Proceedings 02

WORKSHOP ON THE
EXPERIENCE OF WATER HARVESTING

TECHNOLOGY
IN EAST SHEWA AND ARSI ZONES
Proceedings of a Workshop
February 23-24, 2006

Melkassa Agricultural Research Centre
Organised by
Project for Irrigation Farming Improvement
(IFI Project, OIDA-JICA)
and
Project on Strengthening Technology Development, Verification, Transfer
and Adoption through Farmers Research Groups
(FRG Project, EIAR-OARI-JICA)
Published March 2006
Cover Participants visiting different water harvesting sites during the
workshop
Editing Yusuf Kedir, and Kiyoshi Shiratori
© EIAR, OARI, OIDA and JICA 2006

Workshop on the Experience of Water Harvesting Technology in East Shewa and Arsi Zones: 23-24 February 2006
Contents
Acronyms...................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction ................................................................................................................. 3
Keynote Speech............................................................................................................ 5
1. Experiences of Adama Area Development Program in Water Harvesting

Technology ................................................................................................................... 9
2. Water Harvesting Experiences of Self Help Development International Dodota

Project......................................................................................................................... 15
3. Implementing Drip Irrigation: Water Harvesting and Utilization Project......... 24
4. Implementing Water Harvesting Structures for Integrated Watershed

Management: experiences of J-Green and Melkassa Research Center................... 39
5. Experiences of Oromia Irrigation Development Authority (OIDA) and Irrigation

Farming Improvement Project (IFI-JICA) on WHT................................................. 49
Minute on the discussion held on February 23, 2006 .............................................. 55
Minutes of the discussion on February 24, 2006...................................................... 57
Minutes of the discussions on February 24, 2006/06/21 .......................................... 60
Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 60
WHT Workshop Schedule.......................................................................................... 61
General guideline for preparation of paper and presentation for the workshop .... 62
Attendee List.............................................................................................................. 67
1
Acronyms
ABP Area based programme

ADB African Development Bank
ADLI Agricultural Development Led Industrialisation
ADP Area Development Programme
ARDP Agricultural and Rural Development Office
ASSP Agricultural Sector Support Programme
CCF Christian Children’s Fund
CIS Corrugated iron sheet
DA Development Agent
EIAR Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research
FDS Family Drip System
FRG Farmer Research Group
HH Household
IFI Irrigated Farming Improvement (Project)
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
KA Kebele Administration
MARC Melkassa Agricultural Research Centre
MoARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
OARI Oromia Agricultural Research Institute
OIDA Oromia Irrigation Development Authority
OIDA-CB Oromia Irrigation Development Authority-Central Branch
PA Peasant Association
PE Poly ethylene
PSNP Productive Safety Net Programme
PVC Polyvinyl chloride
RWH Rain Water Harvesting
SG2000 Sasakawa Global 2000
SMS Subject Matter Specialist
SNNP Southern Nations
USAID United State Agency for International Development
WHT Water Harvesting Technology
WV World Vision
2
Introduction
This workshop on Water Harvesting Technologies (WHT), held on February 23-24

2006, was a first attempt to provide major stakeholders who were operating in the
field of WHT an opportunity in one way or another to exchange experiences gained
and lessons learnt in their activities in east Shewa and Arsi Zones. Efficient use of
WHT can provide farmers in the area, where unreliable rainfall and moisture
stress is the most priority issues for agricultural production, increase production
thus better nutrition and income.
A diverse group of participants from different organization, government offices,

NGOs, farmers union and farmers, gathered at Melkassa Agricultural Research
Centre, to share field experiences and lessons learnt in two days of presentations,
discussions and field visit.
The workshop was organised by:

- Project on Irrigation Farming Improvement (IFI Project), which is jointly
implemented by Oromia Irrigation Development Authority (OIDA) and Japan
International Cooperation Agency (JICA), facilitates rehabilitation and
improving irrigated agriculture in the Central Rift Valley since September
2005; and
- Project on Strengthen Technology Development, Verification, Transfer and
Adoption through Farmers Research Groups (FRG Project), which is jointly
implemented by Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research (EIAR), Oromia
Agricultural Research Institute (OARI) and JICA, promotes participatory
research and innovative farming in the Central Rift Valley since July 2004.
We werepleased to have 53 participants, 5 from ministries, 14 from research, 21

from local government offices, 6 from NGOs, 6 were farmers and 1 from a donor
agency.
WHT has been one of the core interventions by the government and NGOs in the
area. There are different types of WHT such as water harvesting pond, ground
tank, treadle pump, drip irrigation and others in combination with high value
production mainly vegetables and fruits. The workshop was convened to grasp
what were the types of technologies and approaches being introduced to the
farmers and what were the outcomes and their constraints.
The workshop was expected to consolidate experience of different stakeholders and

their constraints. Although, there were major players on WHT in the area but the
workshop investigated only a part of the whole issues on WHT. It was rather
regarded as a start for more close communication and collaboration among the
3
stakeholders to maximise the impact through more coordinated interventions

which were previously made individually.
These proceedings make available to persons who could not attend the workshop
what was presented and discussed. Since this was a first WHT stakeholder
meeting in the area, the information here is more indicative than conclusive. We
hope that this report will heighten stakeholders’ interest in exchanging
information and collaborative activities where it is possible for better farmer
practices. The papers were prepared in English by contributors based on what they
presented their experiences in Amharic during the workshop.
We thank all the staffs of IFI and FRG Projects for their effort to prepare and
manage the workshop. Special thanks go to Dr. Fasil, Centre Manager of Melkassa
Agricultural Research Centre (MARC) for accepting the idea of the workshop and
allow us to use the centre’s facility. We thank also the catering staffs of MARC for
their services for food and refreshment. We appreciate all the participants of the
workshop who contributed to the discussions.
This workshop has brought a considerable amount of information on what is

happening on WHT in the area and shown a possibility of further advancement
through linking some of our activities. We are pleased to share the following
information with readers and we look forward to increasing production and income
of farmers through WHT in the Central Rift valley.
The Editors
4
Keynote Speech
Lakew Desta
Water Harvesting Coordinator
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
Distinguished Workshop Participants!

Ladies and Gentlemen!
I feel honoured and extremely delighted to make a keynote speech on this
important experience-sharing workshop. Also I would like to thank the organizers
for giving me this opportunity.
In the country's ADLI policy and food security programs water is considered as one
of the three pillars (land, labour and water) for development. Although the total
surface and groundwater potential of the country is estimated at more than 120
billion cubic meter, there is a serious problem in terms of access. Out of the total
4.25million hectare irrigation potential it is only 247,500ha1 (5.8%) that is
developed in small, medium and large-scale irrigation programs. Of this developed
55% is traditional. Oromiya region comprises the highest irrigation potential,
which is 32% of the country. To harness the available potential effectively
financial, physical and human capitals are not adequately available. Obviously
there are a number of physical, technical and socio-economic problems.
Intensive and high amount of rainfall during the wet season in the highlands is
the major cause of degradation particularly soil erosion. The rain/runoff washes
down the nutrient rich soil, seed and applied fertilizer. Big gullies are acting as
permanent drainage ditches thus depleting soil moisture regime. During the dry
season water is a major constraint in many parts of the country and women,
children and livestock have to travel distant places to get it. In this respect it is
like that a blessing is changed into curse. Peak hydrograph during wet season and
absence of any flow over dry seasons, high rainfall variability of unreliability that
results in significant runoff variability, erosion and sedimentation problem
jeopardizes availability of water. This needs to be changed through effective
watershed treatment and various WH interventions.
Water is a scarce resource in agricultural (crop and livestock) production in many

parts of the country in general and in the rift valley in particular. The lowlands,
which are largely inhabited by pastoralists of extensive livestock production lack of
1
Household level expansion is not included here.
5
water is a critical problem. To transform the vicious cycle problem to virtuous

opportunities water is the major natural capital of the country.
Investment in smallholder agriculture sub-sector using water and related

appropriate technology are taken as the starting point for food insecure areas of
the country. It is reported that on average 5 million people are chronically food
insecure every year. WH and irrigation is an area of opportunity for investment
both for export and domestic markets.
MoARD and respective regional Bureaux have planned and implemented

aggressive and ambitious WH programs in the last three years along the country's
food security programs. The major on-going government program of WH is the one
associated with the Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) and is being carried
out in 192 Weredas. In the PSNP WH is the main entry point. The number of food
insecure, thus Safety Net Weredas, is increasing from time to time. Of the donor
funded programs, African Development Fund (ADB) assisted WH and SSI under
the Agricultural Sector Support Program (ASSP) is the major one, carried out in
all regions and coordinated by the MoARD. WH is also promoted under World Food
Program assistance of a MERET2 project in seven regions. There are also many
region specific projects. The strategy followed for dissemination/upgrading WHT
under the government program is packaging technologies, preparation of technical
guidelines and construction manuals, conducting ToT that includes practical
demonstration for regional, zonal and Wereda experts. There are TVET colleges
and Farmers' Training Centers, which are also supplemented by DA centered
practical demonstration and training. Presently, one of the common approaches
being pursued for the promotion of WHT is the Community Based Participatory
Watershed Development.
Quite a number of underground cisterns surface ponds and micro ponds of various
shapes and construction materials have been implemented. Yearly more than
hundred thousands of household WH structures (surface ponds, micro-ponds,
cisterns of various shapes, hand dug wells, low-cost water lifting, family drip
systems, rooftop WH, etc.) are being reported per major regions. Part is with
success while the other part is with problem and needs to be refined.
Positive effects: 1) overall awareness of the community and development workers

on WH has increased; 2) better identification of the needy communities and
niches/sites compared to previous years; 3) growing level of integration with
income generating activities such as bee keeping, dairy, fattening (e.g. Lome-Mojo
and Alaba); 4) establishment of self-help groups under little external assistance,
among others, could be mentioned. After implementation of the program there are,
however, positive effects and success stories (e.g. Alaba, Chencha3, Kombolcha,
2
MERET - Managing Environmental Resources to Enable Transitions to more sustainable livelihoods
3
A farmer was able to get up to 30,000 Eth. Birr from sale of highland fruit seedlings prepared under WH.
6
Bati, Boset, Arsi Dodota, etc) noted in various parts of the country. In areas where
the niche commands hand dug wells were found less costly, sustainable and most
liked by farmers. Ground water recharging through artificial techniques is
required to sustainable utilization of shallow and hand dug wells.
Problems in the choice of technology (supply driven, technically focused),

inadequate research in the field and little local consultation (indigenous
knowledge), lack of access to markets, inadequate credit, lack of improved seed and
extension services, lack of proper institutional support services WUAs, etc. could
be mentioned. On the structures, among other, water loss through seepage and
evaporation are major problems. Other problems: 1) absence of replaceable parts
and basic working tools along with the distribution of treadle pumps; 2)
unavailability of adequate family drip kits along with WH structures; 3) piercing,
tearing, and problem of not laying it properly - problem of plastics on open ponds
and its poor subsequent management; 4) no experience sharing by farmers and
development workers from successful projects/schemes; and 5) turnover of trained
staff and institutional instability are the main ones.
Water harvesting (construction of open household ponds/micro-pond) is not a

panacea to all problems. The possibility of accessing drinking as well as irrigation
water through shallow/hand dug wells, soil storage and runoff farming practices
need to be adequately explored before deep ponding option. Household level WH
using ponds and micro-ponds should be used where irrigation from shallow ground
water abstraction and stream diversion is not a viable option.
It was necessary to correct the ambitious WH programs through community based

participatory watershed development planning approaches and this is being widely
applied in the country. As far as storage by deep ponding is concerned integration
of the catchment treatment, conveyance system to the silt trap and the storage,
lifting system, again conveyance of lifted water and method of water application to
the root of each plant through drip system are all interconnected and effective WH
system should not miss one.
At the national level, the planned target in the water sector particularly through
household level water harvesting, micro and small irrigation is 400,000 ha in each
of the short term (2002-2006), medium term (2007-2012) and long term (2013-
2016) planning phases.
High water potential; earmarked in various regions for irrigation development,

high level commitments from donors, NGOs, govt., (New Coalition on Food
Security in Ethiopia), etc. availability of wide range of technologies worldwide that
can be adapted and up-scaled through applied research are existing opportunities.
7
Research is needed in areas of high yielding and short maturing varieties. Further
the research is expected to work on adaptation and efficient utilization of low cost
water management technologies, socio-economic and marketing research to
enhance access to market (input supply and output marketing).
In conclusion, the abject poverty and food insecurity of the country can be tackled
if hands are joined. The assistance being provided to the poorly developed water
sector by the stakeholders (World Vision, Self Help, CCF, J-Green, SG200, etc) is
of great contribution. Gravity force irrigation, SS irrigation, WH and irrigation
farming are expected outputs of the project.
From this experience-sharing workshop by the respective stakeholders I am sure

that its outcome will be very much useful and be shared among WH promoters
including MoARD.
Thank you.
8
1. Experiences of Adama Area Development Program in

