UM 2 Av. 1494 46 66 118 204 205 126 121 141 132 135 110 68
1615 m Chief´s Camp vl i or m/l ^ s i 66%1 1290 21 41 86 153 154 83 98 108 107 121 71 20
8934119 Webuye LM 2-1 Av. 1692 47 86 125 203 253 157 151 155 156 127 103 44
1524 m Health Centre l/m ^ (s/m) 66%2 1450 21 60 67 152 210 140 130 122 123 115 70 15

8934120 Chwele UM 2 Av. 1425 52 61 103 182 185 108 135 114 136 174 110 66
1615 m Health Centre m/l ^ s i 66%2 1230 23 40 75 137 140 87 110 80 110 140 75 25

8934134 Bungoma LM 2 Av. 1604 41 89 146 244 242 120 107 120 127 137 142 61
1388 m Water Supply l/m ^ (s/m) 66%2 1370 15 65 70 180 190 80 90 80 100 115 90 20

1
These figures of rainfall reliability should be exceeded normally in 10 out of 15 years.
2
Estimate of this reliability by correlation, no detailed data were available for enough years to GTZ.

TABLE 2: TEMPERATURE DATA

No. and Name of Kind of Temperature in°C Belt
AEZ1
altitude Station records limits
J F M A M J J A S O N D Yr.
Kamusinga
Sec. School Mean max. 26.8 27.8 27.6 26.2 24.9 24.8 23.5 22.8 25.2 25.6 25.0 25.6 25.5
2000 m
8934107 (1961-67, ann. Mean temp. 19.9 20.6 20.7 20.4 19.4 18.8 18.3 18.1 18.7 19.6 19.4 19.5 19.4
UM 1 UM
17085 m mean. temp.
Mean min. 12.9 13.4 13.7 14.6 13.8 12.7 13.1 13.3 12.1 13.5 13.7 13.3 13.3 1500 m
ca. 0.6°C
higher now) Abs. min. 7.8 11.1 10.0 11.1 11.1 10.0 10.0 11.1 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 7.8

1
AEZ = Agro-ecological zone

145
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 6

146
BUNG. & MT.EL. 7

147
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 8

TABLE 3: AVERAGE POTENTIAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION

Average Potential Evapotranspiration ET0 in mm Av. Rainfall
No. and Name of Type1 Year %
altitude Station AEZ J F M A M J J A S O N D Year in of
mm ET0

8934060 Kimilili interp. 157 143 156 128 116 104 102 119 121 141 130 146 1563 1549 99%
1676 m Agric. Dep. UM 2-1

8934082 Bungoma interp. 170 157 171 149 136 122 120 138 140 158 145 162 1767 1536 87%
1433 m Agric. Dep. LM 2

8934113 Kapsakwony interp. 152 138 150 123 110 100 96 112 114 135 125 139 1494 1656 111%
1829 m &KLHIV2I¿FH UM 1

8934118 Sirisia interp. 160 145 159 133 120 110 107 125 126 145 134 150 1614 1494 93%
1615 m Chief´s Camp UM 2

8934119 Webuye interp. 162 151 165 142 132 119 118 130 136 152 140 153 1700 1692 99%
1524 m Health Centre LM 2-1

1
Type of eruation: calc. = calculated by formula of Penman & McCulloch (1965) with albedo for green grass 0.2; interp. = interpolated from neigh-
bouring stations, considering altitude and rainfall difference.
AEZ = Agro-Ecol. Zone, explaining table see general part.

148
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 9

TABLE 4: CLIMATE IN THE AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES

66% reliability 60% reliability of cereal and

Agro- of rainfall 1 legumes growing period
Altitude Ann. mean Ann. av.
Ecological Subzone temperature rainfall
in m in°C in mm
Zone 1st 2nd 1st 2nd Total3
rainy s. rainy s. rainy s.2 rainy s. in days
in mm in mm in days in days
TA 1
Tropical Alpine Unimportant, because little crop possibilities only
3000-3500 10.0-7.0 1000-1300 near UH
Cattle and Sheep
Zone
TA I1
Tropical Alpine Relatively small, hence unimportant
Sheep Zone
UH 0-1
Forest Zone and
Here all Forest Reserve (steep slopes and valuable timber)
Sheep and Dairy
Zone

LH 1 p or l/m 190 or
^m 1950-2400 18.0-15.2 1600-1800 750-950 650-800 more2 170-175 >360
Tea-Dairy Zone

LH 2
Wheat/Maize- vl i 1950-2300 18.0-16.4 1300-1600 630-800 630-690 185 or 100-130 285-330
or two more
Pyrethrum Zone
vl i or m/l 1540-1800 650-800 620-700 170 or 115-130 285-300
UM 1 ^m/s i more
1500-2000 21.0-18.0
Coffee-Tea Zone 170 or
m/l^s/m 1540-1700 700-750 600-650 more 105-115 245-265

UM 2 vl i or 160 or
1500-1900 21.0-18.8 1300-1600 650-720 550-630 85-105 245-265
Main Coffee Zone m/l^s i more
UM 3
Maize and l/vl i or 140 or
m^s i 1500-1900 21.0-18.8 1200-1500 550-650 450-580 more 85-105 215-245
Marginal Coffee
Zone
UM 4
0DL]H6XQÀRZHU 1/vl or 1500-1900 21.0-18.8 1150-1400 500-630 400-560 130 or 80-100 210-230
two more
Zone
LM 1
210 or
Lower Midland l^m 1350-1500 22.0-21.1 1600-1800 700-800 500-650 more 135-145 345-355
Sugacane Zone

p or two 1400-1650 650-750 480-580 195 or 115-130 310-325

more
LM 2
Marginal vl i or 1350-1550 22.0-20.9 1350-1600 650-700 460-580 180 or 105-115 285-295
l^mi more
Sugarcane Zone
m/l^s/m 1500-1650 630-700 480-630 155-175 105-115 260-290

LM 3
Lower Midland m/1^(s) 1200-1400 22.4-21.6 1200-1450 500-650 430-500 150-170 85-105 230-270
Cotton Zone

1
Amounts surpassed normally in 10 of 15 years, falling during the agro-humid period which allows growing of most cultivated
plants.
2
More if growing cycle of cultivated plants continues into the period of second rains.
3
Agrohumid conditions continue from 1st to 2nd rainy season in the whole district.

149
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 10

150
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 11

AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES AND SUBZONES

TA = TROPICAL ALPINE ZONES
TA I = Tro p i c a l-Alp in e Ca tt le and Sheep Zone
Grazing for sheep and cattle. Cabbages, potatoes and pyrethrum marginal (cultivatable near
forest only)
TA II = Tro p i c a l-Alp in e S h e e p Zone
Grazing for sheep

UH = UPPER HIGHLAND ZONES

UH 0 = Fo re s t Zo n e
UH 1 = S h e e p a n d Da i r y Zo n e
Here Forest Reserve because of steep slopes and valuable timber production

LH =
LOWER HIGHLAND ZONES
LH 1 = Te a - Da i r y Zo n e
LH 1 p = Tea-Dairy Zone with permanent cropping possibilities dividable in a long to medium cropping
or l/m^m season, followed by a medium one Most of it is Forest Reserve because of steep slopes, water
retention and valuable timber production

Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. > 8 0 % o f t h e o p t i m u m ) 1
1st rainy season, start norm. end of F.: Peas; cabbages, lettuce, spinach
2nd rainy season, start norm. end of July: Peas
G o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. 6 0 - 8 0 % o f t h e o p t i m u m )
1st rainy season: Maize H 614, 625 - 629 2, H 6210 or 6213 (>2100 m), PAN 99 and others, see
crop list, med. mat. potatoes like Desirée (~60%)3ODWHPDWUDSHVHHGOLNH1LOODFDXOLÀRZHU
carrots, leek, kales, endive
2nd rainy season: Early mat. potatoes like Annet; carrots, kales, cabbages, beetroot, spinach,
celery
Whole year, best planting time end of F.: Tea (high quality on deeply weathered soils)
F a i r y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. 4 0 - 6 0 % o f t h e o p t i m u m )
1st rainy season: Finger millet; onions and sweet potatoes (lower places)
2nd rainy season: Leek, lettuce
Whole year: Pyrethrum (higher places), plums, passion fruit(lower places)
Pasture and forage
Around 0.6 ha/LU on secondary pasture of Kikuyu grass, well suitable for grade dairy cows

LH 2 = Wh e a t/ Ma iz e - Py re t h r u m Zone
LH 2 vl i Wheat/Maize-Pyrethrum Zone with a very long cropping season and intermediate rains, dividable
or two in two variable cropping seasons and intermediate rains
G o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. 6 0 - 8 0 % o f t h e o p t i m u m )
1st rainy season (to 2nd r. s.), start norm. March: Late mat. wheat like Kenya Bongo (Apr.-O.),
late mat. triticale, late mat. maize like H 611D (higher places), H 614, 625 - 629, H 6210 or
H 6213, PAN 99 (e. of F./Apr.-S./O., ~80% on deep volcanic soils in lower places); peas,
horse beans, med. mat. potatoes 3$SU$XODWHPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH.HQ\D:KLWHORZHU
SODFHVEHVWOLQVHHGUDSHVHHGFDEEDJHVNDOHVFDXOLÀRZHUFDUURWVEHHWURRWVSLQDFKFHOHU\
lettuce
2nd rainy season, start undistinctly around July: M. mat. barley like K. Research (June-O.), m.
mat. wheat like K. Tembo (June-O.); linseed; kales, carrots, beetroot, spinach, tomatoes
(lower places), celery
Whole year: Black Wattle, Pyrethrum New Zealand Flax (higher places)
F a i r y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. 4 0 - 6 0 % o f t h e o p t i m u m )
1st rainy season: Finger millet, med. mat. beans like Cuarentino (50-60%, lower places); tomatoes,
onions
2nd rainy season: Peas, beans (below 2100 m); e. mat. potatoes like Annet (S.-D.); cabbages,
FDXOLÀRZHURQLRQVOHWWXFH
Whole year: Apples, pears and plums above 2100 m; strawberries, passion fruit (below 2100m)

151
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 12

Pasture and forage

Around 1.0 ha/LU on highland savanna of Kikuyu, Red oats and tufted grass 4 between Cedar
IRUHVW UHOLFWV a KD/8 RQ DUWL¿FLDO SDVWXUH RI 1DQGL 6HWDULD !P RU 5KRGHV JUDVV 
2000 m; with add. feeding of Giant Setaria and lucerne or clover down to 0.3 ha/LU; suitable
for grade dairy cows

UM = UPPER MIDLAND ZONES

UM 1 = Co ff e e - Te a Zo n e
UM 1 = Coffee-Tea Zone with a very long cropping season and intermediate rains, dividable in a med-
vl i or ium to long cropping season followed by a medium to short one and i. r. (see Diagram Kimilili)
m/l^m/s i
Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l
1st rainy season, start norm. beginning of March: Cabbages, kales
2ndUDLQ\VHDVRQVWDUWVLQGLVWLQFWO\EHJRI$XJXVW(PDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH+6
Whole year: Tea (~80%, medium quality) passion fruit, guavas

Good yield potential

1st rainy season: Maize H 614, H 625 - 629, H 6210 or H 6213 (March - Sep.,other varieties see
FURSOLVW3$1 +ORZHUSODFHVXSWRP¿QJHUPLOOHWPPDW
beans like Cuarentino 5 ; m. mat. potatoes like Desirée (higher places), sweet potatoes (lower
SODFHVPPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH.HQ\D:KLWH)HGKDRU6KDEDPPDWVR\DEHDQVOLNH+LOO
spinach, onions, carrots (above 1600 m), broccoli
2nd rainy season: E. mat. beans like Rose coco, sweet potatoes (lower places); kales, onions,
tomatoes
Whole year: Arabica coffee, bananas, yams, taro (in valleys), mountain pawpaws, avocadoes,
loquats
Fair yield potential
1st rainy season: High altitude sorghum; tomatoes
2ndUDLQ\VHDVRQ0PDWPDL]H+3$1 KLJKDOWVRUJKXP$XJ)¿QJHU
millet; e. mat. potatoes like Annet; cabbages
Whole year: Citrus, taro ( on slopes)
Pasture and forage
$URXQGKD/8RQDUWL¿FLDORUVHFRQGDU\SDVWXUHRIVWDUJUDVVGRZQWRDERXWKD/8
feeding Napier resp. Bana grass, banana leaves and stems, maize stalks, sweet potatoes vines and
other forage like Silver leaf desmodium (Desmodium uncinatum)

UM 1 = Coffee-Tea Zone
m/l^s/m with a medium to long cropping season followed by a short to medium one

The same as above , but tea only good instead of very good; stocking rates about 10% less.

UM 2 = Ma i n Co ff e e Zo n e
UM 2 = Main Coffee Zone with a very long cropping season and intermediate rains, dividable in a
vl i or medium to long cropping season followed by a short one and i. r.
m/l^s i

Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l
1st rainy season, start norm. beg. of March: Maize H 614 (higher places, March-Oct.); cabbages,
kales
Whole year, best planting time March: Castor

Good yield potential

1st rainy season: Maize H 623 (lower places, March-Aug.), H 625, 629, 6210, 6213 (March-
6HS3$1 ¿QJHUPLOOHWPPDWEHDQVOLNH&XDUHQWLQR5 ; sweet potatoes; m.
PDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH.HQ\D)HGKDRU6KDED0D\2FWPPDWVR\DEHDQVOLNH%ODFN+DZN
onions, spinach, tomatoes
2nd rainy season, start undistinctly b. of Aug.: E. mat. beans like Katheka, onions (on light
soils)
Whole year: Arabica coffee (~60%, on good deep volcanic soils), Macadamia nuts, bananas (in
valleys), passion fruits, mountain pawpaws, avocadoes, guavas

152
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 13

Fair yield potential

1st rainy season: M. mat. wheat and barley (only in northeastern higher places, May- Sep.); m.
mat. potatoes like Desirée (higher places), pigeon peas (lower places)
2nd rainy season: M. to e. mat maize like H 513 or 515 (Aug.-Nov.), 623 (July-Nov.); e. mat.
potatoes like Annet (end of July-Oct.), sweet potatoes; tomatoes
Whole year: Arabica coffee (on less suitable soils), bananas (outside valleys), citrus, taro (in
valleys), yams, pineapples (lower places)

Pasture and forage

KD/8RQVHFRQGDU\SDVWXUHDURXQGKD/8RQDUWL¿FLDOSDVWXUHRI5KRGHJUDVVGRZQWR
0.15 ha/LU feeding Napier or Bana grass and others; Silver leaf desmodium best fodder legume
(for rotation and dairy cows)

153
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 14

UM 3 = Ma rg i n a l Co ff e e Zo n e (here Coffee-Maize Zone)

UM 3 = Marginal Coffee Zone with a long to very long cropping season and intermediate rains,
l/vl i or dividable in a medium cropping season followed by a short one and i. r.
m^s i

Good yield potential

1st rainy season, start. norm. beg. of March: Maize H 614, 625 - 629, H 6210 & 6213 (higher
QRUWKHDVWHUQSODFHV3$1 +ORZHUSODFHV¿QJHUPLOOHWKLJKDOW
sorghum; m. mat. beans (lower places) 5VZHHWSRWDWRHVPPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH.HQ\D
Fedha or Shaba (May- Oct.), e. mat. soya beans like Black Hawk (lower places), m. mat.
like Hill (higher places); cabbages, kales, onions (on light soils), spinach, tomatoes
2nd rainy season, start indistinctly b. of Aug.: Very early mat. beans like Katheka (poor in dry
years); onions (on light soils)
Whole year: Mountain pawpaws, Macadamia nuts, castor

Fair yield potential

1st rainy season: M. mat. wheat and barley (only in northeastern higher places); m. mat.
potatoes like Desirée (higher places)
2nd rainy season: E. mat potatoes like Annet (higher places), sweet potatoes; tomatoes
Whole year: Arabica coffee (with mulching on good deep soils, otherwise poor resp.
marginal), bananas (like coffee), avocadoes, citrus 6, pineapples

154
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 15

Pasture and forage

±KD/8RQQDWXUDOVDYDQQDSDVWXUHKD/8RQDUWL¿FLDOSDVWXUHRI5KRGHVJUDVV
down to 0.18 ha/LU feeding Napier or Bana grass and others. Desmodium uncinatum best
fodder legume
UM 4 = Ma iz e - S u n f lo we r Zo ne
UM 4 = 0DL]H6XQÀRZHU=RQHZLWK
with aD long
ORQJ to
WR very
YHU\ long
ORQJ cropping
FURSSLQJ season
VHDVRQ dividable
GLYLGDEOH in
LQ two
WZR variable
YDULDEOH
l/vl or two cropping seasons (See Kakamega District)

LM LOWER MIDLAND ZONES

LM 1 = Lo we r Mi d l a n d S u gar C ane Zone
LM 1 = Lower Midland Sugar Cane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a medium one
l^m
Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l
1st rainy season, start norm. F. but reliable end of March: Early & med. mat. sorghum; m.
PDW VXQÀRZHU OLNH .HQ\D )HGKD 6KDED + RU  P PDW VR\D EHDQV OLNH +LOO
sweet potatoes, yam beans
Whole year , best planting time March: Pawpaws, guavas
Good yield potential
1st rainy season: M. mat. maize like H 623, late mat. sorghum like E 1291 (for stock feed),
¿QJHUPLOOHWULFHPPDWEHDQVOLNH&XDUHQWLQRSLJHRQSHDV0DUFK)\HOORZ\DPV
(F.-O./N.); sweet pepper, kales, Chinese cabbage, spinach, cabbage, chillies, egg plants
(to 2nd rainy season), pumpkins
nd
2 rainy season , start undistinctly end of Aug.: Maize H 511, 513 or 515, m. mat. sorghum;
HPDWEHDQVFRZSHDVVZHHWSRWDWRHVPPDWVR\DEHDQVHPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH+6
345; kales, Chinese cabbage, spinach, onions
Whole year: Sugar cane, bananas (nematodes danger), tea in upper places (70-80%, but
medium to low quality), Robusta coffee, avocadoes, cassava
Fair yield potential
1st rainy season: Cotton (med. quality)
2ndUDLQ\VHDVRQ0DL]H+¿QJHUPLOOHWODWHPDWJURXQGQXWVOLNH0ZLWXQGHDQGODWH
mat. bambarra groundnuts (both in light soils); cabbage
Whole year: Mangoes, taro, citrus
Pasture and forage
Around 0.5 ha/LU on sec. pasture where originally there has been a moist submontane
forest; down to 0.13 ha/LU feeding Napier resp. Bana grass, banana leaves and Siratro (start
middle - end of F.: fair yields, start beginning - end of March: good yields)

LM 2 = Ma rg i n a l S u g a r Ca n e Zone
LM 2 = Marginal Sugar Cane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a (weak) medium to
l^(m/s) i short one and intermediate rains
Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l
1st rainy season, start norm. mid F. to b. of March: Early mat. sorghum like Serena (March
±-XQHPPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH.HQ\D)HGKD6KDED+RUHPDWVR\DEHDQV
like Black Hawk; sweet potatoes, onions, yam beans
Whole year: E. mat.cassava, pawpaws
Good yield potential
1stUDLQ\VHDVRQ0PDWPDL]HOLNH+ODWHPDWVRUJKXPOLNH(VWRFNIHHG¿QJHU
millet; m. mat. beans like Cuarentino, pigeon peas (March-F.), late mat. rosette resistant
groundnuts like Mwitunde (in light soils); cotton (med. quality); sweet pepper, tomatoes,
cabbages, kales. roselle
2nd rainy season , start Aug.: Bulrush millet, m. mat. sorghum, ratoon sorghum (S.-Aug.); e.
mat. beans like Rose coco (GLP 2), green grams; onions, kales, tomatoes
Whole year: Bananas (nematodes danger), pineapples, sisal

155
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 16

Fair yield potential

1st rainy season: Rice, bambarra groundnuts (in light soils, even in poor ones), cowpeas;
tobacco
2nd rainy season: Maize H 512, 513, 515; pigeon peas (Sep.-July), cowpeas, m. mat.
groundnuts like Serere 116; sweet potatoes; simsim; cabbages; cotton (July-Feb.),e. mat.
VXQÀRZHUOLNH+6
Whole year: Sugarcane (on less suitable soils and near LM 3 marginal), Robusta coffee,
citrus, mangoes
Pasture and forage
0.5-0.7 ha/LU on high grass savanna with Hyparrhenia and Panicum dominating; down to
about 0.15 ha/LU feeding Napier resp. Bana grass and banana leaves. Siratro and Desmodium
for soil and pasture improvement, Leucaena

LM 2 = Marginal Sugar Cane Zone with a long to medium cropping season

l/m^(s/m) followed by a (weak) short to medium one
Small and transitional. Crop potential like LM 2 l^(m/s) i but m. mat. sorghum in 2nd rainy
season and bananas only fair, maize H 511-13 in 2nd rainy season and sugar cane (also on
good soils) only marginal. Ratooning sorghum 1st to 2nd rainy season good. Stocking rates
~10% less.
LM 2 = Marginal Sugar Cane Zone with a medium to long cropping season followed by a (weak)
m/l^(s/m) short to medium one
Small, crop potential like LM 2 l^(m/s) i but earlier mat. varieties in 1st rainy season (see crop
list). No Robusta coffee. Stocking rates ~15% less.

LM 3 = Lo we r Mi d l a n d Co tt on Zone
LM 3 = Lower Midland Cotton Zone with a medium to long cropping season followed by a (weak)
m/l^(s) short one
Good yield potential
1st rainy season, start norm. beg. of March: M. mat. maize H 511, 513, 515, m. mat. sorghum
like KARI Mtama, ratooning sorghum 1st to 2nd rainy season, e. mat. millets; m. mat.
beans like Cuarentino, green grams, cowpeas; groundnuts like Mwitunde (in light soils),
simsim; sweet potatoes; cotton (lower places), m. mat. soya beans like Hill, tobacco
KLJKHU SODFHV VXQÀRZHU WRPDWRHV PXVNPHORQV RQLRQV FKLFN SHDV HVS RQ KHDY\
black soils); yam beans
2nd rainy season , start indistinctly end of Aug.: Simsim, green grams, tomatoes
Whole year, best planting time March: Cassava, sisal. Near swamps with water regulation
resp. add. irrigation: Rice (lower places, bottomlands), bananas (on dams), Chinese
cabbage (on ridges) and other vegetables
Fair yield potential
1stUDLQ\V0DL]H+¿QJHUPLOOHWSLJHRQSHDV0DUFK)FRWWRQKLJKHU
places)
2nd rainy season: E. mat. proso millet (Oct.-Nov.), dwarf sorghum, e. mat. bulrush millet
(bird rejecting awned var. best); e. mat. beans like Katheka, e. mat. bambarra groundnuts
(in light soils, even in poor ones); sweet potatoes (in swampy places)
Whole year: pawpaws, mangoes, citrus, pineapples
Pasture and forage
Around 0.6 – 1.0 ha/LU on mixed savanna; to about 0.18 ha/LU feeding Bana resp. Napier
grass and others; Desmodium, Stylosanthes and others for pasture improvement, Leucaena

1
All these percentages are climatical, assumed that the place has suitable soils and is well fertilized and manured.
2
Needs 8 months to ripe (end of Feb.-Oct.)
3
Spraying against fungus diseases important
4
The bad tufted grasses Eleusine jaegeri and Pennisetum schimperi are expanding if the areas are overgrazed. They may be controlled by fire.
5
Sometimes rotting because of too wet conditions
6
With additional irrigation (D.-F.) well growing

156
BUNG. & MT.EL. 17

157
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 18

SOIL DISTRIBUTION, FERTILITY AND MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS

The topography of the districts ranges from the heights of the Mt. Elgon region to the low areas of the Nzioa
river which drains the major part of the area. In the central part around Bungoma the landscape is character-
ized by a succession of valleys and higher areas. Apart from the Mt. Elgon region, the area is underlain by
granites from the Basement system.

On the highest part of the extinct Mt. Elgon volcano, soils rich in organic matter are found (MV 1). Down-
hill, the depth of the horizon rich in organic matter becomes less thick (MV 2).

On the volcanic footridges, which make up the lower part of the mountain, fertile soils with a topsoil dark-
ened by organic matter occur (units RB 1 and RB 2). Soil unit FB 1 having a moderate to high fertility, and
FG 1 with a low to very low fertility occupy the footslopes.

On the undulating plains upland soils of units Uh, Um and Ul are dominant. Generally speaking, they have
good physical properties, but their nutrient level is low. In the southeastern part of the district they are as-
sociated with soil unit UmG 2 which has developed on granites and includes an association of soils with a
low fertility .

LEGEND TO THE SOIL MAP OF BUNGOMA AND MT. ELGON DISTRICTS

([SODQDWLRQRIWKH¿UVWFKDUDFWHUphysiography)

M Mountains and Major Scarps (steep; slopes predominantly over 30%; relief intensity more than
300m (Mountains) or more than 100 m (Major Scarps); altitudes up to 4250 m)
H Hills and Minor Scarps (hilly to steep; slopes predominantly over 16%; relief intensity up to 100
(Minor Scarps) to 300 m (Hills); altitudes up to 2850 m)
R Volcanic FootridgesGLVVHFWHGORZHUVORSHVRIPDMRUROGHUYROFDQRHVDQGROGHUODYDÀRZVXQGX 
lating to hilly; slopes between 5 and 30%; altitudes between 2000 and 3000 m; Mount Elgon
F Footslopes (at the foot of Hills and Mountains; gently undulating to rolling; slopes between 2 and
16%; various altitudes)
U Uplands
Uh Upper Middle-Level Uplands (undulating to rolling; slopes between 5 and 16%; altitudes be-
tween 1650 and 2650 m, here 2200 m)
Um Lower Middle-Level Uplands (gently undulating to undulating; slopes between 2 and 8%; alti-
tudes between 1200 and 2100 m)
Ul Lower-Level Uplands (very undulating to undulating; slopes between 2 and 8%; altitudes be-
tween 1200 and 1900 m)
A Floodplains and River Terraces DOPRVWÀDWWRJHQWO\XQGXODWLQJVORSHVEHWZHHQDQGYDUL 
 RXVDOWLWXGHVVHDVRQDOO\ÀRRGHGRUSRQGHG
B BottomlandsÀDWWRJHQWO\XQGXODWLQJVORSHVEHWZHHQDQGYDULRXVDOWLWXGHVVHDVRQDOO\ 
ponded)
V Minor Valleys (V or U-shaped valleys; slopes mainly up to 16%, exceptionally up to 30%; width
mainly 250-500 m, up to about 1000 m; depth up to about 100 m; various altitudes

2 Explanation of second character (lithology)

A Recent Alluvial Sediments from various sources

B Basic Igneous Rocks (basalts, nepheline phonolites; older basic tuffs included
D Mudstones and Claystones
G Granites and Granodiorites
N Biotite Gneisses
R Quartz-Feldspar Gneisses
S Sandstones, Grits and Arkoses
U Undifferentiated Basement System Rocks (predominantly Gneisses)

158
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 19

V Undifferentiated or Various Igneous Rocks

X Undifferentiated or various Rocks

3 Soil descriptions

MB1 Well drained, very shallow to moderately deep, dark reddish brown, friable and slightly smeary, gravely
clay; in places with humic topsoil, deep and/or rocky:
ando-eutric CAMBISOLS, with ando-haplic PHAEOZEMS, predominantly lithic phases, and with
LITHOSOLS, and Rock Outcrops

MU2 Well drained, very shallow to shallow, brown to reddish brown, stony and rocky, gravely to very
gravely sandy loam to sandy clay loam:
LITHOSOLS and dystric REGOSOLS, rocky and stony phases.

MV1 Imperfectly drained, shallow to moderately deep, greyish brown, friable loam to clay loam, with an
acid humic to peaty topsoil; in places very shallow or rocky:
dystric HISTOSOLS, predominantly lithic phase; with LITHOSOLS and Rock Outcrops

MV2 Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark reddish brown, friable, stony clay loam, with an acid
humic top soil; in places very shallow and rocky:
humic CAMBISOLS, stony and partly lithic phase; with LITHOSOLS and Rock Outcrops

HGC Complex of:

Somewhat excessively drained, shallow, stony and rocky soils of varying colour, consistency and
texture:
dystric REGOSOLS and RANKERS, with ferralic and humic CAMBISOLS, lithic, rocky and stony
phases, LITHOSOLS and Rock Outcrops
RB1 Well drained, deep to extremely deep, dark reddish brown to dark brown, friable and slightly smeary
clay, with an acid humic topsoil; in places shallow and rocky:
ando-humic NITISOLS and humic ANDOSOLS, partly lithic phases; with Rock Outcrops

RB2 Well drained, extremely deep, dusky red to dark reddish brown, very friable clay, with an acid humic
topsoil:
humic NITISOLS

FB1 Well drained, deep to very deep, dark reddish brown, friable clay, with humic topsoil; in places shallow
to moderately deep and rocky:
chromo-luvic PHAEOZEMS, partly lithic and rocky phase, with mollic NITISOLS

FG1 Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark yellowish brown to reddish brown, friable, stony, sandy
clay loam to gravely sandy clay; in places with an acid humic topsoil or very shallow and rocky:
ferralic, dystric and humic CAMBISOLS and orthic ACRISOLS, stony and partly lithic and rocky
phases; with LITHOSOLS and Rock Outcrops

FUC Complex of:

Well drained, deep, dark reddish brown to dark yellowish brown soils of varying consistency and
texture; in places moderately deep, gravely and/or stony:
orthic FERRALSOLS, orthic ACRISOLS and ferralic ARENOSOLS partly stony phases

UhB1 Well drained, very deep to extremely deep, dark red to dark reddish brown, friable clay, with a humic
topsoil:
mollic NITISOLS

UhN1 Well drained, very deep, reddish brown, friable, gravely sandy clay to clay, with an acidic humic topsoil
humic ACRISOLS, with humic CAMBISOLS

159
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 20

UmG2 Well drained, deep, dark yellowish brown to dark brown, friable sandy clay loam to sandy clay; in
places gravely in the deeper subsoil:
ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS

UmG3 Well drained, deep to very deep, red to dark brown, friable sandy clay to clay:
ferralo-orthic/chromic ACRISOLS

UmG6 Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark yellowish brown, friable sandy clay:
orthic ACRISOLS

UlG3 Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark yellowish brown to strong brown, friable sandy clay;
over petroplinthite; in places very shallow, stony or rocky:
orthic and ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS, petroferric and partly stony phase, with LITHOSOLS and Rock
Outcrops
UlG4 Well drained, deep,strong brown to yellowish brown, friable sandy clay loam to sandy clay; in places
shallow to moderately deep over petroplinthite:
orthic FERRALSOLS, partly petroferric phase

UlGA1 Association of:

Well drained, deep to very deep, dark yellowish brown, friable clay loam to clay; in places with an
acidic humic topsoil; in places stony; on straight side slopes 50%):
orthic ACRISOLS, with humic ACRISOLS, partly stony phases
and:
well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark yellowish brown to brown, friable sandy clay loam;
RYHUSHWURSOLQWKLWHLQSODFHVH[FHVVLYHO\GUDLQHGDQGVDQG\RQLQWHUÀXYHVFRQYH[VORSHVDQGQHDU
fringes to bottomlands (50%):
(ferralo-)orthic ACRISOLS, petroferric phase, with ferralic ARENOSOLS

UlN1 Well drained, deep to very deep, dark red to dark reddish brown, very friable sandy clay loam to clay;
in places moderately deep over petroplinthite:
rhodic and orthic FERRALSOLS, partly petroferric phase

UlN3 Well drained, deep to very deep, dark red to dark reddish brown, very friable sandy clay loam to clay:
rhodic FERRALSOLS

UlRA Association of:

Well drained, deep, strong brown to yellowish red and dark red, friable sandy clay loam to sandy clay;
LQSODFHVVKDOORZWRPRGHUDWHO\GHHSRYHUSHWURSOLQWKLWHRQLQWHUÀXYHV
orthic FERRALSOLS with rhodic FERRALSOLS, partly petroferric phases
and:
well drained, moderately deep to deep, dark yellowish brown to brown, friable sandy clay loam to clay,
with an acid humic topsoil; in places shallow; on steeper valley sides (30%):
humic CAMBISOLS; partly lithic phase

UlX1 Well drained, deep to very deep, dark red strong brown, friable clay; in many places shallow or
moderately shallow or moderately deep petroplinthite:
orthic to rhodic FERRALSOLS, partly petroferric phase

UlX2 Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark reddish brown to strong brown, friable clay; over
petroplinthite; in places deep:
orthic FERRALSOLS, petroferric phase
$$ :HOOWRPRGHUDWHO\ZHOOGUDLQHGGHHSGDUNJUH\LVKEURZQWR\HOORZLVKEURZQIULDEOHVWUDWL¿HGVDQG\
FOD\ORDPWRFOD\LQSODFHVPRWWOHG¿UPFOD\LQSODFHVVOLJKWO\VDOLQHRUVRGLFRQULYHUOHYHHV
eutric FLUVISOLS, with vertic FLUVISOLS and vertic and eutric GLEYSOLS, partly saline-sodic
phases

160
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 21

BXC1 Complex of:

 LPSHUIHFWO\WRSRRUO\GUDLQHGGHHSWRGHHSYHU\GDUNJUH\WREURZQPRWWOHG¿UPWRYHU\¿UPVDQG\
clay to cracking clay, in many places abruptly underlying a topsoil of friable sandy loam; in places
saline and sodic:
dystric PLANOSOLS, dystric and vertic GLEYSOLS and pellic VERTISOLS; partly saline-sodic
phases

BXC2 Complex of:

 ,PSHUIHFWO\WRSRRUO\GUDLQHGGHHSWRGHHSYHU\GDUNJUH\WRGDUNJUH\LVKEURZQPRWWOHG¿UPFOD\
LQPDQ\SODFHVDEUXSWO\XQGHUO\LQJDWRSVRLORIIULDEOHWR¿UPVDQG\ORDPWRVDQG\FOD\ORDPLQPDQ\
places peaty or with an acid humic or histic topsoil:
dystric and humic GLEYSOLS, dystric PLANOSOLS and dystric HISTOSOLS

XC Complex of:
Well drained, shallow to deep soils of varying colour, consistency and texture (on valley sides):
CAMBISOLS, ACRISOLS and FERRALSOLS, partly lithic phases, with Rock Outcrops
and:
 LPSHUIHFWO\WRSRRUO\GUDLQHGGHHSPRWWOHGVRLOVZLWKSUHGRPLQDQWO\JUH\LVKFRORXUV¿UPFRQVLVWHQF\
DQG¿QHWH[WXUHVLQYDOOH\ERWWRPV
GLEYSOLS, with VERTISOLS and HISTOSOLS

NOTES for definitions (of underlined words):

mollic Nitisols and chromo-luvic Phaeozems: soils are equally important
mollic Nitisols, with chromic-luvic Phaeozems: Nitisols are prevalent
in places: in < 30% of the area
in many places: in 30-50% of the area
predominantly: in > 50% of the area
deeper subsoil: below 80 cm

161
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 22

3.3.2 POPULATION AND LAND

BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Population of Bungoma District during the 1999 census was 876,491 people, more than double as much
as 1979! They have to live on an area of 2,069 km2 only. The highest numbers are registered in Kanduyi
Division (Table 5). Agricultural land that supports crop and livestock production is estimated at 1,838 km2
(183,800 ha). This area is mostly spread into the AEZs of LM 1 to LM 3 which are suitable for sugar cane
and cotton growing and AEZ UM 1 to UM 4 which are suitable for tea, coffee and dairy production.