Water Harvesting Technology
Berhanu Dawa
Adama Development Program Coordinator
World Vision Ethiopia, Adama
1. Introduction
1.1 World Vision Ethiopia, Adama Area Development Program
World Vision Ethiopia (WVE) is a Christian humanitarian organization and is

operating in the country since 1971. During its early stage of operation, WVE has
been engaged in huge life saving relief programs and rehabilitation of relief
stricken communities. Since 1990, the organization is undertaking integrated
development interventions through its area development programs (ADPs).
Currently WVE operates in seven regional states namely, the South Nations-
Nationalities and Peoples’ Region, Oromiya, Amhara, Tigray, and Afar,
Benishangul-Gumz, and Addis Ababa. The total number of the ADPs in these
regions is now forty-one, not including the new phase-in areas to be studied.
Adama ADP is one of the forty-one ADPs, which is located around 120kms
Southeast of Addis Ababa in Adama woreda of East Shoa Zone, Oromia Region.
The ADP was launched in 1991. In the current year, the ADP is implementing six
specific projects (one sponsorship and five grant projects). Major areas of
development intervention are agriculture, off farm, health, HIV/AIDS, education,
capacity building, early warning and disaster management, and child development.
1.2 Justification for working on WHT in the area
Located in the hot Great East African Rift Valley (1300-1800masl), the area is
characterized by erratic rainfall (760mm mean annual rainfall), frequent drought,
crop failure, and lack of water permanent water sources like streams and lakes.
The mean monthly temperature of the area ranges from 22oC to 34oC. Awash is the
only river that crosses the woreda and only few villages have access to this river.
People from vast area of the woreda had to travel for several hours to get water
from the river in the past. These days, however, boreholes drilled by the ADP and
other organizations are supplying potable water to the community.
Except those few kebele administrations (KAs) located along the course of Awash
River, the rest are totally depend on rainfall for crop production. “Meher” (that
extends from June to September) is the main rainy season during which food crops
9
are grown. Even during this main season of production, the occurrence of rainfall
is unreliable. Late or early occurrence, uneven distribution, interruption and
insufficiency of the rainfall are common in the area. Scanty showers that fall
during “belg” season can only support some grass for livestock.
Therefore, water-harvesting technology (WHT) is being introduced by the ADP to

counter the effects of the adverse natural conditions noted above and enhance food
production through intensive backyard gardening using the water collected in the
structures.
2. Planning and Implementation Processes
2.1 Planning Processes
Community based and participatory planning approach is the basis for

undertaking all the development activities of the ADP. All the stakeholders,
especially the community, concerned local government offices and the ADP jointly
work on the selection and prioritisation of activities based on the needs and
potentials of the of the communities. The identified activities along with their
budgets are included in the draft annual plan of the ADP. The draft plan was
critically reviewed and commented by team of experts at branch and head office
levels. The final plan document was approved by the national director and was
returned to the ADP for implementation. Thus, planning and implementation of
water harvesting structures follow same process as one of the diverse activities
planned every year.
As far as area coverage of the activity is concerned, the ADP has targeted fifteen
rural KAs with better potential for agricultural development. In fact the ADP
operation area covers twenty-nine rural KAs and one rural town (i.e. Awash
Melkassa) of the woreda. As enhancement of HH food security is the main goal of
the ADP, the lion’s share of the annual budget is allocated for activities that
directly contribute to the attainment of the goal. Taken as one of such activities,
water harvesting structures are being planned and implanted every year in the
targeted KAs during the last three years (i.e. FY’03 and FY’05). The ADP has also
planned to construct 51 structures for targeted farmers in 2006.
The fact that the area is characterized by porous type of soil and very high rate of
evaporation, the ADP has selected concrete lined hemispherical underground
structure that can store 55 to 60 m3 of rainwater. The diameter of the structure is
6m and its depth is 3 meters. At completion, the structure is covered either by cone
shaped reinforced concrete or corrugated iron sheet (CIS) as shown in picture 1.
10
Nature of the soil in the area, volume of water to be stored, durability of the
structure, and capacity of the HHs to manage the structure are the major criteria
to select this type of structure. Even though the cost of the structure seems high
(Birr 6000.00 per structure), its durability outweighs the cost.
Selection of beneficiaries is based on the development policy and strategy of the

organization that strictly emphasizes purposeful targeting of the ‘very poor’ and
‘poor’ segments of the community. These are already identified using wealth-
ranking method during ADP redesigning process. The poor and very poor HHs to
be targeted must have backyards gardens and agree to excavate/dig the site, and
contribute local materials like sand, stones and water during construction.
Picture 1 Concrete roofed (left) and corrugated iron sheet roofed (right) rainwater-
harvesting structures
2.2 Methods and Levels of Implementation
Three parties were involved in selection of the beneficiaries/end users of the

structures at planning stage as mentioned above. These are the ADP staffs,
woreda rural development office staffs and KA leaders. The selected HHs are
expected to express their willingness and commitment to undertake the activity in
their backyards. Technical staff from woreda rural development office and the ADP
jointly selected the appropriate sites for all structures to be constructed in the
backyards of the targeted farmers. Respective KA offices have sent official letters
that bear the names of the targeted HHs to the ADP. Then the ADP has trained all
the beneficiaries of the technology before the construction according to is plan.
Other relevant training like organic fertilizer/compost preparation, horticulture
production, improved irrigation practices, etc, have been organized for the targeted
HHs.
At construction stage of the structures, the ADP has provided construction

materials like cement, chicken wire, reinforcement bars, corrugated iron sheets
11
and hollow blocks to each HH. Masons and carpenters were also hired for concrete
lining and roofing works, respectively. On the other hand, the beneficiaries were
responsible for all excavation works, supply of local materials like sand, stone and
water. In monetary terms, the ADP has spent about Birr 5000.00 while a targeted
HH has contributed Birr 1000.00 in the form of labour and local materials supply
for each structure. Women were participating in all the works that demand labour.
In some distant KAs beneficiary HHs provided food for masons on their free will
and women have taken the responsibility of food preparation. After completion of
the structure, women have played a leading role in backyard gardening activities
and they took the produced vegetables to local markets.
3. Current Status of the Activity
It’s now four years since the ADP has begun to promote water-harvesting
technology on wider scale. Out of the 104 structures planned to be constructed
during the last three years, 89 (85.6%) are implemented as indicated in the table
below. Failure of some HHs to timely excavate the site and delay of local materials
supply needed and stony nature of some selected sites are the main reasons for
under accomplishment. The ADP has planned to construct 51 structures in FY’06.
Table 1: FY’03 to FY’05 plan and accomplishment of rainwater harvesting

structures by Adama ADP
FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 Total

Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual
10 11 33 27 61 51 104 89
Utilization efficiency of the collected water varies from HH to HH. Almost all of the
farmers who are benefiting from the structure have tried to practice vegetable
gardening using the water from the structure. Farmers are using the vegetables
for HH consumption and marketing to get income. How ever, the benefit they
gained from vegetable production was small as compared to the income from using
the water for animal fattening purpose.
Even though conclusive studies are not yet conducted on the income generated as
the result of the structures, some women testify that they have earned 30 to 40
Birrs from vegetables per one growing season. But those who have practiced
animal fattening were earning over Birr 800.00. Even though, water alone is not
the in put needed for fattening, it plays a major role in fattening business. Thus,
some of the HHs who have got rainwater harvesting structure could fatten two to
three oxen within three months period. Some farmers produce mud blocks for
house construction using the water from the structure or sell the water to others
and earn money. Therefore, the structures are contributing to the improvement of
12
HHs’ livelihood in different ways, depending on the capacity HHs to utilize them
effectively.
Effective utilization of the structures is regularly monitored by staffs of the ADP as

well as concerned government staff at woreda and KAs levels. In addition,
different training and technical advices are given to the heads of the HHs during
field visits.
Today, there is a remarkable improvement in the level of farmers’ awareness on

utilization of WHT. The number of farmers requesting the technologies is growing
every year. If construction materials like cement, chicken wire, CIS, etc. are
provided; most of the farmers are willing to excavate their site and to subsidize the
necessary local materials by themselves.
4. Evaluation of WHT Adopted
The types of the structure being constructed by the ADP have long lasting and
diverse benefits to the users. A well-managed structure is expected to serve over 30
years. But the cost incurred from the structure can be returned within few years, if
utilized effectively. Obviously, it would have been unthinkable for poor farmers to
construct such costly structures by their own. The ADP, however, believes that
such permanent structures would benefit the targeted poor HHs sustainably and
result in significant livelihood improvement. With provision of in put packages
like vegetable seeds, improved chicken, treadle pump, etc. along with the structure,
the HHs will graduate within one or two years. The ADP does not provide any
direct support to such HHs for they are expected to be self-sufficient thereafter.
The fact that the technology is introduced during the past few years, great success
might not be scored right now. But all the structures constructed during the past
three years are benefiting the HHs in one-way or another. The level of efficiency in
utilizing the structure varies from HH to HH. It is believed that efficiency of
utilization and management of the structures will be improved through time. For
instance, the use of the collected rainwater for animal fattening is a new aspect,
which was not envisaged by the ADP itself. But this is the profitable direction as
far as income generation is concerned.
Large water holding capacity, durability, possibility to store water for more
months, and multi purpose uses are considered as advantages/strength of the
selected technologies. The fact that this type of structure demands relatively high
cost, most of the farmers cannot afford to construct it by themselves. Hence the
rate of adoption by other farmers could be low. This might be seen as weakness of
the technology adopted.
13
More over lack of initial capital and other remunerative activities like animal
fattening are major gap. Concerned stakeholders need to exert a concerted effort to
bridge these gaps by facilitating access to credit services. Awareness creation
works should also be strengthened to enhance dissemination of the technologies.
5. Lesson Gained from the Past
The primary purposes envisioned by the ADP while introducing the technology has
been focused on promotion of intensive backyard gardening and alleviating
moisture stresses in the area. This was geared towards attainment of the main
goal of the ADP, i.e. enhancement of food security at HH level. But farmers are
proving that the technology can be used for more profitable and income generating
activity like fattening. Most of the farmers that are living in KAs far away from
Awash River have to take their livestock to the river or other water sources, which
takes several hours. But beneficiaries of the water harvesting structures are able
to provide water, especially to their farm oxen, and save considerable time to
plough their farm fields. The structure is also being used as a source of water for
house construction by producing mud blocks. Others sell the water to other
farmers and get incomes. All of these uses are believed to contribute to HH food
security.
6. Future Plans of the ADP
Except its relatively high cost of construction, the technology is found to be

appropriate to the locality and easily manageable by farmers. Of course, questions
can arise about safety of using the water for livestock consumption/fattening and
contribution of the structures to malarial attack. So far, no danger has been
reported from the beneficiaries or their neighbours to the ADP. This might imply
that the types of the structures being constructed by the ADP are not causing
significant adverse environmental impact.
Therefore, the ADP will continue to promote the utilization of WHT in the area.
Depending on its financial capacity, the ADP will construct structures for targeted
HHs’ and will also search for more effective applications of the technology. The
ADP is also planned to introduce drip irrigation practices so that farmers may use
the water more efficiently when producing vegetables.
14
2. Water Harvesting Experiences of Self Help Development

International Dodota Project
Frew Behabtu
Self Help Development International
1. Introduction
1.1 Dodota Integrated Rural Development Project
Self Help Development International is an Irish based a non-profitable registered

charity organization with its basic philosophy of “helping people to help
themselves”. The organization is currently operational in five African countries. In
Ethiopia the organization has been implementing integrated rural development
projects since 1984. The projects are operational in Oromia and SNNP regions of
the country. Area Based Program (ABP), Capacity Building Program and HIV/
AIDS Mainstreaming Program are the three major areas of intervention by the
organization in the country.
Dodota Integrated Rural Development project is one of the ABP that was
implemented in October 1999 in Arsi zone, Dodota sire district of Oromia region.
The project area is situated in the rift valley, some 125 km South East of Addis
Ababa. The wider objectives of the project are to increase agricultural production
and productivity and household-farm incomes as well as to improve accesses to
basic social services along with the conservation and restoration of the natural
resource bases in the project area. In order to achieve the goals, the project has got
eight major components, which are crop production, livestock production, natural
resource management, education, water supply, public health, women’s program
and capacity building. The project mainly implements its integrated components in
collaboration and active participation of the beneficiaries and government bodies.
1.2 Justifications for working on WHT in the area
The rainfall pattern in the project area is not evenly distributed. Thus, the yield of
crops in the low land area is very low and sometime it completely fails due to
shortage of water during the flowering or maturation stage but the rainfall
intensity is high if it rains. Therefore in order to use efficiently the rainwater
different mechanisms has to be used. Rain water-harvesting technology is one of
the options to increase the productivity of an area. Under the natural resource
management component the project planned to demonstrate rainwater-harvesting
technologies.
15
2. Planning and implementation approaches
The project commenced the activities after evaluating the initiative of one farmer
how used to dig a pond by himself and used the harvested water for irrigating crop
at his backyard (Badosa Betela PA in 2001). Then the project by providing plastic
sheet to minimize seepage,eight ponds having 4m by 4m and 3m-depth sizes,
excavated at backyards of voluntary farmers . The harvested water has been used
as a supplementary irrigation for the production of different vegetables.
The capacity of the pond required and seepage losses were the major challenges to
effectively irrigate the back yard. To solve these problems, experts from the project
and government departments made an experience-sharing visit to Kenya.
• Awareness creation is conducted at each PA.