The population density increased by more than 100% over the 1979 census to 424 persons per km2. It
ranges from 374 persons in Bumula Division to 538 persons in Kimilili Division (Table 5). The available
agricultural land per person reduced considerably from 2.86 ha per household in 1979 to 0.9 ha 1999
(Tables 6 & 7). The estimate for 2005 is 1,096,490 people, it means 0.15 ha per person. Given that the soils
are continuously being exhausted, one wonders if this exhausted soil resource would be able to feed the ever
increasing population. Urgent steps must be taken to replenish the soil fertility status if food insecurity is
to be kept at bay.
TABLE 5: POPULATION IN BUNGOMA DISTRICT PER DIVISION AND
LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)
DIVISION/LOCATION Male Female Total Area in km2 Density
BUMULA 61,866 67,145 129011 344.9 374
Bumula 4,547 4,963 9,510 26.4 360
Kimatuni 6,511 7,090 13,601 40.2 338
Kabula 7,032 7,768 14,800 42.1 352
Khasoko 4,883 5,290 10,173 25.1 405
Kimaeti 6,800 7,258 14,058 35.6 395
Napara 5,577 5,991 11,568 30.9 374
Mukwa 5,079 5,443 10,522 25.9 406
Siboti 6,341 6,882 13,223 32.8 403
South Bukusu 8,299 9,151 17,450 49.1 355
West Bukusu 6,797 7,309 14,106 36.8 383
CENTRAL 29,415 31,190 60,605 150.1 404
Kabuchai 7,928 7,928 16,289 41.4 393
Luuya 8,699 8,699 17,940 47.1 381
N. Bukusu 5,720 5,720 11,885 29.5 403
Sirare 7,068 7,423 14,491 32.1 451
CHWELE 19,903 21,271 41,174 85.2 483
Chwele 10,370 11,382 21,752 43.8 497
Makuyuni 9,533 9,889 19,422 41.4 489
KANDUYI 80,913 82,655 163,568 319.4 512
Bukembe 16,744 16,905 33,649 86.1 391
E. Bukusu 22,257 23,774 46,031 125.5 367
Kibabii 11,466 12,143 23,609 50.4 468
Musikoma 13,323 13,615 26,938 43.1 625
Township 17,123 16,218 33,341 14.3 2332
KIMILILI 46,717 49,957 96,674 179.7 538
Kamukuywa 12,151 13,062 25,213 46.1 547
Kibingei 12,803 13,522 26,325 51.3 513
Kimilili 13,241 14,288 27,529 42.1 654
Maeni 8,522 9,085 17,607 40.2 438
NDIVISI 27,622 29,714 57,336 132.3 433
Chetambe 8,583 9,121 17,704 40.1 442
Lukusi 6,580 7,113 13,693 36.9 371
Namarambi 7,094 7,866 14,960 34.5 434
Ndivisi 5,365 5,614 10,979 20.8 528
SIRISIA 21,388 22,700 44,088 110.5 399
Namwela 10,054 10,514 20,568 45.3 454
Sirisia 11,334 12,186 23,520 65.2 361

162
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 23

TABLE: 5 Continued
DIVISION/LOCATION Male Female Total Area in km2 Density
TONGAREN 64,761 68,535 133,296 375.9 355
Kabuyefwe 6,831 7,234 14,065 35.8 393
Kiminini 5,636 5,635 11,271 49.1 230
Mbakalo 11,477 12,170 23,647 49.7 476
Naitiri 17,372 18,499 35,871 105.4 340
Ndalu 7,757 8,057 15,814 58.6 270
Tongaren 15,688 16,940 32,628 77.3 422
WEBUYE 55,684 59,013 114,697 269.1 426
Bokoli 11,552 12,305 23,857 68.2 350
Misikhu 14,812 16,242 31,054 69.3 448
Sitikho 10,521 11,047 21,568 80.9 267
Webuye 18,799 19,419 38,218 50.7 754
MALAKISI 17,688 18,354 36,042 101.4 355
Lwandanyi 5,386 5,768 11,154 25.5 437
Malakisi 7,095 7,390 14,485 39.8 364
Namubila 5,207 5,196 10,403 36.1 288
BUNGOMA DISTRICT 425,957 450,534 876,491 2,068.5 424

TABLE 6: COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLDS IN BUNGOMA DISTRICT PER DIVISION

AND LOCATION ( Source: Census 1999)
BUNGOMA DISTRICT
DIVISION/LOCATION Households Family Persons per
total >15years < 15years household1)
BUMULA 26,568 2.0 2.1 4.8
Bumula 1,994 2.0 2.1 4.8
Kimatuni 2,949 2.0 2.0 4.6
Kabula 3,065 2.1 2.1 5.3
Khasoko 2,171 2.0 2.0 4.7
Kimaeti 2,884 2.0 2.0 4.8
Napara 2,414 2.0 2.0 4.8
Mukwa 2,090 2.1 2.1 5.0
Siboti 2,733 2.1 2.0 4.8
South Bukusu 3,435 2.1 2.2 5.1
West Bukusu 2,833 2.1 2.1 5.0
CENTRAL 11,552 2.2 2.2 5.2
Kabuchai 3,110 2.2 2.2 5.2
Luuya 3,326 2.2 2.2 5.4
N. Bukusu 2,315 2.2 2.1 5.1
Sirare 2,801 2.2 2.1 5.1
CHWELE 8,145 2.2 2.0 5.0
Chwele 4,537 2.1 1.9 4.8
Mukuyuni 3,608 2.3 2.1 5.3
KANDUYI 34,370 2.0 1.8 4.6
Bukembe 7,012 2.0 1.9 4.7
E. Bukusu 9,025 2.1 2.2 5.1
Kibabii 4,659 2.1 2.0 5.0
Musikoma 5,801 2.0 1.8 4.6
Township 7,873 1.7 1.3 3.8
KIMILILI 19,488 2.1 1.9 4.9
Kamukuywa 5,140 2.0 2.0 4.9
Kibingei 5,011 2.1 2.0 5.2
Kimilili 6,039 2.0 1.7 4.5
Maeni 3,298 2.2 2.1 5.2
NDIVISI 10,839 2.2 2.1 5.2
Chetambe 3,343 2.2 2.0 5.3
Lukusi 2,543 2.2 2.2 5.4
Namarambi 2,884 2.1 2.0 5.1
Ndivisi 2,069 2.2 2.0 5.3
SIRISIA 8,341 2.2 2.1 5.2

163
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 24

TABLE: 6 Cont.
DIVISION/LOCATION Households Family Persons per
total >15years < 15years household1)
Namwela 3,855 2.2 2.0 5.2
Sirisia 4,486 2.2 2.2 5.2
TONGAREN 23,823 2.2 2.3 5.5
Kabuyefwe 2,647 2.1 2.3 5.3
Kiminini 1,946 2.3 2.2 5.7
Mbakalo 4,145 2.2 2.4 5.7
Naitiri 6,416 2.1 2.3 5.6
Ndalu 2,979 2.2 2.1 5.3
Tongaren 5,690 2.1 2.3 5.6
WEBUYE 23,298 2.1 1.9 4.8
Bokoli 4,408 2.2 2.2 5.4
Misikhu 5,789 2.2 2.1 5.2
Sitikho 4,247 2.1 2.1 5.1
Webuye 8,854 1.9 1.5 4.2
MALAKISI 7,420 2.1 1.9 4.8
Lwandanyi 2,325 2.1 1.9 4.8
Malakisi 3,056 2.1 1.9 4.7
Namubila 2,039 2.2 2.0 5.1
BUNGOMA DISTRICT 173,844 2.1 2.0 5.0

/DJHU¿JXUHWKDQWKHIDPLO\VXPEHFDXVHRIUHODWLYHVDQGODERXUHUVLQKRXVHKROG
1)

TABLE 7: AVAILABLE LAND AREA IN BUNGOMA DISTRICT PER AEZ AND

HOUSEHOLD (Source: Calculated from DAO’s reports)

in ’00 ha = km2 in ’00 ha = km2 in ha

Area in agro-ecological zones Agricultural

Division Non-agricultural land
AEZ land per
Agricultural

without
townships
Forest reserve,

Others (roads,
lakes, swamps

steads, rivers)

land
steep slopes
Unsuitable

Household

Person
home-

LH1 LH2 UM1 UM2 UM3 UM4 LM1 LM2 LM3

BUMULA 80 262 5 21 105 121 10 1.0 0.2

CENTRAL 2 30 118 6 4 45 52 11,1 1.0 0.19
CHWELE 15 69 3 4 39 21 2,1 0.8 0.16
KANDUYI 2 92,5 226 11 20 91 98,9 5 0.6 0.14
KIMILILI 28 152 22 120 7 0.8 0.16
SIRISIA 2 5 11 92 8 5 59 20,5 1.1 0.21
NDIVISI 1 25 105 3 47 17 6,3 32 1.0 0.18
TONGAREN 3 34,9 341 7 131 203 1.4 0.26
WEBUYE 49 220 13 7 47 0.9 0.19
MALAKISI 5 23,4 73 1 6 53 67 5 0.9 0.19
BUNGOMA 9 10 389 1586 44 167 234 220 339 498 54 0.9 0.18
DISTRICT

164
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 25

MT. ELGON DISTRICT

Mt. Elgon district was curved out of the former Bungoma district in 1993. During the 1999 census, Mt.
Elgon’s population was 135,033 people residing on 609.6 km2 of land (Table 8), statistically, but in fact
without the Mt. Elgon Forest Reserve on 334.7 km2. Agricultural land that supports crop and livestock pro-
duction in the district is approximately 260 km2 (Table 10). A large portion of the district lies within the
tropical alpine (TA) zone and UH0-1 (Forest reserve) zone, covering some 609 km2 (Table 10). The lower
parts of the district lie in the AEZs LH 1 and UM 1 that are suitable for growing such cash crops like tea,
pyrethrum and coffee. These two AEZs cover up to 207 km2 of land in the district (Table 10).
TABLE 8: POPULATION IN MT. ELGON DISTRICT PER DIVISION AND
LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)

DIVISION/LOCATION Male Female Total Area in km2 Density

CHEPTAIS 19,601 20,468 40,069 79.50 504
Chepkube 41,106 4,241 8,347 21.90 381
Cheptais 5,941 6,251 12,192 19.50 625
Chesikak 4,330 4,499 8,829 16.00 552
Sasuri 5,224 5,477 10,701 22.10 484
KAPSOKWONY 12,107 12,419 24,526 58.40 420
Elgon 2,860 2,986 5,846 14.90 392
Kamuneru 2,067 2,120 4,187 9.10 460
Kapsokwony 3,138 3,144 6,282 14.10 448
Nomorio 4,042 4,169 8,211 20.30 404
KAPTAMA 11,916 11,969 23,885 66.80 358
Chemoge 2,345 2,278 4,623 13.70 337
Kaboywo 3,130 3,086 6,216 15.60 398
Kaptama 3,232 3,395 6,627 21.60 307
Kongit 3,209 3,210 6,419 15.90 404
KOPSIRO 23,159 23,394 46,553 130.00 358
Chepyuk 7,413 7,259 14,672 54.30 270
Chongeywo 4,522 4,823 9,345 17.60 531
Emia 6,587 6,475 13,062 40.10 326
Kapkteny 4,637 4,837 9,474 18.00 526
Mt Elgon Forest ------- ------ ------- 334.7 -------
MT. ELGON DISTRICT 66,783 68,250 135,033 944.30 143

The population density of the district (excluding the unpopulated Mt. Elgon Reserve) in the1999 census
was 403 persons per km2, ranging from 358 persons (Kaptama and Kopsiro Divisions), to 504 persons in
(Cheptais Division). This can be compared to the original Mt. Elgon division average density of 220 per-
sons per km2 in 1979. Available agricultural land per household of 5.3 persons (Table 9) was 1.02 ha, which
translates to 0.19 ha per person (Table 10). The estimate for 2005 is 151,370 people, it means 0.15 ha per
person, which is an alarming low figure.

165
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 26

TABLE 9: COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLDS IN MT. ELGON DISTRICT PER DIVISION

AND LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)

DIVISION/LOCATION Households Family Person per

total >15 years < 15 years household 1)
CHEPTAIS 7,603 2.2 2.2 5.2
Chepkube 1,635 2.2 2.1 5.1
Cheptais 2,440 2.1 2.1 4.9
Chesikak 1,568 2.3 2.4 5.6
Sasuri 1,960 2.3 2.3 5.4
KAPSOKWONY 4,896 2.1 2.0 5.0
Elgon 1,183 2.0 2.0 4.8
Kamuneru 818 2.1 2.1 5.1
Kapsokwony 1,401 1.8 1.8 4.4
Nomorio 1,494 2.2 2.3 5.5
KAPTAMA 4,349 2.2 2.2 5.5
Chemoge 869 2.1 2.1 5.3
Kaboywo 1,082 2.2 2.3 5.7
Kaptama 1,229 2.2 2.1 5.4
Kongit 1,169 2.2 2.3 5.5
KOPSIRO 8,479 2.1 2.4 5.5
Chepyuk 2,562 2.2 2.5 5.7
Chongeywo 1,718 2.2 2.5 5.4
Emia 2,412 2.1 2.4 5.4
Kapkateny 1,787 2.1 2.2 5.3
MT. ELGON DISTRICT 25,327 2.2 2.2 5.3

/DUJHU¿JXUHWKDQWKHIDPLO\VXPEHFDXVHRIUHODWLYHVDQGODERXUHUVLQKRXVHKROG
1)

TABLE 10: AVAILABLE LAND AREA IN MT. ELGON DISTRICT PER AEZ AND
HOUSEHOLD Census 1999

in ’00 ha = km2 in ha

Agricultural land
Agricultural land

Non-agricultural land Area in agro-ecological zones AEZ per

Location/Division without
Forest reserve,

Others (roads,
lakes, swamps

homesteads,
steep slopes

townships
Unsuitable

Household

Person
rivers)

LH1 LH2 UM1 UM2

CHEPTAIS 24 56 50 6 0.72 0.14

KAPSOKWONY 16 46 30 9 2 2 0.86 0.17
KAPTAMA 15 42 28 7 4 3 0.96 0.18
KOPSIRO 20 116 85 13 2 2 1.36 0.24
MT. ELGON DISTRICT 334.7 75 260 193 35 14 7 1.02 0.19

166
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 27

3.3.3 AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS:

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Bungoma District

The district is one of the fertile regions of Kenya and the agriculturally potential land is estimated at 183,800
ha. The combination of good soils, adequate amount of rainfall which is well distributed during the growing
season makes it suitable for a variety of small scale farming enterprises. The district comprises of the AEZs
LM 1-LM 3 (Sugarcane Zones to Cotton Zone) and UM 1-UM 4 (Coffee/Tea/Dairy Zone to Maize-Sun-
flower Zone. Coffee is planted on approximately 4,500 ha, yielding 320 kg per ha of clean coffee. That is
less than half the amount produced in Embu and Meru districts. There was considerable yield increase in the
district up to 520 kg/ha but poor marketing strategies and delayed produce payments continue to discour-
age many farmers to invest in higher acreage and production levels. The potential for sugarcane production
covers more than half the agricultural land area measuring the agro-ecological zones, the well suited soils are
less extensive. Sugarcane is with 27,000 ha (2004) the main cash crop and increases its performance.

TABLE 11: BUNGOMA DISTRICT COFFEE AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD TRENDS
(Source: Ministry of Agriculture; DAO’s Annual Reports and CBS)

Year
(until 1993, Mt. Elgon Area Production Yield
district included) ha tons kg/ha
1980/81 3,382 953 281
1981/82 3,681 1,285 349
1982/83 3,970 1,286 300
1983/84 4,050 1,071 264
1984/85 4,238 1,798 424
1985/86 4,553 1,575 345
1986/87 4,945 1,971 398
1987/88 5,281 2,240 424
1988/89 5,676 2,177 383
1989/90 5,955 1,195 200
1990/91 6,500 1,699 279
1991/92 6,065 1,608 265
1992/93 4,566 1,387 297
1993/94 4,581 1,246 266
1994/95 4,530 1,224 270
1995/96 4,530 1,470 324
1996/97 5,000 1,575 315
1997/98 4,615 2,399 520
1998/99 5,000 1,575 315
1999/00 4,500 1,467 326
2000/01 4,700 1,474 314
2001/02 4,000 1,480 370
2002/03 4,500 1,450 322

167
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 28

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Mt. Elgon District

Mt. Elgon district was hived off Bungoma in 1993. The AEZs LH 1-UM 1 where coffee and tea farming
enterprises are dominant and comprise approximately 28,100 ha. Planted coffee area is 1,205 ha, a quarter
of what it has been, with average yields of 250 kg of clean coffee per ha per annum, a third of what is pro-
duced in East Kenya. It reveals a low standard which will not be improved due to the poor returns. Maize
gives better returns. Maize is thus an important staple food and cash crop in the district covering an area of
14,500 ha with average yields of 2.9 metric tons per hectare (Tables 12 & 13).

TABLE 12: MT. ELGON DISTRICT COFFEE AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD TRENDS
(Source: Ministry of Agriculture; DAO’s Annual Reports and CBS)

Year Area Production Yield

(district created in 1993) ha tons kg/ha
1993/94 4,566 1,370 300
1994/95 4,618 1,385 300
1995/96 4,530 906 200
1996/97 4,530 453 100
1997/98 4,476 1,343 300
1998/99 5,000 500 100
1999/00 4,500 450 100
2000/01 1,381 414 300
2001/02 1,500 300 200
2002/03 1,205 362 300

TABLE 13: MT. ELGON DISTRICT MAIZE AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD TRENDS
(Source: Ministry of Agriculture; DAO’s Annual Reports and CBS)

Year Area Production Yield

(district created in 1993) ha tons kg/ha
1993/94 16,000 43,200 2,700
1994/95 16,100 43,500 2,700
1996/97 16,200 45,400 5,800
1997/98 16,300 44,000 2,700
1998/99 16,800 48,700 2,900
1999/00 16,780 58,700 3,500
2000/01 15,000 54,000 3,600
2001/02 15,550 35,800 2,300
2002/03 14,500 39,200 2,700

168
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 29

DISTRIBUTION OF FARMING ACTIVITIES DURING THE YEAR PER WEEKS AND

AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES

169
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 30

170
BUNG. & MT.EL. 31

171
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 32

172
BUNG. & MT.EL. 33

173
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 34

174
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 35

3.3.4 FARM SURVEY IN BUNGOMA AND MT. ELGON DISTRICTS

The Farm Survey (FS) was carried out during the year 2004 in nine sites covering the AEZs (LH 1-2, UM
1-4 and LM 2-3), with different Subzones (Table 15). The size of the farms included in the survey ranged
between 0.5 ha and 10 ha. This can be compared to the overall farm size in Bungoma and Mt. Elgon dis-
tricts of 0.9 ha and 1.02 ha per household, respectively. Despite the reduced land size per household, some
amount of land is still put under grazing. Only between 5 - 14% of the cattle are improved dairy stocks.
Sheep and goats are also important components of the livestock in the district, by numbers almost the same
as cattle. The stocking rate of 2.0 - 9.5 LU/ha is an indication of the important role livestock plays in these
districts (Table 16). However, the minimal percentage of land under fallow is an indication of land scarcity
in these districts (Table 17). Most farmers grow more than one crop in any one given season (Table 17), but
use comparatively inadequate amounts of fertiliser (Table 18). Maize crop still dominates the farming land-
scape in these districts (Table 17). It is usually intercropped with a legume (e.g. beans, cowpeas, soybeans).
The low maize yields reported in Bungoma district (Table 18) are a reflection of low usage of fertilisers and
manure to improve their nutrient depleted soils. In 1977, the year of the first Farm Survey, maize yields were
more than 50% higher with less inputs!

The graphs in Table 14 indicate that most farmers plant and cultivate their maize crop at the recommended
time of the year, but sunflower and beans receive less attention. The soils of the Lower Midlands (LM) are
not fertile, but by selecting suitable crops, which demand fewer nutrients like sweet potatoes, cassava, Na-
pier grass, etc., high and reliable yields can be achieved here as well, which would go a long way to ensure
food security. The hectarage of the medium and large farms is multifold higher than the average. This im-
plies a tendency towards commercialisation of local agriculture but also on the other hand it could be seen
as an indicator of increasing landless people.

The poor road network in these districts is one of the major reasons that its agricultural potential has not yet
been fully tapped. The production of maize, milk, beef and horticultural products could be increased sub-
stantially if the all weather roads were improved. To achieve this goal, labour productivity must be increased
through mechanisation of farm work as far as possible, and road infrastructure development, access to credit
facilities and market information have to be improved.

TABLE 15: FARM SURVEY SITES in BUNGOMA and MT. ELGON Districts
Agro-Ecological Unit
District No. in
Soil Farm Survey Areas
Kenya AEZone Subzone
Unit
BUNGOMA 9 LM 2 l^(m/s) i UlGA 1 Kanduyi Division, Musikoma Location,
Namasanda Sub-location
10a LM 3 m/l^(s) BXC 1 Bumula Division, Bumula Location,
North Myanga Sub-location
10b LM 3 m/l^(s) UlGA 1 Nambale Division, Bumula Location,
Lunao Sub-location
11 UM 1 m/l^m/s i UIN 1 Kimilili Division, Kimilili Location,
Kibingei Sub-location
12 UM 2 m/l^s i UIN 1 Kimilili Division, Maeni Location,
Sikhendu Sub-location
13 UM 3-4 l/vl i or UIRA Tongaren Division, Naitiri Location,
m^s i Naitiri Sub-location
14 UM 4 l/vl or two UlGA 1 Tongaren Division, Mbakalo Location,
Mbakalo Sub-location
MT.ELGON 15 LH 1 l/m^m RB 2 Kapsakwony Division, Elgon Location,
Kibuk Sub-location
16 LH 2 vl i or two RB 2 Kapsakwony Division, Kapsakwony
Location, Chemweisus Sub-location

175
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 36

176
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 37

TABLE 16a: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 2 OF
BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UlGA 1 Survey area 09 (Namasanda)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual Permanent
Sheep & children under
ha Dairy Cross Zebu Poultry Pigs Adults Labourers Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 2.11 0.57 0.13 1.3 1.1 4.2 0.1 3.87 3 0.2 2.33
Avg.1 2.11 2.83 2 2.6 4.13 12.6 3 3.87 7.5 1.5 3.18
Up. Qu. 2.8 0 0 2 1.5 3.5 0 5.25 5 0 3.25
Lo. Qu. 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.76 0.65 0.17 0.1 0.54
Avg.1 0.76 0.75 0.30 - 0.89
Up. Qu. 1.03 0.94 0.2 0.25 0.38
Lo. Qu. 0.39 0.2 0 0.16 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Cross Zebu Dairy Cross Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 4.0 - 0.3 0.07 0.62 - 3.8 0.9 8.0 31.6
Avg.1 4.0 - 1.49 1.01 1.25 - 10.2 7.0 8.5 65.0
Up. Qu. 5 - 0 0 0.71 - 0 0 10 0
Lo. Qu. 3 - 0 0 0 - - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 51.8 13 13 16 16 - - 1.2 1.2 0 0 0 0
Avg.1 57.5 19 19 20 19 - - 2.5 2.4 0 0 0 0
Up. Qu. 68.1 10 11 16 17 - - 0.5 0.6 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 33.5 0 0 10 - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

177
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 38

TABLE 16b: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 3 OF
BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: Bottomlands BXC 1 Survey area 10a (North Myanga)
Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers
Range Land Family Casual Number of children
ha Sheep & Adults Labourers under 14 years
Dairy Zebu Poultry
Goats
Avg.0 1.01 0.3 1.8 1.3 2.4 3.83 0.83 2.8
Avg.1 1.01 2.25 3.38 3.55 9 3.83 3.57 3.11
Up. Qu. 1.39 0 3.25 3 1 5 0.25 4.25
Lo. Qu. 0.56 0 0 0 0 2 0 1

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.65 0.06 0.15 0.02 0.13
Avg.1 0.65 0.10 0.21 - 0.27
Up. Qu. 0.82 0.10 0.21 - 0.26
Lo. Qu. 0.39 0 0.07 - 0.1

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.2 2.2 0.3 1.8 15.2 2.2 12.2 14.3
Avg.1 5.2 - 2.5 3.4 - 11.7 16.0 100
Up. Qu. 6 - 0 2.7 - 0 15.3 0
Lo. Qu. 4 - 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 39.6 11.5 - 10.4 - - - 0.7 7.1 0.02 0.2 0.1 -
Avg.1 44.0 20.3 - 19.6 - - - 1.2 7.9 0.5 2.9 3.1 -
Up. Qu. 34.6 12.2 - 12.2 - - - 0.4 3.4 0 0 0 -
Lo. Qu. 11.5 0 - 0 - - - 0 - 0 - 0 -

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

178
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 39

TABLE 16c: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 3 OF
BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: Undulating peneplains UlGA 1 Survey area 10b (Lunao)
Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers
Range Land Family Casual Number of children
ha Sheep & Adults Labourers under 14 years
Dairy Zebu Poultry Pigs
Goats
Avg.0 2.0 0.1 3.17 1.23 3.6 0.03 3.27 0.97 1.83
Avg.1 2.0 1.5 3.96 3.36 13.5 1 3.27 2.07 2.39
Up. Qu. 2.43 0 6 2.25 2.5 0 4.25 2 3
Lo. Qu. 0.82 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0.75

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.74 0.60 0.35 0.02 0.29
Avg.1 0.74 0.67 0.55 - 0.66
Up. Qu. 1.05 0.83 0.25 0.07 0.23
Lo. Qu. 0.32 0.2 0.2 0 0.1

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.1 1.7 0.06 1.6 9.5 0.3 8.9 3.1
Avg.1 5.1 - 0.8 2.0 - 3.1 7.4 100
Up. Qu. 6 - 0 2.5 - 0 24 0
Lo. Qu. 4 - 0 1.2 - - -- 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 48.1 13 16 14 17 - - 0.8 1.0 0 0 0.03 0.03
Avg.1 51.5 19 21 21 24 - - 1.3 1.4 0 0 0.8 0.9
Up. Qu. 55.9 12 15 10 12 - - 1.0 1.2 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 18.6 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

179
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 40

TABLE 16d: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ UM 1 OF
BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^m/s i, Soil Unit: UlN 1 Survey area 11 (Kibingei)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers
Range Land Family Casual Number of children
ha Sheep &
Dairy Zebu Poultry Rabbits Adults Labourers under 14 years
Goats
Avg.0 2.62 1.53 3 2.27 33.47 1.13 5.93 1.8 2.8
Avg.1 2.62 4.18 4.74 4.25 45.64 34 5.93 3.6 3.36
Up. Qu. 3.6 2.25 5.25 4 17.25 0 7 2 4
Lo. Qu. 1.19 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1.75

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.26 0.28 0.70 - 0.44
Avg.1 1.26 0.32 0.81 - 0.78
Up. Qu. 1.45 0.4 1.2 0.15 0.4
Lo. Qu. 0.68 0.11 0.10 0 0.3

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 6.2 1.8 0.6 1.1 7.0 2.4 4.3 33.8
Avg.1 6.2 - 1.6 1.8 - 5.2 5.8 71.1
Up. Qu. 8 - 0.7 1.5 - 2.1 4.4 61.7
Lo. Qu. 4 - 0 0 - 0 0 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 68.98 22 - 23 - - - 2.8 12.2 0.2 0.7 1.7 7.3
Avg.1 73.91 27 - 29 - - - 5.0 18.7 1.7 6.5 2.8 10.5
Up. Qu. 78.39 29 - 34 - - - 9.0 23.4 0 0 2.1 7.5
Lo. Qu. 26.13 7 - 17 - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

180
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 41

TABLE 16e: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ UM 2 OF
BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^s i, Soil Unit: UlN 1 Survey area 12 (Sikhendu)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers
Range Land Family Casual Number of children
ha Sheep & Adults Labourers under 14 years
Dairy Zebu Poultry
Goats
Avg.0 2.29 2.03 2.07 2.9 11.3 4.33 3.43 3.37
Avg.1 2.29 3.21 4.13 4.83 18.83 4.33 5.15 4.39
Up. Qu. 3.14 3 3 4 10.75 5.25 5 6
Lo. Qu. 1.18 0 0 0 0 2.75 0 0.75

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.24 0.46 0.53 - 0.10
Avg.1 1.24 0.46 0.59 - 0.24
Up. Qu. 1.73 0.51 0.71 0.05 0.14
Lo. Qu. 0.52 0.2 0.4 0 0.06

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.8 2.0 1.0 0.9 8.2 4.2 3.9 49.5
Avg.1 5.8 - 1.6 1.8 - 6.01 7.03 80.9
Up. Qu. 7 - 1.1 1.0 - 4.62 4.20 100
Lo. Qu. 4.7 - 0 0 - 0 0 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 63.3 23.4 61.4 32.7 - - - 2.05 5.4 1.6 4.3 3.9 10.3
Avg.1 67.8 30.9 83.7 31.6 - - - 2.83 7.7 4.0 10.7 6.3 17.2
Up. Qu. 84.1 20.3 68.5 30.4 - - - 2.12 7.1 0.6 2.2 2.3 7.8
Lo. Qu. 28.0 0 0 26.7 - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

181
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 42

TABLE 16f: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ UM 3 - 4
OF BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: l/v l i or m^s i, Soil Unit: UlRA Survey area 13 (Naitiri)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers
Range Land Family Casual Number of children
ha Sheep & Adults Labourers under 14 years
Dairy Zebu Poultry
Goats
Avg.0 2.53 1.23 2.6 1.37 13.27 3.4 1.3 2.67
Avg.1 2.53 3.08 5.2 3.42 15.92 3.52 1.95 3.33
Up. Qu. 3.04 2 4.25 2 19.25 4.25 1.25 4
Lo. Qu. 0.97 0 0 0 3 2 0 1

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.61 0.20 0.46 - 0.26
Avg.1 1.66 0.21 0.51 - 0.66
Up. Qu. 1.94 0.3 0.6 - 0.2
Lo. Qu. 0.61 0.08 0.1 - 0.18

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.4 1.6 0.5 1.0 8.8 2.9 5.7 32.1
Avg.1 5.4 - 1.4 2.1 - 6.64 10.17 87.9
Up. Qu. 8 - 0.78 1.5 - 3.67 7.08 100
Lo. Qu. 3 - 0 0 - 0 0 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 74.5 31 - 35 - - - 0.2 1.7 0.2 1.2 1.1 8.4
Avg.1 79.8 33 - 35 - - - 0.3 2.6 0.8 6.6 3.9 -
Up. Qu. 82.8 26 - 26 - - - 0.2 1.4 0 0 1.0 6.7
Lo. Qu. 20.7 17 - 17 - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

182
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 43

TABLE 16g: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ UM 4 OF
BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: l/v l or two, Soil Unit: UlGA 1 Survey area 14 (Mbakalo)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers
Range Land Family Casual Number of children
ha Sheep & Adults Labourers under 14 years
Dairy Zebu Poultry
Goats
Avg.0 2.57 0.47 4.17 1.6 12.13 5.43 1.97 3.1
Avg.1 2.57 2.33 5.21 3.43 15.17 5.43 4.54 3.32
Up. Qu. 3.68 0 7 3 20 7.25 1 4.25
Lo. Qu. 0.59 0 1.75 0 2.75 2.75 0 1

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.24 0.19 0.61 0.24 0.29
Avg.1 1.24 0.26 0.63 - 0.62
Up. Qu. 1.73 0.4 1.2 0.05 0.3
Lo. Qu. 0.38 0 0.11 0 0.1

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 4.3 1.9 0.2 1.6 7.8 0.8 6.8 12.4
Avg.1 4.3 - 1 2.0 - 4.1 8.2 26.3
Up. Qu. 5 - 0 1.9 - 0 5.8 0
Lo. Qu. 3 - 0 - - 0 - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 71.4 12 78 28 - - - 0.9 5.9 - - 0.1 0.4
Avg.1 71.4 20 96 28 - - - 1.4 6.8 - - 1.6 7.8
Up. Qu. 100 12 50 27 - - - 0.8 3.3 - - 0 0
Lo. Qu. 27.5 0 - - - - - 0 - - - 0 -

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

183
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 44

TABLE 16h: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LH 1 OF
MT. ELGON DISTRICT

Subzone: l/m^m, Soil Unit: RB 2 Survey area 15 (Kibuk)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual Permanent
Sheep & B/ children under
ha Dairy Zebu Cross Poultry Donkey Adults Labourers Labourers
Goats hives 14 years
Avg.0 2.76 1.7 1.37 3.27 3.8 8.9 0.67 0.07 5.93 3.37 0.13 4.33
Avg.1 2.76 7.29 5.13 5.44 5.7 14.83 2.22 2 5.93 5.32 1.33 4.48
Up. Qu. 3.88 0.5 1.25 5.25 6.25 14.25 1 0 7.25 3.25 0 6
Lo. Qu. 1.55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.61 0.26 0.43 0.31 0.15
Avg.1 1.61 0.32 0.54 1.02 0.26
Up. Qu. 1.83 0.47 0.7 0.61 0.27
Lo. Qu. 0.8 0.05 0.10 0.6 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Cross Zebu Dairy Cross Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.5 2.5 0.7 0.5 1.2 16.3 4.4 3.4 7.7 78.4
Avg.1 5.5 - 2.9 2.0 2.0 - 15.2 10.2 10.3 71.3
Up. Qu. 7 - 0.2 0.4 1.6 - 0.8 1.8 7.5 25.0
Lo. Qu. 5 - 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 72.4 9.3 - 28.9 - - - 0.6 3.4 0.26 1.6 0.40 2.54
Avg.1 74.9 34.9 - 32.2 - - - 0.8 3.8 1.09 5.5 1.21 6.09
Up. Qu. 88.5 16.4 - 32.9 - - - 0.6 2.3 0.03 0.13 0.27 1.06
Lo. Qu. 28.1 0 - 29.7 - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

184
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 45

TABLE 16i: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LH 2 OF
MT. ELGON DISTRICT

Subzone: v l or two, Soil Unit: RB 2 Survey area 16 (Chemweisus)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual
Sheep & children under
ha Dairy Zebu Cross Poultry Donkey Adults Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 1.96 2.87 0.93 1.63 3.4 8.8 0.13 4.3 1.67 3.47
Avg.1 1.96 6.14 3.11 3.5 6 12.57 1 4.3 2.94 3.59
Up. Qu. 2.4 4 1.25 3 4.25 13.25 0 6 1.25 5
Lo. Qu. 1.15 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.21 0.13 0.34 0.21 0.05
Avg.1 1.21 0.16 0.38 0.78 0.22
Up. Qu. 1.6 0.19 0.54 0.31 0.03
Lo. Qu. 0.58 0.03 0.18 0 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Cross Zebu Dairy Cross Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 4.9 3.1 1.6 0.5 0.8 17.8 9.2 2.9 4.8 82.9
Avg.1 4.9 - 3.2 1.7 1.8 - 16.6 8.6 9.2 85.5
Up. Qu. 6.3 - 1.8 0.6 1.3 - 8.2 2.4 5.6 75.6
Lo. Qu. 3 - 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 74.6 10 - 34 - - - 0.62 5.79 0.04 0.39 0.43 4
Avg.1 74.6 30 - 35 - - - 0.8 6.04 0.62 4.65 1.60 12
Up. Qu. 100 13 - 38 - - - 0.6 5.19 0 0 0.39 3.38
Lo. Qu. 37.4 0 - 17 - - - 0.08 1.81 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

185
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 46

TABLE 17a: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 2 OF BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UlGA 1 Survey area 09 (Namasanda)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cassava 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.75
Chewing cane <0.01 <0.01 0 0 <0.02 <1.00
Cow peas & local vegetables 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.88
Ground nuts 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.44
Kales 0.02 0.22 0 0 0.65 2.85
Maize 0.03 0.45 0 0 0.9 3.94
Maize & beans 0.58 0.64 0.8 0.3 17.35 76.03
Millet 0.02 0.17 0 0 0.5 2.19
Pineapples 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00
Sorghum 0.02 0.16 0 0 0.62 2.72
Sweet potatoes 0.06 0.42 0 0 1.69 7.41
Tomatoes 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.4 1.75
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.04
Total Sample Area 0.78 22.82 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.07 0.73 0 0 2.2 35.37
Beans & sorghum 0.01 0.3 0 0 0.3 4.82
Cassava 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.15 2.41
Cow peas & local vegetables 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 3.22
Kales 0.02 0.22 0 0 0.65 10.45
Kales & local vegetables 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.16
Onions 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.4 6.43
6XQÀRZHU 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 6.43
Sweet potatoes 0.06 0.18 0.06 0 1.80 28.94
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.11 1.77
Total Sample Area 0.2 6.22 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.05 0.09 0.09 0 1.63 8.24
Coffee 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.20
Eucalyptus 0.00 0.02 0 0 0.02 0.10
Sugarcane 0.60 0.95 0.85 0 18.1 91.46
Total Sample Area 0.65 19.79 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

186
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 47

TABLE 17b: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 3 OF BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: Bottomlands BXC 1 Survey area 10a (North Miyanga)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 1.59
Cassava 0.10 0.20 0.14 0 2.86 15.18
Ground nuts 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.2 1.06
Irish potatoes 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.21
Kales 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.53
Maize 0.16 0.40 0.2 0 4.82 25.58
Maize & beans 0.25 0.40 0.4 0 7.59 40.29
Millet 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.42 2.23
Onions 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.53
Sorghum 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.53
Sugarcane 0.04 0.6 0 0 1.2 6.37
Sweet potatoes 0.04 0.14 0.06 0 1.11 5.89
Total Sample Area 0.62 18.84 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.04 0.26 0 0 1.32 8.71
Cassava 0.09 0.18 0.2 0 2.55 16.82
Ground nuts 0.05 0.16 0.06 0 1.41 9.30
Kales 0.01 0.14 0 0 0.28 1.85
Maize 0.07 0.22 0.13 0 1.95 12.86
Maize & beans 0.13 0.27 0.21 0 4.01 26.45
Maize & ground nuts 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 1.32
Onions 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.26
Simsim 0.01 0.14 0 0 0.28 1.85
Sorghum 0.02 0.11 0 0 0.45 2.97
Sugarcane 0.04 0.6 0 0 1.2 7.92
Sweet potatoes 0.04 0.12 0.1 0 1.23 8.11
Tomatoes 0.01 0.12 0 0 0.24 1.58
Total Sample Area 0.52 15.16 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.06 0.10 0.1 0 1.84 100
Total Sample Area 0.06 1.84 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