• Interested farmers were selected and their backyards were visited to check
whether rainwater could be harvested or not.
• The selected farmers were sent to visit areas where farmers are using the pond
and trainings were given on the management.
• As a prerequisite, the farmers were requested to dig the pond, to collect local
materials for the construction and to pay back some part of cost
• Treadle pump, watering can sand barrels were provided for the selected
farmers.
The project and the district natural resource desk have given adequate training for
the participants on the management of the water being harvested. More over,
farmers to farmers training and field days were organized by the project to enrich
their understanding.
After analysing the capacity and cost needed for the construction of different water
harvesting structures (annex 1), the project has selected 60m3 cemented-
hemispherical water tank for the following advantages. The cost break down is
summarized in annex 2
• Its minimum cost as compared to others

• It doesn’t need additional reinforcement
• Due to its shape, the water pressure is evenly distributed so the structure is
more stable
• It can be easily done by local masonry
3. Current status of the activities
In the year 2003, twenty-five cement lined hemispherical ponds with a capacity to
hold 60m3 were constructed. The approach followed for the construction of the
16
pond was that, the farmer excavated the site and collected stone, woody materials
and water. Where as the project provided cement, sand, mesh wire, PVC, nails and
the masonry. Additionally there has been an agreement made between the project
and the beneficiaries to pay back 600 Birr in two years period.
In the year 2004, the project requested interested farmers to pay 800.00 Birr (400
Birr before the construction and 400 after a year) for the construction of the pond
and eleven ponds were constructed. The repaid money from the farmers was used
as a revolving fund for the users to the purchase necessary inputs. In the year
2005, five interested farmers have requested only technical support from the
project and constructed the pond by themeselves.
Totally, the project constructed forty-four road run off harvesting pond (eight
plastic cover and thirty-six cemented) out of these five farmers were introduced
with drip irrigation having the capacity to irrigate 500m2. Currently they have
bought animal drawn carts, a pair of oxen, and covered their household
expenditure and send their children’s to school. Generally, the farmers are able to
produce twice per year and able to earn more than 1500.00 Birr.
Using watering cans, some farmers are in a position to irrigate 300m2 as

complementarily. In one production time, these farmers have obtained additional
income of about 700.00 Birr from this plot. Moreover, nine farmers are carrying
out animal fattening and seedling production from the harvested water (annex 5).
Raising and selling of different vegetables, fruits, forest and forage tree seedling by
these farmers also provided opportunities to other farmers to engage in agro-
forestry activities.
4. Lessons and Challenges of the implementation
• Cost increment of inputs required for the construction.

• Wrong conclusion drawn from mismanaged ponds.
• Farmers were not familiar with vegetable production.
• Unavailability of appropriate construction manuals and demonstration sites in
the country.
5. Opportunities for the technologies

• Farmers have shown their interest to adopt the technology
• Willingness of different organization to carry out the activity (donors’ interest)
• Government policy is in support of the technology
Frequent follow up and back up training was provided for the participants to
sustain the activity. The farmers are very much interested with the technology and
17
currently other farmers are requesting to have the pond with minimum support for
out side.
6. Future plans of the project
The project has taken the experiences obtained from Fentale district on irrigation
water and input requirements (annex 3) as benchmark for future implementation
of the activities. Discussions with the beneficiaries were made what kind of crop to
plant. Thus, packages were developed on how to irrigate 300m2 area (annex 4)
using watering cans and 500m2 area using drip irrigation.
The project has finalized the project at Dodota and a new five-years (2006-2010)
project has commenced at lode Hetosa district that is adjacent to Dodota sire.
Under natural resource component forty RWH ponds are planned to be constructed.
18
Annex 1.Comparison of costs required for different water harvesting tanks (birr)
Type of the tanks Tank capacities (m3)

10 30 50 60
Hemispherical - 1780.00 2686.00 3435.00
Spherical 1652.00 - - -
Bottle shape 1336.00 1941.00 - -
Dome cap 2087.00 3137.00 4148.00 4428.00
Brick cap 1902.00 3153.00 4286.00 4780.00
Cylindrical fero cemented 2970.00 - - -
Cylindrical brick tank 2267.00 - - -
Cylindrical masonry 2358.00 - - -
Annex 2. Bill of quantity to construct a hemispherical water tank (60 m3)
Materials Unit Amount Unit cost Total cost

Cement Qt 16 68.81 1100.96
Sand Truck 1 450.00 450.00
PVC 110 m 3 17.50 52.50
Mesh wire Roll 1.5 165.00 247.50
Nail Kg 5 10.00 50.00
For covering
• Bamboo sheet No. 12 8.00 96.00
• Wood material Different - - 222.00
• Mulch Bunch 10 3.50 35.00
Labour for the construction - - - 800.00
Total 3053.60
The cost is excluding the labour for excavating the pond and stone required.
19
Annex 3. Irrigation water requirement for potato crop
Zone East Showa

District Fentale (Metehara)
Crop type Potato
Area 300 m2
Maturity day 120 days
Descriptions July August September October Total

Monthly RF mm (80% 248.4 131.6 39.6 0.1 419.7
probability)
Harvested rain water, mm 149.7 103.9 37.1 0.1 290.8
(69.2%)
ET, mm/month 171.0 158.0 150.0 158.0 637.0
CET coefficient 0.5 0.8 1.2 0.75
ETc, mm/month 85.5 126.4 180 118.5
ETc, mm/day 2.8 4.1 6 3.8
Seepage 30%
Ir, m3 7.3 10.7 15.7 9.9
ET= Evapotranspiration, ETc = Crop evapotranspiration
ETC x li x A
Ir =
1000 x Ef
Where;
Ir Water requirement
ETc Evapotranspiration coefficient
Ir Irrigation interval
A Area (m2)
Ef Efficiency probability
Inputs requirement for plot Area 300 m2 planted with different crops
Crop Seeds Fertilizer (Kg) Expected yield Spacing (cm)
types required, Kg DAP Urea Per plot Per hectare Rows Plants
Potato 62.5 6.0 4.5 6.0 200 70 30
Tomato 7.5 4.5 6.0 7.2 240 100 30
Pepper 0.0188 3.0 3.0 2.4 80 60 30
Cabbage 0.012 4.5 4.5 6.9 230 60 40
Lettuce 0.020 4.5 4.5 5.0 100 60 30
Onion 0.113 6.0 3.0 4.5 150 20 10
Garilc 12.5 3.0 1.5 3.0 100 30 10
20
Annex 4. Harvested water utilization and crop specific research recommendations
Criterion used for the selection of crops and crop varieties

• Drought tolerant
• Early maturing
• Market oriented
• Household food
Agronomic characteristics of vegetable crops selected for backyard irrigation
Average water
requirements
(mm/season).
Altitude (m)
Temp (0C)
Crop type
Varieties
maturity
Soil type
Days to
(days)
Potato Tolcha 1700-2800 Sandy loam 15-20 110-125 800
Tomato Marglobe 1100-1800 `` 21-26 110-120 650
Onion Adama red 1800-2500 `` 12-24 110-120 700
Cabbage Copenhagen 1800-2000 `` 15-23 120-140 500
Lettuce Mareko 1700-2000 `` 16-25 110-120 500
Pepper Fana 1400-2100 `` 21-29 110-120 650
Eth. kale B. oleracea Perennial 500
Watering
• perforated watering can
• pressure pump (thirdle)
• gardening hose
Cropping calendar
・ Round 1 July - October
・ Round 2 February – may
Recommended practices
• tie-ridging furrows
• row planting
• mulching
• sprinkling
- early in the morning
- late in the afternoon
21
Input expenditure for 300m2 area (Birr)
Fertilizer
Crop type Seed Chemical Total
DAP Urea
Potato 17.46 10.35 200.30 18.30 246.41
Tomato 13.00 13.80 3.00 48.70 78.50
Pepper 9.98 6.90 0.90 - 17.78
Cabbage 13.00 10.35 1.70 - 25.05
Lettuce 13.00 10.35 2.50 - 25.85
Onion 17.46 6.90 32.50 40.82 97.68
Garlic 9.98 3.45 62.50 - 75.93
Expected yields and income for 300m2 area
Crop types Unit Yield (Qt) Unit cost Total Expenditure Revenue
(birr) (birr) (birr) (birr)
Potato Qt 6.0 150.00 900.00 246.41 653.59
Tomato Qt 7.2 140.00 1008.00 78.50 929.50
Pepper Qt 2.4 350.00 840.00 17.78 822.22
Cabbage Qt 6.9 120.00 828.00 25.05 802.95
Lettuce Qt 5.0 150.00 750.00 25.85 724.15
Onion Qt 4.5 200.00 900.00 97.68 802.32
Garlic Qt 3.0 250.00 750.00 75.98 674.07
22
Annex 5. Summary of income generated from animal fattening and tree seedling
production
1. Animal fattening activity summary

Year: 2005
Number of users: 9 (one pond for each)
Cycle: 1
Kinds of animals
Descriptions
Sheep Cow Ox Total
Numbers of animals 28 1 4 33
Cost
- Purchase 4200.00 400.00 2680.00 7280.00
- Feed 2798.00 150.00 780.00 3728.00
Total 6998.00 550.00 3460.00 11008.00
Selling prices 10834.00 870.00 5163.00 16867.00
Profit total 3836.00 320.00 1703.00 5859.00
Average net profit/pond/cycle = 651.00 birr
2. Tree seedling production

Year: 2005
Number of users: 9 (one pond for each)
Number of Number of tree Incomes generated

Unit cost
participants seedlings raised per individual
3 5,000 0.10 500.00
4 4,000 0.10 400.00
2 6,000 0.10 600.00
The species raised were different fruit and forest seedlings
23
3. Implementing Drip Irrigation: Water Harvesting and

Utilization Project
Berecha Turi
Sasakawa Global 2000, Ethiopia
1. Introduction
Water scarcity and utilization has been a long existing problem in Sub-Saharan African
countries. Due to erratic and irregular rainfall, agriculture has, at times experienced devastating
periods that were disastrous for the food security of the people. Although the rainfall, combined
with the water resources of the country, should be sufficient to pursue durable and sustainable
agriculture, factors like infiltration, evaporation and different types of erosion have (put a halt
to this possibilities) curtailed its achievement. In collaboration with Israel drip irrigation plastic
tube producer; Plastro P.L.C., SG 2000/Ethiopia has been introducing drip irrigation system
along with proper watershed Management, to enable farmers achieve sustainable agriculture in
some countries.
2. Irrigation
Although irrigation has long been a vital part of agriculture in sub-Saharan

African countries, it has not earned its rightful place yet. Generally there are four
systems of irrigation.
- Surface irrigation
- Sprinkler irrigation
- Sub irrigation
- Drip irrigation
24
2-1 Surface Irrigation