187
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 48

TABLE 17c: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 3 OF BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: Undulating peneplains UlGA 1 Survey area 10b (Lunao)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.04 0.37 0 0 1.1 5.09
Cassava 0.06 0.15 0.06 0 1.55 7.17
Finger millet 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.46
Maize 0.23 0.50 0.4 0 7.04 32.56
Maize & beans 0.31 0.52 0.4 0 9.33 43.15
Sorghum 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.85
Sweet potatoes 0.05 0.18 0.1 0 1.4 6.48
Tobacco 0.02 0.35 0 0 0.7 3.24
Total Sample Area 0.72 21.62 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.10 0.30 0.2 0 2.96 21.48
Cassava 0.04 0.18 0.01 0 1.29 9.36
Cotton 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.73
Cow peas 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.73
Ground nuts 0.02 0.16 0 0 0.65 4.72
Maize 0.04 0.18 0.01 0 1.24 9.00
Maize & beans 0.13 0.43 0.13 0 3.84 27.87
Simsim 0.01 0.13 0 0 0.4 2.90
Sorghum 0.03 0.17 0 0 1 7.26
Sweet potatoes 0.06 0.26 0.03 0 1.8 13.06
Tobacco 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 2.90
Total Sample Area 0.46 13.78 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.06 0.09 0.1 0 1.67 9.35
Sugarcane 0.54 0.85 0.8 0 16.2 90.65
Total Sample Area 0.6 17.87 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

188
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 49

TABLE 17d: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ UM 1 OF BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^m/s i, Soil Unit: UlN 1 Survey area 11 (Kibingei)
First Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Arrow roots 0.00 0.08 0 0 0.08 0.21
Cassava 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.13
Chewing cane 0.01 0.09 0 0 0.28 0.73
Finger millet 0.03 0.16 0 0 0.98 2.56
Ground nuts 0.01 0.09 0 0 0.34 0.89
Kales 0.02 0.17 0 0 0.5 1.31
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.26
Maize 0.04 0.6 0 0 1.2 3.14
Maize & beans 1.00 1.04 1.2 0.4 30.06 78.61
Onions 0.01 0.13 0 0 0.4 1.05
6XQÀRZHU 0.08 2.5 0 0 2.5 6.54
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.09 0 0 0.35 0.92
Tomatoes 0.02 0.3 0 0 0.6 1.57
Water Melons 0.03 0.8 0 0 0.8 2.09
Total Sample Area 1.26 38.24 100
Second Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Arrow roots 0.00 0.08 0 0 0.08 0.39
Beans 0.09 0.28 0.2 0 2.8 13.82
Chewing cane 0.01 0.09 0 0 0.28 1.38
Cow peas 0.03 1 0 0 1 4.94
Ground nuts 0.07 0.19 0.1 0 2.1 10.37
Kales 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 1.48
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.99
Maize 0.05 0.75 0 0 1.5 7.40
Maize & beans 0.04 0.28 0 0 1.1 5.43
Simsim 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.49
Sorghum 0.02 0.25 0 0 0.5 2.47
Soyabeans 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.99
6XQÀRZHU 0.25 0.95 0.4 0 7.6 37.51
Sweet potatoes 0.04 0.10 0.1 0 1.25 6.17
Tomatoes 0.04 0.21 0 0 1.25 6.17
Total Sample Area 0.67 20.26 100
Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.02 0.08 0.03 0 0.61 7.55
Bananas 0.08 0.12 0.14 0 2.4 29.70
Coffee 0.15 0.20 0.2 0 4.46 55.20
Mangoes 0.01 0.07 0 0 0.28 3.47
Passion fruits 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 2.48
Paw paws 0.00 0.03 0 0 0.03 0.37
Sugarcane 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 1.24
Total Sample Area 0.27 8.08 100
NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms; Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

189
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 50

TABLE 17e: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ UM 2 OF BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: m/l^s i, Soil Unit: UlN 1 Survey area 12 (Sikhendu)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cassava 0.01 0.06 0 0 0.37 1.09
Chewing cane 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.18
Finger millet 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.59
Ground nuts 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.59
Kales 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.59
Maize & beans 1.05 1.09 1.3 0.4 31.6 93.02
Sweet potatoes 0.03 0.13 0 0 0.8 2.36
Tomatoes 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.59
Total Sample Area 1.14 33.97 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.11 0.47 0.05 0 3.3 16.16
Cabbages 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.96
Cassava 0.01 0.06 0 0 0.23 1.13
Chewing cane 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.96
Cow peas 0.01 0.09 0 0 0.28 1.37
Finger millet 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 1.47
Ground nuts 0.01 0.13 0 0 0.38 1.86
Kales 0.05 0.18 0.09 0 1.63 7.98
Sorghum 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.15 0.73
Soyabeans 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.98
6XQÀRZHU 0.30 1.14 0.33 0 9.1 44.56
Sweet potatoes 0.07 0.10 0.1 0 2.2 10.77
Tomatoes 0.06 0.31 0 0 1.85 9.06
Total Sample Area 0.67 20.42 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.03 0.24 0 0 0.95 7.03
Bananas 0.11 0.12 0.17 0.08 3.34 24.70
Coffee 0.30 0.39 0.33 0.08 8.9 65.83
Mangoes 0.01 0.11 0 0 0.33 2.44
Total Sample Area 0.45 13.52 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

190
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 51

TABLE 17f: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ UM 3 - 4 OF BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: l/v l i or m^s i, Soil Unit: UlRA Survey area 13 (Naitiri)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Onions 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.21
Cassava 0.02 0.07 0.04 0 0.58 1.22
Finger millet 0.02 0.22 0 0 0.65 1.36
Ground nuts 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.42
Irish potatoes 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.21
Maize 0.19 1.12 0 0 5.6 11.76
Maize & beans 1.33 1.48 1.53 0.4 39.9 83.79
Sorghum 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.10
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.12 0 0 0.24 0.50
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.42
Total Sample Area 1.59 47.62 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.06 0.38 0 0 1.9 10.27
Onions 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.54
Cassava 0.02 0.07 0.03 0 0.56 3.03
Finger millet 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.54
Ground nuts 0.01 0.07 0 0 0.44 2.38
Irish potatoes 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.54
Maize 0.01 0.3 0 0 0.3 1.62
Maize & beans 0.03 0.5 0 0 1 5.41
Sorghum 0.01 0.07 0 0 0.21 1.14
6XQÀRZHU 0.40 0.79 0.8 0 11.9 64.32
Sweet potatoes 0.04 0.11 0.05 0 1.1 5.95
Tomatoes 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 1.08
Indigenous vegetables 0.02 0.10 0 0 0.59 3.19
Total Sample Area 0.61 18.5 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.11 1.95
Bananas 0.14 0.14 0.2 0.08 4.13 73.10
Coffee 0.02 0.18 0 0 0.74 13.10
Passion fruits 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 3.54
Macadamia 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.71
Mangoes 0.00 0.02 0 0 0.03 0.53
Paw paws 0.00 0.03 0 0 0.06 1.06
Pineapples 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.15 2.65
Sugarcane 0.01 0.06 0 0 0.19 3.36
Total Sample Area 0.19 5.65 100
NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms; Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

191
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 52

TABLE 17g: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ UM 4 OF BUNGOMA DISTRICT

Subzone: l/v l or two, Soil Unit: UlGA 1 Survey area 14 (Mbakalo)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Chewing cane 0.01 0.11 0 0 0.21 0.59
Finger millet 0.05 0.18 0.1 0 1.4 3.93
Ground nuts 0.02 0.15 0 0 0.74 2.08
Maize 0.23 1 0.1 0 7 19.67
Maize & beans 0.84 0.87 1.3 0.3 25.33 71.19
Sorghum 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.28
Sweet potatoes 0.03 0.15 0 0 0.76 2.14
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.11
Total Sample Area 1.18 35.58 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.04 0.22 0 0 1.3 12.5
Chewing cane 0.01 0.11 0 0 0.21 2.02
Ground nuts 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.96
Maize 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.96
Maize & beans 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.38
Sorghum 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.96
6XQÀRZHU 0.24 0.46 0.4 0 7.29 70.10
Sweet potatoes 0.04 0.19 0 0 1.12 10.77
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.07 0 0 0.14 1.35
Total Sample Area 0.33 10.4 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.00 0.06 0 0 0.12 2.12
Bananas 0.11 0.15 0.2 0 3.20 56.64
Coffee 0.07 0.25 0.1 0 2.22 39.29
Fruit trees 0.00 0.08 0 0 0.08 1.42
Mangoes 0.01 0.03 0 0 0.03 0.53
Total Sample Area 0.19 5.65 100
NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

192
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 53

TABLE 17h: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LH 1 OF MT. ELGON DISTRICT

Subzone: l/m^m, Soil Unit: RB 2 Survey area 15 (Kibuk)
First Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annualCrops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.05 0.32 0 0 1.6 3.93
Cabbages 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 0.74
Carrots 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.25
Cassava 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.12
Cow peas 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.12
Finger millet 0.05 0.15 0.1 0 1.35 3.31
Ground nuts 0.00 0.03 0 0 0.03 0.07
Irish potatoes 0.06 0.19 0.1 0 1.7 4.17
Kales 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.15 0.37
Maize 0.61 1.36 1.1 0 17.7 43.45
Maize & beans 0.48 0.73 0.8 0 14.5 35.59
Maize, beans & peas 0.06 1.8 0 0 1.8 4.42
Onions 0.04 0.16 0.03 0 1.1 2.70
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.06 0 0 0.18 0.44
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.13 0.32
Total Sample Area 1.38 40.74 100
Second Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.13 0.31 0.2 0 3.75 47.53
Cabbages 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 2.53
Carrots 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 1.27
Cow peas 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.15 1.90
Dolichos 0.00 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.51
French beans 0.00 0.15 0 0 0.3 3.80
Irish potatoes 0.04 0.18 0 0 1.1 13.94
Kales 0.01 0.09 0 0 0.35 4.44
Onions 0.03 0.13 0 0 0.8 10.14
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.07 0 0 0.2 2.53
Tomatoes 0.03 0.15 0 0 0.75 9.51
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.08 0 0 0.15 1.90
Total Sample Area 0.26 7.89 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.13
Bananas 0.06 0.11 0.1 0 1.87 24.13
Coffee 0.15 0.30 0.15 0 4.47 57.68
Pyrethrum 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.3 3.87
Tea 0.03 0.3 0 0 0.9 11.61
Woodlots/Forest 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 2.58
Total Sample Area 0.26 7.75 100
NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms; Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

193
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 54

TABLE 17i: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LH 2 OF MT. ELGON DISTRICT

Subzone: v l or two, Soil Unit: RB 2 Survey area 16 (Chemweisus)
First Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.3 0.83
Cassava 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.14
Cow peas 0.01 0.04 0 0 0.08 0.22
Finger millet 0.07 0.23 0.1 0 2.1 5.78
Irish potatoes 0.03 0.14 0.01 0 0.55 1.51
Kales 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.4 1.10
Maize 0.60 1.31 0.8 0 18.4 50.61
Maize & beans 0.45 0.66 0.8 0 13.7 37.68
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.12 0 0 0.35 0.96
Tomatoes 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.10
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.03 0 0 0.03 0.08
Total Sample Area 1.21 36.36 100
Second Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.09 0.25 0.1 0 2.7 33.21
Cabbages 0.00 0.08 0 0 0.15 1.85
Cow peas 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.2 2.46
Irish potatoes 0.06 0.19 0.09 0 1.73 21.28
Kales 0.03 0.07 0.05 0 0.75 9.23
Onions 0.01 0.13 0 0 0.25 3.08
Sweet potatoes 0.02 0.11 0 0 0.55 6.77
Tomatoes 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.4 4.92
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.03 0 0 0.10 1.23
Wheat 0.04 0.65 0 0 1.3 15.99
Total Sample Area 0.27 8.13 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.06 0.12 0.1 0 1.84 43.09
Coffee 0.06 0.19 0.1 0 1.93 45.20
Pyrethrum 0.02 0.25 0 0 0.5 11.71
Total Sample Area 0.14 4.27 100
NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

194
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 55

3.3.5 INTRODUCTION TO THE ACTUAL LAND USE SYSTEMS AND POTENTIAL

INTENSIFICATION BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT

0RUH GHWDLOHG LQIRUPDWLRQ FDQ EH IRXQG WRJHWKHU ZLWK FDOFXODWLRQV RI SUR¿WDELOLW\ LQ WKH )DUP 0DQDJHPHQW
Guidelines of each district and in the KARI Fertiliser Use Manual.

In terms of aerial coverage, the dominant Zones are LM 2, LM 3, UM 1, UM 2, UM 3 and UM 4.

Subzone LM 2 l^(m/s) i of the Lower Midland Marginal Sugarcane Zone

This is the Lower Midland Marginal Marginal Sugarcane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a (weak)
medium to short one and intermediate rains as typified by Namasanda Sub-location in Bungoma district. It
is dominated by soils on lower-level uplands. The soils are well drained, deep to very deep (association of
orthic Acrisols, with humic Acrisols, partly stoney phases and ferralo-orthic Acrisols, petroferric phase, with
ferralic Arenosols). The rainfall variability in this Subzone is high, and hence the reliability is low but suf-
ficient. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of between 580 – 720 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons; the
second rainy season 380 – 450 mm.

Maize is still the dominant food crop, followed by sorghum, finger millet and cassava. The dominant legume
crops are common beans, pigeon peas and cowpeas, though the latter is very susceptible to pests and dis-
eases. The dominant fruit crop is banana. Fruit production potential in this Subzone is likely to be improved
through the current use of improved tissue culture banana seedling material. These seedlings are disease re-
sistant and take only about 18 months to produce the first fruit. This will greatly improve the quality of the
produce and hence fetch more cash income for the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited
to the growing of kales, tomatoes and onions, mainly for home consumption.

The cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: sugar cane and sunflower. The proximity
to Nzoia Sugar Factory has led to the intensification of sugar cane growing. However, the yield of sugar cane
per hectare is rather low due to a decline in soil fertility. It has been reported that some of the farmers do
sell the fertiliser meant for application on sugar cane fields. The issue of soil fertility replenishment needs to
be seriously addressed in this Subzone if the returns to land are to be improved. This can be done especially
through application of organic and inorganic fertilisers. There is also need to promote the use of effective mi-
crooganisms (EM) technology, which enhances the bio-degradation of compost. If the above listed conser-
vation measures are well practiced, the soil fertility status would be greatly enhanced. The dominant visible
soil conservation structures include Fanya juu, which is usually fortified with Napier grass. Besides serving
as an erosion control measure, it serves as fodder for animals, since many farmers do practice zero grazing in
this Subzone. The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on the predominant
soil of this Subzone is shown in Table 18a.

195
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 56

TABLE 18a: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 2, l^(m/s) i, UlGA 1
Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UlGA 1 Survey area 09 (Namasanda)
AEZ: LM 2 MARGINAL SUGARCANE ZONE
Subzone: l^(m/s) i (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season > 180, 2nd rainy season 105 - 115)
Unit with predom. Soil: UIG 1 (association of orthic/humic acrisols, with humic ACRI-
Crop Yields3) and SOLS, partly stony phases and ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS, petro-
Inputs
ferric phase, with ferralic ARENOSOLS)
2nd rainy season: 380 - 450 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 580 - 720 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III =
AEU Pot.6)
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5)
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 6000 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 929 1568 1868 4000 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 0 13 15
P2O5 kg/ha 13 19 20
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha - 0.7 1.4

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management

196
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 57

Subzone LM 3 m/l^(s) of the Lower Midland Cotton Zone (Valley bottomlands)

This is the Lower Midland Cotton Zone with a medium to long cropping season followed by a (weak) short one as
typified by North Myanga Sub-location in Bungoma district. It is dominated by soils on bottomlands. The
soils are a complex of imperfectly drained to poorly drained, deep to deep (dystric Planosols, dystric and
vertic Gleysols and pellic Vertisols; partly saline-sodic phases). The rainfall variability in this Subzone is high,
and hence the reliability is low. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of between 500 – 600 mm in
10 out of 15 seasons; the second rainy season only 300 – 350 mm.

The valley bottom areas in this Subzone are well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is
still the current most dominant food crop grown on higher ground as well as the valley bottoms. Apart
from maize, sweet potatoes and yams grown in these valley bottoms constitute important components of
the food diet. The dominant fruit crop is the cooking banana type that is grown near the homesteads on
higher ground as well as in these valley bottoms. Farmers are yet to take advantage of the new technology of
planting improved tissue culture banana seedlings. This could be due to the unavailability of the technology
and basically lack of information about it. This calls for concerted efforts on the part of extension officers to
provide farmers with the necessary relevant information. Vegetable production in the wetlands of this Sub-
zone is limited to the growing of kales, cabbages, tomatoes and onions, mainly for home consumption. In
some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres. Soil conservation measures being practiced
in the wetlands of this Subzone are mainly cut-off drainage canals and raised embankments. Very little or
no fertiliser is applied to the food crop fields. There is need to promote the use of effective microoganisms
(EM) technology, which enhances the bio-degradation of compost. Without caring to improve soil fertility
through additional external inputs in the form of manures, the hunger problem cannot simply be wished
away. One cannot expect to produce enough food from an exhausted soil! The present yield increase under
three levels of inputs and the potential on the predominant soil of this Subzone is presented in Table 18b.

197
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 58

TABLE 18b: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 3, m/l^(s), Bottomlands BXC 1
Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: Bottomlands BXC 1 Survey area 10a (North Myanga)
AEZ: LM 3 COTTON ZONE
Subzone: m/l^(s) (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 155 - 170, 2nd rainy season 85 - 100)
Unit with predom. Soil: BXC 1 = complex of dystric PLANOSOLS, dystric and vertic GLEY-
Crop Yields3) and
SOLS and pellic VERTISOLS; partly saline-sodiy phases
Inputs
st 2nd rainy season: 300 - 350 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1 rainy season: 500 - 600 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - 2363 3058 3500 - 1440 2250
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 46.4 50 80 115
P2O5 kg/ha 42 50 80 104
K2O kg/ha. - - - -
Manure t/ha 1.7 2.7 2.7 6.6
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 1264 2007 3500 - 897 1151
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 25 29 48 56
P2O5 kg/ha 25 27 48 51
K2O kg/ha - - - -
Manure t/ha 0.8 1.7 1.6 3.2

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management

198
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 59

Subzone of the Lower Midland Cotton Zone (Undulating peneplains)

This is the Lower Midland Cotton Zone with a medium to long cropping season followed by a (weak) short one
as typified by Lunao Sub-location in Bungoma district. It is dominated by soils on undulated peneplains.
The soils are well drained, moderately deep to very deep, partly stony or petroferric (association of orthic
and humic Acrisols with ferralic Arenosols). The rainfall variability in this Subzone is high, and hence the
reliability is low. The first rainy season can still rely on an amount of between 500 – 600 mm in 10 out of
15 seasons; the second rainy season on 300 – 350 mm.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still the current most dominant food
crop on the uplands, even though yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil infertility related
problems. Apart from maize, sorghum, finger millet, sweet potatoes, cassava (grown on the higher ground)
constitute important components of the food diet. The dominant legume crops include: common beans,
cowpeas, green grams and pigeon, which are usually grown on higher ground. The dominant fruit crop is
the cooking banana type that is grown near the homesteads on higher ground as well as in these valley bot-
toms. Farmers are yet to take advantage of the new technology of planting improved tissue culture banana
seedlings. This could be due to the unavailability of the technology and basically lack of information about
it. This calls for concerted efforts on the part of extension officers to provide farmers with the necessary rel-
evant information. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes and
onions, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres.
The current cash crops grown in this Subzone include: sunflower, tobacco, cotton and coffee. However, the
returns from these cash crops are very minimal because of poor marketing outlets and road infrastructure.

Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone is mainly through the use of crop resi-
dues. Very little or no fertiliser is applied to the food crop fields. There is need to promote the use of effective
microoganisms (EM) technology, which enhances the bio-degradation of compost. If the above listed soil
fertility improvement measures are well practiced, food production would be greatly enhanced. The pres-
ent yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on the predominant soil of this Subzone is
shown in Table 18c.

199
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 60

TABLE 18c: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 3, m/l^(s), Undulating peneplains UlGA 1
Subzone: m/l^(s), Soil Unit: Undulating peneplains UlGA 1 Survey area 10b (Lunao)
AEZ: LM 3 COTTON ZONE
Subzone: m/l^(s) (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 85 - 105, 2nd rainy season 80 - 95)
Unit with predom. Soil: UIGA 1 = association of orthic/humic acrisols, with humic ACRISOLS,
Crop Yields3) and partly stony phases and ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS, petro-
Inputs ferric phase, with ferralic ARENOSOLS
2nd rainy season: 300 - 350 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 500 - 600 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - 713 1107 4000 - 1927 -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha - 31 42
P2O5 kg/ha - 25 45 -
K2O kg/ha. - - - -
Manure t/ha - 2.5 2.6 0.3
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 780 874 3500 - 640 1107
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 31 32 - -
P2O5 kg/ha 25 33 - -
K2O kg/ha - - - -
Manure t/ha 1.9 2.5 - -

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management

200
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 61

Subzone UM 1 m/l^m/s i of the Coffee-Tea Zone

This is the Coffee-Tea Zone with a medium to long cropping season followed by a medium to short one and inter-
mediate rains as typified by Kibingei Sub-Location in Bungoma district. It is dominated by soils on lower-
level uplands. The soils are well drained, deep to very deep (rhodic and orthic Ferralsols, partly petroferric
phase). The first rainy season can rely only on an amount of between 700 – 950 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons
and the second rainy season 450 – 550 mm.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still most dominant food crop,
even though generally, yields per hectare are low due to soil infertility related problems. Apart from maize,
sorghum, sweet potatoes, and finger millets are important components of the food diet. The legume crops
consist of mainly beans and small amounts of cowpea. It should be pointed out here that cowpea is more
susceptible to pest infestation and as such requires high inputs of insecticides, which unfortunately are
beyond the reach of a majority of smallholder farmers. The dominant fruit crops are: cooking and sweet
bananas, passion fruits and guavas. The dominant fruit crop is the cooking banana type that is grown near
the homesteads on higher ground as well as in these valley bottoms. Farmers are yet to take advantage of the
new technology of planting improved tissue culture banana seedlings. This could be due to the unavailability
of the technology and basically lack of information about it. This calls for concerted efforts on the part of
extension officers to provide farmers with the necessary relevant information. Vegetable production in this
Subzone is limited to the growing of cabbages, kales, tomatoes and onions and carrots, mainly for home
consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres. The current cash crops
grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: tea, sunflower and arabica coffee. Despite this being a cof-
fee zone, most smallholder farmers concentrated their efforts on tea because of the poor returns from coffee.
Most of the coffee bushes have been cut back to give room for the growing of legumes and maize.

Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone include: inorganic fertiliser application
on tea farms, compost manure and use of crop residues. A combination of inorganic and organic fertiliser is
applied on maize fields at planting, though not at the recommended rates. The use of effective microogan-
isms (EM) technology, which enhances the bio-degradation of compost, is yet to reach farmers in this Sub-
zone. Efforts need to be intensifies by the extension staff to make the farmers understand the importance
of fertilising their farms. The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on the
predominant soil of this Subzone is shown in Table 18d.

201
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 62

TABLE 18d: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) UM 1, m/l^m/s i, UlN 1
Subzone: m/l^m/s i, Soil Unit: UlN 1 Survey area 11 (Kibingei)
AEZ: UM 1 COFFEE - TEA ZONE
Subzone: m/l^m/s i (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 200 or >, 2nd rainy season 130 - 150)
Crop Yields3) and Unit with predom. Soil: UIN 1 = rhodic and orthic FERRALSOLS
Inputs 2nd rainy season: 450 - 550 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 700 - 950 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - 7000 - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha 1000 1500 3000 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha - - -
P2O5 kg/ha - - -
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0.5 2.0 3.2
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 2813 4617 5141 5500 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 11 26 35
P2O5 kg/ha 25 28 42
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0 1.1 3.4

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

202
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 63

Subzone UM 2 m/l^s i of the Main Coffee Zone

This is the Main Coffee Zone with a medium to long cropping season followed by a short one and in-
termediate rains as typified by Sikhendu Sub-Location in Bungoma district. It is dominated by soils on
middle-level uplands. The soils are well drained, deep to very deep but partly petroferric (rhodic and orthic
Ferralsols). The first rainy season can rely on an amount of at least 580 – 720 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons
and the second rainy season on 380 – 450 mm.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still most dominant food crop, even
though generally, yields per hectare are low due to soil infertility related problems. Apart from maize, sweet
potatoes and finger millet are important components of the food diet. The legume crops consist of mainly
beans and more recently soyabeans. The dominant fruit crops are: cooking and sweet bananas, passion fruits,
mountain pawpaws, guavas and avocados. Fruit production in this Subzone could be improved through the
use of improved tissue culture and grafted seedling material, which take a much shorter period to mature.
This would greatly improve the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for the farmers.
Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of cabbages, kales, tomatoes and onions and
carrots, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres.
The current cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: tea, sunflower, macadamia nuts
and arabica coffee. Despite this being a main coffee zone, most smallholder farmers concentrated their ef-
forts on the other cash crops like tea because of the poor returns from coffee.

The dominant soil conservation structure, particularly on tea and coffee farms is Fanya juu, which is usually
fortified with Napier grass. Besides serving as an erosion control measure, it serves as fodder for animals,
since many farmers do practice zero grazing in this Subzone. Soil fertility improvement measures being prac-
ticed in this Subzone include: inorganic fertiliser application on tea and coffee farms, compost manure and
use of crop residues. A combination of inorganic and organic fertiliser is applied on maize fields at plant-
ing, though not at the recommended rates. The use of effective microoganisms (EM) technology, which
enhances the bio-degradation of compost, is yet to reach farmers in this Subzone. The present yield increase
by three levels of inputs, and the potential on the predominating soil of this subzone see Table 18e.

203
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 64

TABLE 18e: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) UM 2, m/l^s i, UlN 1
Subzone: m/l^s i, Soil Unit: UlN 1 Survey area 12 (Sikhendu)
AEZ: UM 2 MAIN COFFEE ZONE
Subzone: m/l^s i (Periods in days2): 1st rainy season >160, 2nd rainy season 105 - 115)
Crop Yields3) and Unit with predom. Soil: UIN 1 = rhodic and orthic FERRALSOLS
Inputs 2nd rainy season: 380 - 450 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 580 - 720 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - 7000 - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 1553 3094 4126 5000 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 0 27 27
P2O5 kg/ha 34 37 40
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha - 2.3 2.8

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

204
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 65

Subzone UM 3-4 l/vl i or m^s i of the Marginal Coffee Zone (Coffee-Maize Zone)

This is the Marginal Coffee Zone (here Coffee-Maize Zone) with a long to very long cropping season and inter-
mediate rains, dividable in a medium cropping season followed by a short one and intermediate rains. Naitiri
Sub-Location in Bungoma district typifies this. It is dominated by soils on lower-level uplands. The soils
are well drained, deep (association of orthic Ferralsols with rhodic Ferralsols, partly petroferric phases and
humic Cambisols; partly lithic phase). The first rainy season can rely on an amount of between 550 – 650
mm in 10 out of 15 seasons; the second rainy season which follows immediately the first one (already in
mid July) on 450 – 580 mm.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still most dominant food crop in
this zone, with relatively good yields due to the application of organic and inorganic fertilisers. Apart from
maize, sweet potatoes and finger millet are important components of the food diet. The legume crops consist
of mainly beans and more recently soybeans are gaining prominence. The dominant fruit crops are: cooking
and sweet bananas, mountain pawpaws, guavas, pineapples and avocados. Fruit production in this Subzone
could be improved through the use of improved tissue culture and grafted seedling material, which take a
much shorter period to mature. This would greatly improved the quality of the produce and hence fetch
more cash income for the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of cab-
bages, kales, tomatoes and onions and carrots, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is
sold for cash in nearby market centres. The current cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance
are: sunflower, macadamia nuts and arabica coffee. Most smallholder farmers are concentrating their efforts
on cash crops like macadamia nuts and sunflower, whose cash returns are more promising than coffee.

Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone include: inorganic fertiliser application
on maize, sunflower and macadamia nuts fields as well as compost manure and use of crop residues. The
use of effective microoganisms (EM) technology, which enhances the bio-degradation of compost, is yet to
reach farmers in this Subzone. The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on
the predominant soil of this Subzone is given in Table 18f.

205
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 66

TABLE 18f: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) UM 3 - 4, l/v l i or m^s i, UlRA
Subzone: l/v l i or m^s i, Soil Unit: UlRA Survey area 13 (Naitiri)
AEZ: UM 3 - 4 MARGINAL COFFEE-SUNFLOWER-MAIZE ZONE
Subzone: l/v l i or m^s i
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 135 or more, 2nd rainy season: 83 -103)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UIRA = rhodic and orthic FERRALSOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 450 - 580 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 550 - 650 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha 1800 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha -
P2O5 kg/ha -
K2O kg/ha -
Manure t/ha 1.5
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - 4500 7000 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 40
P2O5 kg/ha 38
K2O kg/ha. -
Manure t/ha 0.2
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha 850 1650 2800 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha - - -
P2O5 kg/ha - - -
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 1.2 2.0 3.0
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 3311 3634 4425 5000 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 25 33 38
P2O5 kg/ha 25 33 42
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha - 0.3 0.3

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

206
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 67

Subzone UM 4 l/vl or two of the Maize-Sunflower Zone

This is the Maize-Sunflower Zone with a long to very long cropping season, dividable in two variable crop-
ping seasons as typified by Mbakalo Sub-Location in Bungoma district. It is dominated by soils on lower-
level uplands. The soils are well drained and deep (association of orthic ACRISOLS, with humic ACRI-
SOLS, partly stony phases and ferralo-orthic ACRI-SOLS, petroferric phase, with ferralic ARENOSOLS).
The rainfall variability in this Subzone is high, and hence the reliability is low. But the first rainy season can
still rely on an amount of at least 420 – 500 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons and the immediately following
second rainy season on 330 – 350 mm.

Maize is still the current most important food crop. Other important dietary staple food crops include:
sorghum, sweet potatoes, cassava and finger millet. The dominant legume crops in order of importance in-
clude: beans, soybeans and groundnuts. Important fruit crops include: cooking bananas, pawpaws, passion,
mangoes and to a small extent citrus. Fruit production in this Subzone could be improved through the use
of improved grafted seedling materials, which take a very short period to bear first fruits. This would greatly
improved the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for the farmers. Vegetable produc-
tion in this Subzone is limited to the growing of cabbages, kales, tomatoes and onions, mainly for home
consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres.

The current cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: surplus maize, sunflower, maca-
damia nuts and coffee. Due to the poor returns from coffee to the farmers, the crop is no longer valued by
farmers. A majority of them have pruned back the coffee trees and planted maize and legumes instead. All
former coffee processing factories in this Subzone have closed since farmers are no longer farming coffee.

Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone include: inorganic and organic fertilis-
ers application and use of compost and crop residues. There is, however, need to promote the use of effective
microoganisms (EM) technology, which enhances the bio-degradation of compost. If urgent measures to
improve soil fertility are not taken, the problem of food insecurity, especially of the small farmers, cannot be
solved. The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on the predominant soil of
this Subzone is shown in Table 18g.

207
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 68

TABLE 18g: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) UM 4, l/v l or two, UlGA 1
Subzone: l/v l or two, Soil Unit: UlGA 1 Survey area 14 (Mbakalo)
AEZ: UM 4 MARGINAL SUNFLOWER-MAIZE ZONE
Subzone: l/v l or two
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 130 or more, 2nd rainy season: 85 -105)
Unit with predom. Soil: UIGA 1 = association of orthic ACRISOLS, with humic ACRI-
Crop Yields3) and
SOLS, partly stony phases and ferralo-orthic ACRI-
Inputs
SOLS, petroferric phase, with ferralic ARENOSOLS
2nd rainy season: 330 - 350 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 420 - 500 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha 1654 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha -
P2O5 kg/ha -
K2O kg/ha -
Manure t/ha 1.2
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 6500 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha 800 1700 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha - -
P2O5 kg/ha - -
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 0.1 0.8
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 2118 2144 2916 5000 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 0 15 17
P2O5 kg/ha 33 36 40
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0 1.0 1.3
NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

208
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 69

MT. ELGON DISTRICT

Subzone LH 1 l/m^m of the Tea-Dairy Zone

This is the Tea-Dairy Zone with a long to medium cropping season followed by a medium one as typified by
Kibuk Sub-Location in Mt. Elgon district. It is dominated by soils on volcanic foot ridges. The soils are
well drained and extremely deep (humic Nitisols). The first rainy season can rely on an amount of at least
800 – 1000 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons and the second rainy season on 400 – 700 mm.

Maize is still the current most important food crop. However, some of the varieties are susceptible to rotting
while still in the field, e.g. H628, H627 and H626. The dominant legume crop here is field peas. Important
fruit crops include: passion and plums. These fruits are fetching good income for the local farmers since
the demand is assured. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of cabbages, kales,
tomatoes and carrots, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby
market centres.

The current cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: tea and pyrethrum. Lack of
marketing channels and road infrastructure are major drawbacks in realising the full potential of these cash
crops in this zone. Due to the poor returns from coffee to the farmers, the crop has been pruned back and
is no longer productive on many farms. The livestock sector plays a very crucial role as an income earner
to majority of households in this zone. Most animals are crosses of local and dairy breeds, with a few pure
dairy breeds. A few farmers keep crosses of bulls to service neighbours cows at a fee. There is good potential
for keeping dairy goats in this Subzone. Already, some farmers are commercialising the local goat for meat.
These local goats could be improved for milk production too. The keeping of indigenous poultry is also a
good income earner for most households.

The dominant visible soil conservation structures include Fanya juu, which is usually fortified with Napier
grass. Besides serving as an erosion control measure, it serves as fodder for animals, since many farmers do
practice semi-zero grazing as well as free range in this Subzone. Soil fertility improvement measures being
practiced in this Subzone include: organic fertilisers application and use of compost and crop residues.
Majority of farmers, however, do apply inadequate fertilisers on their fields using wrong application rates.
There is, however, need to promote the use of effective microoganisms (EM) technology, which enhances
the bio-degradation of compost. The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on
the predominant soil of this Subzone is given in Table 18h.

209
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 70

TABLE 18h: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LH 1, l/m^m, RB 2
Subzone: l/m^m, Soil Unit: RB 2 Survey area 15 (Kibuk)
AEZ: LH 1 TEA-DAIRY ZONE
Subzone: l/m^m
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 190 or more, 2nd rainy season: approx. 150)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: RB 2 = humic NITISOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 400 - 700 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 800 - 1000 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - 5625 7604 8500 - - - *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha - 25 27
P2O5 kg/ha - 55 77
K2O kg/ha. - - -
Manure t/ha - 1.0 1.5
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha 600 800 - * - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha - -
P2O5 kg/ha - -
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 2 4
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 5207 6473 8000 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 31 38
P2O5 kg/ha 75 97
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 1.4 1.8

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

210
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 71

Subzone LH 2 vl i of the Wheat/Maize-Pyrethrum Zone

This is the Wheat/Maize-Pyrethrum Zone with a very long cropping season and intermediate rains as typified by
Chemweisus Sub-Location in Mt. Elgon district. Due to the small farms, wheat production is insignificant.
The Subzone is dominated by soils on volcanic foot ridges. The soils are well drained and extremely deep
(humic Nitisols). The first rainy season can rely only on an amount of at least 700 – 900 mm in 10 out of
15 seasons and the second rainy season on 350 – 450 mm.

Maize is still the current most important food crop. However, some of the varieties are susceptible to rotting
while still in the field, e.g. H629, H628, H627 and H626. Farmers are also growing finger millet as an addi-
tional food crop. The dominant legume crops here are field peas and common beans. Important fruit crops
include: passion fruits, strawberries, apples, pears and plums, which have a ready market, both in Kenya and
neighbouring Uganda. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of cabbages, kales,
tomatoes and carrots, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby
market centres.

The current cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: wheat, and pyrethrum. Many
problems are however limiting the expansion of wheat growing in this zone. These include: lack of local
stockists to supply seed, lack of harvesting mechanised equipment like combine harvester, lack of husbandry
knowledge about the crop, inadequate use of suitable fertilisers and poor road network. If these problems
are addressed, then wheat growing will rapidly expand in this zone since the cash returns from wheat are
better than those of maize. The livestock sector plays a very crucial role as an income earner to majority of
households in this zone. Most animals are crosses local breeds, with a few pure dairy breeds. A few farmers
keep crosses of bulls to service neighbours cows at a fee. The keeping of indigenous poultry is also a good
income earner for most households.

The dominant visible soil conservation structures include Fanya juu, which is usually fortified with Napier
grass. Besides serving as an erosion control measure, it serves as fodder for animals, since many farmers do
practice semi-zero grazing as well as free range in this Subzone. Soil fertility improvement measures being
practiced in this Subzone include: organic fertilisers application and use of compost and crop residues. Ma-
jority of farmers, however, do apply inadequate fertilisers on their fields using wrong rates. There is, however,
need to promote the use of effective microoganisms (EM) technology, which enhances the bio-degradation
of compost. The present yield increase under three levels of inputs and the potential on the predominant soil
of this Subzone is shown in Table 18i.

211
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 72

TABLE 18i: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LH 2, v l or two, RB 2
Subzone: v l or two, Soil Unit: RB 2 Survey area 16 (Chemweisus)
AEZ: LH 2 WHEAT/MAIZE - PYRETHRUM ZONE
Subzone: v l or two
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season 200 or more, 2nd rainy season: 130 - 140)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: RB 2 = humic NITISOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 350 - 450 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 700 - 900 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - 7031 7102 8500 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 20 25
P2O5 kg/ha 67 75
K2O kg/ha. - -
Manure t/ha 1.2 1.2
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - - *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 7481 7834 * - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha - 25 26
P2O5 kg/ha 0 75 90
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0 1.2 1.6

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

212
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 73

3.3.6 FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPORTANT

AGRO-ECOLOGICAL UNITS

These are mainly the Agro-Ecological Units represented by the Farm Survey Areas which were selected for
this purpose.
The Fertiliser Use Recommendation Project of the GTZ (1986 - 92) had two trial sites in the former Bun-
goma district, i.e. one at Kamakoiwa in Zone UM 2 and the other in Tongaren in UM 4. For the other
zones, subzones and units, Muriuki and Qureshi have showed which results from other districts could
be representative (see map of Fertiliser Recommendations and Farm Survey Areas), and have constructed
curves for fertiliser response1.

Recommended rates of an AEU increase towards a wetter subzone and decrease as one approaches a drier
one, if the soil unit extends here (see the small maps). In our recommendations, we have tended to lower the
application rates due to the low financial base of the smallholder farmers. The optimum can be calculated
from the curve formulas in MURIUKI & QURESHI - Fertiliser Use Manual, KARI, Nairobi 2001. In the
long run, the appropriate amount must be given to maintain the nutrient content. Some quantities for this
can be seen in the chapter 3.1 of the General Remarks section.

Higher recommendations are given in the Smallholder Farming Handbook of the IRACC and MSS, Nai-
robi 1997, but the economic investment and risk is too high for the local farmers here. A rural small credit
system for the inputs would help alot. Where scientific sources for quantifying the rates are lacking, some
conclusions could be drawn from the difference in inputs and yields between the low and high production
levels of the Farm Survey 2004. An empty column in the tables denoted by “Other Nutrients Recommend-
ed”, does not mean that there is nothing to be applied, but it is because of lack of trial results. Symptoms
of nutrient deficiencies and methods of addressing it can be obtained from Muriuki, A.W. and Qureshi,
J.N. (2001), Tables 1&2, p.22-23.

Finally, it must be emphasized here once again that fertilising alone will increase the yields only in the short
term. The micronutrients that are not included in the fertiliser become exhausted very fast. Application
of manure to recover the extracted nutrients is a must in order to have a stable agrobiological system with
continuous crop production2.
This advice is urgent for the upland soils which, due to their senility, have a low nutrient content. In the
long run it is necessary for the young volcanic soils RB 2 with their higher nutrient content to be maintained
through continuous application of fertilizers.

213
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 74

214
BUNG. & MT.EL. 75

215
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 76

216
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 77

TABLE 19a: FERTILIZER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1 LM 2 l^(m/s) i & l^(s) i, UlGA 1 & UlG 3 2

Average Yield Average Yield

Recommended
Crop varieties and Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
Fertiliser Rates
Season kg/ha Rate is Applied 1 Manure is Recommended
kg/ha Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 10 N + 20 P2O5 560 3 5t/ha o ca. 600 kg 500 kg lime/ha +
Hybrid maize & beans - - 5t/ha o ca. 400 kg Mg + Potassium
Sorghum 20 P2O5 650 5t/ha o ca. 500 kg 500 kg lime/ha
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize 4 20 P2O5 400 5t/ha o ca. 300 kg -
Maize local & beans - - * -
Biseasonal (or more)
Cassava, local 20 N + 35 P2O5 5000 * -
Semi-permenent
300 CAN + 250 Lime soil 4 t/ha at
Superphosph., planting, 250 kg/ha
Sugarcane 5 ratoons 600 CAN
ca. 30000 *
Muriate of Potash
+ 400 Superphos. for 3rd ratoon
Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 96 & 97, and conclusions from the Farm Survey
2004, area 9;
1
Rates and yields are similar in both subzones; * data not available
2
The soil units extend into zone LM 1. There the rates and the yield increase are 10 – 20 % higher, esp. in 2nd season.
3
Higher rates become uneconomic: 20 kg N & 30 kg P2O5/ha give 800 kg.
4
In the drier subzone l^(s) i an early mat. Maize variety is climatically better suited.
5
The Prov. Farm Man.O. J. Imbira recommends (for practical reasons) lower amounts than the IRACC: 4 bags/ha DAP or 9 bags/ha SSP and
2 bags/ha potash at planting time, 7 bags/ha CAN or 4 bags/ha urea as topdressing; 9 bags/ha CAN or 5 bags/ha urea for the ratoon.

TABLE 19b: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS LM 3 m/l^(s), UlGA 1 & BXC 1 1

Average Yield Average Yield

Recommended
Crop varieties and Season Fertiliser Rates Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
kg/ha Rate is Applied 1 Manure is Recommended
kg/ha Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 20 N + 20 P2O5 950 5t/ha o 600 kg 500 kg lime/ha +
Local maize & beans - - 4t/ha o 400 kg Mg + Potassium
Hybrid maize & beans 20 P2O5 800 (maize) 5t/ha o 500 kg together
Sorghum, med. mat. 20 P2O5 700 * Lime
Cotton, unim. var., long staple 100 CAN 900 * Lime
Second rainy season
Local maize & beans 10 N + 10 P2O5 600 (maize) 4t/ha o 400 kg Potassium + Mg
Sorghum, early mat. 20 P2O5 500 * Lime
Biseasonal (or more)
Cassava 25 N + 35 P2O5 5000 * -

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 96 & 106, and conclusions from the Farm Survey
2004, area 10a & b; cotton: IRACC, Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi
1997, p. 155
1
Maize and beans are difficult in the waterlogged soils of the bottomlands BXC 1, farmers try to plant suitable crops on the adjoining higher places;
* data not available

217
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 78

TABLE 19c: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-ECOLOG-

ICAL UNITS 1 UM 1 m/l^m/s i, UM 2 m/l^s/m & s i, UM 3-4 l/vl i, UlN 1 2 & 3

Average Yield Average Yield

Recommended Increase if this
Crop varieties and Season Fertiliser Rates Increase if Other Nutrients
kg/ha Rate is Applied 1 Manure is Recommended
kg/ha Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 75 N + 10 P2O5 2300 5t/ha o 720 kg Lime + Mg +
Hybrid maize & beans 75 N + 20 P2O5 1900 (maize) * Potassium
Local maize & beans 20 N + 20 P2O5 1000 (maize) 5t/ha o 600 kg together
Potatoes (Annet higher 75 P2O5 6600 5t/ha o 2000 kg Potassium
places)
Cabbages (Copenhagen) 50 P2O5 10300 5t/ha o 12000 kg -
Second rainy season
Beans (GLP 2) - - * -
Permanent crops
Tea in UM 1 150 N + 30 P2O5 3 4000 green tea * Copper
(uneconomic with
Coffee in UM 1, 2, 3 -
present prices)

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 95 & 96; KARI & GTZ: Fertiliser Use Recommenda-
tion Vol. 11, Bungoma District, Nairobi 1995; and conclusions from the Farm Survey 2004, area 11; for
tea FMHB 1982 and IRACC: Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.- Nairobi 1997.
1
The climatic difference does not affect significantly the food crops listed, except potatoes which do not do well in lower places of UM. The soil
UlN 1 tends to lower yields because of its partly petroferric phase; * data not available
2
The soil unit UlN 1 appears also in some parts of LM 1 & 2. Maize there should be H 626 instead of 625, sweet potatoes instead of potatoes.
3
IRACC recoomends one year after planting 20 gm of NPK 25:5:5 per bush, after 2 years 30 gm, after 3 years 50 gm.

218
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 79

TABLE 19d: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS1 UM 3-4 l/vl i or m^s i & UM 4 l/vl or two, UlRA & UlGA 1

Average Yield Average Yield

Recommended Increase if this
Crop varieties and Season Fertiliser Rates Rate is Applied 1 Increase if Other Nutrients
kg/ha Manure is Recommended
kg/ha Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 10 N + 15 P2O5 600 1 5t/ha o 730 kg Lime + Mg +
Hybrid maize & beans (GLP 2) 30 P2O5 1000 2 (maize) - Potassium
Potatoes (Annet) 50 P2O5 9500 * together
Cabbages (Copenhagen) 75 P2O5 5200 3 5t/ha o 4200 kg “
Second rainy season
Beans (GLP 2) 20 P2O5 140 - -

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 95 & 96; KARI & GTZ: Fertiliser Use Recommenda-
tion Vol. 11, Bungoma District, Nairobi 1995; and conclusions from the Farm Survey 2004, area 14.
1
In UM 4 during dry years there is no response to N, therefore it is recommended for UM 3-4 only, in UM 4 with 15 kg P2O5 only it is 400
kg/ha.
2
In UM 4 competition for water can cause lower yields than monocropped maize.
3
Without P2O5 yield is almost zero because of very low natural P content in the soil.
* data not available

219
 BUNG. & MT.EL. 80

TABLE 19e: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1 LH 1 l/m^m & LH 2 vl i or two, RB 2

Recommended Average Yield

Crop varieties and
Season
First rainy season
Maize (H 625) 2
Maize (H 625) & beans
Potatoes
Cabbages
Second rainy season
Beans
Cabbages 4
Permanent or semi-
permanent crops
Tea in LH 1 5
Pyrethrum in LH 2
Increase if this Average Yield Increase Other Nutrients
Fertiliser Rates Rate is Applied 1
kg/ha if Manure is Applied Recommended
kg/ha
- - 5t/ha o 750 kg 25 kg/ha potassium
- - 5t/ha o 750 kg (maize) 25 kg/ha potassium
50 P2O5 2700 3t/ha o 1000 kg -
40 P2O5 ca. 10000 * -
20 P2O5 110 3 * Potassium
30 P2O5 6000 - -
160 N + 35 P2O5 ca. 4000 green tea * *
20 N + 40 P2O5 800 * *

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 96 & 102; KARI & GTZ: Fertiliser Use Recommen-
dation, Kericho District, Nairobi 1995; and conclusions from the Farm Survey 2004; for tea and pyreth-
rum FMHB 1982 and IRACC: Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997;
S.M. KANYANJUA et al.: Effects of Potassium Use... E.A. Competitor, May 16th, 2005
1
The moisture difference between LH 1 and 2 does not affect significantly the food crops listed here, therefore the rates and yields are almost the
same, during the 2nd season a bit lower in LH 2; * data not available
2
Maize yields are generally still high at these fertile volcanic soils, 4300 kg/ha at an average. In future fertiliser will become more necessary.
3
Uneconomic, better to put beans after potatoes to get remaining phosphate and to give just potassium.
4
Other medium mat. food crops may be grown too.
5
IRACC recoomends one year after planting 20 gm of 25:5:5 per bush, after 2 years 30 gm, after years 50 gm.

222
220
 KAKAM. GROUP 1

3.4 BUTERE-MUMIAS, KAKAMEGA, LUGARI AND VIHIGA GROUP OF DISTRICTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS District page

3.4.1 Natural Potential 4
Introduction 4
Average Annual Rainfall Map 5
Table 1: Rainfall Figures 6
Table 2: Temperature Data 7
66% Reliability of Rainfall in Agrohumid Period of First Rainy Season. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
66% Reliability of Rainfall in Agrohumid Period of Second Rainy Season . . . . . . . . . . . .9
Table 3: Average Potential Evapotranspiration 10
Table 4: Climate in the Agro-Ecological Zones 10
Agro-Ecological Zones and Subzones Map 11
Agro-Ecological Zones and Subzones (=Legend to the AEZ Map), with Land Use
Potentials and Water Availability &Requirement Diagrams 12

Soils Map 17
Soil Distribution, Fertility and Major Characteristics 18

3.4.2 Population and Land 24

Butere-Mumias District
Table 5: Population in Butere-Mumias District Per Division and Location 24
Table 6: Composition of Households in Butere-Mumias District Per Division and Location 25
Table 7: Available Land Area in Butere-Mumias District per AEZ and Household 25

Kakamega District
Table 8: Population in Kakamega District 26
Table 9: Composition of Households in Kakamega District 27
Table 10: Available Land Area in Kakamega District per AEZ and Household 27

Lugari District
Table 11: Population in Lugari District Per Division and Location 28
Table 12: Composition of Households in Lugari District Per Division and Location 28
Table 13: Available Land Area in Lugari District per AEZ and Household 29

Vihiga District
Table 14: Population in Vihiga District Per Division and Location 29
Table 15: Composition of Households in Vihiga District Per Division and Location 30
Table 16: Available Land Area in Vihiga District per AEZ and Household 31

3.4.3 Agricultural Statistics 31

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Butere-Mumias District 31

221
 KAKAM. GROUP 2

Table 17: Butere-Mumias District Sugarcane: Area, Production and Yield Trends 31
Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Kakamega District 31
Table 18a: Kakamega District Tea: Area, Production and Yield Trends 32
Table 18b: Kakamega District Coffee: Area, Production and Yield Trends 32
Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Lugari District 33
Table 19a: Lugari District Sugarcane: Area, Production and Yield Trends 33
Table 19b: Lugari District Maize: Area, Production and Yield Trends 33
Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Vihiga District 34
Table 20a: Vihiga District Tea: Area, Production and Yield Trends 34
Table 20b: Vihiga District Coffee: Area, Production and Yield Trends 34
Distribution of Farming Activities During the Year 35
Tables 21 a-j: Farming Activities in the Agro-Ecological Zones 35-39

3.4.4 Farm Survey in Kakamega Group of Districts 40

Table 22: Farm Survey Sites in Kakamega Group of Districts 40
Farm Survey Areas and Fertiliser Recommendations Map 41
Tables 23 a-k: Assets, Land Use, Farming Intensity and Inputs 42-52
Tables 24 a-k: Cropping Pattern 53-62

3.4.5 Introduction to the Actual Land Use Systems and Potential Intensification
by Better Farm Management 64

LM1 p or two of the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone 64

Tables 25 a-k: Increase of Yields by Better Farm Management 65 - 84
LM1 l^m i of the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone (sandy clay loam over Petroplinthite) 66
LM1 l^m i of the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone (sandy friable clay) 68
UM 1 p or two of the Coffee-Tea Zone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70
LM1 p or two of the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone (sandy friable clay) 72
UM1 p or two of the Tea-Coffee Zone (friable clay) 74
UM1 p or two of the Tea-Coffee Zone (friable to firm sandy clay) 76
LM2 l^(m/s) i of the Marginal Sugarcane Zone 76
UM 4 l/vl or two of the Maize-Sunflower Zone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
UM1 p or two of the Tea-Coffee Zone (different soils) 80

3.4.6 Fertiliser and Manure Recommendations for Important Agro-Ecological Units 85

Maps of Important Agro-Ecological Units 87
Tables 26 a-m: Fertiliser and Manure Recommendations for Agro-ecological Units 89 - 97

222
 KAKAM. GROUP 3

LM 1 p or two & l^m i, UlG1 & UIS1 of the Sugarcane Zone 88

LM 1 l^m i & LM 2 l/m^(s/m) & l^(m/s) i, UmG3 of the Sugarcane Zone 90
LM 1 p or two, UmD2 & 3 of the Sugarcane Zone 91
UM 1 p or two resp. two/three, UhV1, UhI2, UhD1&2, UhGA1 & UhG2
of the Tea-Coffee Zone 92
LM 1 p or two & LM 2 l^(m/s) i, UmG5 of the Sugarcane & Tea-Coffee Zones 95
UM 2-4 l/vl or two, LIA1 & 2, UmG1, 2 & 3 of the Coffee & Maize Sunflower Zones 96

223
 KAKAM. GROUP 4

3.4.1 NATURAL POTENTIAL

INTRODUCTION

This district group has one of the highest population densities in Kenya. In several locations, more than
1000 people live on the agricultural output of 1 km2. This figure, as well as a high annual rainfall averag-
ing between 1200 and 2200 mm, suggests a high potential area. However, there are some limitations. For
example, in the centre of the Kakamega district, rainfall is too high leading to leaching of the soils and pro-
viding a fvourable environment for fungal diseases to attack crops. Therefore, this area is classified as UM 0
and is thus taken out of agricultural planning as a forest zone (of course some cropping is possible together
with planting of young trees). In large parts of the district the soils are the main problem. They are heavily
leached because of unsustainable farming practices.

In the northeastern areas the generally humid climate is interrupted by four semi-arid months (November-
February) restricting cultivation of important perennial plants like bananas. Therefore it is classified as Zone
3-4 although the average rainfall covers more than 60% of the potential evapotranspiration.

In view of the increasing population, the development of the full land use potential of a mixed farming
ecosystem is very necessary, incorporating legumes, indigenous vegetables, fruits and forage. In this district
group, cultivation is possible throughout the year, although the time from December to February is drier
(see Diagram Kakamega). Nevertheless, three harvests of vegetables and other short maturing crops are pos-
sible per year in many places. The growing periods shown in the Subzones can be varied because there is no
real dry spell between the rainfall peaks during the year.

The rainfall expectation is high, at least 500 - 1100 mm during the 1st rainy season and 450 –850 mm dur-
ing the 2nd rainy season in 10 out of 15 years. It starts at the end of July. Here in the Western Kenya, there
is only a slight increase in rainfall during this month, and a severe decrease in November (see Diagram Mu-
mias). The 60% reliability of the length of the growing periods ranges from 365 days in UM 1 to about 230
days in UM 4 (see Table 4). In the eastern part of the district (in UM 0, 1, 2 and UM 3-4), the annual mean
temperature is about 18° - 21°C; in the rest of the district group it is higher than 21°C (LM 1-3). Due to the
wet climate evapotranspiration is not high, 1600 –1800 mm per year for the whole district group. Only in
the very lowest parts, the annual average evapotranspiration is higher than 1800 mm.

224
KAKAM. GROUP 5

225
 KAKAM. GROUP 6

TABLE 1: RAINFALL FIGURES

from selected typical stations having at least 15 years of records

Agro Ecol. Annual Monthly rainfall in mm

No. and Name of Station Zone Kind of rainfall
altitude Subzone records mm J F M A M J J A S O N D

8934001 KakamegaDistr. UM 1 Average 1929 59 95 151 254 260 190 164 230 186 134 118 87
1554 m 2I¿FHUHF p or two 66%1 1730 31 56 112 216 230 161 147 197 156 118 81 58
8934002 Bukura LM 1 Av. 1800 54 92 161 258 247 158 132 187 161 130 126 94
1463 m Farmers Tr. C. p or two 66%1 1620 28 54 120 218 218 130 115 157 130 115 85 60
8934013 Mumias, Girl´s LM 1 Av. 1829 55 94 159 251 261 166 134 156 151 138 118 86
1340 m Sec. School l^mi 66%1 1660 33 58 110 235 242 145 120 130 141 125 75 53
8934016 Lugari UM 3 Av. 1371 42 64 99 177 191 166 170 212 141 81 75 53
1546 m Forest Stn. l/vl i or two 66%2 1220 8 40 85 150 160 130 140 170 90 60 30 22
8934028 Kakamega UM 0 Av. 2100 82 108 176 284 279 200 186 218 183 147 131 84
1676 m Forest Station 66%1 1930 55 100 162 268 223 190 174 205 150 131 113 66
8934031 Yala, St. Mary’s LM 1 Av. 1858 68 95 152 262 260 132 106 155 148 131 136 104
1463 m Sch., (Siaya D.) l ^ m i 66%1 1635 37 80 136 254 244 124 97 140 132 120 118 78
8934040 Butere LM 1 Av. 1882 63 100 176 293 266 138 123 179 169 144 139 102
1433 m Health Centre p or two 66%1 1685 20 43 129 265 230 120 88 141 140 115 90 50
8934041 Mwihila Sec. LM 1 Av. 23793 87 125 250 402 346 194 195 242 241 188 188 108
1448 m School, Yala p or two 66%2 1950 45 65 180 280 260 150 135 185 190 150 130 65
8934061 Malava UM 1 Av. 2043 56 73 147 255 272 213 214 267 206 154 113 83
1595 m Agric. Stn. p or two 66%1 1840 24 30 83 212 245 160 159 185 145 140 63 33
8934071 Mantana, UM 3-4 Av. 1331 39 42 78 157 166 142 155 225 134 82 59 52
1905 m Stanley Estate l/vl or two 66%2 1190 18 20 55 120 130 125 130 190 105 56 20 19
8934072 Kaimosi UM 1 Av. 2146 84 102 170 304 252 244 173 220 191 160 140 89
1745 m Tea Estate p or two 66%2 1940 56 90 155 270 205 220 160 205 156 140 120 68
8934078 Esirwa, Kaimosi UM 1 p Av. 2091 73 89 153 281 292 187 184 235 197 160 122 96
1707 m Farmers Tr. C. or two/three 66%2 1900 48 78 140 248 250 170 168 210 160 140 103 74
8934084 Shikusa UM 2 Av. 1735 75 88 161 253 234 143 137 183 154 135 128 71
1652 m Borstal Inst. l ^ (m/s)i 66%2 1540 40 50 120 215 205 120 118 160 130 120 90 45
8934096 Kakamega UM 1 Av. 2019 74 110 166 312 250 155 155 224 178 161 144 85
1585 m Agric. Exp. Stn. p or two 66%2 1820 38 65 120 275 220 130 125 190 150 140 100 55
8934097 Mumias LM 1 Av. 2232 124 122 208 370 354 216 148 144 193 181 147 87
1312 m Sec. School p or two 66%2 1940 70 75 140 275 270 180 130 127 170 160 98 54
8934103 Vihiga, UM 1 Av. 1808 80 89 143 263 214 119 105 138 146 126 144 105
1585 m Maragoli p or two 66%2 1600 45 70 130 250 198 105 96 120 130 100 120 53
8934108 Sigalagala UM 1 Av. 2002 96 123 184 190 264 175 184 215 167 159 148 81
1502 m Tech. School p or two 66%2 1800 50 80 140 150 230 148 160 185 138 130 105 55
8934109 Eregi, St. UM 1 Av. 1847 78 118 153 259 229 150 126 174 132 126 122 75
1500 m Augustins T.T.C. p or two 66%2 1650 40 70 114 220 202 125 110 145 105 110 84 50

1
These figures of rainfall reliability should be exceeded normally in 10 out of 15 years.
2
Estimate of this reliability by correlation, no detailed data were available for enough years to GTZ.
3
Figure probably 10% too high due to record errors.

226
 KAKAM. GROUP 7

TABLE 1: Continued

No. and Agro Ecol. Kind of Ann. Monthly rainfall in mm

altitude1 Name of Station Zone records rainfall
Subzone mm J F M A M J J A S O N D
8934130 Malava Forest UM 1 Av. 1936 99 82 100 210 253 198 200 267 200 162 107 57
1685 m Guard Post p or two 66%2 1735 45 40 60 170 230 150 149 185 140 138 60 30
8934131 Kakamega UM 1 Av. 1832 89 114 123 232 242 198 130 215 179 125 113 75
1545 m Fuel Area p or two 66%2 1635 45 70 85 208 215 165 105 185 150 110 75 50
8934133 Mumias LM 1 Av. 2010 70 112 164 280 297 179 129 182 160 172 151 86
1302 m Sugar Factory p or two 66%2 1830 50 66 115 250 260 148 115 150 145 155 100 53
8935015 Turbo, Forest UM 4 Av. 1258 36 43 75 151 153 141 184 229 112 60 53 21
1829 m Lands Est. (cl.77) l/vl or two 66%
8935042 Lahre Farm UM 4 Av. 1194 30 32 67 154 174 132 168 191 100 58 51 36
1844 m (closed ca. 80) l/vl or two 66%

8935171 Lugari Farmers UM 4 Av. 1287 40 50 88 132 200 136 159 198 131 70 49 20
1742 m Training Centre l/vl or two 66%2 1150 20 22 60 100 155 120 120 165 110 50 15 10

1
These figures of rainfall reliability should be exceeded normally in 10 out of 15 years.
2
Estimate of this reliability by correlation, no detailed data were available for enough years to GTZ.

TABLE 2: TEMPERATURE DATA

No. and Name of Kind of Temperature in°C Belt

AEZ1
altitude Station records
J F M A M J J A S O N D Yr. limits

Mean max. 28.4 29.0 29.1 27.1 26.3 25.8 25.5 26.0 26.9 26.9 26.7 27.4 27.1
Kakamega 2000 m
8934096 Mean temp. 21.1 21.6 22.0 21.2 20.6 19.9 19.5 19.7 20.1 20.5 20.5 20.7 20.5
Agric. Exp. UM 1 UM
1585 m
Stn. Mean min. 13.7 14.2 14.9 15.3 14.8 13.9 13.4 13.3 13.3 14.0 14.3 13.9 14.1 1500 m
Abs. min. 5.2 4.5 5.1 9.2 8.2 8.3 8.1 5.3 5.2 8.2 8.0 6.3 4.5

Mean max. 31.6 31.8 32.2 29.9 28.8 28.5 28.3 28.7 29.6 29.8 29.8 30.3 30.2
1500 m
8934133 Mumias Mean temp. 22.3 22.7 23.4 22.6 22.0 21.4 20.9 21.4 21.6 21.9 21.8 21.8 22.1
LM 1 LM
1302 m Sugar Factory
Mean min. 12.9 13.6 14.5 15.2 15.1 14.2 13.5 13.7 13.5 14.0 13.7 13.3 13.9 1000 m
Abs. min 8.0 7.2 7.1 11.2 11.5 10.8 9.2 10.1 10.1 9.5 8.2 9.8 7.1

1
AEZ = Agro-ecological zone

227
 KAKAM. GROUP 8

228
KAKAM. GROUP 9

229
 KAKAM. GROUP 10

TABLE 3: AVERAGE POTENTIAL EVAPOTRANSPIRATION

Average Potential Evapotranspiration ET0 in mm Av. Rainfall
1
No. and Name of Type Year %
altitude Station AEZ J F M A M J J A S O N D Year in of
mm ET0
Mumias
8934133 calc.
1302 m Sugar LM 1 185 169 192 151 141 131 134 146 157 165 155 174 1900 2010 106%
Factory
Mumias
8934013 Girl´s interp. 183 171 194 153 143 133 135 148 157 167 158 176 1918 1829 95%
1340 m Sec. School LM 1
Kakamega
8934096 interp.
1585 m Agr. Exp. UM 1 167 154 174 138 132 126 133 146 156 163 141 162 1793 2019 113%
Stn.
8934103 Vihiga interp. 166 155 176 140 134 129 134 146 157 162 141 163 1805 1808 100%
1585 m Agric. Stn. UM 1

1
Type of eruation: calc. = calculated by formula of Penmann & McCulloch (1965) with albedo for green grass 0.2; interp. = interpolated from
neighbouring stations, considering altitude and rainfall difference.
AEZ = Agro-Ecol. Zone, explaining table see general part.

TABLE 4: CLIMATE IN THE AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES

66% reliability 60% reliability of cereal and

Agro- Ann. mean Ann. av. of rainfall 1 legumes growing period
Ecological Subzone Altitude
in m temperature rainfall
Zone in°C in mm 1st 2nd 1st 2nd
rainy s. rainy s. rainy s.2 rainy s. Total3
in mm in mm in days in days in days

UM 1 p or two / 1800- 800- 150 or

three >2000 1000 700-800 more 210-215 365
Coffee-Tea Zone 1500-1900 21.0
p or two – 18.5 1600- 700- 150 or
>2000 1000 650-800 more 210-215 365

UM 2 Very small, see Bungoma (soils not very suited for coffee)
Main Coffee Zone
UM 3
Maize and Marginal Very small, see Bungoma (soils not very suited for coffee)
Coffee Zone
UM 4
0DL]H±6XQÀRZHU 1/vl
or 1500-1900 21.0 – 18.9 1000 1600 500-700 450-600 115 or
115 or less ~230
Zone two more
170 or
LM 1 p or two 1800-2000 800-900 580-750 180-190 350-360
more
Lower Midland 1300-1500 22.2 – 21.0
Sugar Cane Zone vl i or 195 or
1650-1850 750-850 550-730 135-145 330-340
l^mi more

LM 2
Marginal Sugar 1 ^ (m/ 1300-1500 22.2 – 21.0 1500-1850 700-900 550-700 195 or 115-135 310-330
Cane Zone s) i more

1
Amounts surpassed normally in 10 of 15 years, falling during the agro-humid period which allows growing of most cultivated plants.
2
More if growing cycle of cultivated plants continues into the period of second rainy season. Reliability of 60% only due to the subzone system
(see Table II).
3
Agrohumid conditions continue from 1st to 2nd rainy season in the whole district.

230
KAKAM. GROUP 11

231
 KAKAM. GROUP 12

AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES AND SUBZONES

UM = UPPER MIDLAND ZONES
UM 0 = Fo re s t Zo n e
Too wet for good yields of most crops. Forest best land use

UM 1 = Te a - Co ff e e Zo n e
UM 1 = Tea-Coffee Zone with permanent cropping possibilities,
p or two / dividable in two or three variable cropping seasons
three
Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. > 8 0 % o f t h e o p t i m u m ) 1
1st rainy season, start norm. end of Feb. to mid March: Late mat. maize H 6210 & 6213,
cabbages, kales
2ndUDLQ\VHDVRQVWDUWXQGLVWLQFWO\HQGRI-XO\(PDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH+\EULG6
Whole year: Tea (~ 80%, medium quality), passion fruit, guavas
G o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. 6 0 - 8 0 % o f t h e o p t i m u m ) 1
1st rainy season (to 2nd rainy season): Late mat. maize like H 614, 625-29 (March – Sep./Oct.),
PHGPDWOLNH+XSWRP3$1 ¿QJHUPLOOHWPPDWEHDQVOLNH
Cuarentino (except on Acrisols); m. mat. potatoes like Desirée (higher places above 1600
PVZHHWSRWDWRHVPPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH.HQ\D)HGKDRU6KDEDPPDWVR\DEHDQVOLNH
Hill; spinach, broccoli, onions, carrots (above 1600 m)
2nd rainy season: E. mat beans like Rose coco (on light and medium soils), green grams (July-
Oct.); sweet potatoes; e. mat. soya beans like Magoye (Aug.-Oct.) or Black Hawk (July-
Oct.); kales, onions, broccoli, tomatoes
Whole year: Bananas, taro, yams, mountain pawpaws, winged beans 2, loquats, avocadoes
F a i r y i e l d p o t e n t i a l ( a v. 4 0 - 6 0 % % o f o p t i m u m ) 1
1st rainy season: High alt. sorghum; m. mat. beans like Cuarentino on Acrisols 3 ; tomatoes
2nd rainy season: Med. mat. maize like H 513 or H 622, even H 623 (July-Dec.), high alt.
VRUJKXP$XJ)HE¿QJHUPLOOHW5RVHFRFREHDQV-XO\6HSRQKHDY\DQG$FULVROV
Cuarentino beans (July-Nov.); potatoes (higher places), cabbages
3rd rainy season, start indistinctly in Oct.: Very e. mat. beans like Katheka (on Acrisols poor, ~
35%) and fast growing vegetables
Whole year: Arabica coffee, citrus
Pasture and forage
Around 0.6 ha/LU on artif. or sec. pasture of star grass; down to 0.12 ha/LU feeding Napier
resp. Bana grass, banana stems and leaves, maize stalks, and fodder legumes (Desmodium
uncinatum, Stylosanthes guyanensis, Siratro = Macroptilium atropurpureum)

UM 1 = Tea-Coffee Zone with permanent cropping possibilities, dividable in two variable cropping
p or two seasons (see Diagram Kakamega)
Like UM 1 p or two / three, but no reliable third crop in Oct.-Feb. Stocking rates about 10%
less

UM 2 = Ma i n Co ff e e Zo n e
Very small and transitional, potential see Bungoma District, but lower yields because of less
suitable soils and sometimes excessive rains

UM 3 = Ma rg in a l Co f fe e Zo n e
Very small and transitional, potential see Bungoma District, but lower yields because of less
suitable soils

232
 KAKAM. GROUP 13

UM 4 = Ma i z e -S u n fl o we r Zo n e
UM 4 = 0DL]H6XQÀRZHU =RQH ZLWK D ORQJ WR YHU\ ORQJ FURSSLQJ VHDVRQGLYLGDEOH LQ WZR YDULDEOH
l/vl or cropping season
two
Good yield potential
1st rainy season, start norm. around end of Feb./March (most crops continue to 2nd rainy season):
Late mat. maize like H 612 – 614 (and other high yielding varieties; see crop list); m. mat.
or late planted e. mat. beans (~60%) 3 , m. mat. potatoes (above 1600 m), sweet potatoes
a P PDW VXQÀRZHU OLNH .HQ\D )HGKD RU 6KDED ODWH PDW VXQÀRZHU OLNH .HQ\D
White in higher places; e. or med. mat. soya beans; cabbages, kales, spinach
2nd UDLQ\ VHDVRQ  VWDUW LQGLVWLQFWO\ PLG -XO\ ( PDW VXQÀRZHU OLNH +6  SRRU LQ GU\
years)
Whole year: Sisal, castor

Fair yield potential

1st rainy season: Finger millet, high alt. sorghum (50-60%); tomatoes, e. mat. onions (on light
soils)
2nd rainy season: Very early mat. beans like Katheka (poor in dry years); sweet potatoes, e. mat.
potatoes like Annet (higher places); late mat. onions (on light soils)
Whole year: Avocadoes 4, citrus 4, pineapples

Pasture and forage

Around 1.2 ha/LU on nat. pasture of Hyparrhenia savanna; about 0.6 ha/LU on artif. pasture
of Rhodes grass; down to 0.2 ha/LU feeding Napier resp. Bana grass, Desmodium and Siratro
(Macroptilium atropurpureum); suitable for grade cattle and dairy cows (silage or hay for dry
VHDVRQSUR¿WDEOH

233
 KAKAM. GROUP 14

LM LOWER MIDLAND ZONES

LM 1 = Lo we r Mi d l a n d S u g a r C ane Zone
LM 1 = Lower Midland Sugar Cane Zone with permanent cropping possibilities, dividable in two
p or two cropping season
Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l
1stUDLQ\VHDVRQVWDUWQRUPHQGRI)HEWRHQGRI0DUFK/DWHPDWVRUJKXPHPDWVXQÀRZHU
like HS 345, late mat. soya beans; sweet potatoes, e. mat. cassava, yam beans
Whole year: Pawpaws, guavas

Good yield potential

1st rainy season: Med. mat. maize like H 515 and 623 5 ¿QJHU PLOOHW P PDW EHDQV OLNH
Cuarentino 3 (on medium soils); sweet pepper, kales, Chinese cabbage, spinach, cabbage,
chillies, yellow yams (e. of Feb.-beg. of Nov.), egg plants (to 2nd rainy season), pumpkins
nd
2 rainy season , start indistinctly around mid July: Maize H 622 and 623 (end of June –
1RY'HF+HQGRI-XO\'HF¿QJHUPLOOHWPPDWVRUJKXPPPDWEHDQVOLNH
Cuarentino (fair on heavy soils), e. mat. beans like Rose coco (Sep. – Dec. on med. & light
soils), very e. mat. like Katheka (Oct.-Dec., on med. & light soils); sweet potatoes; e. and
PPDWVR\DEHDQVOLNH0DJR\H6HS1RYDQG+LOO$XJ1RYPPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH
Kenya Fedha or Shaba; cabbage, kales, Chinese cabbage, spinach, onions
Whole year: Sugar cane, bananas (nematodes danger) 7, tea (upper places, nearly 80%, but
medium to low quality), Robusta coffee (~60%) 7, late mat. cassava (on sandy soils), pigeon
peas, avocadoes
Fair yield potential
2nd rainy season: Katheka & Rosecoco beans (GLP 2) on heavy soils, late mat. groundnuts and
late mat. bambarra groundnuts (both in light soils, bambarra groundnuts. even in poor ones),
cowpeas
Whole year: Mangoes 6, taro, citrus 6
Pasture and forage
Around 0.5 ha/LU on sec. pasture where originally there has been a moist submontane forest;
down to < 0.1 ha/LU feeding Napier resp. Bana grass, banana leaves and others (see LM 1 vl i);
Siratro (start beg. - end of March: good yields, start mid - end of Feb.: fair yields)