In surface irrigation, water is conveyed directly over the field, and the soil acts as
reservoir for the moisture. Topography should be nearly level to allow the water to
run at a slow, non-erosive speed. Its drawbacks are large losses of water due to
seepage and evaporation, inefficient distribution of the water and most
importantly, excessive leaching of water-soluble nutrients, soil erosion and
deleterious effect on soil structure. Heavy soils become paddled under the heavy
load of water, which result in a loss of soil aeration and in subsequent baking and
cracking when the soil dries out.
2-2 Sprinkler irrigation

In sprinkler irrigation, water is conveyed through pipes and is distributed under pressure as
simulated rain. Although evaporation is higher with sprinkler irrigation than with surface
irrigation, the application rate results in a more efficient use of water. The slower rate of
application reduces run off, erosion and compaction of the soil. Sloppiness is not a factor.
Disadvantages for implementers are high initial cost, high water consuming rate and high
power pressure.
2-3 Subsurface irrigation

Subsurface irrigation consists of creating and maintaining an artificial water table. In order for
such a system to function properly, the ground must be level and subsurface soil must be
permeable enough to permit the rapid movement of water laterally and vertically to prevent the
loss of water through deep percolation. In most cases, sub irrigation is not an option for African
soils since topography, soil type and investment costs play key roles in application.
2-4 Drip irrigation

Drip Irrigation (trickle irrigation) uses a ramifying system of water conducting
plastic tubes that deliver water by means of emitters or outlets, to individual
plants. Water is applied at a rate of 0.6-40 litters per hour under low pressure (1
bar or less).
25
Certainly, the slogan, “water is life” cannot optimally utilize the water
collected, using the traditional and inefficient flood irrigation method. Drip
irrigation is an efficient irrigation method, and must be used since it is based on
the concept, “More crop per drop”
As an environmentally responsible organization, SG 2000 is committed to the

development of methods and tools to preserve water, one of the world’s most
precious resources, through introduction of modern drip irrigation systems, to
raise yields and efficiency. SG 2000 facilitates the promotion of agricultural
methods and technology that increase global food production and bring relief to
many less privileged population
3. Drip irrigation system
Drip irrigation is obtainable in a wide Variety of systems, products, materials and

financial cost. The users should take into account all options and combined them
into a system where durability, simple operation and attractive financial cost were
molded together to best serve the users market using a variety of drip our-let
enables the systems to be used in almost all agricultural habitats and crops trees,
high we have crops, vegetables, fruits, flowers and green houses.
3-1 Implementation of the system
26
Drip irrigation systems are always made up of combination of necessities.

Development actors at all levels, starting with National level and ending with
weekly visit by an expert to individual growers, should be trained on the issue of
efficient drip irrigation.
Aimed at realizing the mentioned advantages and disadvantage of drip irrigation

systems and materials, professional training and demonstration centers should be
established to provide the relevant know how through seminars and workshops.
Water availability for drip irrigation is a crucial factor when establishing Family
Drip Systems (FDS). Based on calculations done by professionals from water
resource and agricultural sectors, a water amount of 6.0 m3 is enough to irrigate
100 m2 plot of land through FDS that enable the growing of vegetables or cereals.
3-2 Drip irrigation system focal points

Pressure
Transportation
Filtration
Water out let (dripper)
(1) Pressure
Pressure can be achieved in three or more ways.
a. Mechanical (tap, water pump more of mechanical system.) include discussion
for page 8
27
b. Gravitational (water container elevated at least 5 meters on flat terrain or

using top graphical.) include discussion from page 8
c. Gravitational (pressure less) by elevation of water container (tanker) 1 to 2
meters. Include discussion page 8
Water tank to which the FDS is installed
In all three ways location of the water source is an important factor.

- The pressure less system can be used on small agricultural plots and
backyards up to 500-1000m2 in size. Financial cost, easy installing and
operating make this system attractive. Target- groups are back yard-farmers,
small scale farmers, hobby- farmers and farmers under water stress area are
recommended.
- The gravitational system is based on a water container placed at a height of at
least 5 meters. The pressure thus developed will be 0.5 bar; this is enough to
give an even distribution of water both in quality and in location. Water from
the elevated container can irrigate an area of more than 1000 m2, depending
on the container size and irrigation duration of the crop. Target- groups are
private investors, Ur ban area farming, horticulture, green house, garden
irrigation, orchards, community farming, etc,
28
The mechanical system is based on the same irrigation method as above, but
depends in its water supply on a water pump or an already existing water- supply.
Pressure is regulated through values
(2) Transportation
Transportation of water is done by poly Ethelene (PE)-tubes (raiser, Pled Pipe and
laterals) varying in diameter from 12 to 110 mm. The applied diameter depends on
field capacity, crop choice, available water - quantity and topography of the field.
(3) Filtration
Filtration in relation with drip irrigation is compulsory. Especially surface water is
always contaminated with soil particles algae, bacterial slime or others. When
fertilizers are added, filtration is most important if not applied, it will eventually
clog the system and thus disable the system. Filtration should be small-sized
enough to produce clean irrigation water, but should not stem the flow of water by
choosing a too fine filter. This is related to available pressure, water- requirement and choice
of dripper. Filtration can be from 500 up to 100 micro meters. It can be differentiated in sand
filters and / or biological filters, based on requirements of the customer
(4) Water outlet

Out let - choice is based on
- water demand of the crop
- type of crop
- distance b/n plants
- distance b/n rows
- available water
- available pressure
For better consumption, the following two types of drippers are available.
29
- A standard inline dripper with intervals of 20,30,40 cm, etc, specially suitable
for dense crops like salad, onion, tomato, etc
- A system composed by the user consisting of dripper (2L/h, 4 l/h 6L/h),
capillaries (2L/h, 4L/h), adjustable dripper (0-16L/h) or a combination of these
are available for implementation Drip intervals are variable and with the use
of plugs, drip intervals can be changed between seasons. (Suitable for fruits,
flowers, onion, tomato and inter cropping.)
3-4. Smallholders Family Drip system (FDS)
Drip Irrigation provides an ideal solution to the unique needs of small holders for
conserving scarce water resources while irrigating evenly and efficiently, and
helping to increase yields year- round (possibility of 2-3 harvest per annual) In
order to adopt drip irrigation for the special needs of small holders, FDS- that is
gravity- based non power requiting is found pertinent. A grower who holds more
then 500m2 can combine 2-4 FDS units in a cluster, using a common water tank or
can extend the size of FDS units from 600m length of hydrogols to two rolls, which
is 1200 m long.
1) FDS components (for a unit)

Type Quantity
1. Water lank 1
2. Ball value 1
3. Filter 1
4. Union (when important) 1
5. Agri-fit elbow 1
6. Agri- fit Adaptor 1
7. Raiser - (m) depends on the light of the tanker
8. T 1
9. X mm valve (3/4 1 " 1 2
30
10. Y m polyethylene as required

11. Head connect or (pcs) as required
12. Plastic bent (pcs) 2
13. Hydro god (Laterals) (rolls) as required
14. Puncher
15. Inserter 1
16. Barbed coupling as required
17. Line end (pcs) 5
18. Teflon (roll) 1-2
2) System installation
Installation of the FDS system first involves marking the block to be cultivated.
For example, in a 500m2 field, this block should be 20 m long and 25m wide. The
raiser fix into the 'T' thus has 12.5m to be fixed to each side of distribution pipe.
The distance between crop beds may be determined according to crop pattern. The
best economical spacing of lateral is suggested to be at every 0.80m. Lateral with
30cm spaced emitter has more advantage to grow vegetable crops (Onion, tomato,
pepper e t c)
The water tank should be installed at the edge of the plot, at least 1.2 -1.5 above
the ground (depends on the slope of intended plot). The height of the water tank
affects the gravity pressure with which the system operates. Tank size is flexible,
but it is recommended that the volume equals the volume of one- day consumption
and not equal or less than 2 hours of plot irrigation consumption under normal
installation (1.5m height). Water flow through each emitter will be 0.6 litters per
hour. The tank can be made either of plastic (Roto), concrete or metal with capacity
1-2 m3 (1mx1mx2m). The tank can be filled by manual pedal pumping (treadle
pump), engine pumps or windmill etc. The water source for the system can be any
kind of reservoir, bore hole, pond, well, river, canal or stream. Personal or shared
31
pump is simply installed near the water source and a network of pipelines (hose)
connected to both the water tank and motorized pump. Beneficiary farmers can
pool their resources to purchase one pump, connected it to multiple water tanks by
a hose network.
The value end the filter is installed at the irrigation out let of the tank, and the
distribution pipe is connected to the filter and laid in the middle of the plot. The
two drip lines on each bed are connected to the distribution pipe (0.80m spacing
b/n the drip lines) on both sides of the PLDE pipe.
Flow Rate Calculation

- A master dripper flow Rate = a Lph
- Number of hydrogol emitters to be fed = b
masterdropperflowrate a
= = cLph
numberofemitterstobefed b
- Master dripper = poly ethylene division emitter = PLDE = 3.85L/ph
- 12 hydrogol emitters are to be fed = 12 emitters
3.85 Lph
= 0.32 Lph
12
3-5. Merits of Pressure Less Drip Irrigation
Drip Irrigation is attractive economically in many modern flower development

farms, green houses, economical farms and small holder farm plots in Ethiopia.
Though frequent water application is recommended, it s very slow and in small
amounts so that little is lost by evaporation. In most cases, water is directly given
to the cultivated plant roots, in the form of droplets. The system is flexible to
produce various types of crops through coupling or uncoupling, accommodated by
either piercing or plugging of the plastic tubes that carry and distribute water. The
flow and pressure from the supply line are reduced or regulated by various types of
32
valves and emitters Drip Irrigation will have dramatic consequences since
evaporation from the surface irrigation systems causes salts to accumulate on the
soil surface. Additional water supplied in excess of the amount required for plants
will leach these potentially damaging salts from the soil zone close to the roots.
Salts are pushed out to the periphery of the root profile by an advancing front of
water emitted from the outlets. So providing the water by drip Irrigation is far
more efficient than welting the entire field. In addition to its flexibility, the total
set-up of drip irrigation is very lighter compared to other irrigation systems and
can easily be operated and moved by one person.
Extended, slopes of less than 50% are not limiting factor for drip irrigation, since
erosion problems are under control. Because water delivery is in a closed system
and under pressure, only small amount of water is applied; hence; there is no run
off. Most of the soil surface stays dry especially between plants; as a result the crop
field is essentially free of weeds.
Generally, the loss of water between the rows and through deep percolation is
under control, which by then eliminates salinity effects of deep under ground
saline water supplies. Almost all-high valve crops can be managed under drip
33
irrigation system, using various spacing (space between emitters, hydrogols)of 20,
30 and 40 cm between emitters on 12mm hydrogoal and 120, 80 and 60 cm
between hydrogoals. PLDE pipes are implemented in plots of over 40 small
farmers in Ethiopia through SG 2000 water harvesting project.
3-6. Demerits of Pressure Less Drip Irrigation system
Most developing countries are very late in accessing such technologies for utilizing
their abundant water sources, Large scale farms (commercial farm) need care,
time, and trained man power, especially during the period of installation and
maintenance. The initial cost per plot of such useful item for the small farmers is
high (USD 172.00 for one FDS).
Limited manufacturing companies have an opportunity to raise unit price that

affects small farmers. Clogging of emitters is observed due to inert materials, soil
particles, fine sand, algae and others associated with poorly installed filtration
systems. In water stressed areas ruminates and non ruminant animals look for
drops of water even under emitters. As a result rodents, ants, termites, sheep,
goats and big animals cause leakage to the system while searching for moisture or
grazing. These are very important factors for the durability of the system and to
keep it operational at a low level.
3-7. Tentative Solutions
According to the manufacturers, Plastro PLC, Israel Poly Ethylene (PE) made
irrigation materials are fair in price and durable for drip irrigation systems when
compared with PVC materials. They can endure unfavourable climate conditions.
Fluctuation in temperature does not the life of the material as long as it is kept
safely above the ground on racks and protected from rodents and other animals.
Thick walled PE probably resist attack against termites, mice, ants and the like.
34
Bacterial slime, soil particles and fine sand could be protected through frequent
discharge of water (every day) for 2-3 minutes to keep away particles on sticking to
the wall of hydrogoals. This holds true for fertigation process. As far as Ethiopian
climate is concerned, the installed PE materials are ultra-violet resistant; so,
direct exposure to the sun light has no significant effect. The supplied filtration
units and other additional accessories are essential in using FDS with surface
water stored under ground water reservoirs.
Underground water reservoir with silt trap
Smallholder farmers use mechanical cleaning when hydrogoals are clogged, by