LM 1 = Lower Midland Sugar Cane Zone with a very long cropping season and intermediate rains,
vl/l i or dividable in a long cropping season followed by a medium one and intermediate rains
l^m i
Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l
1st rainy season, start norm. end of Feb. to end of March: E. and med. mat. sorghum; m. mat.
VXQÀRZHU OLNH .HQ\D )HGKD 6KDED +  RU  P PDW VR\D EHDQV OLNH +LOO VZHHW
potatoes, e. mat. cassava, yam beans
Whole year, best planting time begin of March: Pawpaws, guavas

Good yield potential

1st rainy season: Med. mat. maize like H 515 and 623 (60-70%), late mat. sorghum (70-80%),
¿QJHU PLOOHW P PDW EHDQV OLNH &XDUHQWLQR 3; pigeon peas (March-Feb.); sweet pepper,
kales, Chinese cabbage, spinach, cabbage, chillies, yellow yams (Feb.-Oct./Nov.), egg
plants (to 2nd rainy season), pumpkins
nd
2 rainy season , start indistinctly end of Aug.: Maize H 513, 515, m. mat. sorghum; beans
a FRZSHDV VZHHW SRWDWRHV P PDW VR\D EHDQV P PDW VXQÀRZHU OLNH +6
kales, Chinese cabbage, spinach, onions
Whole year: Sugar cane, bananas (nematodes danger) 7, late mat. cassava, tea (upper places,
70-80%, but medium to low quality), Robusta coffee (~60%) 7, avocadoes

234
 KAKAM. GROUP 15

Fair yield potential

1st rainy season: Cotton (medium quality)
2ndUDLQ\VHDVRQ0DL]H+-XO\1RY¿QJHUPLOOHWODWHPDWJURXQGQXWVOLNH0ZLWXQGH
(in light soils) and late mat. bambarra groundnuts (in light soils, even in poor ones),
cabbage
Whole year: Mangoes 6, taro, citrus 6
Pasture and forage
Around 0.6 ha/LU on sec. pasture where originally there has been a moist submontane forest;
down to 0.13 ha/LU feeding Napier or Bana grass, banana leaves and stems, maize stalks,
sweet potato vines and fodder legumes

LM 2 = Ma rg in a l S u g a r Ca n e Zone
LM 2 = Marginal Sugar Cane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a (weak) medium to
l^(m/s) i short one and intermediate rains
Ve r y g o o d y i e l d p o t e n t i a l
1st rainy season, start norm. mid. F. to b. of March: Early mat. sorghum like Serena (March
±-XQHPPDWVXQÀRZHUOLNH.HQ\D)HGKD6KDED+RUHPDWVR\DEHDQVOLNH
Black Hawk; sweet potatoes, onions, yam beans
Whole year: Cassava, pawpaws

235
 KAKAM. GROUP 16

Good yield potential

1st rainy season: M. mat. maize like H 515 or 623 5 , late mat. sorghum like E 1291 (stock
IHHG ¿QJHU PLOOHW P PDW EHDQV 8 like Cuarentino, pigeon peas (March-F.), late mat.
rosette resistant groundnuts like Mwitunde (in light soils); cotton (med. quality); sweet
pepper, tomatoes, cabbages, kales. roselle
2nd rainy season , start Aug.: Bulrush millet, m. mat. sorghum, ratoon sorghum (S.-Aug.); e.
mat. beans like Rosecoco (GLP 2), green grams; onions, kales, tomatoes
Whole year: Bananas (nematodes danger) 7 , pineapples, sisal
Fair yield potential
1st rainy season: Rice, bambarra groundnuts (in light soils, even in poor ones), cowpeas;
tobacco
2nd rainy season: Maize H 515, 623; pigeon peas (Sep.-July), cowpeas, m. mat. groundnuts
like Serere 116; sweet potatoes; simsim; cabbages; cotton (July-Feb.) 9HPDWVXQÀRZHU
like HS 345
Whole year: Sugar cane (on less suitable soils and near LM 3 marginal), Robusta coffee,
citrus, mangoes
Pasture and forage
0.5-0.7 ha/LU on high grass savanna with Hyparrhenia and Panicum dominating; down to
about 0.15 ha/LU feeding Napier resp. Bana grass and banana leaves. Siratro and Desmodium
for soil and pasture improvement, Leucaena

LM 2 = Marginal Sugar Cane Zone with a long to medium cropping season followed by a (weak)
l/m^(s/m) short to medium one
Small and transitional. Crop potential like LM 2 l^(m/s) i but m. mat. sorghum in 2nd rainy
season and bananas only fair, maize H 513, 515 in 2nd rainy season and sugar cane marginal
only (also on good soils). Ratooning or late mat. sorghum 1st to 2nd rainy season good.
Stocking rates ~10% less

1
All these percentages are climatical, assumed that the place has suitable soil and is well fertilized and manured.
2
Edible pods, vines and tubers. Fixes a lot of nitrogen (see Nat. Ac. of Science: The Winged Bean: A High Protein Crop for the
Tropics. Washington 1975). Needs very high rainfall.
3
Sometimes rotting because of too wet conditions
4
With add. irrigation (Dec.-Feb.) well growing
5
Staggered planting dates are advised in order to minimize the risk of yield decrease or failures; early planting risky due to the
danger of dry spells in late Feb. and early March, best planting time mid to end of March.
6
Danger of Fungus disease
7
Windbreaks against the daily winds from the lake, light shade and mulching or compost are necessary to re-establish the former
forest eco-system, otherwise bananas and coffee grow poorly. Hardpan soils should be avoided.
8
Should be intercropped with maize because of higher yields and minimizing occasionally hail stone damage.
9
Although climatically less suitable, cotton is mainly planted in 2nd rainy season because of more labour availability. It can be inter
planted in maize already during July.

236
KAKAM. GROUP 17

237
 KAKAM. GROUP 18

SOIL DISTRIBUTION, FERTILITY AND MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS

The major part of the district shows a rather uniform undulating topography, but its eastern boundary is formed
by the Nandi Escarpment, a prominent topographical feature. West of Soy, in the northeastern area of the district,
there is a plateau with moderately deep soils (units LI3, LIA1 and LIA2).The dominant soils of the district are
found on upper middle-level uplands (units Uh, Um and Ul. They are poor in plant nutrients.

On plateaus and higher-level structural plains, soil unit L of low natural fertility is found. On hills and minor scarps
soils of units HGC, HIC, HU1 and HUC1 occur. Their fertility is variable.Valley bottom soils with waterlogging
can be seen in some places in the northern, western and northeastern part of the district.

LEGEND TO THE SOIL MAP OF KAKAMEGA GROUP OF DISTRICTS

 ([SODQDWLRQRIWKH¿UVWFKDUDFWHUphysiography)

M Mountains and Major Scarps (steep; slopes predominantly over 30%; relief intensity more than 300 m
(Mountains) or more than 100 m (Major Scarps); altitudes up to 4250 m)

H Hills and Minor Scarps (hilly to steep; slopes predominantly over 16%; relief intensity up to 100 (Minor
Scarps) to 300 m (Hills); altitudes up to 2850 m)

L Plateaus (very gently undulating to undulating; slopes less than 8%; altitudes between 1200 and 1600 m
– Maseno/Kisumu/Muhoroni/Sondu – and between 2000 and 2500 m – Uasin Gishu and Siria Plateaus

R Volcanic FootridgesGLVVHFWHGORZHUVORSHVRIPDMRUROGHUYROFDQRHVDQGROGHUODYDÀRZVXQGXODWLQJWR

hilly; slopes between 5 and 30%; altitudes between 2000 and 3000 m; Mount Elgon/Tinderet Mountains/
Mau Forest

F Footslopes (at the foot of Hills and Mountains; gently undulating to rolling; slopes between 2 and 16%;
various altitudes)

U Uplands

Uh Upper Middle-Level Uplands (undulating to rolling; slopes between 5 and 16%; altitudes between 1650
and 2650 m, here 2200 m)

Um Lower Middle-Level Uplands (gently undulating to undulating; slopes between 2 and 8%; altitudes
between 1200 and 2200 m)

Ul Lower-Level Uplands (very undulating to undulating; slopes between 2 and 8%; altitudes between
1200 and 2100 m

A Floodplains and River Terraces DOPRVW ÀDW WR JHQWO\ XQGXODWLQJ VORSHV EHWZHHQ  DQG  YDULRXV
DOWLWXGHVVHDVRQDOO\ÀRRGHGRUSRQGHG

B BottomlandsÀDWWRJHQWO\XQGXODWLQJVORSHVEHWZHHQDQGYDULRXVDOWLWXGHVVHDVRQDOO\SRQGHG

V Minor Valleys (V or U-shaped valleys; slopes mainly up to 16%, exceptionally up to 30%; width mainly
250-500 m, up to about 1000 m; depth up to about 100 m; various altitudes

2 Explanation of second character (lithology)

A Recent Alluvial Sediments from various sources

B Basic Igneous Rocks (basalts, nepheline phonolites; older basic tuffs included
D Mudstones and Claystones
F Gneisses Rich in Ferromagnesian Minerals and Hornblende Gneisses

238
 KAKAM. GROUP 19

G Granites and Granodiorites

I Intermediate Igneous Rocks (andesites, phonolites, syenites, etc.)
R Quartz-Feldspar Gneisses
S Sandstones, Grifts and Arkoses
U Undifferentiated Basement System Rocks (predominantly Gneisses)
V Undifferentiated or various Igneous Rocks
X Undifferentiated or various Rocks
Y Acid Igneous Rocks (Syenites, etc.)

3 Soil descriptions

MU2 Well drained, very shallow to shallow, brown to reddish brown, stony and rocky, gravely to very gravely
sandy loam to sandy clay loam:
LITHOSOLS and dystric REGOSOLS, rocky and stony phases.

HGC Complex of:

Somewhat excessively drained, shallow, stony and rocky soils of varying colour, consistency and
texture:
dystric REGOSOLS and RANKERS, with ferralic and humic CAMBISOLS, lithic, rocky and stony
phases, LITHOSOLS and Rock Outcrops

HIC Complex of:

Well drained, shallow to deep, dark red to strong brown, friable, gravely sandy clay; over petroplinthite
or rock; in many places very shallow, stony and rocky:
ferralo-chromic CAMBISOLS and orthic and rhodic FERRALSOLS, partly lithic, stony and rocky
phases, with LITHOSOLS

HU1 Well drained, moderately deep to deep, dark reddish brown, friable sandy clay loam to clay, with an acid
humic topsoil:
humic CAMBISOLS

HUC1 Complex of:

Excessively to well drained, shallow, dark red to brown, sandy clay loam to clay; in many places stony,
bouldery and rocky; in places with an acid humic topsoil and/or moderately deep to deep:
dystric REGOSOLS, with humic and (ferralo)-chromic CAMBISOLS, lithic, bouldery and rocky phases,
with LITHOSOLS and Rock Outcrops

LI3 Well drained, very deep, dark reddish brown to dark red, friable clay:
nito-rhodic FERRALSOLS

LIA1 Association of:

well drained, moderately deep to deep, dark red, very friable clay; over petroplanthite; on relatively
higher parts (60%):
rhodic FERRALSOLS, partly petroferric phase
and
well to imperfectly drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark red to brown, friable clay; over petroplinthite
or rock; in many places mottled, in places very shallow and/or rocky; near depressions and valley sides
(20%):
ferralic and gleyic CAMBISOLS, petroferric and lithic phases, with LITHOSOLS and Rock Outcrops
and
SRRUO\GUDLQHGPRGHUDWHO\GHHSWRGHHSGDUNJUH\WRJUH\PRWWOHG¿UPFOD\ZLWKDKXPLFWRSVRLOLQ
many places over petroplinthite; in depressions (20%):
mollic GLEYSOLS, partly petroferric phase

LIA2 Association as in unit LIA1 but with:

30%: rhodic Ferralsols, partly petroferric
50%: ferralic and gleyic CAMBISOLS, with LITHOSOLS and Rock Outcrops
20%: mollic GLEYSOLS, partly petroferric phase

239
 KAKAM. GROUP 20

FUC Complex of:

Well drained, deep, dark reddish brown to dark yellowish brown soils of varying consistency and texture;
in places moderately deep, gravely and/or stony:
orthic FERRALSOLS, orthic ACRISOLS and ferralic ARENOSOLS, partly stony phases

UhB3 Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark red, friable clay; over pisoferric material:
ferralo-chromic CAMBISOLS and rhodic FERRALSOLS, pisoferric phase

UhB5 Well drained, deep to extremely deep, dark red, friable clay; in places moderately deep over pisoferric
material:
rhodic FERRALSOLS, partly pisoferric phase

UhD1 Well drained, very deep, dark reddish brown to yellowish red, friable clay:
ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS

UhD2 Well drained, extremely deep, dusky red to dark red, vary friable clay:
nito-rhodic FERRALSOLS

UhDC Complex of:

Soils of unit UhD1:
ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS
and
Unit UhD2:
nito-rhodic FERRALSOLS

8K* :HOOGUDLQHGGHHSWRYHU\GHHS\HOORZLVKUHGWRGDUNUHGGLVKEURZQIULDEOHWR¿UPVDQG\FOD\ZLWKDQ
acid or thick acid humic topsoil:
humic and ferralo-humic ACRISOLS

8K* :HOOGUDLQHGPRGHUDWHO\GHHSWRGHHSVWURQJEURZQIULDEOHWR¿UPERXOGHU\DQGIDLUO\URFN\VDQG\FOD\
with an acid humic topsoil:
humic ACRISOLS, bouldery phase

UhG6 Well drained, deep to extremely deep, dark red, very friable clay; in many places bouldery and rocky:
rhodic FERRALSOLS, bouldery and rocky phase

UhGA1 Association of:

:HOOGUDLQHGPRGHUDWHO\GHHSWRGHHSEURZQIULDEOHWR¿UPIDLUO\ERXOGHU\DQGIDLUO\URFN\JUDYHO\
coarse sandy clay; on moderate slopes (60%):
dystric CAMBISOLS
and
somewhat excessively drained, very shallow to shallow, brown, friable, bouldery and extremely rocky,
gravely coarse sandy clay loam; in places with an acid humic top soil; on steep slopes (40%):
LITHOSOLS and RANKERS, rocky and bouldery phase

UhI2 Well drained, deep to very deep, strong brown to dark reddish brown, friable clay, with a humic to acid
humic topsoil; in places shallow to moderately deep:
luvic PHAEOZEMS, partly lithic phase

UhV1 Well drained, extremely deep, dark red, friable clay, in places with a humic topsoil:
dystric NITISOLS, with dystro-mollic NITISOLS

UmB1 Well drained, extremely deep, dark red, friable clay:

dystric NITISOLS

UmD1 Well drained, very deep, red to dark red, friable clay:
dystric NITISOLS

240
 KAKAM. GROUP 21

UmD2 Well drained, deep to very deep, reddish brown to strong brown, friable clay:
orthic FERRALSOLS

UmD3 Well drained, extremely deep, dark red, very friable clay:
rhodic FERRALSOLS

UmF1 Well drained, moderately deep to deep, dark yellowish brown, friable, gravely clay; in many places with
a humic topsoil, in places shallow:
eutric CAMBISOLS and haplic PHAEOZEMS, partly lithic phases

UmG2 Well drained, deep, dark yellowish brown to dark brown, friable sandy clay loam to sandy clay; in places
gravely in the deeper subsoil:
ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS

UmG3 Well drained, deep to very deep, red to dark brown, friable sandy clay to clay:
ferralo-orthic/chromic ACRISOLS

UmG5 Well drained, moderately deep to deep, dark yellowish brown to dark reddish brown, friable, gravely
sandy clay to clay, with an acid humic topsoil:
humic ACRISOLS

UmG7 Somewhat excessively drained, shallow, very dark grey to strong brown, friable, fairly rocky, fairly
bouldery, coarse sandy loam with an acid humic topsoil; in places moderately deep to deep, coarse sandy
loam:
RANKERS and humic CAMBISOLS, lithic phase

UmR1 Well drained, deep to very deep, dark red to brownish yellow, friable clay; in places moderately deep:
orthic FERRALSOLS and ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS

UmU1 Well drained, very deep, red to dark red, very friable clay:
rhodic FERRALSOLS

UmU2 Well drained, moderately deep to deep, strong brown to red, friable sandy clay loam to clay; in many
places over petroplinthite; in places rocky:
orthic and rhodic FERRALSOLS, with ferralic CAMBISOLS, partly petroferric phases; with Rock
Outcrops

UmV1 Well drained, very deep to extremely deep, dark red, friable clay, in places deep:
eutric NITISOLS, with chromic LUVISOLS

8P9 :HOOGUDLQHGGHHSWRYHU\GHHS\HOORZLVKUHGWRVWURQJEURZQIULDEOHWR¿UPFOD\LQSODFHVVKDOORZWR
moderately deep over petroplinthite; in places rocky or stony:
chromic and orthic ACRISOLS, partly petroferric and stony phase; with Rock Outcrops

UlD1 Well drained, moderately deep to very deep, dark red to strong brown, friable clay; in many places
shallow over petroplinthite:
chromic and orthic ACRISOLS and rhodic FERRALSOLS, partly petroferric phases, and dystric phases,
with dystric NITISOLS

UlG1 Well drained, deep to very deep, yellowish red to strong brown, friable clay; in places moderately deep,
over petroplinthite or rock; in places rocky:
orthic ACRISOLS; with Rock Outcrops

UlG2 Well drained, moderately deep to deep, dark reddish brown to red, friable; stony, gravely sandy clay to
clay; over petroplinthite or rock; in places shallow or rocky:
orthic ACRISOLS; with orthic FERRALSOLS, stony and partly petroferric phases; with Rock
Outcrops

241
 KAKAM. GROUP 22

UlG3 Well drained, shallow to moderately deep, dark yellowish brown to strong brown, friable sandy clay;
over petroplinthite; in places very shallow, stony or rocky:
orthic and ferralo-orthic ACRISOLS, petroferric and partly stony phase, with LITHOSOLS and Rock
Outcrops

8O* 3RRUO\GUDLQHGVKDOORZWRPRGHUDWHO\GHHSGDUNEURZQPRWWOHG¿UPFOD\DEUXSWO\XQGHUO\LQJDWRSVRLO
of loose to friable sand to sandy loam; partly over rotten rock:
dystric PLANOSOLS, partly lithic and paralithic phase

UlGC1 Complex of:

Well drained, moderately deep to very deep, reddish brown to yellowish brown, friable clay; over
petroplinthite (70%):
orthic FERRALSOLS, with orthic ACRISOLS, partly petroferric phases
and
moderately well drained, shallow, brown to dark brown, sandy clay loam; over petroplinthite (30%):
ferralic CAMBISOLS, petroferric phase

UlRA Association of:

Well drained, deep, strong brown to yellowish red and dark red, friable sandy clay loam to sandy clay; in
SODFHVVKDOORZWRPRGHUDWHO\GHHSRYHUSHWURSOLQWKLWHRQLQWHUÀXYHV
orthic FERRALSOLS with rhodic FERRALSOLS, partly petroferric phases
and
well drained, moderately deep to deep, dark yellowish brown to brown, friable sandy clay loam to clay,
with an acid humic topsoil; in places shallow; on steeper valley sides (30%):
humic CAMBISOLS; partly lithic phase

UlS1 Well drained, moderately deep to deep, dark reddish brown to strong brown, friable sandy clay loam to
clay, over petroplinthite; in places shallow:
orthic ACRISOLS, with orthic FERRALSOLS, partly petroferric phase

UlU1 Well drained, very deep, red to darl red, very friable clay:
rhodic FERRALSOLS

UlX1 Well drained, deep to very deep, dark red strong brown, friable clay; in many places shallow or moderately
shallow or moderately deep petroplinthite:
orthic to rhodic FERRALSOLS, partly petroferric phase

UlY1 Well drained, moderately deep to deep, yellowish red to strong brown, friable clay; over petroplinthite or
rock; in places shallow over petroplinthite or bouldery:
orthic FERRALSOLS, partly petroferric or bouldery phase

$$ :HOOWRPRGHUDWHO\ZHOOGUDLQHGGHHSGDUNJUH\LVKEURZQWR\HOORZLVKEURZQIULDEOHVWUDWL¿HGVDQG\
FOD\ORDPWRFOD\LQSODFHVPRWWOHG¿UPFOD\LQSODFHVVOLJKWO\VDOLQHRUVRGLFRQULYHUOHYHHV
eutric FLUVISOLS, with vertic FLUVISOLS and vertic and eutric GLEYSOLS, partly saline-sodic
phases

%, 3RRUO\GUDLQHGPRGHUDWHO\GHHSWRGHHSJUH\WRGDUNJUH\PRWWOHG¿UPFOD\ZLWKDKXPLFWRSVRLOLQ
places over petroplinthite; Uasin Gishu plateau:
mollic GLEYSOLS, partly petroferric phase

BX2 Imperfectly to poorly drained, deep to very deep, greyish brown to very dark grey and black, mottled,
¿UPWRYHU\¿UPFOD\WRFUDFNLQJFOD\LQSODFHVZLWKDVDOLQHDQGVRGLFVXEVRLOVOLJKWO\HOHYDWHGSDUWVRI
bottomlands:
eutric GLEYSOLS and pellic VERTISOLS, partly saline-sodic phases

242
 KAKAM. GROUP 23

BXC1 Complex of:

 LPSHUIHFWO\WRSRRUO\GUDLQHGGHHSWRGHHSYHU\GDUNJUH\WREURZQPRWWOHG¿UPWRYHU\¿UPVDQG\
clay to cracking clay, in many places abruptly underlying a topsoil of friable sandy loam; in places saline
and sodic:
dystric PLANOSOLS, dystric and vertic GLEYSOLS and pellic VERTISOLS; partly saline-sodic
phases

BXC2 Complex of:

 ,PSHUIHFWO\WRSRRUO\GUDLQHGGHHSWRGHHSYHU\GDUNJUH\WRGDUNJUH\LVKEURZQPRWWOHG¿UPFOD\
LQPDQ\SODFHVDEUXSWO\XQGHUO\LQJDWRSVRLORIIULDEOHWR¿UPVDQG\ORDPWRVDQG\FOD\ORDPLQPDQ\
places peaty or with an acid humic or histic topsoil:
dystric and humic GLEYSOLS, dystric PLANOSOLS and dystric HISTOSOLS

VXC Complex of:

Well drained, shallow to deep soils of varying colour, consistency and texture (on valley sides):
CAMBISOLS, ACRISOLS and FERRALSOLS, partly lithic phases, with Rock Outcrops
and
 LPSHUIHFWO\WRSRRUO\GUDLQHGGHHSPRWWOHGVRLOVZLWKSUHGRPLQDQWO\JUH\LVKFRORXUV¿UPFRQVLVWHQF\
DQG¿QHWH[WXUHVLQYDOOH\ERWWRPV
GLEYSOLS, with VERTISOLS and HISTOSOLS

NOTES for definitions (of underlined words):

mollic Nitisols and chromo-luvic Phaeozems: soils are equally important
mollic Nitisols, with chromic-luvic Phaeozems: Nitisols are prevalent
in places: in < 30% of the area
in many places: in 30-50% of the area
predominantly: in > 50% of the area
deeper subsoil: below 80 cm

243
 KAKAM. GROUP 24

3.4.2 POPULATION AND LAND

BUTERE-MUMIAS DISTRICT

The population of this district during the 1999 census was 478,928 people living on an area of 939.3 km2 of
land (Table 5). Out of this area, 710 km2 is suitable for crop and livestock production. This is approximately
75.6% of the total land area of the district. The area lies within the AEZ LM 1 (Table 7) that is well suited
for sugar cane growing as a cash crop.

The population density in this region has risen since the 1979 census when it was 298 persons per km2. It
rose by 76% to 525 persons per km2 during the 1999 census. As a consequence, the agricultural land avail-
able per household and per person has reduced considerably. In 1979, a household of 4.81 persons had 1.27
ha at its disposal, representing 0.26 ha per person. In 1999 however, a household of 4.4 persons (Table 6)
had only 0.66 ha, translating to 0.15 ha per person (Table 7) which was not enough. The estimate for 2005
is 538,670 people, it means 0.13 ha per person which is a catastrophe on the exhausted soils.

TABLE 5: POPULATION IN BUTERE-MUMIAS DISTRICT PER DIVISION

AND LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)

DIVISION/LOCATION Male Female Total Area in km2 Density

MATUNGU 51,284 57,030 108,314 259.80 417
Koyonzo 24,372 27,493 51,865 123.80 419
Matungu 26,912 29,537 56,449 136.00 415
MUMIAS 81,453 87,290 168,743 326.40 517
Etenje 22,058 24,478 46,536 95.02 489
Nabongo 26,749 26,829 53,578 96.60 555
Shibinga 32,646 35,983 68,629 134.60 510
BUTERE 53,162 58,475 111,637 209.80 532
Township 7,630 7,980 15,610 22.60 691
Central Marama 9,009 9,724 18,733 38.40 488
West Marama 11,749 12,963 24,712 51.20 483
North Marama 7,970 8,859 16,829 32.50 518
Marenyo 4,766 5,261 10,027 18.50 542
Shianda 4,173 4,688 8,861 13.20 671
South Marama 4,684 5,389 10,073 17.80 566
Manyala 3,181 3,611 6,792 15.60 435
KHWISERO 41,144 47,090 88,234 143.30 616
West Kisa 4,611 5,032 9,643 17.60 548
Shirombe 4,089 4,676 8,765 10.60 827
Central Kisa 7,612 8,904 16,516 24.50 674
Mulwanda 9,155 10,495 19,650 28.60 687
North Kisa 6,637 7,667 14,304 26.00 550
East Kisa 4,603 5,415 10,018 16.30 615
Kisa South 4,437 4,901 9,338 19.70 474
BUTERE/MUMIAS DISTRICT 227,043 249,885 476,928 939.30 508

244
 KAKAM. GROUP 25

TABLE 6: COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLDS IN BUTERE-MUMIAS DISTRICT

PER DIVISION AND LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)

Households Family Relatives & Persons per

DIVISION/LOCATION total >15years < 15years others household
MATUNGU DIVISION 23,522 1.9 1.9 0.8 4.6
Koyonzo 11,259 1.9 1.9 0.8 4.6
Matungu 12,263 2.0 1.9 0.7 4.6
MUMIAS DIVISION 38,804 1.9 1.7 0.7 4.3
Etenje 10,427 2.0 1.7 0.8 4.5
Nabongo 13,769 1.7 1.4 0.7 3.8
Shibinga 14,608 2.0 1.9 0.8 4.7
BUTERE DIVISION 24,625 2.0 1.6 0.9 4.5
Township 3,515 1.9 1.6 0.8 4.3
Central Marama 4,021 2.0 1.8 0.8 4.6
West Marama 5,261 2.0 1.8 0.9 4.7
North Marama 3,651 2.0 1.7 0.9 4.6
Marenyo 2,162 2.0 1.6 1.0 4.6
Shianda 2,099 1.9 1.5 0.8 4.2
South Marama 2,285 1.9 1.5 1.0 4.4
Manyala 1,631 1.9 1.3 1.0 4.2
KHWISERO DIVISION 19,798 1.9 1.5 1.0 4.4
West Kisa 2,216 1.9 1.4 1.0 4.3
Shirombe 2,108 1.9 1.4 0.8 4.1
Central Kisa 3,744 1.9 1.4 1.1 4.4
Mulwanda 4,381 2.0 1.4 1.1 4.5
North Kisa 3,114 2.0 1.5 1.1 4.6
East Kisa 2,175 1.9 1.6 1.1 4.6
Kisa South 2,060 1.9 1.6 1.0 4.5
BUTERE-MUMIAS DISTRICT 106,749 1.9 1.7 0.8 4.4
TABLE 7: AVAILABLE LAND AREA IN BUTERE-MUMIAS DISTRICT PER AEZ AND
HOUSEHOLD (Source: Calculated from DAO’s Reports)

In ’00 ha = km2 In ha
Agricultural land

Non agricultural land Area in agro-ecological zones Agricultural land per

DIVISION/ (total)
LOCATION
Unsuitable steep slopes, forest House
reserve, lakes, swamps and others UM 1 LM 1 LM 2 Person
(roads, homesteads, rivers) hold
BUTERE 63.8 146 209.8 0.588 0.131
Township 6.9 15.7 22.6 0.435 0.101
Central Marama 11.7 26.7 38.4 0.662 0.143
West Marama 15.6 35.6 51.2 0.67 0.144
NORTH MARAMA 9.9 22.6 32.5 0.618 0.134
Marenyo 5.6 12.9 18.5 0.594 0.129
Shianda 4 9.2 13.2 0.436 0.104
South Marama 5.4 12.4 17.8 0.541 0.123
Manyala 4.7 10.9 15.6 0.667 0.16
KHWISERO 29.3 114 3.75 143.3 0.571 0.129
West Kisa 3.6 14 3.75 17/6 0.626 0.145
Shirombe 2.2 8.4 10.6 0.395 0.096
Central Kisa 5 19.5 24.5 0.519 0.118
Mulwanda 5.8 22.8 28.6 0.518 0.116
North Kisa 5.3 20.7 26 0.656 0.145
East Kisa 3.3 13 16.3 0.591 0.13
Kisa South 4.1 15.6 19.7 0.755 0.167
MATUNGU 59.8 200.0 259.8 2.0 0.847 0.185
Koyonzo 27.7 95.3 123.8 0.844 0.184
Matungu 31.3 104.7 136 2.0 0.851 0.185
MUMIAS 61.2 170.0 231.2 0.592 0.139
Nabongo 25.6 71.0 96.6 0.506 0.133
Shibinga 35.6 99.0 134.6 0.673 0.144
Etenje/S.Wanga 15.2 80.0 95.2 0.765 0.172
TOTAL AREA 229.3 710.0 3.75 937.3 2.0 0.660 0.149

245
 KAKAM. GROUP 26

KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

According to the 1999 population census statistics the population of Kakamega district was 603,422 people
residing in an area of 1,395 km2 (Table 8). The agricultural land LM 1, LM 2 and UM 1 suitable for both
crop and livestock production is estimated at 1,147 km2. The larger part of the district is within the Agro-
Ecological Zones (AEZs) LM 1 and LM 2 suitable for dairy, sugar cane, tea and coffee production.

The population density averages 433 persons per km2 and ranges from the low of 313 persons in Shinyalu to
the high of 1,485 persons in Municipality Division. Available agricultural land per household of 4.8 persons
(Table 9) has declined from an average of 1.30 ha in 1979 to 0.83 ha in 1999, for an average household of
4.8 (Table 10). This implies that agricultural land per person was only a mere 0.17 ha. This scenario points
to a serious population pressure on land in the district. The estimate for 2005 is 749,860 people, it means
0.13 ha per person!

TABLE 8: POPULATION IN KAKAMEGA DISTRICT PER DIVISION AND

LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)

DIVISION/LOCATION Male Female Total Area in km2 Density

NAVAKHOLO 31,254 34,083 65,337 173.40 377
Bunyala West 13,214 14,690 27,044 72.20 386
Nambacha 10,460 11,189 21,649 56.70 382
Bunyala East 7,580 8,204 15,784 44.50 355
KABRAS 72,250 77,260 149,510 424.20 352
Kabras West 9,229 9,922 19,151 46.60 411
Shirugu 10,125 10,760 20,885 62.90 332
Kabras Central 11,306 12,190 23,496 72.80 323
Shivanga 11,156 12,319 23,475 67.60 347
Kabras East 14,687 15,560 30,247 101.90 297
Kabras South 15,747 15,509 32,256 72.40 446
ILEHO 15,151 16,394 32,545 77.70 419
Kambiri 9,499 9,217 18,716 41.80 448
Ivihiga 6,652 7,177 13,829 35.9.00 385
SHINYALU 49,124 54,824 103,948 332.20 313
Ilesi 8,071 8,826 16,897 23.70 713
Khayega 14,745 17,478 32,223 38.00 848
Murhanda 11,724 12,463 24,187 177.30 136
Shibuye 14,584 16,057 30,641 93.60 327
IKOLOMANI 43,306 48,798 92,104 142.90 645
Isulu 7,607 8,271 15,878 26.90 590
Shisere 10,543 11,386 21,929 40.00 548
Shirumba 7,485 8,399 15,884 19.30 823
Iguhu 9,195 10,328 19,523 32.70 597
Erege 3,328 4,220 7,548 9.20 820
Shikumu 5,148 6,194 11,342 14.80 766
LURAMBI 41,270 44,593 85,863 194.10 442
Butsotso North 17,200 18,420 35,620 82.30 433
Shikoti 7,829 8,550 16,379 31.70 517
Butsotso South 9,047 9,944 18,988 48.90 388
Bukura 7,194 7,682 14,876 31.20 477
MUNICIPALITY 36,988 37,127 74,155 49.90 1,485
Shieywe 17,563 17,874 35,437 18.50 1916
Bukhungu 19,425 19,253 38,678 31.40 1,232
KAKAMEGA DISTRICT 290,343 313,079 603,422 1,394.80 433

246
 KAKAM. GROUP 27

TABLE 9: COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLDS IN KAKAMEGA DISTRICT PER DIVISION

AND LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)
Households Family Relatives & Persons per
DIVISION/LOCATION >15years < 15years
total others household
NAVAKHOLO 13,032 2.1 2.1 0.8 5.0
Bunyala West 5,559 2.0 2.2 0.8 5.0
Nambacha 4,275 2.1 2.0 1.0 5.1
Bunyala East 3,198 2.1 2.0 0.8 4.9
KABRAS 29,022 2.2 2.0 0.9 5.1
Kabras West 3,818 2.2 2.1 0.7 5.0
Shirugu 3,976 2.2 2.0 0.8 5.1
Kabras Central 4,480 2.2 2.0 1.0 5.2
Shivanga 4,543 2.2 2.0 1.0 5.2
Kabras East 5,660 2.2 2.1 1.0 5.3
Kabras South 6,545 2.2 1.9 0.8 4.9
ILEHO 6,476 2.1 1.7 1.1 4.9
Kambiri 3,692 2.1 1.7 1.0 4.8
Ivihiga 2,784 2.1 1.8 1.1 5.0
SHINYALU 21,377 2.1 1.7 1.0 4.8
Ilesi 3,488 2.1 1.7 1.0 4.8
Khayega 6,719 2.0 1.7 0.9 4.6
Murhanda 4,944 2.1 1.8 1.0 4.9
Shibuye 6,226 2.1 1.7 1.1 4.9
IKOLOMANI 19,577 2.0 1.6 1.1 4.7
Isulu 3,360 2.0 1.7 1.0 4.7
Shisere 4,560 2.1 1.7 1.0 4.8
Shirumba 3,446 2.0 1.6 1.0 4.6
Iguhu 4,020 2.1 1.6 1.1 4.8
Erege 1,625 1.9 1.5 1.0 4.4
Shikumu 2,566 1.9 1.5 1.0 4.4
LURAMBI 17,429 2.1 1.9 1.1 4.9
Butsotso North 7,156 2.1 2.0 0.9 5.0
Shikoti 3,361 2.1 1.8 0.9 4.8
Butsotso South 3,830 2.1 1.8 1.0 4.9
Bukura 3,082 2.1 1.7 0.9 4.7
MUNICIPALITY 18,268 1.8 1.3 0.8 3.9
Shieywe 9,331 1.7 1.2 0.8 3.7
Bukhungu 8,937 1.9 1.4 0.8 4.1
KAKAMEGA DISTRICT 125,181 2.1 1.8 0.9 4.8

TABLE 10: AVAILABLE LAND AREA IN KAKAMEGA DISTRICT PER AEZ AND
HOUSEHOLD (Source: Calculated from DAO’s Reports)
In ’00 ha = km2 In ’00 ha = km2 in ha

Non-agricultural land Area in agro-ecological zones (total) Agricultural

land per
Unsuitable steep slopes

Others (roads, home-

Forest reserve, lakes,

Agricultural land

DIVISION
steads, rivers)

Household
swamps

Person

UM 1 UM 2 UM 3 UM 4 LM 1 LM 2 LM 3 UM 0

MUNICIPALITY - - 13.00 36.90 30.00 - - - 15.00 2.00 - 2.00 0.104 0.013

LURAMBI - - 11.10 183.0 - - - - 180.00 3.00 - - 3.616 0.452
NAVAKHOLO - 3.40 10.00 160.00 - - - - 156.00 4.00 - - 4.240 0.530
KABRAS 2.30 18.00 13.00 391.00 - 20.00 10.00 113.00 20.00 200.00 61.30 - 4.536 0.567
ILEHO 2.00 31.00 7.00 37.70 20.00 - - - 17.00 15.70 - 25.00 3.816 0.477
SHINYALU 2.60 102.00 8.00 220.00 215.60 - - - 10.00 5.00 - 102.00 5.120 0.640
IKOLOMANI 4.00 5.00 15.00 118.90 28.30 - - - 91..90 7.00 13.0 - 2.482 0.310
TOTAL AREA 10.90 159.40 77.10 1047.75 293.90 20.00 10.00 113.00 486.90 234.70 74.30 124.00 0.916 0.19

247
 KAKAM. GROUP 28

LUGARI DISTRICT

According to the 1999 population census, the population of Lugari District was 215,920 people. The total
land area of the district is 670.2 km2 (Table 11). The agricultural land that supports crop and livestock pro-
duction is estimated at 484 km2. The lower portion of the district lies within AEZ LM 2 which is mainly
suitable for sugar cane production. The main part of the district lies within AEZ UM 4, where intensive
maize and sunflower cultivation are the main cash income crops cultivated, in addition to various food
crops.

The population density averages 322 persons per km2 and ranges from the low of 302 persons to the high
of 437 persons in Likuyani and Matete Divisions, respectively (Table 11). The available agricultural land
has declined considerably per household and per person. In 1979, a household of 6.40 persons had 4.32
ha, i.e. 0.68 ha per person. This can be compared to 1999 figures of a household having 5.1 persons with
1.56 ha, i.e. 0.30 ha per person (Tables 12 & 13). The estimate for 2005 is 268,320 people, it means 0.24
ha agricultural land per person.

TABLE 11: POPULATION IN LUGARI DISTRICT PER DIVISION AND LOCATION

(Source: Census 1999)

DIVISION/LOCATION Male Female Total Area in km2 Density

LIKUYANI 44,499 46,711 91,210 302.00 302
Sinoko 7,707 8,209 15,916 50.70 314
Nzoia 10,846 11,349 22,195 55.20 402
Kongoni 16,125 17,334 33,459 99.30 337
Likuyani 9,821 9,819 19,640 96.80 203
LUGARI 39,217 40,915 80,132 266.30 301
Lugari 10,925 11,123 22,048 81.20 272
Mautuma 9,534 10,037 19,571 83.60 234
Lumakanda 11,478 11,783 23,261 59.30 392
Chekalini 7,280 7,972 15,252 42.20 361
MATETE 21,557 23,021 44,578 101.90 437
Luandeti 9,714 10,647 20,361 44.30 460
Chevaywa 11,843 12,374 24,217 57.60 420
LUGARI DISTRICT 105,273 110,647 215,920 670.20 322

TABLE 12: COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLDS IN LUGARI DISTRICT PER

DIVISION AND LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)

Households Family Person per

DIVISION/LOCATION
total >15 years < 15 years household1)
LIKUYANI 17,782 2.1 2.0 5.1
Sinoko 3,068 2.1 1.9 5.2
Nzoia 4,552 2.0 1.9 4.9
Kongoni 6,315 2.1 2.1 5.3
Likuyani 3,847 2.1 1.9 5.1
LUGARI 15,140 2.1 2.0 5.2
Lugari 4,150 2.1 2.1 5.2
Mautuma 3,545 2.2 2.1 5.5
Lumakanda 4,634 2.1 1.9 5.0
Chekalini 2,811 2.2 2.0 5.3
MATETEe 8,742 2.1 2.0 5.1
Luandeti 3,914 2.2 2.1 5.2
Chevaywa 4,828 2.1 1.9 5.0
LUGARI DISTRICT 41,664 2.1 2.0 5.1

/DUJHU¿JXUHWKDQWKHIDPLO\VXPEHFDXVHRIUHODWLYHVDQGODERXUHUVLQKRXVHKROG
1)

248
 KAKAM. GROUP 29

TABLE 13: AVAILABLE LAND AREA IN LUGARI DISTRICT PER AEZ AND
HOUSEHOLD (Source: Calculated from DAO’s Reports)

In ‘00 ha = km2 In ’00 ha = km2 In ha

Non-agricultural land Area in agro-ecological zones Agricultural land per

DIVISION /
LOCATION Forest Agricultural
Unsuitable steep Others (roads, land
reserve, homesteads, UM 4 UM 2-4 UM 3-4 LM 1 Household Person
slopes lakes, rivers)
swamps
LIKUYANI 160 4,816 980 24,244 213 29 1.36 0.27
Nzoia 33 946 187 4,354 44 0.96 0.20
Sinoko 30 860 170 4,010 40 1.31 0.25
Kongoni 45 1,290 255 8,340 69 14 1.32 0.25
Likuyani 52 1,720 368 7,540 60 15 1.96 0.38
LUGARI 400 2,230 2,500 21,500 183 80 1.73 0.33
Mautuma 150 700 800 6,710 54 30 1.88 0.34
Lumakanda 100 430 600 4,800 49 10 1.03 0.21
Chekalini 50 300 500 3,370 42 1.20 0.23
Lugari 100 800 600 6,620 41 40 1.60 0.30
MATETE 505 190 1,105 8,390 19 40 58 0.95 0.19
Luandeti 250 50 500 3,500 19 37 3 0.95 0.18
Chevaywa 255 140 605 4,800 3 55 0.96 0.19
TOTAL AREA 1,069 7,236 4,485 54,134 415 40 109 58 1.34 0.26

VIHIGA DISTRICT
During the 1999 census, the population of Vihiga district was 498,883 people living within an area of 563
km2 of land (Table 14). Agricultural land that supports crop and livestock production was estimated at 409
km2, averaging 72.6% of the total land area (Table 16). Most parts of this productive land area lies within
the AEZs LM 1 and UM 1 that are suitable to sugar cane, coffee and tea growing as cash crops besides the
staple food crops – maize, beans, cowpeas, etc. The estimate for 2005 is 595,180 people.

The population density has risen from 692 persons per km2 in 1979, to 886 persons per km2 in 1999 and
ranges from 616 persons per km2 in Tiriki East division to 1,068 persons per km2 in Sabatia division (Table
14).

The available agricultural land, just like in Kakamega and Lugari Districts, has equally shrunk due to the
rapid increase in population. Currently, agricultural land available per household of 4.7 persons (Table 15)
stands at 0.33 ha. (0.07 ha per person) (Table16). The current comparable estimates for 2005 are 0.25 and
0.06, respectively. If this trend remains unchecked, there will soon be almost no land available for cultiva-
tion in Vihiga district.

TABLE 14: POPULATION IN VIHIGA DISTRICT PER DIVISION AND LOCATION

(Source: Census 1999)
DIVISION/LOCATION Male Female Total Area in km2 Density
LUANDA 43,096 49,365 92,462 98.6 938
Central Bunyore 11,199 13,246 24,445 29.4 831
West Bunyore 15,255 17,255 32,510 28.7 1,133
S.W. Bunyore 8,052 9,189 17,241 20.2 854
South Bunyore 8,590 9,676 18,266 20.3 900
EMUHAYA 31,833 37,417 69,250 74.6 928
North Bunyore 8,426 9,583 18,009 20.6 874
N.E. Bunyore 9,758 11,495 21,253 24.3 875
East Bunyore 7,441 8,820 16,261 16.2 1004
Wekhomo 6,208 7,519 13,727 13.5 1017
SABATIA 54,675 63,188 117,863 110.4 1,068
Izava 5,819 6,803 12,622 9.8 1,288
Chavakali 7,963 8,732 16,695 15.4 1,084

249
 KAKAM. GROUP 30

TABLE 14: Cont.

DIVISION/LOCATION Male Female Total Area in km2 Density
West Maragoli 8,969 10,626 19,595 16.4 1,195
Busali West 4,704 5,575 10,279 10.4 988
Busali East 5,184 5,808 10,992 13.3 826
Wodanga 9,821 10,649 19,570 19.5 1,004
North Maragoli 8,093 9,271 17,364 16 1,085
Izava North 5,022 5,724 10,746 9.6 1,119
TIRIKI EAST 28,245 31,698 59,943 97 616
Shaviringa 16,367 18,203 34,570 72.6 476
Shamakhokho 11,878 13,495 25,373 24.4 1,040
TIRIKI WEST 36,048 40,322 76,370 92.1 829
Gisambai 9,389 10,460 19,849 23.40 848
Banja 10,083 11,780 21,863 27.30 801
Tambua 8,313 8,835 17,148 22.30 769
Jepkoyai 8,263 9,247 17,510 19.10 917
VIHIGA 38,823 44,172 82,995 90.30 919
Lugaga 5,109 5,805 10,914 12.00 910
Wamuluma 7,132 8,163 15,295 11.40 1,342
Central Maragoli 10,263 11,313 21,576 17.60 1,226
South Maragoli 7,883 8,736 16,619 28.40 585
Mungoma 8,436 10,155 18,591 20.90 890
VIHIGA DISTRICT 232,720 266,163 498,883 563.00 886

TABLE 15: COMPOSITION OF HOUSEHOLDS IN VIHIGA DISTRICT PER DIVISION AND

LOCATION (Source: Census 1999)
Households Family Relatives & Person per
DIVISION/LOCATION >15 years < 15 years
total others household
LUANDA 20,830 2.0 1.5 0.9 4.4
Central Bunyore 5,457 1.9 1.6 0.7 4.5
West Bunyore 7,355 2.0 1.4 1.0 4.4
S. W. Bunyore 3,838 2.0 1.6 0.8 4.4
South Bunyore 4,180 2.0 1.5 0.9 4.4
EMUHAYA 15,449 2.0 1.5 0.9 4.4
NORTH BUNYORE 4,069 2.0 1.5 0.9 4.4
N. E. Bunyore 4,684 2.0 1.5 1.0 4.5
East Bunyore 3,705 1.9 1.4 1.1 4.4
Wekhomo 2,991 2.0 1.5 1.0 4.5
SABATIA 23,763 2.1 1.5 1.3 4.9
Izava 2,594 2.1 1.5 1.3 4.9
Chavakali 3,561 2.0 1.5 1.1 4.6
West Maragoli 3,934 2.1 1.5 1.3 4.9
Busali West 2,020 2.1 1.5 1.3 4.9
Busali East 2,175 2.1 1.6 1.3 5.0
Wodanga 3,792 2.1 1.5 1.3 4.9
North Maragoli 3,563 2.1 1.5 1.2 4.8
Izava North 2,124 2.2 1.6 1.2 5.0
TIRIKI EAST 12,011 2.1 1.6 1.7 4.9
Shaviringa 6,891 2.1 1.6 1.2 4.9
Shamakhokho 5,120 2.2 1.5 1.2 4.9
TIRIKI WEST 15,144 2.1 1.7 1.2 5.0
Gisambai 4,028 2.0 1.6 1.3 4.9
Banja 4,264 2.1 1.7 1.2 5.0
Tambua 3,314 2.1 1.7 1.2 5.0
Jepkoyai 3,538 2.1 1.6 1.1 4.8
VIHIGA 17,749 2.0 1.5 1.1 4.6
Lugaga 2,331 2.1 1.4 1.2 4.7
Wamuluma 3,285 2.0 1.4 1.2 4.6
Central Maragoli 4,712 2.0 1.4 1.1 4.5
South Maragoli 3,514 2.1 1.6 1.0 4.7
Mungoma 3,907 2.0 1.5 1.2 4.7
VIHIGA DISTRICT 104,946 2.0 1.5 1.2 4.7

250
 KAKAM. GROUP 31

TABLE 16: AVAILABLE LAND AREA IN VIHIGA DISTRICT PER AEZ AND HOUSEHOLD
(Source: Calculated from DAO’s Reports)

in ’00 ha = km2 in ’00 ha = km2 in ha

Non-agricultural Area in agro-ecological zones AEZ Agricultural

land land per
without townships
Location/Division

Agricultural land
Forest reserve, lakes,

homesteads, rivers)
Unsuitable steep

Others (roads,

household
swamps

person
slopes

LH 1 UM 1 UM UM 4 LM 1 LM 2 LM UM 0
2-3 3-4

LUANDA - - 26.6 72 - 59 - - 13 - - - 0.35 0.08

EMUHAYA - - 26 48.6 - 39 - - 9.6 - - - 0.31 0.03
SABATIA - - 21 89.4 - 70 - - 19.4 - - - 0.37 0.07
TIRIKI - - 20 72,1 - 60 - - 12.1 - - - 0.47 0.09
VIHIGA - - 25 65.3 - 44 - - 21.3 - - - 0.37 0.08
VIHIGA DISTRICT - - 98.6 347.4 - 272 - - 75.4 - - - 0.33 0.07

3.4.3 AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Butere-Mumias District

The district was curved from the larger Kakamega district in 1998. The agricultural potential in the district
comprise the AEZ LM 1 and LM 2, in which sugarcane is predominantly grown. Currently, sugarcane is
cultivated on an estimated land area of 43,000 ha including the nucleus estate of Mumias Sugar Company
and the Outgrowers. The yield averages 85 metric tons per hectare (Table 17).

TABLE 17a: BUTERE-MUMIAS DISTRICT SUGARCANE: AREA,PRODUCTION AND

YIELD TRENDS (Source: Ministry of Agriculture, DAO’s Annual Reports & CBS)

Year
Area Production Yield
(created in 1998 from the
ha tons tons/ha
larger Kakamega district)
1998/99 43,100 3,664 85
1999/00 43,100 3,664 85
2000/01 43,200 3,570 85
2001/02 43,250 3,613 86
2002/03 43,000 3,655 85

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Kakamega District

It should be noted that out of the total land area of 139,480 ha, 85% is covered by infertile Acrisol soils. The
KARI station is however situated within the fertile Nitosol soils. The information from the research centre
therefore gives an optimistic picture of the agricultural production potential of the district. The well distrib-
uted rainfall supports the erroneous general opinion that the whole district is of high agricultural potential.
Approximately 2,000 ha of tea are planted and produce some 4,900 kg of green leaf per ha per year. Coffee
covers approximately 700 ha and yields about 810 kg of clean coffee per ha per year. Sugarcane is the cash
crop in the lower western zones, covering around 15,000 ha since many years without significant changes

251
 KAKAM. GROUP 32

TABLE 18a: KAKAMEGA DISTRICT TEA: AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD TRENDS
(Source: Ministry of Agriculture, DAO’s Annual Reports & CBS)

Year Area Production Yield

ha tons kg/ha
1980/81 1,953 1,953 1,000
1981/82 2,050 2,049 1,000
1982/83 2,020 2,020 1,000
1983/84 2,024 3,441 1,700
1986/87 2,200 4,400 2,000
1987/88 2,258 5,453 2,415
1988/89 1,984 5,537 2,719
1989/90 1,976 6,056 3,016
1990/91 2,008 7,723 3,908
1991/92 2,125 6,724 3,164
1992/93 2,060 8,023 3,895
1993/94 2,569 9,155 3,564
1994/95 2,084 10,027 4,811
1996/97 2,100 10,050 4,785
1997/98 2,150 10,250 4,767
1998/99 2,090 10,005 4,787
1999/00 2,045 9,995 4,886
2000/01 2,067 10,000 4,838
2001/02 2,000 9,950 4,975
2002/03 1,998 9,900 4,955

TABLE 18b: KAKAMEGA DISTRICT COFFEE : AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD

TRENDS (Source: Ministry of Agriculture, DAO’s Annual Reports & CBS)

Year Area Production Yield

ha tons kg/ha
1981/82 1,345 320,000 283
1982/83 1,200 310,000 258
1983/84 1,530 311,000 203
1984/85 1,154 320,000 277
1987/88 1,697 1,340,000 697
1988/89 1,136 1,143,000 790
1989/90 1,539 1,231,000 1006
1990/91 1,391 1,455,000 800
1991/92 1,503 1,196,000 1047
1992/93 1,305 979,000 796
1993/94 1,279 1,002,000 750
1994/95 1,284 822,000 784
1997/98 738 638,000 800
1998/99 750 640,000 864
1999/00 800 676,000 853
2000/01 796 637,000 845
2001/02 701 561,000 801
2002/03 693 561,000 809

252
 KAKAM. GROUP 33

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Lugari District

The district was hived off Kakamega in 1995 and the agricultural statistics begin in 1994/95. The agricultur-
al potential of the district lies in arable land estimated at 48,400 ha. The smallholder farmers grow sugarcane
and maize in small units. Currently sugarcane is cultivated on an area approximately 3,100 ha and yields an
average of 80 mt per ha. Maize crop covers about 9,700 ha with an average yield of 1.7 mt per ha, a decline
of more than 30% since 1995 due to depletion of the soils..

TABLE 19a: LUGARI DISTRICT SUGARCANE: AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD

TRENDS (Source: Ministry of Agriculture, DAO’s Annual Reports & CBS)

Year
Area Production Yield
(created in 1995 from the
ha tons tons/ha
larger Kakamega district)
1994/95 15,160 1,213,000 80
1996/97 15,200 1,216,000 80
1997/98 15,000 1,200,000 80
1998/99 15,300 1,224,000 80
1999/00 15,225 1,142,000 75
2000/01 15,150 1,136,000 75
2001/02 15,190 1,139,000 75
2002/03 15,235 1,219,000 80

TABLE 19b: LUGARI DISTRICT MAIZE: AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD TRENDS
(Source: Ministry of Agriculture, DAO’s Annual Reports & CBS)

Year
(created in 1995 from the Area Production Yield
larger Kakamega district) ha tons kg/ha
1994/95 6,819 168 2500
1995/96 7,026 183 2600
1996/97 6,900 179 2600
1997/98 7,150 179 2500
1998/99 7,500 210 2800
1999/00 7,000 168 2400
2000/01 9,735 160 1600
2001/02 9,435 174 1800
2002/03 9,700 167 1700

253
 KAKAM. GROUP 34

Development and Trends of Major Cash Crops in Vihiga District

The district was created from the larger Kakamega district in 1990. The agricultural potential in the district
comprise the AEZs UM 1 (Coffee-Tea Zone) and LM 1 (Sugarcane Zone). Coffee is cultivated on 1,250 ha
and yields about 390 kg of clean coffee per ha per annum. Smallholder tea growers cultivate some 2,000 ha
yielding approximately 5,000 kg of green leaf per annum.

TABLE 20a: VIHIGA DISTRICT TEA: AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD TRENDS
(Source: Ministry of Agriculture, DAO’s Annual Reports and CBS)

Year Area Production Yield

ha tons kg/ha
1990/91 3,011 9,855 3,273
1991/92 2,591 9,188 3,564
1992/93 2,602 9,570 3,678
1993/94 2,639 9,975 3,780
1994/95 3,102 12,284 3,960
1996/97 3,089 12,820 4,150
1997/98 3,098 13,724 4,430
1998/99 2,991 14,312 4,785
1999/00 3,009 14,714 4,890
2000/01 3,012 14,879 4,940
2001/02 3,108 15,509 4,990
2002/03 4,003 19,935 4,980

TABLE 20b: VIHIGA DISTRICT COFFEE: AREA, PRODUCTION AND YIELD TRENDS
(Source: Ministry of Agriculture, DAO’s Annual Reports & CBS)

Year Area Production Yield

ha tons kg/ha
1990/91 2,360 435 184
1991/92 1,315 265 202
1992/93 1,218 865 710
1993/94 1,230 490 398
1994/95 1,340 485 362
1996/97 1,340 485 362
1997/98 1,350 450 330
1998/99 1,300 470 360
1999/00 1,400 450 320
2000/01 1,225 480 390
2001/02 1,300 475 365
2002/03 1,250 488 390

254
 KAKAM. GROUP 35

DISTRIBUTION OF FARMING ACTIVITIES DURING THE YEAR PER WEEK AND

AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES

255
 KAKAM. GROUP 36

256
KAKAM. GROUP 37

257
 KAKAM. GROUP 38

258
KAKAM. GROUP 39

259
 KAKAM. GROUP 40

3.4.4 FARM SURVEY IN KAKAMEGA GROUP OF DISTRICTS

The Farm Survey (FS) was carried out during the year 2004 in nine sites covering the AEZs (UM 1 and 4;
LM 1 and 2), with different Subzones (Table 22). Farm holdings in Kakamega Group of districts are small.
Many households have farm sizes of between 0.4 ha and 1.2 ha.
Virtually all the farm holdings were formally registered as private individual holdings in the name of a man.
There were a few exceptions, where widows were found. Due to the reduced land size per household, some
amount of land is put under forage for zero-grazing. Sheep and goats are also important components of the
livestock in the district with numbers almost the same as cattle. The stocking rate tends to be too high. This
is an indication of the important role livestock plays in these districts (Table 23). Farmers grow more than
one crop in any one given season (Table 24), but use comparatively low amounts of fertiliser (Table 25).
Maize crop still dominates the farming landscape in these districts (Table 24). It is usually intercropped with
a legume (e.g. beans, cowpeas, soybeans). The low maize yields reported in these districts (Table 25) are a re-
flection of low usage of fertilisers and manure to improve the nutrient depleted soils. According to the Farm
Survey of 1977 the yields were more than 50% higher than those reported during the Farm Survey 2004!
The graphs in Table 21 indicate that most farmers plant and cultivate their maize crop at the recommended
time of the year. In Agroecological Units, where soil fertility has diminished, selection of suitable crops,
which demand fewer nutrients like sweet potatoes, cassava, Napier grass, etc., high and reliable yields can be
achieved here as well to ensure food security.

The poor road infrastructure in these districts is one of the major constraints explaining why its agricultural
potential has not yet been fully realised. The production of maize, milk, beef and horticultural products,
cash crops could be increased substantially if the all weather roads were improved. To achieve this goal,
labour productivity must be increased as far as possible, road infrastructure development, access to credit
facilities and market information are improved.

TABLE 22: FARM SURVEY SITES IN KAKAMEGA DISTRICT GROUP

Agro-Ecological Unit
District No. in
Kenya Soil Farm Survey Areas
AEZone Subzone
Unit
17 LM 1 p or two UlG 1 Mumias Division, East Wanga Location,
BUTERE- Lushenya Sub-location
MUMIAS Matungu Division, Koyonzo Location,
18 LM 1 l^m i UlS 1 Munami Sub-location
19 LM 1 l^m i UmG 3 Lurambi Division, North Botsotso Location
20 UM 1 p or two UhI 2 Shinyalu Division, Khayega Location
21 LM 1 p or two UmG 3 Lurambi Division, Butsotso South Location
KAKAMEGA
22 LM 2 l/m^(s/m) UmG 5 Kabras Division, Kabras Central Location
22a UM 1 p or two UhG 2 Kabras Division, Kabras East Location
Kabras Division, Kabras Central Location,
23 LM 2 l^(m/s)i UmG 5
Magui Sub-location
LUGARI 24 UM 4 l/vl or two UmG 3 Lugari Division, Lugari Location
Hamisi Division, Tambua Location,
25 UM 1 p or two UhGA 1
Jepkoyai Sub-location
Vihiga Division, Muigai and Muhandi Sub-
VIHIGA 26 UM 1 p or two UhV 1
locations
Sabatia Division, Chavakali Location,
27 UM 1 p or two UhD 1
Igunga Sub-location

260
KAKAM. GROUP 41

261
 KAKAM. GROUP 42

TABLE 23a: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 1 OF
BUTERE-MUMIAS DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UlG 1 Survey area 17 (Lushenya)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual
Sheep & Poultry Poultry children under
ha Dairy Zebu Adults Labourers
Goats (Indigenous) (Exotic) 14 years
Avg.0 2.31 0.57 2.73 1.3 9.2 0.27 4.03 1.67 2.53
Avg.1 2.31 2.43 4.32 3.25 18.4 8 4.03 2.63 2.92
Up. Qu. 2.76 0.25 4 3 10.25 0 5 2.25 3.25
Lo. Qu. 0.88 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.58 0.94 0.30 0.49 0.13
Avg.1 0.58 1.13 0.50 0.97 0.27
Up. Qu. 0.8 1.23 0.48 0.2 0.26
Lo. Qu. 0.2 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.1

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 4 1.5 0.27 1.19 11.5 1.9 9.0 17.27
Avg.1 4 3.0 1.16 1.88 14.0 5.0 9.0 72.73
Up. Qu. 4.3 2.1 0.14 1.98 9.5 0.5 8.9 2.27
Lo. Qu. 3 0 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 52.7 15.1 9.3 15.4 9.6 - - 0.9 0.6 0 0 0.03 0.02
Avg.1 65.9 17.4 9.0 17.8 9.2 - - 2.1 1.1 0 0 0.9 0.4
Up. Qu. 68.8 12.5 8.2 12.5 8.2 - - 0.7 0.4 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 15.1 4 4 4.8 4.8 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

262
 KAKAM. GROUP 43

TABLE 23b: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 1 OF
BUTERE-MUMIAS DISTRICT

Subzone: l^m i, Soil Unit: UlS 1 Survey area 18 (Munami)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual
Sheep & children under
ha Dairy Zebu Poultry Adults Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 2.09 0.1 1.73 0.2 13.17 3.8 0.87 2.6
Avg.1 2.09 1 2.74 2 21.94 3.8 2.36 3
Up. Qu. 2.59 0 3 0 16.25 4.25 1.25 4
Lo. Qu. 1.55 0 0 0 0 3 0 1

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.84 0.67 0.36 0.23 0.13
Avg.1 0.84 0.71 0.53 0.30 0.27
Up. Qu. 1.03 0.9 0.43 0.23 0.26
Lo. Qu. 0.64 0.4 0 0.08 0.1

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.8 0.9 0.05 0.8 5.2 0.3 4.8 7.8
Avg.1 5.8 1.8 0.5 1.3 7.5 2.2 5.2 77.8
Up. Qu. 7 1.8 0 1.3 6.5 0 6.5 0
Lo. Qu. 5 0 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 38.5 13.2 16.7 16.7 21.1 - - 1.4 1.7 0 0 0 0
Avg.1 52.5 16.5 19.5 17.9 21.1 - - 2.9 3.4 0 0 0 0
Up. Qu. 59.5 19.5 22.2 19.5 22.2 - - 0.5 0.6 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 0 2.4 3.8 13.7 21.9 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

263
 KAKAM. GROUP 44

TABLE 23c: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 1 OF
KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

Subzone: l^m i, Soil Unit: UmG 3 Survey area 19 (North Butsotso)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual Permanent
Sheep & children under
ha Dairy Zebu Poultry Rabbits Adults Labourers Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 2.55 1.1 2.2 0.9 7.03 0.07 4.3 1.5 0.03 2.87
Avg.1 2.55 2.36 3.47 2.08 9.17 2 4.3 2.37 1 3.74
Up. Qu. 3.3 2 3.25 2 10.5 0 6 2 0 5
Lo. Qu. 1 0 0 0 1.5 0 2.75 0 0 0.75

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.71 0.84 0.18 0.46 0.36
Avg.1 0.71 1.12 0.30 3.2 0.54
Up. Qu. 1.01 1.3 0.1 0.58 0.31
Lo. Qu. 0.4 0.08 0 0.50 0.02

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 6.2 1.4 0.5 0.9 19.4 6.4 12.8 33.3
Avg.1 6.2 1.1 0.5 0.6 15.0 6.4 8.5 50.8
Up. Qu. 8 1.7 0.7 1.0 25.0 15 23.0 50
Lo. Qu. 4.75 0 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 33.1 10.6 8.9 9.5 8.0 - - 1.0 0.8 0 0 0.5 0.5
Avg.1 41.4 15.9 11.2 15.0 10.5 - - 1.4 1.0 0 0 2.3 1.6
Up. Qu. 47.1 10.0 7.7 10.0 7.7 - - 1.0 0.8 0 0 0.1 0.0
Lo. Qu. 9.4 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

264
 KAKAM. GROUP 45

TABLE 23d: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ UM 1 OF
KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhI 2 Survey area 20 (Khayega)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual
Sheep & children under
ha Dairy Zebu Poultry Pigs Adults Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 1.18 0.34 2.14 0.17 13.45 0.45 3.79 4.55 3.03
Avg.1 1.18 2 3.26 1.25 15 2.17 3.79 7.33 3.83
Up. Qu. 1.86 0 3.5 0 15.5 0 5.5 4 4.5
Lo. Qu. 0.42 0 0 0 4.5 0 2 0 1

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.78 0.15 0.16 0 0.09
Avg.1 0.78 0.16 0.33 0 0.13
Up. Qu. 1.25 0.31 0.2 0 0.1
Lo. Qu. 0.35 0.01 0 0 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 3.2 2.1 0.3 1.8 15.8 2.4 13.4 10.34
Avg.1 3.2 4.7 1.9 2.8 16.5 6.7 9.9 60
Up. Qu. 3.5 2.2 0 2.2 17.5 0 17.5 0
Lo. Qu. 2 0 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09. Hence, sheep & goats mixed = 0.1

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 54.0 5.9 - 13.1 - - - 0.1 0.8 0 0 0 0
Avg.1 53.0 24.3 - 20.1 - - - 0.3 1.5 0 0 0 0
Up. Qu. 88.4 0.8 3.2 12 - - - 0.2 0.6 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 0 0 - 0 - - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

265
 KAKAM. GROUP 46

TABLE 23e: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 1 OF
KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UmD 3 Survey area 21 (Butsotso South)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual
Sheep & children under
ha Dairy Zebu Poultry Pigs Adults Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 0.62 0.87 1.87 0.73 8.3 0.57 3.7 0.8 2.77
Avg.1 0.62 2.89 3.73 3.14 11.86 17 3.7 2.67 3.32
Up. Qu. 0.8 1.25 4 0.25 14.25 0 5 1 4
Lo. Qu. 0.38 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.39 0.12 0.07 0.01 0.03
Avg.1 0.39 0.14 0.13 - 0.15
Up. Qu. 0.53 0.1 0.1 0.07 0
Lo. Qu. 0.19 0.05 0 - 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 4 4.7 1.6 3.0 41.5 14.5 28.4 31.75
Avg.1 4.1 11.4 5.2 6.1 52.5 24.1 28.4 78.40
Up. Qu. 5 6.7 1.7 5 53.8 13.8 40 37.5
Lo. Qu. 3 0 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 57.4 13.7 45.9 14.0 46.8 - - 8.2 27.4 0 0 0 0
Avg.1 71.8 16.7 47.9 17.0 48.8 - - 12.7 36.6 0 0 0 0
Up. Qu. 81.6 19.0 100 19.0 100 - - 6.1 32.0 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 16.3 3.2 12 3.2 12 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

266
 KAKAM. GROUP 47

TABLE 23f: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ UM 1 OF
KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UmG 5 Survey area 22a (Kabras East)
Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual
Sheep & children under
ha Dairy Zebu Poultry B/hives Adults Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 2.82 0.96 3.70 1.89 - 0.15 4.48 1.81 2.93
Avg.1 2.82 4.33 4.17 3.92 - 4 4.48 2.88 3.95
Up. Qu. 3.8 0 6 4 - 0 6 2 5
Lo. Qu. 1.25 0 1 0 - 0 2 0 0

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.89 0.91 0.89 - 0.13
Avg.1 0.89 0.91 0.89 - 0.32
Up. Qu. 1.2 1.2 1 0.15 0.25
Lo. Qu. 0.45 0.42 0.2 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.2 1.8 0.4 1.3 5.6 1.2 4.2 20.6
Avg.1 5.2 - 1.7 1.5 - 5.3 4.7 65.6
Up. Qu. 6 - 0 1.6 - 0 6 0
Lo. Qu. 4 - 0 0.8 - 0 5 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 60.1 8.8 8.5 23.6 22.9 - - 0.4 0.4 0 0 0.2 0.2
Avg.1 62.4 21.6 20.9 26.6 25.7 - - 0.9 0.9 0 0 2.5 2.5
Up. Qu. 83.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 - - 0.3 0.3 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 16.7 0 0 11.1 12.0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

267
 KAKAM. GROUP 48

TABLE 23g: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ LM 2 OF
KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UmG 5 Survey area 23 (Mugai)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Family Casual
Land ha Sheep & children under
Dairy Zebu Poultry Adults Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 3.34 2.23 3.53 1.7 18.57 3.6 3.67 2.03
Avg.1 3.34 4.47 4.42 5.1 20.63 3.6 5.24 2.77
Up. Qu. 4.8 4 5.5 1.5 28.5 5 5 3
Lo. Qu. 1.54 0 1 0 7.5 2 0 0

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.95 1.13 0.71 0.44 0.11
Avg.1 0.95 1.17 0.71 1.32 0.19
Up. Qu. 1.4 1.05 0.83 0.9 0.62
Lo. Qu. 0.59 0.4 0.35 0 0.2

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 5.93 1.9 0.8 1.1 8.8 3.7 5.0 38.7
Avg.1 5.93 - 1.5 1.3 - 6.9 6.2 71.3
Up. Qu. 7.25 - 0.9 1.1 - 5.3 6.7 66.7
Lo. Qu. 4.75 - 0 0.6 - 0 2.9 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 45.7 14.5 12.2 21.6 18.3 - - 0.3 0.3 0 0 0 0
Avg.1 59.6 21.7 17.7 27.0 22.1 - - 0.6 0.5 0 0 0 0
Up. Qu. 69.8 16.1 21.4 28.6 38.1 - - 0.4 0.6 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 13.1 0 0 3.2 4.8 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

268
 KAKAM. GROUP 49

TABLE 23h: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ UM 4 OF
LUGARI DISTRICT

Subzone: l/v l or two, Soil Unit: UmG 3 Survey area 24 (Lugari)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual
Sheep & children under
ha Dairy Zebu Poultry Pigs Adults Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 1.83 0.73 4.5 1.53 12.73 0.07 4.5 5.33 2.73
Avg.1 1.83 3.14 5.87 3.29 21.22 2 4.5 6.96 3.57
Up. Qu. 2.55 0.25 6.25 2 17.25 0 6.25 8 4
Lo. Qu. 0.95 0 0.75 0 0 0 2 0.75 0.75

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 1.30 0.05 0.21 0.03 0.24
Avg.1 1.30 0.08 0.46 0.4 0.31
Up. Qu. 1.78 0.04 0.23 0 0.50
Lo. Qu. 0.51 0 0 0 0.08

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 3.1 3.0 0.4 2.5 26.0 4.78 26.68 13.96
Avg.1 3.1 - 1.9 3.2 - 10.25 17.40 65.95
Up. Qu. 4 - 0.1 2.5 - 1.22 27.78 4.17
Lo. Qu. 2 - 0 0.8 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 73.09 28.3 - 32.1 - - - 0.8 - 0.07 - 0.15 3.9
Avg.1 78.32 31.5 - 33.2 - - - 1.1 - 1.04 - 1.54 -
Up. Qu. 92.75 25.4 - 25.4 - - - 0.7 - 0 - 0 0
Lo. Qu. 24.31 19.5 - 26.8 - - - 0 - 0 - 0 -

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

269
 KAKAM. GROUP 50

TABLE 23i: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ UM 1 OF
VIHIGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhGA 1 Survey area 25 (Jepkoyai)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Sheep Family Casual children
ha Poultry Poultry B/hives Adults Labourers under
Dairy Zebu &
(Indigenous) (Exotic) (Langstroth) 14 years
Goats
Avg.0 1.14 2.5 1.2 0.63 6.37 62.27 0.03 4.63 1.1 3.23
Avg.1 1.14 3.95 2.12 1.9 12.73 373.6 1 4.63 2.54 3.88
Up. Qu. 1.38 4 2 1 10 0 0 5.25 2 4
Lo. Qu. 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.75 0 1.75

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.45 0.17 0.40 0.10 0.09
Avg.1 0.45 0.20 0.40 0.21 0.30
Up. Qu. 0.63 0.25 0.46 0.04 0.16
Lo. Qu. 0.15 0.04 0.10 0 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Cross Zebu Dairy Cross Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 8.7 3.6 2.5 1.1 9.7 6.7 2.9 67.6 4.7 0.59
Avg.1 8.7 - 3.9 1.9 - 10.5 5.2 90.4 12.3 6.55
Up. Qu. 10.3 - 3.9 2.0 - 9.7 4.4 100 4.4 0
Lo. Qu. 7 - 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 35.9 13.0 22.5 14.3 - - - 1.3 3.0 0.0 17.8 0 0
Avg.1 43.1 19.6 34.5 15.3 - - - 4.7 10.8 0.5 4.9 0.12 0
Up. Qu. 44.4 15.8 29.5 15.8 - - - 0.4 0.9 0.2 12.7 0.25 0
Lo. Qu. 14.8 4.7 16.5 5.2 - - - 0 0 0 - 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

270
 KAKAM. GROUP 51

TABLE 23j: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ UM 1 OF
VIHIGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhV 1 Survey area 26 (Muhandi)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Family Casual
Land ha Sheep & children under
Dairy Zebu Poultry Adults Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 0.69 1 1.33 1.2 4.5 2.93 0.73 2.63
Avg.1 0.69 2.14 2.35 2.77 16.88 2.93 2.44 3.04
Up. Qu. 1.11 2 2 2 1.75 4 2 3.25
Lo. Qu. 0.35 0 0 0 0 2 0 2

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.39 0.12 0.13 0.01 0.04
Avg.1 0.39 0.13 0.13 - 0.09
Up. Qu. 0.63 0.2 0.2 - 0.08
Lo. Qu. 0.20 0.05 0.05 - 0

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 6.7 3.6 1.6 1.9 18.9 8.3 10.0 42.9
Avg.1 6.7 - 3.4 3.5 - 17.7 17.6 87.6
Up. Qu. 8 - 2.2 2 - 11 10 100
Lo. Qu. 5 - 0 0 - 0 0 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 28.8 7.2 22.3 11.1 34.3 - - 0.03 0.08 1.3 3.9 0.1 0.4
Avg.1 50.8 10.3 30.8 15.1 45.2 - - 0.39 1.16 2.1 6.4 0.8 2.5
Up. Qu. 38.5 5.9 18.5 6.8 21.3 - - 0 0 1.5 4.8 0 0
Lo. Qu. 0 0 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

271
 KAKAM. GROUP 52

TABLE 23k: ASSETS, LAND USE, FARMING INTENSITY AND INPUTS IN AEZ UM 1 OF
VIHIGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhD 1 Survey area 27 (Igunga)

Assets People on farm
Livestock Numbers Number of
Range Land Family Casual Permanent
Sheep & children under
ha Dairy Zebu Poultry Adults Labourers Labourers
Goats 14 years
Avg.0 0.74 1.13 1.93 0.47 1.1 5.1 1.73 0.03 5.8
Avg.1 0.74 2.83 2.64 2.8 11 5.1 2.26 1 6
Up. Qu. 1 2 3 0 0 7 3 0 7.5
Lo. Qu. 0.4 0 0 0 0 3 0.75 0 3

Land Use
Ann. Crops Perm. Crops Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops Fallow Other Use
Range
ha ha ha ha ha
Avg.0 0.34 0.16 0.09 0 0.16
Avg.1 0.34 0.16 0.13 0 0.18
Up. Qu. 0.41 0.18 0.12 0.09 0.20
Lo. Qu. 0.17 0.05 0 0 0.04

Farming Diversity & Stocking Intensity

Stocking Rate
Cropping Farm Land Permanent pasture & Fodder Crops
Improved Cattle
Range Diversity TLU/ha TLU/ha
% of total cattle
Crops/year Total Total
Dairy Zebu Dairy Zebu
TLU TLU
Avg.0 8 4.4 1.7 2.7 34.8 13.6 21.1 36.9
Avg.1 8 - 4.3 3.6 - 25.0 21.14 77.8
Up. Qu. 10.3 - 2.2 3 - 18.3 25 66.7
Lo. Qu. 5 - 0 0 - - - 0
TLU: Tropical Livestock Unit is a KARI derived factor loading for animals stock in the tropics e.g. dairy = 1.1,
local breeds = 1.0, cross breeds = 1.05, sheep = 0.11, goats = 0.09.