drying under sunlight and gently hitting at emitters, followed by flashing with
water for sometime. In some systems the out lets are easily disassembled for
cleaning, in case of clogging. A standard minimum three years´ warranty on drip
irrigation materials by the manufacturer indicated the durability aspect and
trouble-free operations of the FDS.
35
Total investment required for utilizing underground Water Reservoirs and FDS (SG
2000/Ethiopia Experience)
1. Under ground Reservoir (Pair) US$ 1000.00
2. Water tanker (2000 L) US$ 228.00
3. Motorized water pump (Robin) US$ 300.00
4. FDS (set) US$ 172.00
Total US$ 1700.00
36
Economic Analysis of FDS for 500 m2 plot of land with 2 crop harvest/year ( in USD)
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Remarks Item Gross revenues
1) Tomatoes yield (kg) 1800.00 2000.00 2200.00 2300.00 2000.00 2200.00 2300.00 2000.00 2200.00 2300.00
2) Tomatoes value CFA per kg 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21
1) Lettuce yield (kg) 1900.00 2000.00 2100.00 1900.00 2000.00 2100.00 1900.00 2000.00 2100.00 2000.00
2) Lettuce value (CFA) per kg 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
Total gross revenues US$ 454.00 500.00 546.00 559.00 500.00 546.00 559.00 500.00 546.00 563.00
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Remarks Costs & Investment
3) Cost of irrigation system 120.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 150.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4) Water tank 150.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mineral fertilizers (NPK) 73.33 110.00 110.00 110.00 110.00 110.00 110.00 110.00 110.00 110.00
Mineral fertilizer (Urea) 13.00 19.50 19.50 19.50 19.50 19.50 19.50 19.50 19.50 19.50
Tomatoes seeds 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63
Lettuce seeds 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
Toots 20.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Pesticides 23.33 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00
5) Pedal pump 60.00 0.00 0.00 58.33 58.33 0.00 58.33 0.00 0.00 58.33
Sterilization 60.00 0.00 67.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 67.00 0.00 67.00 0.00
Total Costs US$ 625.29 170.13 237.13 228.46 228.46 350.13 295.46 170.13 237.13 228.46
Net Revenue US$ -71.29 329.88 308.88 330.54 330.50 195.88 263.54 329.88 308.88 334.54
Source: More crop per Drip; Drip irrigation project for small Holders, Netafim October 2005
37
4. Recommendations
1) Agriculture development in Ethiopia will continue to depend on small-scale

farmer sub sector.
2) Rain fed agriculture should progressively be transformed to irrigate, small-
scale agriculture systems. This necessitates the use of shallow rivers, fresh
water lakes and streams, shallow tube wells and water harvesting
technologies.
3) Water harvesting can help reduce soil erosion by slowing down/reducing
runoffs.
4) Stored water should be used in combination with drip irrigation.
5) Stable water supply (even from house roofs) should be used in diversification
of livestock (dairy and meat production) and poultry activity.
6) Dairying should be promoted for areas with high population density.
7) Credit sources (public, private, mixed funds) should in place.
“Few scientists think of agriculture as the chief, or model Science. Many indeed,
do not consider it a science at all. Yet it was the first science – the mother of all
sciences; it remains the science that makes human life possible; and it may be that,
before the end of the century, the success or failure of science as a whole will be
judged by the success or failure of agriculture.”
Agriculture-The Island Empire

Andre and Jean Mayer, Daedulus 1974
38
4. Implementing Water Harvesting Structures for Integrated

Watershed Management: experiences of J-Green and
Melkassa Research Center
Yusuf Kedir
Melkassa Research Center
1 Introduction
In Ethiopia, on average, people suffer from drought once in 3.4 years since the 1960s.
Besides these drought years, it is reported that 85% of the households in rural Ethiopia go
through food shortage for three months in the slack season.
The rainfall pattern of Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia had been changing at least in the
last ten years and resorted to taking necessary measures to cope with the factors that
aggravate drought such as deforestation, land degradation, soil erosion (particularly
caused from gullies) and decline in soil fertility.
To tackle the above problems, in 2002, Japan Green Resources Agency (J-Green) launched
a basic study of agriculture and rural development in Oromia Region of Ethiopia in
cooperation with Melkassa Agricultural Research Centre (MARC). In 2003, Ethiopian
Agriculture and Research Organization (EARO) and J-Green have decided to launch a
joint study titled; “Verification Study of Technologies on Natural Resources’ Conservation
and Restoration for the Prevention of Desertification” in Merko and Koka peasant
associations of Boset woreda1.
Why water harvesting structures in the area?

In Boset Woreda, there is no nursery due to lack of stable water resource. Instead, Boset
woreda agriculture office established a nursery in the neighbouring Adama Woreda, where
a permanent river, namely the Awash, is situated. They lift up water from the Awash
River and supply to the nursery. World Vision Adama Development Program supports
part of nursery management costs.
The nursery site is located more than 60 km from the furthermost place of the Woreda.
Seedlings are carried to the surrounding micro watersheds using an old truck borrowed
from Zonal BoA, which often breaks down. Most roads are dirt, and particularly in the
rainy season, dirt roads get slippery, both of which become the main causes that the
delivery are limited only to the places along paved Nazareth—Miesso road and that
delivery sometimes gets late and missing the proper time of plantation.
１
All the information included in this document about Boset woreda is taken from draft survey
report of the project: "Verification Study of Technologies on Natural Resources’
Conservation and Restoration for the Prevention of Desertification." Scope of the Study
(Draft), June 2005.
39
Considering the difficult situations the woreda Agricultural and Rural Development Office
(ARDO) is facing on natural resources issues, it is an urgent matter to develop alternative
and supplementary water resources for nursery establishment for multi-purpose tree
seedlings and grass-seed multiplication.
2 General description of the area
Boset Woreda, located 115 km southeast of Addis Ababa, lies in the Central Rift Valley.
The Woreda is 15,140 ha with a population of 124,196. The altitude of the area ranges
from 1000-2000 m. a. s. l., and the topography is dominated by plain, with rugged
landscape in some parts. The prominent soil type is light grey sandy loam. The land use is
classified into cultivated, grazing, bush and various settlements, accounting for 28%, 7%,
51% and 13% of the total land area, respectively. Its agro-ecological zonation, North-
western part of the woreda is located on the skirt of the Ethiopian highlands and its agro-
climate zone is classified into Dega (sub-moist in moisture condition, and tepid to cool in
thermal condition). Mt. Boset and Mt. Belecha are towering at the southern side of
Welenchiti town, and the foot of those mountains also belongs to Dega area. Apart from
those high altitude areas, most part of the Woreda lie in Weyna Dega with an annual
rainfall of 750 to 800 mm. Vegetation of the area is sparsely covered by lowland species of
acacia, thorny bushes, and grasses in farm lands but most of the area is devoid of
vegetation and it looks bare land.
Social and Institutional characteristics

Boset Woreda is one of the most experienced and effectively taking actions for constructing
and popularizing of the water harvesting technologies by organizing the farmers and
forming different groups. The Woreda experts are working together with the farmers by
advising, providing materials and giving trainings in collaboration with NGOs. Some
farmers are selected as a model to create awareness among farmers living around the area.
These farmers have constructed a number of water harvesting ponds and tankers in their
compounds and they are using the collected water for cereal and perennial crops, livestock,
and in small extent for their domestic consumptions.
In Boset Woreda, five sample Kebeles comprising of thirty one gots have twenty four hills,
out of which 9 and 1 hillsides are managed by villagers belong to the PA youth-
associations and women’s association of the Kebeles, respectively. Although this way of
conserving hillside is limited to only where BoA has a strong guidance (some international
organization-led integrated Micro-Watershed (MWS) projects are functioning), it seems
that only successful case to protect a hillside is a ‘formal group-based user-rights’
enclosure by PA-based associations in a Kebele’.
In case of the study on the micro watersheds in Boset Woreda, as Peasant based
associations and individual farmer are anticipated as main bodies to conserve and/or
restore hillsides, and gullies and farmlands, respectively.
3 Planning processes
Field survey of Merko Kebele and discussion with farmers, persons who are using
different water harvesting structures, and Woreda experts were carried out to select the
type of the structures and the location where the structures to be constructed. In the J-
40
Green’s preliminary study, Subject Matter Specialists (SMSs) of the Woreda expressed
their special interests in the development of water resources for nursery and seed
multiplication of forage grasses and leguminous fodder trees.
Most farmers were highly interest to provide land for the construction. However, the team
has decided to put the structure on communal land on which no personal interest will be
reflected and care was taken not to create any dispute among farmers. Hence, the
elementary school of the area was selected for the construction based on the following
criteria;
• Availability of land
• Future fate of the structure, to use it in sustainable way
• Willingness to afford the land and participate in the construction
• Availability of permanent tap water that can supplement the nursery
On the other hand, the urgent need here is to develop water resources that meet the
following requirements: (1) its water capacity meets the water requirement of seedlings
during the months from March to June; (2) it can be installed wherever possible based on
users’ requirements; and (3) its easiness for farmers to maintain using locally available
materials at relatively low costs.
Water-harvesting tank (often referred to as “cistern” or “underground tank”) is an

artificial reservoir covered or lined with a mixture of cement and sand or with a reddish
clay paste. The depth of the tank varies from 3 to 8 m and its water capacity ranges from
30 to 200m3. These technologies are more preferred by the farmers than the dug out ponds
and are highly accepted. Farmers are constructing these structures in their vicinities by
themselves with a support of different organizations. Among the qualities of the
hemispherical concrete structure some are:
• Their durability, they have longer life span than others.

• Their sizes can be increased to meet the demand of an individual,
• They can store water for longer period with out losses.
• They are suitable for water lifting mechanism than ponds.
The project team has planned to raise around 30,000 forage and forestry seedlings in the
nursery to be established around the watershed. Based on the number of the materials the
total volume of water to be stored in the tankers was estimated. The estimation was made
as follow:
41
Description Values Remark Assumptions
Grasses & All are in pots and water is

Total no. seedlings 30,000
seedlings sprinkled
Total nursery days 120 Mar-June Hottest months, for all seedlings
From water surface, No shade, Boset

Pan ET, mm/day Melkassa weather
5.58 is hotter, similar watering for all
(average) station
stages, no rain fall
ET, mm/day;
3.2 Simple assumption Good shading, watered once a day
(average)
Average pot diameter of 100 mm

Pot area, mm2 7,850 Similar pot sizes
was taken
Amount of water to The above assumptions are

25.12 Cm3 / pot/ day
be added for one pot considered for the calculation
Total amount,
753.6 litters
litters/ day
100% efficiency, No application,