Inputs Applied
Fertilizer applied as pure nutrient
Plant protection
Improved kg/ha Manure applied
Range seed % t/ha Insecticide Fungicide
N P2O5 K2O
of area kg/ha kg/ha
AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC AC PC
Avg.0 36.5 8.3 19.2 10.6 24.5 - - 6.7 15.5 0.1 0.2 0 0
Avg.1 78.2 10.9 25.1 13.8 31.9 - - 7.8 17.9 2.1 4.8 0 0
Up. Qu. 44.0 5.1 11.7 6.1 13.9 - - 9.4 21.3 0 0 0 0
Lo. Qu. 0 2.7 9.5 0.9 3.2 - - 2.5 8.8 0 0 0 0

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these
AC = Annual crops
PC = Perennial crops

272
 KAKAM. GROUP 53

TABLE 24a: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 1 OF BUTERE-MUMIAS DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UlG 1 Survey area 17 (Lushenya)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cow peas 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.29
Finger millet 0.03 0.4 0 0 0.8 4.65
Kales 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.3 1.74
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.29
Maize 0.24 0.50 0.2 0 7.05 40.99
Maize & beans 0.30 0.49 0.4 0 8.85 51.45
Sweet potatoes 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.58
Total Sample Area 0.58 17.2 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bambara nuts 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.74
Beans 0.06 0.3 0 0 1.8 13.38
Cow peas 0.07 1.03 0 0 2.05 15.24
Ground nuts 0.02 0.12 0 0 0.6 4.46
Kales 0.03 0.11 0.05 0 0.9 6.69
Kales & local vegetables 0.01 0.4 0 0 0.4 2.97
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.37
Maize 0.02 0.15 0 0 0.6 4.46
Maize & beans 0.1 0.33 0.13 0 3.0 22.30
Simsim 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 1.49
Sorghum 0.11 0.47 0.03 0 3.3 24.54
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.15 1.12
Tomatoes 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.3 2.23
Total Sample Area 0.45 13.45 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.02 0.13 0 0 0.5 1.77
Sugarcane 0.92 1.11 1.23 0.2 27.68 98.23
Total Sample Area 0.94 28.18 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

273
 KAKAM. GROUP 54

TABLE 24b: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 1 OF BUTERE-MUMIAS DISTRICT

Subzone: l^m i, Soil Unit: UlS 1 Survey area 18 (Munami)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Arrow roots 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.21
Cassava 0.08 0.21 0.2 0 2.3 9.50
Finger millet 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.4 1.65
Ground nuts 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 1.24
Kales 0.03 0.23 0 0 0.9 3.72
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.15 0.62
Maize 0.04 0.6 0 0 1.2 4.96
Maize & beans 0.48 0.51 0.65 0.4 14.4 59.50
Onions & dania 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.83
Pineapples 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.41
Sorghum 0.08 0.23 0.2 0 2.3 9.50
Soyabeans 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.83
Sweet potatoes 0.04 0.14 0.1 0 1.3 5.37
Tomatoes 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.4 1.65
Total Sample Area 0.81 24.2 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bambara nuts 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 1.92
Beans 0.12 0.51 0.05 0 3.6 23.08
Cassava 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 1.92
Ground nuts 0.04 0.2 0 0 1.2 7.69
Kales 0.02 0.23 0 0 0.7 4.49
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.13 0 0 0.25 1.60
Maize & beans 0.16 0.28 0.25 0 4.7 30.13
Onions & dania 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.32
Pineapples 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.64
Sorghum 0.07 0.19 0.2 0 2.1 13.46
Soyabeans 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 1.28
Sweet potatoes 0.03 0.14 0.03 0 1 6.41
Tomatoes 0.04 0.28 0 0 1.1 7.05
Total Sample Area 0.52 15.6 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.03 0.1 0.1 0 0.8 4.02
Sugarcane 0.64 0.73 0.8 0.4 19.1 95.98
Total Sample Area 0.67 19.9 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

274
 KAKAM. GROUP 55

TABLE 24c: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 1 OF KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

Subzone: l^m i, Soil Unit: UmG 3 Survey area 19 (North Butsotso)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Arrow roots 0.04 0.19 0.03 0 1.32 6.41
Cassava 0.02 0.09 0 0 0.46 2.23
Collards 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.97
Kales 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 1.46
Indigenous vegetables 0.02 0.11 0.01 0 0.74 3.59
Maize 0.03 0.33 0 0 1 4.85
Maize & beans 0.48 0.53 0.6 0.2 14.3 69.42
Maize, beans & cow peas 0.03 0.8 0 0 0.8 3.88
Soyabeans 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.49
Sweet potatoes 0.04 0.12 0.1 0 1.2 5.83
Tomatoes 0.01 0.09 0 0 0.18 0.87
Total Sample Area 0.69 20.6 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Arrow roots 0.05 0.18 0.1 0 1.42 9.67
Beans 0.14 0.22 0.2 0 4.3 29.27
Cassava 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.1 0.68
Green grams 0.00 0.08 0 0 0.08 0.54
Ground nuts 0.05 0.11 0.1 0 1.53 10.42
Kales 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 2.04
Indigenous vegetables 0.02 0.11 0 0 0.64 4.36
Maize 0.04 0.28 0 0 1.1 7.49
Maize & beans 0.09 0.43 0 0 2.6 17.70
Sweet potatoes 0.08 0.15 0.1 0 2.32 15.79
Tomatoes 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.3 2.04
Total Sample Area 0.49 14.69 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.02 0.05 0.04 0 0.77 3.02
Sugarcane 0.82 1.12 1.2 0 24.7 96.98
Total Sample Area 0.84 25.27 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

275
 KAKAM. GROUP 56

TABLE 24d: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ UM 1 OF KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhI 2 Survey area 20 (Khayega)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cassava 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.22
Cow peas 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.22
Maize 0.07 1.05 0 0 2.1 9.35
Maize & beans 0.70 0.70 0.9 0.35 20.26 90.20
Total Sample Area 0.77 22.46 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.08 0.26 0.2 0 2.3 55.56
Cassava 0.00 0.02 0 0 0.02 0.48
Cow peas 0.00 0.07 0 0 0.13 3.14
Kales 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 1.21
Maize & beans 0.03 0.2 0 0 0.8 19.32
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.06 0 0 0.12 2.90
Indigenous vegetables 0.02 0.14 0 0 0.72 17.39
Total Sample Area 0.14 4.14 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.59 13.88
Coffee 0.02 0.25 0 0 0.5 11.76
Tea 0.11 0.32 0.2 0 3.15 74.12
Total Sample Area 0.15 4.25 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

276
 KAKAM. GROUP 57

TABLE 24e: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 1 OF KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UmD 3 Survey area 21 (Butsotso South)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Chewing cane 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.85
Kales 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.85
Indigenous vegetables 0.05 0.09 0.1 0 1.25 10.64
Maize & beans 0.34 0.36 0.43 0.1 10.2 86.81
Sweet potatoes 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.85
Total Sample Area 0.39 11.75 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.21 0.30 0.3 0 6.2 68.36
Chewing cane 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 1.10
Kales 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 1.10
Indigenous vegetables 0.05 0.09 0.1 0 1.57 17.31
Maize & beans 0.02 0.35 0 0 0.7 7.72
Soyabeans 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 3.31
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.1 1.10
Total Sample Area 0.3 9.07 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.07 0.09 0.1 0.04 2.15 62.32
Coffee 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.1 2.90
Fruits (avocado & paw paws) 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 2.90
Sugarcane 0.04 0.55 0 0 1.1 31.88
Total Sample Area 0.12 3.45 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

277
 KAKAM. GROUP 58

TABLE 24f: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ UM 1 OF KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UmG 5 Survey area 22a (Kabras East)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cassava 0.02 0.07 0.05 0 0.65 2.75
Ground nuts 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.85
Maize 0.10 1.4 0 0 2.8 11.86
Maize & beans 0.69 0.69 0.8 0.4 18.5 78.39
Pigeon peas 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.42
Sweet potatoes 0.05 0.08 0.1 0 1.35 5.72
Total Sample Area 0.87 23.6 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.08 0.28 0.1 0 2.2 47.31
Bulb onions 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 1.08
Cassava 0.02 0.07 0.05 0 0.55 11.83
Cow peas 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.4 8.60
Ground nuts 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 4.30
Kales 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.15 3.23
Kales & local vegetables 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.15 3.23
Sweet potatoes 0.03 0.07 0.05 0 0.85 18.28
Tomatoes 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.1 2.15
Total Sample Area 0.17 4.65 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.05 0.08 0.1 0 1.40 5.67
Citrus 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.40
Pineapples 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.40
Sugarcane 0.86 1.00 1.2 0.4 23.1 93.52
Total Sample Area 0.91 24.7 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

278
 KAKAM. GROUP 59

TABLE 24g: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ LM 2 OF KAKAMEGA DISTRICT

Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UmG 5 Survey area 23 (Mugai)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cassava 0.04 0.08 0.1 0 1.31 4.77
Cow peas 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.73
Garden peas 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.36
Ground nuts 0.05 0.19 0.09 0 1.48 5.39
Maize & beans 0.72 0.72 0.8 0.4 21.5 78.30
Soyabeans 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.36
Sweet potatoes 0.08 0.16 0.2 0 2.46 8.96
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.10 0 0 0.21 0.76
Yellow grams 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.36
Total Sample Area 0.91 27.46 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Beans 0.12 0.33 0.2 0 3.64 30.16
Garden peas 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.83
Ground nuts 0.03 0.2 0 0 0.8 6.63
Maize & beans 0.03 0.22 0 0 0.87 7.21
Soyabeans 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.83
Sweet potatoes 0.21 0.27 0.2 0.00 6.16 51.04
Tomatoes 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.83
Indigenous vegetables 0.01 0.10 0 0 0.20 1.66
Yellow grams 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.83
Total Sample Area 0.4 12.07 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.00 0.02 0 0 0.02 0.06
Bananas 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.00 1.06 3.12
Coffee 0.00 0.06 0 0 0.06 0.18
Passion fruits 0.00 0.02 0 0 0.02 0.06
Pineapples 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.1 0.29
Sugarcane 1.09 1.21 0.98 0.4 32.69 96.29
Total Sample Area 1.13 33.95 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

279
 KAKAM. GROUP 60

TABLE 24h: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ UM 4 OF LUGARI DISTRICT

Subzone: l/v l or two, Soil Unit: UmG 3 Survey area 24 (Lugari)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cassava 0.00 0.06 0 0 0.13 0.34
Finger millet 0.02 0.16 0 0 0.65 1.69
Ground nuts 0.01 0.07 0 0 0.20 0.52
Maize 0.08 2.4 0 0 2.4 6.25
Maize & beans 1.15 1.19 1.45 0.4 34.42 89.57
Sorghum 0.01 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.52
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.21 0 0 0.43 1.12
Total Sample Area 1.28 38.43 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Sun Flower 0.68 0.93 0.85 0 20.42 94.67
Sweet potatoes 0.02 0.15 0 0 0.6 2.78
Tomatoes 0.02 0.18 0 0 0.55 2.55
Total Sample Area 0.72 21.57 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Bananas 0.04 0.06 0.04 0 1.19 79.87
Coffee 0.01 0.15 0 0 0.3 20.13
Total Sample Area 0.05 1.49 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

280
 KAKAM. GROUP 61

TABLE 24i: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ UM 1 OF VIHIGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhGA 1 Survey area 25 (Jepkoyai)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cassava 0.01 0.03 0.01 0 0.31 2.37
Chewing cane 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.16 1.22
Kales 0.02 0.07 0.00 0 0.49 3.75
Indigenous vegetables 0.03 0.04 0.05 0 0.83 6.35
Maize & beans 0.34 0.35 0.45 0.1 10.13 77.51
Monkey nuts 0.00 0.08 0 0 0.08 0.61
Pineapples 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.02 0.15
Sorghum 0.01 0.11 0 0 0.34 2.60
Sweet potatoes 0.02 0.04 0.04 0 0.71 5.43
Total Sample Area 0.44 13.07 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Ground nuts 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.2 2.09
Cassava 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.02 0.21
Chewing cane 0.01 0.08 0 0 0.16 1.67
Soya beans 0.00 0.02 0 0 0.02 0.21
Sorghum 0.05 0.13 0.1 0 1.54 16.06
Kales 0.02 0.08 0 0 0.48 5.01
Maize & beans 0.20 0.23 0.2 0.09 5.86 61.11
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.03 0.01 0 0.42 4.38
Indigenous vegetables 0.02 0.04 0.05 0 0.87 9.07
Pineapples 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.02 0.21
Total Sample Area 0.32 9.59 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.01 0.03 0.01 0 0.46 8.93
Bananas 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.01 1.38 26.80
Coffee 0.05 0.11 0.06 0 1.42 27.57
Mangoes 0.01 0.03 0.01 0 0.27 5.24
Paw paws 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.02 0.39
Tea 0.04 0.2 0 0 1.2 23.30
Woodlots 0.01 0.2 0 0 0.4 7.77
Total Sample Area 0.17 5.17 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

281
 KAKAM. GROUP 62

TABLE 24j: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ UM 1 OF VIHIGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhV 1 Survey area 26 (Muhanda)

First Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cassava 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.14 1.23
Chewing cane 0.00 0.03 0 0 0.06 0.53
Cow peas 0.01 0.06 0 0 0.24 2.11
Ground nuts 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.1 0.88
Kales 0.00 0.03 0 0 0.1 0.88
Indigenous vegetables 0.02 0.09 0 0 0.56 4.92
Maize & beans 0.29 0.29 0.4 0.1 8.87 77.94
Pineapples 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.09
Sorghum 0.03 0.08 0.05 0 0.9 7.91
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.09 0 0 0.4 3.51
Total Sample Area 0.38 11.38 100

Second Rainy Season

Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Cassava 0.01 0.04 0 0 0.16 1.48
Chewing cane 0.00 0.03 0 0 0.06 0.56
Cow peas 0.01 0.07 0 0 0.34 3.15
Finger millet 0.00 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.93
Ground nuts 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.1 0.93
Kales 0.01 0.05 0.02 0 0.37 3.43
Indigenous vegetables 0.03 0.08 0.03 0 0.76 7.04
Maize & beans 0.26 0.28 0.4 0.1 7.82 72.41
Maize & ground nuts 0.00 0.05 0 0 0.05 0.46
Pineapples 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.09
Sorghum 0.03 0.08 0.05 0 0.85 7.87
Sweet potatoes 0.01 0.03 0 0 0.18 1.67
Total Sample Area 0.36 10.8 100

Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.01 0.02 0.00 0 0.16 4.32
Bananas 0.06 0.07 0.1 0.02 1.79 48.38
Coffee 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.15 4.05
Guavas 0.00 0.02 0 0 0.05 1.35
Mangoes 0.00 0.02 0 0 0.06 1.62
Paw paws 0.00 0.02 0 0 0.04 1.08
Tea 0.03 0.15 0.01 0 1.03 27.84
Woodlots (eucalyptus) 0.01 0.14 0 0 0.42 11.35
Total Sample Area 0.12 3.7 100

NOTES:
Avg.0 = average of all sample farms
Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries
Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. = Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points

282
 KAKAM. GROUP 63

TABLE 24k: CROPPING PATTERN IN AEZ UM 1 OF VIHIGA DISTRICT

Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhD 1 Survey area 27 (Igunga)
First Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Arrow roots 0.00 0.06 0 0 0.06 0.60
Carrots 0.00 0.001) 0.00 0.002 0.02
Cassava 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.03 0.30
Chewing cane 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.01 0.10
Kales 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.23 2.31
Leeks 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.004 0.04
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.01 0.00 0 0.12 1.20
Maize & beans 0.32 0.32 0.4 0.15 9.46 94.96
Onions 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.003 0.03
Pumpkins 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.001 0.01
Dhania 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.003 0.03
Spinach 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.005 0.05
Sweet potatoes 0.00 0.001) 0.00 0 0.034 0.34
Total Sample Area 0.33 9.96 100
Second Rainy Season
Annual & Bi-annual Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area of
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Arrow roots 0.00 0.06 0 0 0.06 0.69
Carrots 0.00 0.00 1) 0 0 0.002 0.02
Cassava 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.03 0.34
Chewing cane 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.01 0.11
Kales 0.01 0.05 0 0 0.23 2.64
Leeks 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.004 0.05
Indigenous vegetables 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.06 0.69
Maize & beans 0.28 0.30 0.4 0.15 8.26 94.94
Onions 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.003 0.03
Pumpkins 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.001 0.01
Dhania 0.00 0.001) 0 0 0.003 0.03
Spinach 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.005 0.06
Sweet potatoes 0.00 0.001) 0.00 0 0.032 0.37
Total Sample Area 0.29 8.7 100
Perennial Crops
Average Average Upper Lower Total Sample Area
Crops 0 1 Quartile Quartile of 30 farms
ha ha ha ha ha %
Avocado 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.53 10.82
Bananas 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.59 12.04
Coffee 0.02 0.08 0 0 0.86 17.55
Guavas 0.01 0.02 0.02 0 0.24 4.90
Loquarts 0.00 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.20
Mangoes 0.02 0.03 0.03 0 0.74 15.10
Paw paws 0.00 0.02 0 0 0.02 0.41
Tea 0.03 0.09 0 0 0.81 16.53
Woodlots 0.04 0.55 0 0 1.10 22.45
Total Sample Area 0.16 4.9 100
NOTES: Avg.0 = average of all sample farms; Avg.1 = average of farms, excluding zero entries; Up. Qu./Lo. Qu. =
Upper/Lower Quartile, refers to individual farms, 50% of all sample cases lie between these points
1)
Many farmers have this crop, but less than 50 square metres

283
 KAKAM. GROUP 64

3.4.5 INTRODUCTION TO THE ACTUAL LAND USE SYSTEMS AND

POTENTIAL INTENSIFICATION BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT

More detailed information can be found together with calculations of rentability in the Farm Management
Guidelines of each district and in the KARI Fertilizer Use Manual. Intensification by fertilising and manur-
ing see Tables 26 a - k in the final chapter.

In terms of aerial expanse, the dominant Zones are LM 1, UM 1, UM 4 and LM 2.

Subzone LM 1 p or two, Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone, on Friable Clay

This is the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone with permanent cropping possibilities, dividable in two variable
cropping seasons as typified by Buchenya Sub-Location in Butere-Mumias district. It is dominated by soils on
lower-level uplands. The soils are well drained deep to very deep (orthic Acrisols, with rock outcrops). The
rainfall variability in this Subzone is high, and hence the reliability is low but this is only a problem from
January to March. Therefore it is better to plant early than late to lower the risk of wilted seedlings. The first
rainy season can rely on an amount of between 750 – 850 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons and the second rainy
season on 550 – 730 mm.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still the current most dominant
food crop, even though yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil infertility related problems.
Apart from maize, sorghum, finger millet, sweet potatoes and cassava are important staple food crops.
The dominant legume crops in order of importance include: beans, cowpeas and of recent soybeans. The
dominant fruit crops are the cooking and sweet bananas types. Fruit production in this Subzone could be
improved through the use of improved tissue culture banana and grafted seedling material, which take about
18 months to produce the first fruits. This would greatly improve the quality of the produce and hence
fetch more cash income for the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of
kales, tomatoes and onions, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in the
nearby market centres. The current cash crop grown in this Subzone is sugar cane. Most farmers have put
their land under this crop at the expense of food crops production. As such, most households rely mostly on
food purchases. Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone is mainly through the
use of inorganic fertilisers on the sugar cane farms. The Mumias Sugar Company supplies these fertilisers.
Very little or no fertiliser is allocated to the food crop farms.

Livestock-keeping is an important sector among the people residing in this Subzone. Meat, milk and eggs
provided by livestock serve as important sources of high quality protein to complement diets that are based
on starchy crops like maize, bananas, millet and cassava. Cattle are important in a few homes for traction
and in many households for manure. The main type of cattle kept by farmers is of the Zebu type. In the
past, when the availability of land was not a problem because there were communal grazing lands and many
other uncultivated pieces of land, households had many animals and many different types (cattle, sheep,
goats, poultry). The present land tenure system combined with population pressure creates problems when
it comes to grazing. The emphasis presently is on keeping fewer but higher yielding grade cattle or improved
cattle (cross-breed) where it is financially possible. Zero-grazing is now emphasised as a strategy for com-
mercial farming. This employs a minimal amount of land, is intensive, high yielding, generates high income
and minimises the spread of cattle diseases Napier grass gives relatively high yields (ca. 8000 kg/ha, which
doubles easily by fertilising and manuring). Table 25a gives an indication of the maize yield production
undet three farm management levels and the actual potential of the same for the Subzone.

284
 KAKAM. GROUP 65

TABLE 25a: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 1, p or two, UlG 1
Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UlG 1 Survey area 17 (Lushenya)
AEZ: LM 1 SUGARCANE ZONE
Subzone:p or two
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 195 or more, 2nd rainy season: 135 - 145)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UIG 1 = orthic ACRISOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 550 - 730 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 750 - 850 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha 1200 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha -
P2O5 kg/ha -
K2O kg/ha -
Manure t/ha 1.2
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 4500 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 2884 3156 4600 - 980 1414
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 25 30 80 88
P2O5 kg/ha 25 30 80 90
K2O kg/ha - - - -
Manure t/ha 1.3 1.8 4.3 5.3

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

285
 KAKAM. GROUP 66

Subzone LM 1 l^m i, Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone, on Sandy Clay Loam over Petroplin-
thite

This is the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a medium one and inter-
mediate rains as typified by Munami Sub-Location in Butere-Mumias district. It is dominated by soils on
lower-level uplands. The soils are well drained, moderately deep to very deep (orthic Acrisols, with orthic
Ferralsols, partly petroferric phases). The rainfall variability in this Subzone is high, and hence the reliability
is low. The first rainy season can rely at an amount of between 750 – 850 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons and
the second rainy season on 550 – 730 mm.

This Subzone is well suited for the production of various crops. Maize is the most dominant food crop, even
though yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil infertility related problems. Apart from
maize, sorghum, finger millet, sweet potatoes and cassava constitute important components of the food diet.
The dominant legume crops in order of importance include: beans, cowpeas and of lately soybeans, through
non-governmental (NGO) initiatives. The dominant fruit crops are the cooking and sweet bananas types.
The farmers could improve the quality of these bananas by planting tissue culture seed material, which is
disease free. This would greatly improve the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for
the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes and onions,
mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres.

The current cash crop grown in this Subzone is sugar cane. Most farmers have put their land under this crop
at the expense of food production. As such, most households heavily rely on food purchases. Soil fertility
improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone is mainly through the use of inorganic fertilisers on
the sugar cane farms. Very little or no fertiliser is allocated to the food crop farms.

Livestock-keeping has a long tradition among the people residing here. The emphasis presently is on keep-
ing fewer but higher yielding grade cattle or improved cattle (cross-breed) where it is financially possible.
Zero-grazing is now emphasised as a strategy for commercial farming. This employs a minimal amount of
land, is intensive, high yielding, generates high income and minimises the spread of cattle diseases. Napier
grass gives high yields (ca. 7500 kg/ha and it must be fertilised and manured to increase yield at least on the
petroplinthite soils). Table 25b shows the maize yield increase under three farm management levels for this
Sub-zone and the actual potential.

286
 KAKAM. GROUP 67

TABLE 25b: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 1, l^m i, UlS 1
Subzone: l^m i, Soil Unit: UlS 1 Survey area 18 (Munami)
AEZ: LM 1 SUGARCANE ZONE
Subzone: l^m i
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 195 or more, 2nd rainy season: 135 - 145)
Crop Yields3) and Unit with predom. Soil: UIS 1 = orthic ACRISOLS, with othic FERRALSOLS, partly
Inputs petro-ferric phases
2nd rainy season: 550 - 730 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 750 - 850 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - - *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 4300 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 1157 2349 2742 4200 - 1316 1395
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 3.8 23.1 30.8 70.8 80.0
P2O5 kg/ha 21.9 29.2 30.8 - 80.0
K2O kg/ha - - - - -
Manure t/ha 0 0.8 2.4 2.0 7.2

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

287
 KAKAM. GROUP 68

Subzone LM 1 l^mi, Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone, on Sandy Friable Clay

This is the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a medium one and interme-
diate rains as typified by North Butsotso Location in Kakamega district. It is dominated by soils on lower
middle-level uplands. The soils are well drained deep to very deep (ferralo-orthic/chromic Acrisols). The
rainfall variability in this Subzone is high, and hence the reliability is low. The first rainy season can rely on
an amount of between 900 – 1000 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons and the second rainy season on 500 – 700
mm.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still the current most dominant
food crop, even though yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil infertility related problems.
Apart from maize, sorghum, finger millet, sweet potatoes and cassava constitute important components of
the food diet. The dominant legume crops in order of importance include: beans, cowpeas , groundnuts and
of late soybeans which are intercropped with young sugarcane. The dominant fruit crops are the cooking
and sweet bananas types. Fruit production in this Subzone could be improved through the use of improved
tissue culture banana seedling material, which produce the first fruits only after 18 months. This would
greatly improved the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for the farmers. Vegetable
production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes, indigenous vegetables and onions,
mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres.

The current cash crop grown in this Subzone is sugar cane. Most farmers have put their land under this crop
at the expense of food production. As such, most households heavily rely on food purchases. Soil fertility
improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone is mainly through the use of inorganic fertilisers
on the sugar cane farms and application of farm yard manure. The Mumias Sugar Company supplies these
fertilisers. Very little or no fertiliser is allocated to the food crop farms. However, the Ministry of Agriculture
has put in place the following soil fertility measures: conservation agriculture, soil fertility improvement
trees and farm fallow systems and soil conservation

The main type of cattle kept by farmers is of the Zebu type. The present land tenure system combined with
population pressure creates problems when it comes to grazing. The emphasis presently is on keeping fewer
but higher yielding grade cattle or improved cattle (cross-breed) where it is financially possible. Zero-graz-
ing is now emphasised as a strategy for commercial farming. This employs a minimal amount of land, is
intensive, high yielding, generates high income and minimises the spread of cattle diseases. Napier grass does
a bit better here than in the previous Agro-Ecological Unit of subzone LM 1 l^m i due to the slighlty more
fertile soils. Table 25c shows the increase in maize yield production under three farm management levels
and the potential for the Subzone.

288
 KAKAM. GROUP 69

TABLE 25c: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 1, l^m i, UmG 3
Subzone: l^m i, Soil Unit: UmG 3 Survey area 19 (North Butsotso)
AEZ: LM 1 SUGARCANE ZONE
Subzone: l^m i
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 190 or more, 2nd rainy season: 140 - 165)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UmG 3 = ferralo-orthic / chromic ACRISOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 500 - 700 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 900 - 1000 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 4600 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 750 1300 - *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha - -
P2O5 kg/ha - -
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 0.1 0.3
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 1310 1927 2378 4600 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 0 16 17
P2O5 kg/ha 0 14 17
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0 1.4 1.7

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

289
 KAKAM. GROUP 70

Subzone UM 1 p or two, Coffee-Tea Zone, on Friable Clay

This is the Coffee-Tea Zone with permanent cropping possibilities, dividable in two cropping seasons as typified
by Khayega Location in Kakamega district. It is dominated by soils of upper middle-level uplands. The soils
are well drained deep to very deep (luvic Phaeozems or dystric/mollic Nitisols). The rainfall variability in
this Subzone is high, and hence the reliability is low but rarely critical. The first rainy season can rely on an
amount of between 850 – 1000 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons and the second rainy season 500 – 700 mm.

The zone is well suited for the production of various crops. Maize is still the current most dominant food
crop, even though yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil infertility related problems.
FURP experiments showed a yield decrease of less than half in 5 years if the field is not fertilised and ma-
nured. Apart from maize, sweet potatoes constitute an important component of the food diet. The domi-
nant legume crops in order of importance include: beans, cowpeas and of late soybeans. It should be pointed
out here that cowpea is more susceptible to pest infestation and as such requires high inputs of insecticides,
which unfortunately are beyond the reach of a majority of smallholder farmers. The dominant fruit crops
are: bananas, pawpaws, avocados and to a small extent oranges. Fruit production in this Subzone could be
improved through the use of improved tissue culture and grafted seedling material, which produce the first
fruits after 18 months. This would greatly improved the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash
income for the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes
and onions, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market
centres. Cabbages would give a high yield; the outer leaves can be used as fodder.

The dominant cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are tea and coffee. Due to the poor
returns from coffee, most farmers have pruned back the coffee trees and planted maize and legume crops in
between. All former coffee processing factories in this Subzone are closed, as farmers are no longer farming
coffee. Most farmers are now concentrating their efforts in tea farming. With the construction of Mudete
Tea Factory in the Subzone, many new smallholder farmers have allocated more of their land to the tea
crop.

Farmers have now taken up zero-grazing as a strategy for commercial farming in this Subzone. This employs
a minimal amount of land, is intensive, high yielding, generates high income and minimises the spread of
cattle diseases. Napier grass has very good yield prospects on the fertile soils in this zone (see Table 26 g).

Soil fertility improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone include: compost and farm yard ma-
nure. A key problem still remains the correct application rates by the smallholder farmers. There is an urgent
need for the extension staff needs to provide timely and correct fertiliser application advice to the small-
holder farmers. Table 25d shows the increase in maize yield production under three farm management levels
and the potential for the same in this Subzone.

290
 KAKAM. GROUP 71

TABLE 25d: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) UM 1, p or two, UhI 2
Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhI 2 Survey area 20 (Khayega)
AEZ: UM 1 COFFEE - TEA ZONE
Subzone: p or two
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 215 or more, 2nd rainy season: approx. 150)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UhI 2 = luvic PHAEOZEMS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 500 - 700 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 850 - 1000 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 4500 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 680 1200 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha - -
P2O5 kg/ha - -
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha - 0.2
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 814 2960 3280 4500 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 0 1.1 6.5
P2O5 kg/ha 0 14.6 16.7
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0.1 0.2 0.2

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

291
 KAKAM. GROUP 72

Subzone LM 1 p or two, Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone, on Sandy Friable Clay

This is the Lower Midland Sugarcane Zone with permanent cropping possibilities, dividable in two variable
cropping seasons as typified by Butsotso South Location in Kakamega district. It is dominated by soils of
the lower middle-level uplands. The soils are well drained and deep to very deep (ferralo-orthic/chromic
Acrisols). The rainfall variability in this Subzone is high from January to March, and hence the reliability is
low in these months. Planting at different times lowers the risk of wilted seedlings. After this time there is
enough rainfall. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of between 900 – 1000 mm in 10 out of 15
seasons and the second rainy season on 500 – 700 mm.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still the current most dominant
food crop, even though yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil infertility related problems.
Apart from maize, sorghum, finger millet, sweet potatoes and cassava constitute important components of
the food diet. The dominant legume crops in order of importance include: beans, cowpeas and of late soy-
beans. The dominant fruit crops are the cooking and sweet bananas types. Fruit production in this Subzone
could be improved through the use of improved tissue culture banana seedling material, which take only 18
months to give first fruit. This would greatly improve the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash
income for the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes
and onions, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market
centres.

The cash crop grown in this Subzone is sugar cane. Most farmers have put their land under this crop at the
expense of food production. As such, most households heavily rely on food purchases. Chewing cane is an
important enterprise but planting is limited to wetlands; its propagation is challenged by the commercial
sugar whose production is also encroaching the wetlands. The soil fertility improvement measure being
practiced in this Subzone is mainly the use of inorganic fertilisers on the sugar cane farms. Very little or no
fertiliser is allocated to the food crop farms. This explains, for example, the low maize yields attained in this
Subzone. Table 25e gives an indication of the maize yield increase under three farm management levels and
the potential for the Subzone. Some efforts by the Ministry of Agriculture on soil conservation include: ter-
racing (grass strips, unploughed strips, etc.) and improved fallow systems. Dairy goat is a potential enterprise
in this zone as the expansion of sugarcane production covers large potions of the land.

292
 KAKAM. GROUP 73

TABLE 25e: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 1, p or two, UmD 3
Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UmD 3 Survey area 21 (Butsotso South)
AEZ: LM 1 SUGARCANE ZONE
Subzone: p or two
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 200 or more, 2nd rainy season: approx. 165)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UmD 3 = rhodic FERRALSOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 500 - 700 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 900 - 1000 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - * - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - 4500 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - - - * - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 3198 3900 4500 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 6 16 24
P2O5 kg/ha 6 16 24
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0 7.5 9.3

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

293
 KAKAM. GROUP 74

Subzone UM 1 p or two, Tea-Coffee Zone, on Friable to Firm Sandy Clay

This is the Tea-Coffee Zone with permanent cropping possibilities, dividable in two cropping seasons as typified
by Kabras East Location in Kakamega district. It is dominated by soils of upper middle-level uplands. The
soils are well drained deep to very deep humic Acrisols. The rainfall variability in this Subzone is high, and
hence the reliability is low. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of between 700 – 900 mm in 10
out of 15 seasons and the second rainy season 550 – 700 mm.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still the current most dominant
food crop, even though yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil exhaustion related prob-
lems. Apart from maize, sweet potatoes constitute an important component of the food diet. The dominant
legume crops in order of importance include: beans, cowpeas and most recently soybeans. It should be
pointed out here that cowpea is more susceptible to pest infestation and as such requires high inputs of
insecticides, which unfortunately are beyond the reach of a majority of smallholder farmers. This crop is not
well suited here and therefore not recommended.

The dominant fruit crops are: bananas, pawpaws, avocados and to a small extent oranges. Fruit production
in this Subzone could be improved through the use of improved tissue culture and grafted seedling material,
which produce the first fruits after only 18 months. This would greatly improve the quality of the produce
and hence fetch more cash income for the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the
growing of kales, cabbages, tomatoes and onions, mainly for the market and home consumption. Farmers
in this Subzone have almost abandoned coffee production. Tea is not yet an important cash crop in this
Subzone. This has been due to low cash returns to the farmers. Infact, a majority of farmers have pruned
back the coffee trees and planted maize and legumes instead. Almost all former coffee processing factories
in this Subzone are closed since farmers are no longer farming coffee. Most smallholder farmers are now
concentrating their efforts on growing tea. With the construction of Mudete Tea Factory in the Subzone,
many smallholder farmers have allocated more of their land to tea growing at the expense of food crops.
Most homesteads now rely mainly on food purchases from nearby markets. In the transitional strip to LM
1, there is a tendency to sugarcane. Napier grass and Siratro are well suited for this Subzone.

The dominant soil conservation structure, particularly in tea farms, are grass strips. Soil fertility improve-
ment measures being practiced in this Subzone include: Inorganic fertilisers applied mainly on the existing
few tea enterprises; compost and farm yard manure, which are applied on maize fields. The only problem
is that most farmers do not apply the correct rates of these inorganic fertilisers and manures. There is need
for the extension to give proper and timely advice to farmers in as far as soil replenishment techniques are
concerned (see Table 26 i). Table 25f gives an indication of the increase in maize yield production under
three levels of management and the potential for the same in this Subzone.

294
 KAKAM. GROUP 75

TABLE 25f: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) UM 1, p or two, UmG 5
Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UmG 5 Survey area 22a (Kabras East)
AEZ: UM 1 TEA-COFFEE ZONE
Subzone: p or two
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 195 or more, 2nd rainy season: 115 - 135)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UmG 5 = humic ACRISOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 550 - 700 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 700 - 900 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - * - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - - 6000 - - -
Fertilizer: (Pan 99
N kg/ha & 5243:
P2O5 kg/ha 8000)
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 1141 1900 2453 4600 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 0 11.4 25.0 - - -
P2O5 kg/ha 12.5 25.0 30.5 - - -
K2O kg/ha - - - - - -
Manure t/ha 0 0.5 0.5 - - -

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

295
 KAKAM. GROUP 76

Subzone LM 2 l^(m/s) i, Marginal Sugarcane Zone

This is the Marginal Sugarcane Zone with a long cropping season followed by a (weak) medium to short one and
intermediate rains as typified by Mugai Sub-Location in Kakamega district. It is dominated by soils on lower
middle-level uplands. The soils are well drained, moderately deep to deep (humic Acrisols). The rainfall vari-
ability in this Subzone is higher than in Zone 1, and hence the reliability is lower. But the first rainy season
can still rely on an amount of between 600 – 700 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons and the second rainy season
on 450 – 600 mm.

The zone is well suited for the production of a variety of crops. Maize is still the current most dominant
food crop, even though yields per hectare have considerably declined due to soil infertility related problems.
Apart from maize, sorghum, finger millet, sweet potatoes and cassava constitute important components of
the food diet. The dominant legume crops in order of importance include: beans, cowpeas, yellow grams
and more recently soybeans. The dominant fruit crops are the cooking and sweet bananas types. Fruit
production in this Subzone could be improved through the use of improved tissue culture banana seedling
material. This would greatly improve the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for the
farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes, indigenous veg-
etables and onions, mainly for the market and home consumption.

Though marginal to sugar cane growing, farmers still plant it as a cash crop at the expense of food crop
production. As such, most households heavily rely on food purchases. Soil fertility improvement measures
being practiced in this Subzone is mainly through the use of inorganic fertilisers on the sugar cane farms.
Very little or no fertiliser is allocated to the food crop farms. The data in Table 25g shows the yield increase
of maize undet three different farm management levels and the potential for this Subzone.

296
 KAKAM. GROUP 77

TABLE 25g: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) LM 2, l^(m/s) i, UmG 5
Subzone: l^(m/s) i, Soil Unit: UmG 5 Survey area 23 (Mugai)
AEZ: LM 2 MARGINAL SUGARCANE ZONE
Subzone: l^(m/s) i
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 180 or more, 2nd rainy season: 110 - 120)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UmG 5 = humic ACRISOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 450 - 600 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 600 - 700 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - * - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - 6000 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 681 1649 2171 4500 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 0 19 28
P2O5 kg/ha 4.8 29 50
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0 0.4 0.75

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

297
 KAKAM. GROUP 78

Subzone UM 4 l/vl or two, Maize-Sunflower Zone

This is the Maize-Sunflower Zone with a long to very long cropping season, dividable in two variable cropping
seasons as typified by Lugari Location in Lugari district. It is dominated by soils on lower middle-level up-
lands. The soils are well drained, deep to very deep and very deep (humic Acrisols). The rainfall variability in
this Subzone is high, and hence the reliability is low. The first rainy season can rely on an amount of between
600 – 700 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons and the second rainy season 450 – 600 mm. October to March pre-
vail semi-arid conditions. Therefore it is better for the maize production to combine both rainy seasons and
plant a late maturing high yielding variety instead of two much lower yielding earlier ones.

Maize is still the current most dominant food crop, followed by sorghum and finger millet. The dominant
legume crops in order of importance include: beans, cowpeas and groundnuts. The dominant fruit crops
are: cooking bananas, pawpaws, and more recently passion fruits, due to increased demand. Pineapples are
emerging in importance in this zone. Fruit production in this Subzone could be greatly improved through
the use of improved tissue culture and grafted seedling material, which take only 18 months to produce the
first fruits. This would improve the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash income for the small-
holder farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes and on-
ions, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market centres.

The cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: sunflower, sugarcane and very little coffee.
Due to the poor returns from coffee to most farmers have abandoned the crop. Infact, a majority of farm-
ers have pruned back the coffee trees and planted maize and legumes instead which give higher returns. All
former coffee processing factories in this Subzone are closed, since farmers are no longer farming coffee.

Livestock-keeping has a long tradition among the people residing here. The main type of cattle kept by
farmers is of the Zebu type. In the past, when the availability of land was not a problem because there were
communal grazing lands and many other uncultivated pieces of land, households had many animals and
many different types (cattle, sheep, goats, poultry). The emphasis presently is on keeping fewer but higher
yielding grade cattle or improved cattle (cross-breed) where it is financially possible. Zero-grazing has be-
come important in this zone

The dominant visible soil conservation structures include Fanya juu, which is usually fortified with Napier
grass. Here it grows better because additional run-off water is stopped and concentrated here. This grass is
well known as fodder for animals, since many farmers do practice zero grazing in this Subzone. Soil fertil-
ity improvement measures being practiced in this Subzone include the use of both inorganic and organic
fertilisers. Majority of farmers use a combination of these on their maize fields. This explains why maize
yields of 5 tons per hectare have been recorded in this Subzone. There is however a need for extension staff
to educate farmers on the correct application rates of these fertilisers (see Table 26 k). Table 25h shows the
maize yield increase under three different farm management levels and the potential for this Subzone.

298
 KAKAM. GROUP 79

TABLE 25h: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) UM 4, l/v l or two, UmG 3
Subzone: l/v l or two, Soil Unit: UmG 3 Survey area 24 (Lugari)
AEZ: UM 4 MAIZE - SUNFLOWER ZONE
Subzone: l/v l or two
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 130 or more, 2nd rainy season: 75 - 115)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UmG 3 = humic ACRISOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 450 - 600 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 600 - 700 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 2261 3579 4675 7500 - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 25 31 32
P2O5 kg/ha 31 34 36
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0.2 0.8 0.9

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

299
 KAKAM. GROUP 80

Subzone UM 1 p or two, Tea-Coffee Zone, on Different Soils

This is the Tea-Coffee Zone with permanent cropping possibilities, dividable in two cropping seasons as typified
by three Farm Survey sites in Vihiga district, namely: Jepkoyai, Muhandi and Igunga Sub Locations. Dif-
ferent soil types of upper middle-level uplands dominate the sites. These soils are well drained, moderately
deep to deep, respectively (association of dystric Cambisols and Lithosols and Rankers, rock and bouldery
phase; dystric Nitisols, with dystro-mollic Nitisols; ferralo-orthic Acrisols and nito-rhodic Ferralsols). The
rainfall variability in this Subzone is high, and hence the reliability is low but seldom a problem. The first
rainy season can rely on an amount of at least 600 – 1000 mm in 10 out of 15 seasons and the second rainy
season on 500 – 800 mm.

In this Subzone, the farms are made up of different farming sub-systems, namely the food crop, cash crop,
livestock and tree production. Practically all the farm-households include these four farm sub-systems in
their production. Many farms are no more than narrow pieces of land that extend from a road or divide
(the summit of an interfluvial ridge) down to a river stream. Tea, coffee and French beans are the income
generating crops and the main food crops are maize, beans and bananas: little grazing land is for livestock.
Trees are found in the lower lying areas mainly along the banks of streams.

Maize is still the dominant food crop in this Subzone, even though yields per hectare are considerably low.
The reasons for the low production yields of maize appear to be related to: small farm sizes, wrong selection
of certified hybrid seeds, poor crop husbandry practices, incorrect fertiliser application rates, lack of credit
and general poverty and green plucking.

Bananas are the second most important food crop grown in this Subzone. There are several cultivars avail-
able providing sweet bananas, and varieties for cooking and for other uses. Bananas are important both as
a source of carbohydrate and as a fruit. Because they fruit throughout the year, they are especially valuable
not only as a family food but also in income generation. Their leaves are a good source of food for livestock
and also provide wrapping, thatching and mulching material. Pests, diseases and poor husbandry practices
affect banana production in this Subzone. Some of the pests include the banana weevil and nematodes. For
a long time the weevil and nematodes were controlled by use of agro-chemicals. This has proved ineffective
because the pests have developed resistance; pesticides were used non-selectively and were harmful to the
environment and the user, besides they are too expensive for most smallholder farmers.

Apart from maize and bananas, sweet potatoes constitute an important component of the food diet. The
dominant legume crops in order of importance include: beans, cowpeas and of late soybeans. It should be
pointed out here that beans and cowpeas production in this Subzone is hampered by pest and disease infes-
tations, which require high inputs to manage. These management costs are unfortunately beyond the reach
of a majority of smallholder farmers, and cowpeas are not growing so well because these AEUs are at the
upper limit of their thermal range. Finger millet and sorghum were the main food crops before the introduc-
tion of maize. Finger millet was liked because it could be stored without the use of insecticides for longer
period than any other cereal. However, both finger millet and sorghum have lower yield capacity than maize
and require more labour at all stages of cultivation.

The dominant fruit crops are: bananas, pawpaws, avocados and to a small extent oranges. Fruit production
in this Subzone could be improved through the use of improved tissue culture and grafted seedling material,
which mature much early. This would greatly improve the quality of the produce and hence fetch more cash
income for the farmers. Vegetable production in this Subzone is limited to the growing of kales, tomatoes
and onions, mainly for home consumption. In some cases, the surplus is sold for cash in nearby market
centres.

The main cash crops grown in this Subzone in order of importance are: tea, French beans and Arabica coffee.
Most farmers are concentrating their efforts on tea farming. With the construction of Mudete Tea Factory in

300
 KAKAM. GROUP 81

the Subzone, many new smallholder farmers have allocated more of their land to tea crop. Due to the poor
returns from coffee, the crop is no longer valued in this Subzone. Infact, a majority of farmers have pruned
back the coffee trees and planted maize and legumes instead. Nearly all former coffee processing factories in
this Subzone are closed, as farmers are no longer farming coffee. Many farmers are of the opinion that cof-
fee is occupying space, which could otherwise be utilised for another more remunerative activity, especially
because of the scarcity and the high value of the land in this area.

Cattle are important in a few homes for traction and in many households for manure. The main type of
cattle kept by farmers is of the Zebu type. However, more emphasis is now on keeping fewer but higher
yielding grade cattle or improved cattle (cross-breed) where it is financially feasible. Zero-grazing is now
emphasised as a strategy for increasing household income.

The dominant soil conservation structure, particularly in tea areas is Fanya juu, which is usually fortified
with Napier grass. Besides serving as an erosion control measure, it serves as fodder for animals, since many
farmers do practice zero-grazing in this Subzone.It must be fertilised or manured for sustainable growth
and should be supplemented with Siratro to give more protein to the animals. Soil fertility improvement
measures being practiced in this Subzone include the use of farm yard and compost manures and inorganic
fertilisers. If the above listed measures are well implemented, the sustainability of land and eventually the
livelihoods of the smallholder farmers in this Subzone will significantly improve. Tables 25i, j & k show the
maize yield increase under three farm management levels and the agro-ecological potential for the same in
the respective Subzones.

301
 KAKAM. GROUP 82

TABLE 25i: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) UM 1, p or two, UhGA 1
Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhGA 1 Survey area 25 (Jepkoyai)
AEZ: UM 1 COFFEE - TEA ZONE
Subzone: p or two
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 215 or more, 2nd rainy season: approx. 150)
Crop Yields3) and Unit with predom. Soil: UhGA 1 = association of dystric CAMBISOLS and LITHO-
Inputs SOLS and RANKERS, rocky and bouldery
2nd rainy season: 500 - 700 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 850 - 1000 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha - - - - - -
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha 133 559 686 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 8.3 39.2 50.0
P2O5 kg/ha 9.1 32.8 50.0
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0 1.1 2.9
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 541 2036 2385 4500
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 7.3 22.2 22.6
P2O5 kg/ha 8.0 19.0 22.2
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 0 0.5 1.7

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

302
 KAKAM. GROUP 83

TABLE 25j: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) UM 1, p or two, UhV 1
Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhV 1 Survey area 26 (Muhandi)
AEZ: UM 1 COFFEE - TEA ZONE
Subzone: p or two
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 215 or more, 2nd rainy season: approx. 150)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UhV 1 = dystric NITISOLS, with dystro - mollic NITISOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 500 - 700 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 850 - 1000 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 690 907 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 9.3 10.7
P2O5 kg/ha 10.6 16.4
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 1.9 2.4
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha - 1681 1755 4200
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 9.3 9.5
P2O5 kg/ha 10.6 14.6
K2O kg/ha - -
Manure t/ha 1.7 2.4

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

303
 KAKAM. GROUP 84

TABLE 25k: INCREASE OF YIELDS BY BETTER FARM MANAGEMENT IN

AGRO- ECOLOGICAL UNIT1) UM 1, p or two, UhD 1
Subzone: p or two, Soil Unit: UhD 1 Survey area 27 (Igunga)
AEZ: UM 1 COFFEE - TEA ZONE
Subzone: p or two
(Periods in days2): 1st rainy season: 200 or more, 2nd rainy season: 120 - 130)
Crop Yields3) and
Unit with predom. Soil: UhD 1 = ferralo – orthic ACRISOLS
Inputs
2nd rainy season: 600 - 800 mm in at least
Reliable rainfall: 1st rainy season: 750 - 950 mm
10 out 15 years
Farmers in Prod. Level Farmers in Prod. Level
Maize local pure I= II = III = AEU I= II = III = AEU
stand low med.4) high5) Pot.6) low med.4) high5) Pot.6)
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha
Manure t/ha
Hybrid maize
Yields3) kg/ha
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha
P2O5 kg/ha
K2O kg/ha.
Manure t/ha
Maize local
intercropped
with beans
Yields3) kg/ha 462 486 496 *
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 3.0 5.3 10.2
P2O5 kg/ha 1.0 6.3 13.0
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 2.8 8.3 9.6
Hybrid maize
intercropped with
beans
Yields3) kg/ha 1023 1271 1325 4300
Fertilizer:
N kg/ha 3.0 5.3 8.9
P2O5 kg/ha 1.0 6.3 11.4
K2O kg/ha - - -
Manure t/ha 2.8 7.2 9.6

NOTES:
1)
Source: Small Farm Survey (2004)
2)
Figures of these cereals growing periods should be reached or surpassed in 6 out of 10 years; growing periods may be
considered longer due to immediately following second rainy season by middle rains. Then the second growing period is
VKRUWHUWKDQWKHJLYHQ¿JXUHV
3)
Achieved average yields with average rainfall
4)
Farmers with medium inputs
5)
Farmers with high inputs of fertilizer, insecticides, soil and water conservation
6)
Potential yield according to crop list and local climate of this Agro-Ecological Unit if soils are optimally fertilized, plus
optimal crop management
* Potential for local maize not known; no experimental results

304
 KAKAM. GROUP 85

3.4.6 FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPORTANT AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS

These are mainly the Agro-Ecological Units represented by the Farm Survey Areas which were selected
for this purpose. They are in order from LM 1 and LM 2 to UM 1-4.The Fertiliser Use Recommendation
Project of the GTZ (1986 - 92) had four trial sites in the former Kakamega district, one west of Mumias in
Zone LM 1, the other three in the Kakamega Western Agricultural Research Center, Vihiga-Maragoli and in
Mwihila near Vihiga in zone UM 1. For the other zones, subzones and units, Muriuki and Qureshi have
showed which results from other districts could be representative (see map of Fertiliser Recommendations
and Farm Survey Areas) and constructed curves for fertiliser response1.

Recommended rates of an AEU increase towards the wetter subzone and decrease into the dry one if the soil
unit extends here (see the small maps).Generally, we have tended to lower the rates due to the low financial
base of the smallholder farmers. If a system could be put in place to give the starter fertiliser on credit, repay-
able with part of the money obtained from harvest, then higher rates would be achieved by the farmers. The
optimum can be calculated from the yield functions in Muriuki & Qureshi Fertiliser Use Manual. In the
long run the optimal amount must be given to maintain the nutrient content. Some quantities for this can
be seen in chapter 3.1 under the ‘General Remarks’ section.

Higher application rate recommendations are given in the Smallholder Farming Handbook of the IRACC
and MSS, Nairobi 1997, but the economic investment and risk is too high for the local farmers. A rural
small credit system for the inputs could help a lot. Where scientific sources for quantifying the rates are
lacking, some conclusions can be drawn from the difference of inputs and yields between the low and high
production levels of the Farm Survey 2004. An empty column in the recommendation tables denoted as
“Other Nutrients Recommended” does not mean that there is nothing to be done but it is because of lack of
trial data. Symptoms of deficiencies and methods of addressing these can be found in Muriuki, A.W. and
Qureshi, J.N. (2001), Table 1&2, p.22-23.

Finally it must be emphasized once more that fertilising alone will only increase the yields only for some
few years. The micronutrients that are not included in the fertiliser become exhausted very fast. Manuring
almost up to the full return of the extracted nutrients is a must in order to have a stable agrobiological sys-
tem for continuous sustainable production2. This advice is important for the upland soils which due to their
senility have a low nutrient content. This statement is also valid for the young volcanic nitisols, which still
have a higher nutrient content. For example, the yields of the control plot during the 5 years FURP cultiva-
tion at the Kakamega Research Station decreased to less than half despite the fertile nitisols.

1
Muriuki, A.W. & Qureshi, J.N.: Fertiliser Use Manual. Nairobi kari .
2
Southern China has parts with similar soils to West Kenya and stabilized productivity there for hundreds of years by returning to the fields as

305
 KAKAM. GROUP 86

306
KAKAM. GROUP 87

307
 KAKAM. GROUP 88

308
 KAKAM. GROUP 89

TABLE 26a: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1 LM 1 p or two & l^m i, UlG 1-3 & UlGC 1

Average Yield
Recommended Average Yield
Crop varieties and Increase if this Other Nutrients
Fertiliser Rates Rate is Applied 2 Increase if
Season Manure is Applied
Recommended
kg/ha kg/ha
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 25 N + 25 P2O5 700 5t/ha o 400 kg 500 kg lime/ha
Hybrid maize & beans - - 5t/ha o 390 kg Potassium + Mg.
Sorghum 20 P2O5 680 5t/ha o 400 kg 500 kg lime/ha
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize & beans 25 P2O5 500 (maize) 5t/ha o 300 kg *
Biseasonal
Cassava, local 20 N + 35 P2O5 5000 * -
Semi-permanent
Lime mixed with
350 CAN + 250
soil 4 t/ha at
Superphosphate,
Sugarcane 3 ratoons 650 CAN +
30000 * planting, 250 kg/ha
Muriate of Potash
400 Superphos. for 3rd ratoon
Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 97 & 98; KARI & FURP: Fertiliser Use
Recommendations Vol. 2, Nairobi 1994; conclusions from Farm Survey 2004, area 17; For Cassava
FMHB IIA, 1982, p. 306; For Sugarcane: Inform. Research and Communication Centre (IRACC): Small
Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997, p. 167 and PFMO J. IMBIRA
1
Climate and soil are insignificantly different in respect to fertiliser and manure rates.
2
Double rates don´t double the yield increase, they give only about 80% more, for sugar can less than that.
3
The Prov. Farm Man.O. J. Imbira recommends (for practical reasons) lower amounts than the IRACC: 4 bags/ha DAP or 9 bags/ha SSP and
2 bags/ha potash at planting time, 7 bags/ha CAN or 4 bags/ha urea as topdressing; 9 bags/ha CAN or 5 bags/ha urea for the ratoon. * data not
available

TABLE 26b: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNIT LM 1 l^m i, UlS 1

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Crop varieties and Fertiliser Rates Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
Season kg/ha Rate is Applied Manure is Applied Recommended
kg/ha
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 25 N + 15 P2O5 1100 5t/ha o 800 kg *
Hybrid maize & beans 20 P2O5 800 (maize) 5t/ha o 800 kg *
Second rainy season
Local maize * * 4t/ha o 600 kg *
Local maize & beans * * 4t/ha o 600 kg *
(maize)
Biseasonal
Cassava 25 N + 40 P2O5 6000 * *
Semi-permanent
350 CAN + 250 Lime mixed with soil
1 Superphosphate, 4 t/ha at planting,
Sugarcane ratoons 650 CAN +
30000 *
250 kg/ha Muriate of
400 Superphos. Potash for 3rd ratoon

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 94 & 99; conclusions from Farm Survey 2004, area
18; FMHB IIA, 1982, p. 306 for cassava; For Sugarcane: IRACC: Small Holder Farming Handbook for
Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997, p. 167 and PFMO J. IMBIRA; * data not available
1
The Prov. Farm Man.O. J. Imbira recommends (for practical reasons) lower amounts than the IRACC: 4 bags/ha DAP or 9 bags/ha SSP and
2 bags/ha potash at planting time, 7 bags/ha CAN or 4 bags/ha urea as topdressing; 9 bags/ha CAN or 5 bags/ha urea for the ratoon.

309
 KAKAM. GROUP 90

TABLE 26c: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS LM 1 l^m i, LM 2 l/m^(s/m) & l^(m/s) i, UmG 3

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Crop varieties and Increase if this Other Nutrients
Season Fertiliser Rates Rate is Applied 1
Increase if Manure
Recommended
kg/ha kg/ha
is Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize 20 N, 10 P2O5 900 5t/ha o ca. 800 kg 500 kg lime/ha
Local maize & beans - - 3t/ha o ca. 300 kg Potassium + Mg.
Hybrid maize & beans 20 P2O5 800 (maize) 5t/ha o ca. 500 kg Potassium + Mg.
Sorghum, medium mat. 20 P2O5 750 * Lime
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize 20 P2O5 450 3t/ha o ca. 400 kg Lime
Local maize & beans - - 2t/ha o ca. 200 kg Potassium
Biseasonal
Cassava 20 N + 35 P2O5 ca. 5000 * -
Semi-permanent

350 CAN + 250 Lime mixed with

soil 4 t/ha at
Superphosphate,
Sugarcane 2 ratoons 650 CAN +
30000 * planting, 250 kg/ha
Muriate of Potash
400 Superphos.
for 3rd ratoon
Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 99 & 106; conclusions from Farm Survey 2004,
area 19; FMHB IIA, 1982, p. 306 for cassava; For Sugarcane: IRACC: Small Holder Farming
Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997, p. 167 and PFMO J. IMBIRA
1
Rates for and yields of maize and sugar cane in LM 2 are ca. 20% less; * data not available
2
The Prov. Farm Man.O. J. Imbira recommends (for practical reasons) lower amounts than the IRACC: 4 bags/ha DAP or 9 bags/ha SSP and
2 bags/ha potash at planting time, 7 bags/ha CAN or 4 bags/ha urea as topdressing; 9 bags/ha CAN or 5 bags/ha urea for the ratoon.

310
 KAKAM. GROUP 91

TABLE 26d: FERTILISER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1 LM 1 p or two, UmD 2 & 3
Average Yield
Recommended Average Yield
Crop varieties and Increase if this Other Nutrients
Fertiliser Rates Increase if Manure
Season Rate is Applied Recommended
kg/ha is Applied
kg/ha
First rainy season
Hybrid maize -2 900 5t/ha o ca. 400 kg Little potassium +
Hybrid maize & beans 20 N + 25 P2O5 650 (maize) 5t/ha o ca. 500 kg lime + Mg.
Finger millet 25 P2O5 500 * “
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize -2 500 3t/ha o ca. 400 kg *
Cabbages 50 P2O5 8000 * *
Biseasonal
Cassava 20 N + 35 P2O5 ca. 5000 * -
Semi-permanent
350 CAN + 250 Lime mixed with soil
Sugarcane 3 Superphosphate, 4 t/ha at planting,
ratoons 650 CAN + 30000 * 250 kg/ha Muriate of
400 Superphos. Potash for 3rd ratoon

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 97 & 99; KARI & FURP: Fertiliser Use
Recommendations Vol. 2, Nairobi 1995; conclusions from Farm Survey 2004, area 19; FMHB 1982,
IIA, p. 306 for cassava; For Sugarcane: IRACC: Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-
Nairobi 1997, p. 167 and PFMO J. IMBIRA
1
The soil unit UmD 2 has less clay content than D 3. Therefore water storage capacity is lower. Similar higher fertiliser rates.
2
No significant economic response to N and P in FURP experiments 1987-92. In the meanwhile these fertilisers become necessary due to ongo-
ing soil exhaustion; * data not available
3
The Prov. Farm Man.O. J. Imbira recommends (for practical reasons) lower amounts than the IRACC: 4 bags/ha DAP or 9 bags/ha SSP and
2 bags/ha potash at planting time, 7 bags/ha CAN or 4 bags/ha urea as topdressing; 9 bags/ha CAN or 5 bags/ha urea for the ratoon.

311
 KAKAM. GROUP 92

TABLE 26e: FERTILIZER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNIT UM 1 p or two, UhI 2

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Crop varieties and Fertiliser Rates Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
Season kg/ha Rate is Applied Manure is Applied Recommended
kg/ha

First rainy season

Hybrid maize (H 625) 20 P2O5 1025 1) 5t/ha o 600 kg Lime + potassium
Hybrid maize (H 625) & 20 P2O5 1100 (maize) 5t/ha o 600 kg + Mg.
beans
Second rainy season
Local maize & beans * * 2t/ha o ca. 300 kg “
Potatoes (higher places) 40 P2O5 4000 * *
Permanent crops
Tea 150 N + 30 P2O5 2) 4500 * *

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 81 & 99; conclusions from Farm Survey 2004,
area 20; for tea: FMHB IIA, 1982, p. 397 and IRACC: Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self
Employment.-Nairobi 1997.
1)
Medium mat. maize may not reach this increase but after it a second crop is possible in the 2nd rainy season; * data not available
2)
IRACC recommends one year after planting 20 gm of NPK 25:5:5 per bush, after two years 30 gm, after three years 50 gm

312
 KAKAM. GROUP 93

TABLE 26f: FERTILIZER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNIT UM 1 p or two, UhGA 1

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Crop varieties and Fertiliser Rates Increase if this Increase if Manure Other Nutrients
Season kg/ha Rate is Applied is Applied Recommended
kg/ha
First rainy season
Hybrid maize (H 625)1) 20 N, 10 P2O5 800 5t/ha o ca. 640 kg 500 kg lime/ha +
Local maize & beans - - 3t/ha o ca. 240 kg Potassium + Mg.
Hybrid maize & beans 20 P2O5 640 (maize) 5t/ha o ca. 400 kg Potassium
Sorghum, medium mat. 20 P2O5 600 * Lime
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize (H 511 a.o.) 20 P2O5 400 3t/ha o ca. 320 kg Lime
Local maize & beans - - 2t/ha o ca. 160 kg Potassium
Cabbages 50 P2O5 ca. 10000 * *
Potatoes (Annet) 30 P2O5 ca. 3000 * *
Permanent
Tea 150 N + 30 P2O52) 4050 * *

Source: conclusions from Farm Survey 2004, area 26; similarities to other AEU´s; FMHB IIA, 1982, p. 395-397;
S.M. KANYANJUA et al.: Effects of Potassium Use... E.A. Competitor, May 16th, 2005; IRACC: Small
Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997.
1)
H 625 requires growing into the 2nd rainy season; * data not available
2)
IRACC recommends one year after planting 20 gm of NPK 25:5:5 per bush, after two years 30 gm, after three years 50 gm

TABLE 26g: FERTILIZER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNIT UM 1 p or two, UhV 1

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Crop varieties and Fertiliser Rates Increase if this Increase if Manure Other Nutrients
Season kg/ha Rate is Applied is Applied Recommended
kg/ha

First rainy season

H. maize (H 625) 1) 25 P2O5 800 5t/ha o 1000 kg 25 kg/ha potassium
H. maize (H 625) & 50 P2O5 2000 (maize) * “ “
beans
Second rainy season
H. maize (H 511 a.o.) 25 P2O5 250 2) 5t/ha o 200 kg “ “
H. maize (H 511) & 25 P2O5 550 (maize) * “ “
beans (GLP 2)
Permanent crops &
perennial fodder
Tea 150 N + 40 P2O5 3) 5000 * *
Napier grass 4) 75 N + 50 P2O5 5200 * but necessary *
annually,
Coffee uneconomic with
present prices

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 97 & 99; KARI & GTZ: Fertiliser Use
Recommendations Vol. 2, Nairobi 1995; S.M. KANYANJUA et al.: Effects of Potassium Use... E.A.
Competitor, May 16th, 2005.
1)
After some years of cropping N becomes necessary. Harvest is in the 2nd rainy season; * data not available
2)
Uneconomic, better to plant maize intercropped with beans.
2)
IRACC recommends one year after planting 20 gm of NPK 25:5:5 per bush, after two years 30 gm, after three years 50 gm
4)
Yield without fertiliser in this fertile AEU is already 11000 kg/ha but it drops to a third after five years if no inputs are given, as the FURP experi-
ments in Kakamega WARS have shown.

313
 KAKAM. GROUP 94

TABLE 26h: FERTILIZER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNIT UM 1 p or two, UhD 1 & 2

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Crop varieties and Fertiliser Rates Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
Season kg/ha Rate is Applied Manure is Applied Recommended
kg/ha

First rainy season

Hybrid maize (H 625) 1) -2 - 5t/ha o 300 kg Little potassium +
Hybrid maize & beans 25 N + 25 P2O5 650 (maize) 5t/ha o 300 kg lime + Mg.
Finger millet 25 P2O5 500 “
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize -2 - - -
Cabbages 50 P2O5 8000 - -
Potatoes (Annet) -2 - * Potassium
Perennial
Tea 150 N + 30 P2O53) 4100 - *

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 97 & 99; KARI & GTZ: Fertiliser Use
Recommendations Vol. 2, Nairobi 1995; conclusions from Farm Survey 2004, area 27; IRACC: Small
Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997; S.M. KANYANJUA et al.: Effects of
Potassium Use... E.A. Competitor, May 16th, 2005.
1)
Harvest is in the 2nd rainy season; * data not available
2)
No significant economic response to N and P in FURP experiments 1987-92. In the meanwhile these fertilisers become necessary due to ongoing
soil exhaustion.
3)
IRACC recommends one year after planting 20 gm of NPK 25:5:5 per bush, after two years 30 gm, after three years 50 gm

TABLE 26i: FERTILIZER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNIT UM 1 p or two, UhG 2

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Crop varieties and Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
Season Fertiliser Rates Rate is Applied Recommended
kg/ha kg/ha Manure is Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize (H 625) 1) 25 N + 20 P2O5 1400 5t/ha o 800 kg Potassium +
Hybrid maize & beans 25 N 630 (maize) * lime + Mg.
Cabbages 10 P2O5 11000 * *
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize & beans Fertil. not economic. 5t/ha o 500 kg *
Beans 20 N + 10 P2O5 150 * *
Potatoes (Annet) -2 - * Potassium 2)
Permanent
Tea 150 N + 30 P2O53) 3900 - *
Perennial fodder
Napier grass 75 N + 50 P2O5 5000 * *

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 99 & 100; conclusions from Farm Survey 2004,
area 22; S.M. KANYANJUA et al.: Effects of Potassium Use... E.A. Competitor, May 16th, 2005; IRACC:
Small Holder Farming Handbook for Self Employment.-Nairobi 1997.
1)
Harvest is in the 2nd rainy season; * data not available
2)
After some years of cropping potatoes need N, P2O5 and K (= potassium)
3)
IRACC recommends one year after planting 20 gm of NPK 25:5:5 per bush, after two years 30 gm, after three years 50 gm

314
 KAKAM. GROUP 95

TABLE 26j: FERTILIZER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS LM 1 p or two, l^m i, LM 2 l^(m/s) i, UmG 5

Average Yield
Recommended Average Yield
Crop varieties and Increase if this Rate Other Nutrients
Fertiliser Rates Increase if Manure
Season is Applied Recommended
kg/ha is Applied
kg/ha

First rainy season

Hybrid maize 25 N + 20 P2O5 1000 5t/ha o 600 kg Potassium +
Hybrid maize & beans 25 N + 10 P2O5 ca. 500 (maize) * lime + Mg.
Cabbages 10 P2O5 9000 * *
Second rainy season
Hybrid maize & beans Fertil. not economic. * -

Perennial fodder
Napier grass 75 N + 50 P2O5 4500 * *

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 99 & 106; conclusions from Farm Survey 2004,
area 23; S.M. KANYANJUA et al.: Effects of Potassium Use... E.A. Competitor, May 16th, 2005.

315
 KAKAM. GROUP 96

TABLE 26k: FERTILIZER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1) UM 2-4 l/vl or two, UmG 2&3

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Crop varieties and Increase if this Increase if Manure Other Nutrients
Season Fertiliser Rates Rate is Applied Recommended
kg/ha kg/ha is Applied
First rainy season
Hybrid maize (H 625 or 50 N + 10 P2O5 1700 5t/ha o 700 kg Lime + potassium
626) 2)
Maize H (625) & beans - 100 (maize) * + Mg.
Cabbages Copenhagen 50 P2O5 ca. 7000 5t/ha o 600 kg -

Second rainy season

Beans, early mat. - (enough nutrients - - *
from 1st r. s.)
Potatoes (Annet) - - 5t/ha o 2000 kg -
Permanent
Coffee 3) not economic at
present prices
Perennial fodder
Napier grass 50 N + 10 P2O5 ca. 6000 * *

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 99 & 106; conclusions from Farm Survey 2004,
area 24; FMHB 1982, II A, 1982 for cabbages and Napier grass; S.M. KANYANJUA et al.: Effects of
Potassium Use... E.A. Competitor, May 16th, 2005.
1
The moisture regime depends at local water storage capacity of the soil. It was important for coffee planting, today this is uninteresting.
2
Harvest is in the 2nd rainy season; * data not available
3
Because of the semi-arid conditions from October to February, coffee is only possible at very deep soils with good water storage capacity.

316
 KAKAM. GROUP 97

TABLE 26 l: FERTILIZER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS 1) UM 3-4 l/vl or two, LIA 1&2

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Crop varieties and Fertiliser Rates Increase if this Increase if Other Nutrients
Season kg/ha Rate is Applied Manure is Applied Recommended
kg/ha

First rainy season

Hybrid maize (H 626) 2) 50 N + 10 P2O5 900 5t/ha o 700 kg *
Hybrid maize (H 612) 25 N + 10 P O ca. 500 (maize) * Lime + potassium + Mg.
& beans 2 5

Cabbages 10 N + 20 P2O5 9000 * -

Second rainy season
Beans, early mat. - - * Lime + potassium + Mg.
Potatoes (Annet) 50 P2O5 1050 * -
Permanent
Coffee 3) not economic at
present prices
Perennial fodder
Napier grass 50 N + 10 P2O5 ca. 6000 * *

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 99 & 106; FMHB 1982, II A, 1982, for Napier
grass; S.M. KANYANJUA et al.: Effects of Potassium Use... E.A. Competitor, May 16th, 2005.
1)
LIA 1&2 are similar association of Ferrasols, Cambisols and Gleysols at a plateau of igneous rocks but with different percentages of coverage.
Recommendations are for the Ferrasols; * data not available
2)
Harvest is in the 2nd rainy season.
3)
Because of the semi-arid conditions from October to February, coffee is only possible at very deep soils with good water storage capacity.

TABLE 26m: FERTILIZER AND MANURE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRO-

ECOLOGICAL UNITS UM 4 l/vl or two, UmG 1&2

Recommended Average Yield Average Yield

Crop varieties and Fertiliser Rates Increase if this Rate Increase if Manure Other Nutrients
Season kg/ha is Applied is Applied Recommended
kg/ha

First rainy season

Hybrid maize (H 612 - - 5t/ha o ca. 600 kg 2) * 1)
or 613) 1)
Hybrid maize (H 612) 25 N 650 (maize) 5t/ha o ca. 500 kg 2) * 1)
& beans
Second rainy season
Not enough growing
period after late mat.
maize
Perennial fodder
Napier grass 50 N 6300 * 2) *

Source: MURIUKI & QURESHI: Fertiliser Use Manual 2001, p. 99 & 105 (Kitale NARC).
1
Harvest is in the 2nd rainy season. After some years N, P2O5, K2O and Magnesium is needed.
2
Manuring is not so important for increasing the yields but to maintain them; * data not available

317