Total volume, litters 90,432 90.432 m3 conveyance, management losses, not
for other purposes
226.08 m3 With 40% efficiency
The total amount of water required to raise 30,000 seedlings for three months of nursery
period in the area was estimated as 226 m3. This estimation was made based on 40%
efficiency; mean that 60% water losses were considered.
4 Methods and levels of implementation
A team of professionals from MARC; J-Green and MoARD has visited Merko micro
watershed with the objective of selecting a site at which water harvesting structure to be
constructed. After close investigation of the area, the site selected was the elementary
school of the Kabele based on the criteria explained earlier. And the team agreed for the
suitability of the proposed site to construct the structure.
During the visit, the group has also discussed on various issues and how to move next.
According to the team, the first thing to be cleared out with discussion was how much area
the school can provide for this purpose. The other point was that, it is better to build a 100
m3 water harvesting tank than the anticipated 120 m3. Because when the size goes beyond
100 m3, construction and stability of the structure will be in question. In addition, it was
42
agreed to start with small nursery size and to increase it through time. This approach was
preferred to minimize risk of failure and will have the chance of maximizing efficiencies on
water use & improvement of good nursery management. Period incorporating experienced
professionals from Woreda office during implementation was given paramount importance
for creating sense of ownership and for coordinating all activities.
After step by step fruitful discussions with woreda offices and responsible bodies,
memorandum of understanding was signed between the project team and the local
committee. The memorandum of understanding was developed in Amharic language and
detail discussion has been made on each point. The main issues of the memorandum were;
The school
• To provide land for the construction of the structure and nursery
• To protect the site from any danger
• To take over the nursery and equipment after the project termination and to
handle it properly
The Kebele
• To provide all necessary materials locally available for the construction
• To cooperate and coordinate farmers whenever necessary for the accomplishment of
the structures
• To mediate whenever there is any dispute
• To allocate responsible person who will organize and construct the water
harvesting structures
The team
• To establish the nursery site together with the water harvesting structures
• To hand over the nursery with all nursery equipments for the school after the
project termination
• To purchase materials for fencing the school
The Kebele has selected a local contractor who could take the responsibility to construct
the structures. Contract agreement was signed between the team and the contractor that
was approved by the local representatives. In the agreement the construction costs, the
time in which the construction to be completed, the method of construction and
responsibilities to be taken by each body were discussed and agreement was reached.
During the construction period, efforts were made to use materials and labours from the
area. All labour and material costs were covered by the team.
The dimensions of the structures, the construction procedure, and the compositions of the
materials to be used were specified and prepared by professionals from the team.
Responsible persons selected from the Kebele were appointed to monitor day-to-day
activities and progresses of the construction, and the qualities of the materials used by the
contractor.
5 Current status and evaluation of implementing processes
Although construction was completed, due to unexpected problems, the structures cannot
store the runoff collected from catchments. Previously both tanks cannot store the runoff
even for a week for the reason that using poor quality sand for plastering the tanks. To
43
solve this problem, the upper layers of both tanks were replaced by proper cement-sand
mix but the second tank can not store runoff yet. After short period of time, crack was
observed at the middle of the second tank. So that maintenance works are undertaken
using asphalt emulsions.
The aim of constructing the structures was to supply water for the nursery materials to be
raised during the dry season. Since one of the tanks was not maintained yet and currently
the nursery is under establishment, it is not possible to evaluate the utilization system of
the water.
The implementation was not carried out as planned as the proposal. It was started just
one month before the rainy season and there was time shortage. So all things have been
done in a hurry not to miss the coming rain. Moreover, the type of the structure to be
constructed was not selected with sound justification and estimation of materials costs
was done for different structure. So, cost and material estimated and actually papered
have shown variation as indicated in the table.
Comparison table of the estimated and actually used materials and their costs
44
Estimated Actually used

No Items Unit Unit
Unit Total cost, Total
Amount Amount cost,
cost, birr birr cost, birr
birr
1 Cement Bag 40 40 1,600.0 60.5 66.2397 4,007.5
2 Sand m3 8 31.25 250.0 531.0
3 Stone m3 32 31.25 1,000.0 1,250.0
4 Wire mesh m2 100 30 3,000.0 0 30 0.0
5 PVC pipe Pieces 1 125 125.0 1 96 96.0
6 Steel pipe Pieces 4 25 100.0 2 34 34.0
7 Wood M 120 5 600.0 434.0
8 Nail Kg 30 10 300.0
9 Corrugate Piece 30 54 1,620.0 1,856.2
sheet
10 Labour Man day 75 8 600.0 1,852.5
11 Mason Man day 10 30 300.0
12 Carpenter Man day 4 30 120.0
13 Concrete pipe Piece 0 0.0 7.5 36.5 273.8
14 Water 0 0.0 55.3
15 Mesh for 0 0.0 27.0
filter
Total 9,615.0 10,417.2
Besides, material costs’ fluctuation was another reason for quantity and cost estimation
differences. Some of the items that created the variation are the following.
• The unit cost of cement was varied on average from 57 to 75 birr per bag.
• Costs estimation for labour was much lower than the actual expense
• The estimation did not include the expenses of silt trap, concrete pipe and water for
construction.
Main problem during the implementation was contractor’s lack of ability, which caused
seepage, delay of the completion, etc. The contractor tried to construct the two tanks at the
same time. The main difference between the first and second tank was on the shape of the
dug out ponds. The second one was not excavated as the design document with
hemispherical shape like the first one. Rather it was with rectangular shape leaving wider
space at the middle. To give the hemispherical shape, loose soil was placed between the
stone and the surface of the pond. Since the soil was compacted by hand in dry state, the
crack was created when the back-filled soil was settled. The following pictures show step
by step how the constructions of the two tanks were carried out and where the problem on
the second tank was introduced.
45
The first tank The second tank
Properly constructed
hemispherical shape
Irregularly excavated pond
Placing the stone properly was

Placing the stone starting from the very difficult
bottom
The stone was constructed following At the middle of the tank, loose
the slope of the pond soil was filled
Properly constructed tank Crack created at the middle when

the back soil settled
46
The participation of the appointed individuals to monitor the construction has played very
important role for the accomplishment of the structures. They were monitoring every
activities and were informing the team whenever they faced some problem on the methods
of qualities of the material selected by the contractor.
Levels of farmers’ awareness

The Boset Woreda ARDO has done very interesting works for the popularization of the
technologies and towards empowering the farmers through supportive strategies in the
area. The office has created linkages with other organization from abroad, like Kenya, and
has brought experts to train interested farmers. These farmers are organized with the
help of the Woreda office and formulated different groups, each group has 20 members. All
the members of the group together will construct a water-harvesting structure for a single
member at a time and for the whole member turn by turn. Besides, sorting labour
problems, the system has created awareness of water harvesting technologies and induced
interest in the area. The approach has also helped the farmers to get some equipment, like
brick maker, from different organizations.
As far as the project's team-approach was concerned, on the planning, implementation

processes and the relevance and type of the structure constructed there was no any
complain from the farmers. However, these under ground water harvesting tankers have
some construction, management and utilization problems. Among them, some are the
following:
• Their construction cost is expensive and it is labour intensive.

• Transportation of materials is very difficult.
• It is difficult to construct the structures using local materials.
6 Lessons gained from the past
The two tanks have not been constructed at appropriate time. As of the projects document,
prior to constructing the tank, water requirements of the intended nursery materials
together with the runoff coefficients of the catchments should be studied. In additions to
this information, selection of appropriate water harvesting structure study was not done
properly. Accidentally the team has proposed to construct the tanker not to miss rainy
season for the nursery to be established in the year 2006 around the area.
The construction of the structure was started without written agreement between the
contractor appointed by the Kebele and the project team. Rather it was rely on verbal
agreement. This minor mistake has created a space for the contractor to deny the verbal
agreement and resulted in hot dispute between the team and the contractor. Moreover, the
first verbal agreement did not include the time in which the construction to be completed.
The contractor has tried to do all the work by himself without any additional labours and
has consumed longer time than anticipated. Then, latter on the team has decided to limit
the time and has forced the person to abide by a written agreement.
For such implementation therefore, skilled contractor should be assigned and care should
be taken during the selection. In order to do so, the contract agreements should include
47
each and every issue that might affect the construction work. A contractor's capability
should be examined in advance. In case of skill shortage, the contractor must be replaced
without any compensation. If the time necessary for completion is overdue, penalties
should be imposed strictly. Of course, technical training to improve skill of concerned
party should be planned and executed..
7 Future plans of the organization

As stated earlier, the project has selected two micro watersheds in Boset woreda, Merko
and Koka. Two water harvesting structures were constructed at Merko Kebele. Next,
similar structures will be constructed at Koka Kebele. The experiences gained from Merko
will have significant role for the accomplishment of the program successfully at Koka. The
project team has already contacted Kebele representatives and selected construction site
in the school.
Therefore, the project team will include all the lessons gained from the past and try to
minimize the mistakes committed at Merko for successful implementation of the project at
Koka Kebele.
48
5. Experiences of Oromia Irrigation Development

Authority (OIDA) and Irrigation Farming Improvement
Project (IFI-JICA) on WHT
Dr. Naruoka Michio( IFI)

Yohannes Geleta (OIDA-CB)
1. Introduction
When we think of the recurring drought of the region Oromia seems living under unbreakable
curse. But when we see the potential of the region at least we become hopeful for the change of
the history of the people and the nation. The Government of Ethiopia and the Regional National
Government of Oromia have set a policy in utilizing the existing resource to come out of this
drought, especially water resource in the possible alternative way.
Oromia is a potential rich area in water, land and man power resources, that is about 28 Million
population And according to the study conducted by Oromia Economic Study Office (1999),
there are 58 billions m3/year of mean annual runoff in the seven basins of the region, about 2.1
Billion m3 of underground water and 1.7 million ha land suitable for surface irrigation. But only
less than 10% of the above resource is utilized for irrigation.
However, implementation on these resources needs high capital, highly trained man power, and
takes time with the contrary to the country need.
Therefore it is to be wise to set and implement another less capital intensive and short time
taking alternative to tackle the challenge of the generation.
One of the alternatives is to introduce and expand different Water Harvesting Technology to
utilize the existing resources to escape from the coming un predictable chaos.
2. Past Experiences of OIDA
Before OIDA (Oromia Irrigation Development Authority) started implementation of Water

Harvesting Technology in organized system, there were some experiences specially in pond
construction (Community Pond) in low land of the region by the community and some NGO`S
and also Shallow well development in areas such as Becho plains and in Rift valley regions.
Considering the government policy to reduce the poverty level of the country, the needs of the
community & NGOs’ experiences, about 143,000 Ponds, 500 Tankers and 84,000 Shallow wells
are constructed by OIDA since 2003 in Oromia region. . Not only implementing but also
evaluation of the constructed schemes was done by OIDA in all Oromia zones in 2003 /2004.
The evaluation report indicates the existing problems on WHT, but no concrete solution is
suggested. Hence, setting applicable solutions and standardizing the WHT becomes more
important.
49
3. Implementation processes of the evaluation
OIDA (Oromia Irrigation Development Authority) and PIFI (Project for Irrigation Farming
Improvement of JICA) signed an agreement to work on WHT as one component by
standardizing WHT in an activity area by developing a guideline.
The methodology adopted for analyzing the WHT practical problems are
• Evaluation of the report of The Water Harvesting Activities in Oromia Region
(2003/2004) was made
• Field Visits On OIDA-IFI Districts Dodota Sire & Merti of Arsi Zone and A/T/J
Kombolcha WHT were conducted.
• Other areas field visits, such as Siraro district of East Shewa, two zones from Tigeray
Region were conducted.
• Visits to input supplier of WHT(Treadle Pump suppliers, Plastic sheet supplier and Drip
material Supplier) were made
• Discussion with the OIDA-CB (Central Branch) Experts, Project area District Experts
and with some beneficiaries during the field visit.
• Various guidelines, Manuals, Evaluation reports in the Region and in the country were
referred.
• Question and answer system is developed.
This paper is only limited in presenting the practical problems identified during our study time
and the method for possible solutions to make the guide line. The solutions for identified
problems are not included in this paper because the solutions are not yet traced accordingly in
the required manner. The following table shows WHT surveyed by the project team.
Table 1 Water Harvesting Technologies surveyed by IFI

Others
Shallow Pond Tanker
Studied areas M. Dam. , F.
Wells (No) (No) (No)
Harvesting
D.Sire - 8 4 -
Merti - 3 4 -
Siraro - 3 1 -
A/T/J/Kombolcha 5 5 1 2
Tigray 7 5 2 1
Total 12 24 12 3
It is obvious that the structures surveyed are not enough to represent all WHT implemented in
East Shewa & Arsi Zones, but assuming and believing that all WHT constructed in These area
shares the same problem (OIDA evaluation report shows this.) and considering other field
survey before the guide line to be made, we are limited to above WHT schemes for problem
analysis at this level.
50
4. Major Problems found on Water Harvesting Technology
Our experience on the implementation on the WHT & our field study (OIDA-IFI) on WHT
shows there are some defined problems on WHT.
We summarize the problem in two categories
1- WHT facilities are not working properly.

2- Farmers Motivation to utilize & accept WHT declined
Detail analysis of these problems is explained in brief in the logic tree, which is found in the last
part of this paper.
5. Major findings of the Field Survey
The field survey result is here below discussed by the logic tree table (Table 2). And the next
step, which leads to the solution, that is the Question and Answer method is also shortly
explained in this part after the logic tree table (table 3).
51
Table 2 Problem analysis on Water Harvesting technologies

NO. Ground Question
1.1.1.a Water drain from the cracks in Tank. (1) What should I do in order to make a tank without cracks?
(2) How to repair cracks?
1.1.1.b Water drain from the tears of sheet in (1) What should I do in order not to make tears?
Pond. (2) How to repair tears?
1.1.1.c Water infiltrate from the Pond into the (1) How to get a plastic sheet?
ground.
1.1.2.a Water evaporates from Tank. (1) What should I do in order to make a roof?
(2) How to repair the roof?
1.1.2.b Water evaporates from Pond. (1) What should I do in order to make a roof?
1.1.3.a Water isn’t gathered by the water (1) What should I do in order to gather water by the water
catchments. catchments?
(2) How to clean the water catchments?
1.1.3.b Water doesn’t run in the canal. (1) What should I do in order to make the canal through
which water flow?
(2) How to clean the canal?
1.1.4.a Volume of Tank or Pond reduced by the (1) What should I do in order to make the silt trap?
silt. (2) How to clean Pond, Tank and silt traps?
1.2.1.a Shallow well’s inner wall is delicate. (1) What should I do in order to reinforce the inner wall of
Shallow well?
2.1.1.a Farmers finish Tank’s or Pond’s water (1) What should I do in order to teach the irrigation
halfway of crop’s growth. technique?
2.1.1.b Farmers give less water than crop (1) What should I do in order to irrigate for good crops?
consumptive use.
2.1.2.a Farmers couldn’t cure the crop’s disease. (1) What should I do in order to cure the disease?
2.1.3.a Farmers couldn’t bug the harmful insect. (1) What should I do in order to bug the harmful insect?
2.2.1.a Farmers sold low quality crops. (1) What should I do in order to make the high quality crops?
2.2.1.b Farmers sold cheep crops. (1) What should I do in order to make the high price crops?
2.2.1.c Farmers produce crop in the low price (1) What should I do in order to make the crops in the high
season. price season?
2.2.1.d Farmers didn’t store the harvest till high (1) What should I do in order to store the crops till high price
price season. season?
2.3.1.a Farmers think that Tank or Pond was (1) What should I do in order to convenient to access Tank or
located in inconvenient area. Pond?
2.3.2.a Farmer didn’t use the water lifting device. (1) What should I do in order to use the water lifting device?
2.4.1.a Mosquito which is the carrier of Malaria (1) What should I do in order to prevent Malaria?
reproduce in Tank and Pond.
2.4.2.a Farmers think that children and livestock (1) What should I do in order not to fall down children and
fall down in Tank and Pond. livestock in Tank and Pond?
2.5.1.a Farmers think that there is more (1) What should I do in order to develop a new source?
convenient source.
52
Case of Q&A
Q1 What should I do in order not to make tears in the plastic sheet?
A1 Two reasons as for which a tears is made to a plastic sheet are considered.
One is that a sheet is damaged at the time of pumping work. Another is damaged
when wild animals', such as a hyena's, come to drink water. The following measures
are required in order for a sheet to be made not to be damaged.
(1) Measure of Working time

………………….
………………….
………………….
(2) Measure of Wild Animal

…………………...
…………………..
…………………..
53
Table1 Identified Problems on Implemented Shallow well, Pond and Tanker.

Problem Reason Ground
Farmers don't use Tank, 1. Tank, Pond and Shallo 1.1 There isn't enough 1.1.1. Water drain from Tank 1.1.1.a Water drain from the cracks in Tank.
Pond and Shallow well well aren't working water in Tank and Pond. or Pond.
properly. perfectly.
1.1.1.b Water drain from the tears of sheet
in Pond.
1.1.1.c Water infiltrate from the Pond into

the ground.
1.1.2. Water evaporate from 1.1.2.a Water evaporate from Tank.

Tank or Pond.
1.1.2.b Water evaporate from Pond.
1.1.3. Enough water don't enter 1.1.3.a Water isn't gathered by

in Tank and Pond. Watercatchment.
1.1.3.b Water don't run in the canal.
1.1.4. Enough water isn't stored 1.1.4.a Volume of Tank or Pond reduced by
in Tank and Pond. the silt.
1.2. Shallow well collapsed. 1.2.1. Shallow well's inner wall 1.2.1.a Shallow well's inner wall is delicate.
fall down and well
collapsed.
2. Farmers motivation 2.1. Famers didn't get 2.1.1. Crop was damaged by the 2.1.1.a Farmers finish Tank's or Pond's
declined. expected harvest. water shortage. water halfway of crop's growth.
2.1.1.b Farmers give less water than crop

consumptive use.
2.1.2. Crop was damaged by the 2.1.2.a Farmers couldn't cure the crop
disease. disease.
2.1.3. Crop was damaged by the 2.1.3.a Farmers couldn't bug the harmful
harmful insect. insect.
2.2. Farmers didn't get 2.2.1. Farmers couldn't sell with 2.2.1.a Farmers sold low quality crops.
expected return. high price.
2.2.1.b Farmers sold cheap crops.
2.2.1.c Farmers produce crop in the

low price season.
2.2.1.d Farmers didn't store the harvest till

high price season.
2.3. Farmers think that 2.3.1. Farmers think hard work 2.3.1.a Farmers think that Tank or Pond was
irrigation is hard work. to go to Tank or Pond. located in inconvinient area.
2.3.2. Farmers think hard work 2.3.2.a Farmer didn't use the water lifting
to draw water. device.
2.4. Farmers think that 2.4.1. Farmers think spread of 2.4.1.a Mosquito which is the carrier of
Tank and Pond is danger. Malaria will be facilitated. Malaria reproduce in Tank and Pond.
2.4.2. Tank or Pond is near 2.4.2.a Farmers think that children and
the house. livestock fall down in Tank and Pond.
2.5. Farmers wish to develop 2.5.1. There are river, seasonal 2.5.1.a Farmers think that there is more
another source. river, spring and convenient source.
groundwater.
54
Minute on the discussion held on February 23, 2006
Chair: Dr. Fasil Reda, MARC

Rapporteur: Yusuf Kedir, MARC
The point of discussion during the afternoon was on identification of major issues
that need general agreement from the workshop. There were several ideas raised
by the participants during the morning session and Dr. Fasil has started the
discussion by summarizing and putting the main issues together as follow.
There are good policy, donors and opportunities so the condition is well to
work more
We need to work hard on awareness creation and trainings on the

technologies and offering another new water harvesting technologies for the
farmers. Because, farmers are started to produce different things using
these opportunities, such as fattening, vegetable production, dairy and
constructing bricks from mud.
In order to exchange information, we have to have regular annual or some

other convenient time meeting
He also gave emphasis on the level of creating expectation on farmers from

the technologies. We should not over emphasize the advantages of the
technologies and misleading the farmers, it is better to take care on such
points
Creating market is another dimension to work on, as he mentioned.

Farmers should take their products to the market so as to get benefit from
what they produce using the technologies
There were also other comments given by researchers and farmers from different
areas. Their comments are summarized and listed as follow.
Farmers are in need of technicians and spare parts for their treadle pump
and family drip-irrigation system, so there must be some mechanism to help
them.
The cost of water harvesting technologies especially constructed by NGOs

(underground hemispherical cement tank) is very expensive so the engineers
have to work on cost reduction.
55
There should be one standard and model structure that will be popularized
and disseminated, but on which structure there was no agreement reached
and it was left open for further discussions
There is lack of coordination and there is no responsible organization to lead

and manage other, so it is urgent to solve this problem
Once farmers get this appropriate technologies properly, other packages has
to developed together so as to improve the efficiencies of the technologies
OIDA and NGO are working on two different water-harvesting structures

and their cost benefit is not studied yet. Therefore, this is the main
bottleneck to popularize the technologies. if this issue is solved we can go
even to arrange credit facilities, if any organization is sure for the
technologies are surely beneficial
56
Minutes of the discussion on February 24, 2006

Plenary session on the site visit
Chair: Chimdo A.
Rapportor: Endeshaw H.
It was emphasized in the beginning that the focus of the discussion should be on
the activities observed during the visit and what we can learn from it and improve,
but not about a given organization.
On capacity: the 50,000lit water harvesting structure may not sufficiently serve
the farmers’ purpose, so it may be better to increase the capacity or add one
more structure of the same size.
Design: from experience the hemispherical structure failed on vertisol that it
may be better if tripozoid type is used in the WV sites visited. The plastic
coated pond can be roofed with ‘das’ type roofing to reduce evaporation thereby
improving the design.
Cracking: some of the reasons are
o Construction error due to the workmanship capacity, training could be
important
o Design- the shape and dimension
o Quality of construction material (esp.when the farmers are asked to
provide some local resources/materials, it may be of poor quality)
o The mixing ration
o Improper handling of the cement (ay be stored in places exposed to water
and so on)
o when the cement is kept unused for more than 30min from time mixed
with water and sand and if the mixing is done on uncoated soil surface
o Regular watering of the structure for the minimum of the first 21 days.
57
Siltation: The attempt made to control siltation looks insufficient that it has to
be given a serious thought. Surface water harvesting may not be a good idea as
it involve high siltation, risk and evaporation.
Roofing: in some of the sites the poles (roof supporters are not coverd with roofs
and this may result in wastage of resource. It may be good to cover with a
durable roofing than temporary ones.
Plastic lined pond: having fence around this structure need to be taken as a
package of this structure. Roofing should also be considered for this one as for
the others
Agronomy and other management: the drip irrigation is a good beginning but
needs improvement. The spacing would rather be 60 than 90 to increase land
use efficiency. Study on the land use pattern rather than sticking to one or few
commodities. farmers look so ambitious in utilizing the water, what they plan
to do does not commensurate with the water harvested (should be balanced).
Multidisciplinary approach: WHT is a multidisciplinary issue hence demands
multidisciplinary approach (soil scientist, engineer, social scientist…). WHT is
not an end by itself, issues like soil improvement, water management and crop
protection should be integrated, and training can be organized for the same.
Distance:
Site selection: the sites visited are properly selected. However, during site
selection it is important to be careful to construct the structure by the roads
where expansion is imminent, avoid channeling the flood in between
residences as observed during the visit (better to find alternative routs); if pond
can’t be covered better keep it far fro residence. Selection should be done
properly in favor of farmers’ interest, we may not necessarily stick to the ‘poor’
which is also a controversial to qualify. The WH structure is located a bit far
from the farm. If possible having a good lifting mechanism could be better to
make it more economical. It could also be risky to animals.
SHI: sometimes the visitors to our site create a kind of demand on the part of
the farmer, for e.g., a farmer who had no problem with drawing water with his
58
labor starts to demand water lifting machine when visitors remind him that
there is a type of technology for that purpose. As a learning organization, we
are ready to learn and change accordingly.
59
Minutes of the discussions on February 24, 2006/06/21
Recommendations
Chair: Dr. Fasil Reda, MARC
Rapporteur: Dr. Tilahun/Mr. Yusuf K., MARC
The shift from the original purpose of WHT (from food crop production to
fattening, dairy and the like) signals for the need for redesigning the structure and
OIDA would be taking the initiative in this regard. The experience from certain site
indicates that the technology could have promising features with good impact, yet
modification of the structure and improving approaches to introduce the
technology at farmers’ level remains as a challenge.
The basic problem with WHT is that recommendations are being made on blanket
basis. Therefore, we should share experiences among ourselves. It is also necessary
to make economic analysis of the profitability of the technology.
We need to create commonly shared approach among ourselves that avoids
discrimination and confusions at farmers’ level through regular monitoring and
evaluation of our activities. To implement this, a WHT forum is formed among the
stakeholders who operate in East Shewa and Arsi Zones.
OIDA would take the leadership of the WHT forum. A steering committee will be
set up with OIDA acts as a secretariat. OIDA should call the group and discuss on
assigning roles and responsibility.
60
WHT Workshop Schedule
1st Day (February 23, 2006)

1. Opening (9:00-9:30)
(1) Welcoming remarks (Dr. Fasil, MARC)
(2) Opening remarks (Mr. Samuel Hussen, OIDA)
(3) Introduction to the workshop (Mr. Shiratori, FRG)
2. Keynote speech (9:30-10:00)
MARD Coordinator for WHT (Mr. Lakew)

3. Coffee break (10:00-10:30)
4. Presentation Part 1 (10:30-12:30) (Chair: Mr. Yohanes, OIDA/Mr. Tekele, OIDA)
(1) World Vision
(2) Self help
(3) SG2000
5. Lunch (12:30-13:30)
6. Presentation Part 2 (13:30-14:30) (Chair: Mr. Yohanes, OIDA/Mr. Tekele, OIDA)
(4) MARC-J-Green
(5) OIDA-PIFI
7. Coffee break (14:30-15:00)
8. Plenary session (15:00-16:30) (Chair: Mr. Hailu, ATARC/Dr. Tulahun, MARC)
(1) Identification of major issue (engineering, management, institutions)
(2) Roles of different stakeholder on WHT in the area
(3) Establishing linkages among stakeholders
2nd day (February 24, 2006)

9. Site visit (9:00-12:30) (Mr. Yusuf, MARC)
10. Lunch (12:30-13:30)
11. Plenary session on site visit (13:30-14:15) (Chair: Mr. Chimdo, MARC/Mr.
Endeshaw, MARC)
12. Wind up session/ Recommendations (14:15-15:00) (Chair: Dr. Fasil, MARC)
13. Closing (15:00-15:10) (Mr. Fasil, EIAR)
61
General guideline for preparation of paper and presentation

for the workshop
The workshop is intended to share experiences among the stakeholders gained

from the past attempts and efforts towards the implementation of different WHT
in East Shewa and Arsi zones. So the papers to be presented by the invited
participants are required to give emphasis and discuss their planning and
implementation approaches and evaluating it. Identifying clearly the constraints
and weaknesses that limit the respective organizations from implementing the
technologies effectively together with their possible solutions are the major
expected outputs from the workshop.
A. Contents of the paper to be submitted (can be improved as

required)
To address at least the above-mentioned points and to ease the compiling process
of the papers, the following format is tentatively prepared. This format is proposed
to be used as a general guideline that might be followed and it is not a must to
follow it strictly. If any important ideas are missing from the contents, presenters
have the right to include and if not, it is also possible not to discuss all the contents.
The papers will be compiled into proceedings and distributed to workshop

participants and other relevant institutions and personnel.
8 Introduction
• Brief explanation about the organization
• Justifications for working on WHT in the area
9 General description o f target area and people
62
• location and target group

• Social characteristics
• Institutional arrangements
10 Planning and implementation processes (for WHT) followed by the
organization in the area
• Planning processes (main points being considered while planning)
• Area of coverage together with the natures of end users’ selected
• Types and scales of the WHT being selected for the area
• Criteria followed during the selection of the technologies and the
beneficiaries
• Methods and levels of the implementation
• Steps followed by the organization to approach the end users
• Stages and levels of support made by the organizations for the
implementation
• Level of farmers’ participation on the whole processes (especially
women)
• Levels of vertical and horizontal collaborative linkages of the
organization
11 Current status
• Achievements against the plan
• Utilization efficiencies of the collected water against the targets
• Monitoring and follow up of the technologies (structures) and the users
• Levels of farmers’ awareness
12 Evaluation of the planning & implementation approaches followed
• Successes from the approach and technologies selected
• Strengths
• Weaknesses
• Constraints and gaps
13 Farmers’ perception (with in their social, cultural, environmental, and farming
system) on
63
• The relevance of the technologies

• The general approaches followed
• Types of technologies (structures) selected and constructed
• The designs of the structures
• The management aspects of the implemented technologies
14 Lessons gained from the past
• Implementation aspect
• Design aspect
• Management and utilization aspect
• Social and environmental aspect
• Policy aspect
15 Future plans of the organization
• Opportunities
• Threats
16 The way forward
B. Guideline for the presentation during the workshop
Following is a guideline on the contents of the presentation on which each

presenter to focus on. This guideline will help both the presenters and the
participants to select some important issues to be discussed with in the allocated
time period and to concentrate on the selected issues during the workshop. So in
order to make the workshop fruitful, each presenter is advised to follow the
following contents and points during the workshop.
Some points (information)

1) Since farmers are part of the workshop, the presentation and discussion will be
carried out in Amharic language.
64
2) The allocated time of presentation is 20 minutes for each presenter with

additional 10 minutes discussion on each presentation.
3) It is better to avoid long sentences and paragraphs on a single slide
4) Try to select best explanatory words in order to shorten the sentences
5) The presentation can be supported by pictures (photos) & drawings for better
clarification
Contents of the presentation

Justifications for working on WHT in the area
Types of technologies
• Types and levels of the WHT being selected for the area
• Criteria followed during the selection of the technologies and the
beneficiaries
Implementation processes
• Stages and levels of support made by the organizations for the
implementation of the technologies
• Level of farmers’ participation on the whole processes (including women)
Current status
• Achievements against the plan (Results)
• Utilization efficiencies of the collected water against the targets
• Monitoring and follow up of the technologies and the users
Farmers’ perception (with in their social, cultural, environmental, and farming
system) on
• The relevance of the technologies
• Types of technologies (structures) selected and constructed
• The designs of the structures
• The management aspects (maintenance and economy) of the implemented
technologies
Evaluation of the planning & implementation approaches followed
• Successes from the approaches and technologies selected
65
• Strengths
• Weaknesses
• Constraints and gaps
Lessons gained from the past (particular case can be discussed here)
• Implementation aspect
• Design aspect
• Management and utilization aspect
• Social and environmental aspect
• Policy aspect
Conclusions
66
Attendee List
No Name Position Organization/department
1 Mr. Lakew Desta Coordinator for WHT MoARD
2 Mr. Hune Nega Irrigation Expert MoARD
3 Mr. Masahiro Yagi Advisor, Policy Planning MoARD
4 Mr. Aschalew M&E Expert MoARD
5 Mr. Yohannes Geleta Head of CB OIDA, CB, Adama
6 Mr. Tekele Mengesha OIDA Planning head OIDA
7 Mr. Abreham Wolelgne Team Leader District ARD, Adami Tulu
8 Mrs. Amelework Kassa Expert District ARD, Adami Tulu
9 Mr. Mesfin Seiyfu Irrigation Team Leader District ARD, Merti jegu
10 Mr. Getachew Berta Expert District ARD, Merti jegu
11 Mr. Iyasu Weldu OIDA head District ARD, Lume
12 Mr. Mengistu Tadese OIDA head District ARD, Arsi Negele
13 Mr. Dheresa Tafaa Representative District ARD, Dugda Bora
14 Mr. AlemSeged Dagne Representative District ARD, Boset
Division Head of Natural

15 Dr. Tilahun Hordofa MARC-J-Green, MARC
Resources
16 Mr. Yusufu Kedir Researcher MARC-J-Green, MARC
OIDA design & study tem

17 Mr. Samual Hussen OIDA,
leader
18 Mr. Mohamed Head of Socio Economics OARI
19 Dr. Tilahun Gletu Head of Natural resources OARI,
Water Resource R&D

20 Mr. Etefa Emama Ministry of Water
Coordinator
21 Mr. Kozo Inada Chie Advisor, IFI OIDA-IFI,
67
22 Mr. Hideki Sonoyama Coordinator, IFI OIDA-IFI,
23 Dr. Fasil Reda Centre Manager MARC-FRG,
Division Head of Research

24 Mr. Chimdo Anchala MARC-FRG,
Extension
25 Mr. Endeshaw Asegu Representative CCF, Borchota
26 Mr. Bedru Research Extension Division MARC-FRG,

Division Head of Natural
27 Mr. Masku ATARC-FRG,
Resources
Division Head of Research
28 Mr. Wole ATARC-FRG,
Extension
29 Mr. Teha Mume Research Extension Division ATARC-FRG,
Assistant Resident
30 Mr. Minoru Honma JICA Ethiopia Office,
Representative
31 Mr. Kiyoshi Shiratori Chief Advisor, FRG JICA-FRG,
Expert for Appropriate

32 Mr. Iwao matsumoto JICA-FRG,
Technology and Extension
33 Mr. Nobuaki Oizumi Coordinator, FRG JICA-FRG,
34 Mr. Niftalem Temesgen Irrigation Expert District ARD, Dodota Sire
35 Mr. Mulgeta Chari Expert District ARD, Dodota Sire
36 Mr. Abate Mengesha Team Leader OIDA extension department head
37 Mr. Kurabachew Shewawork Irrigation Expert OIDA
38 Dr. Aboule Ebro Researcher ATARC
39 Mr. Berhanu Dawa Coordinator World Vision, Adama
40 Mr. Zegeye Exepert World Vision, Adama
41 Mr. Berecha Turi Agronomy expert SG2000
42 Mr. Amdemeskel Zerezegi SG2000
43 Mr. W/mariyam Lengisa Irrigation Expert Dodota Sire
44 Mr. Firew Behabtu Project coordinator Self Help, Dhera
68
45 Mr. Hussein Urgeesa DA Adami Tulu
46 Mr. Zelalem Shumi DA Merti
47 Mr. Tesfaye Tufa DA Dodota Sire
48 Mr. Haji Abiyu Eda’o Farmer Dodota Sire
49 Mr. Mohammed Nurgelan Farmer Merti
50 Mr. Bude Gona Farmer Adami Tuku
51 Mr. Makonen Bacha Farmer Dodota Sire
52 Mr. Jundi Eresa Farmer Merti
53 Mrs. Wesane Girma Farmer Dodota Sire
69
IFI
FRG
The workshop was supported by JICA

Proceedings 02

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Proceedings 02

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WORKSHOP ON THE

EXPERIENCE OF WATER HARVESTING

February 23-24, 2006

© EIAR, OARI, OIDA and JICA 2006

1. Experiences of Adama Area Development Program in Water Harvesting

2. Water Harvesting Experiences of Self Help Development International Dodota

3. Implementing Drip Irrigation: Water Harvesting and Utilization Project......... 24

4. Implementing Water Harvesting Structures for Integrated Watershed

5. Experiences of Oromia Irrigation Development Authority (OIDA) and Irrigation

Minute on the discussion held on February 23, 2006 .............................................. 55

Minutes of the discussion on February 24, 2006...................................................... 57

Minutes of the discussions on February 24, 2006/06/21 .......................................... 60

WHT Workshop Schedule.......................................................................................... 61

ABP Area based programme

This workshop on Water Harvesting Technologies (WHT), held on February 23-24

A diverse group of participants from different organization, government offices,

The workshop was organised by:

We werepleased to have 53 participants, 5 from ministries, 14 from research, 21

The workshop was expected to consolidate experience of different stakeholders and

stakeholders to maximise the impact through more coordinated interventions

This workshop has brought a considerable amount of information on what is

Distinguished Workshop Participants!

Water is a scarce resource in agricultural (crop and livestock) production in many

water is a critical problem. To transform the vicious cycle problem to virtuous

Investment in smallholder agriculture sub-sector using water and related

MoARD and respective regional Bureaux have planned and implemented

Positive effects: 1) overall awareness of the community and development workers

Problems in the choice of technology (supply driven, technically focused),

Water harvesting (construction of open household ponds/micro-pond) is not a

It was necessary to correct the ambitious WH programs through community based

High water potential; earmarked in various regions for irrigation development,

From this experience-sharing workshop by the respective stakeholders I am sure

1. Experiences of Adama Area Development Program in

1.1 World Vision Ethiopia, Adama Area Development Program

World Vision Ethiopia (WVE) is a Christian humanitarian organization and is

1.2 Justification for working on WHT in the area

Therefore, water-harvesting technology (WHT) is being introduced by the ADP to

2. Planning and Implementation Processes

2.1 Planning Processes

Community based and participatory planning approach is the basis for

Selection of beneficiaries is based on the development policy and strategy of the

2.2 Methods and Levels of Implementation

Three parties were involved in selection of the beneficiaries/end users of the

At construction stage of the structures, the ADP has provided construction

3. Current Status of the Activity

Table 1: FY’03 to FY’05 plan and accomplishment of rainwater harvesting

FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 Total

Effective utilization of the structures is regularly monitored by staffs of the ADP as

Today, there is a remarkable improvement in the level of farmers’ awareness on

4. Evaluation of WHT Adopted

5. Lesson Gained from the Past

6. Future Plans of the ADP

Except its relatively high cost of construction, the technology is found to be

2. Water Harvesting Experiences of Self Help Development

1.1 Dodota Integrated Rural Development Project

Self Help Development International is an Irish based a non-profitable registered

1.2 Justifications for working on WHT in the area

2. Planning and implementation approaches

• Awareness creation is conducted at each PA.

• Its minimum cost as compared to others

3. Current status of the activities

Using watering cans, some farmers are in a position to irrigate 300m2 as

4. Lessons and Challenges of the implementation