ASSESSMENT OF FACTORS AFFECTING WATERSHED

MANAGEMENT PRACTICE IN THE CASE OF KEYAKEL KEBLE,

BONGA ZONE

RESEARCH SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SOIL

RESOURCE AND WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES BONGA UNIVERSITY

RESEARCH IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHLOER OF DEGREE
SCIENCE IN SOIL RESOURCE AND WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

Prepared By: -

NAME ID
1. Debre Ferede ...............................................2100/12
2. Eyerusalem Endale…………………..........1617/12
3. Eyerusalem Nebiy………………………….1626/12
4. Gebeyehu Molla ……………………..……1628/12
5. Worku Nigussie…………………...............1315/12
6. Yibeltal Aziemeraw……………………......1840/12

ADVISOR: MOLLA G. (MSc. In integrated watershed management)

JUNE, 2023
BONGA, ETHIOPIA

ASSESSMENT OF FACTORS AFFECTING WATERSHED

MANAGEMENT PRACTICE IN THE CASE OF KEYAKEL KEBLE,
BONGA ZONE

RESEARCH SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF SOIL

RESOURCE AND WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES BONGA UNIVERSITY

RESEARCH IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHLOER OF DEGREE
SCIENCE IN SOIL RESOURCE AND WATERSHED MANAGEMENT

Debre Ferede
Eyerusalem Endale
Eyerusalem Nebiy
Gebeyehu Molla
Worku Nigussie
Yibeltal Aziemeraw

JUNE, 2023
BONGA UNIVERSITY, BONGA
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

First of all we would like to give a great thanks to our God for giving strength and
maintaining our life up to now. In addition we would like to express my grate full gratitude
to our advisor molla gessese. For his sincere effort frank advice's, closure follow up and his
respect fullness in the preparation and completion of this paper. We would also like to
express our thanks to our loving parents for their moral & financial support to complete
this degree program.

i
Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENT.........................................................................................................i

LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................iii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACROMYOMS..........................................................................iv

ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................vi

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

1.1. Background..................................................................................................................1

1.2. Statement of the Problem............................................................................................3

1.3. Objectives of the Study...............................................................................................3

1.3.1. General Objective.................................................................................................3

1.3.2. Specific Objectives...............................................................................................3

1.4. Research Question.......................................................................................................4

1.5. Significance of the Study.............................................................................................4

1.6. Scope and Limitation of Study....................................................................................4

1.7. Organization of Paper..................................................................................................5

2. LITERATURE REVIEW...................................................................................................6

2.1. Concept of Watershed Management...........................................................................6

2.2. Watershed Management in Ethiopia...........................................................................6

2.3. Community Participation in Watershed Management................................................7

2.4. Watershed Management Development on Socio Economic Aspect...........................8

2.4.1. Water Allocation.................................................................................................10

2.4.2. Livelihood Diversification..................................................................................10

2.4.3. Source Water Protection Area Delineation.........................................................10

2.4.4. Watershed Management Practices for Soil Conservation...................................11

2.4.5. Land Cover and Uses..........................................................................................11

2.5. The Challenges to Successful Watershed Development and Management...............12

3. METHODS AND MATERIALS....................................................................................12

ii
 3.1. Description of Study Area.........................................................................................13

3.1.1. Location..............................................................................................................13

3.1.2. Climate................................................................................................................13

3.1.3. Topography.........................................................................................................13

3.1.4. Population...........................................................................................................13

3.1.5. Land Use.............................................................................................................14

3.1.6. Soil and Vegetation.............................................................................................14

3.2. Sampling Technique and Sample Size......................................................................14

3.2. Data Type, Sources and Methods of Data Collection...............................................15

3.2.1 Questionnaire.......................................................................................................15

3.2.2. Field Observation................................................................................................16

3.2. Methods of Data Analysis.........................................................................................16

4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION........................................................................................17

4.1 General Characteristics of the Respondents...............................................................17

4.1.2 Distribution of Sampled Farmers by Sex................................................................17

4.1.3. Background Information of Respondents...............................................................17

4.1.4. Distribution of Sampled Farmers by Educational Level........................................18

4.1.4. Description of Sample Respondents of Farmers by Marital Status........................18

4.1.3 Family size of the respondents................................................................................18

4.1.5. Family size of the respondents...............................................................................19

4.2. The Community Participation in Watershed Management Practices........................19

4.3. The Socioeconomic Factors Watershed Management..............................................20

4.5. Techniques of Watershed Management Practices to Reducing Soil Erosion............22

4.6. Challenges on Watershed Management Practices.....................................................22

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION...............................................................24

5.1. Conclusion.................................................................................................................24

5.2. Recommendations.....................................................................................................25

iii
6. REFERENCE...................................................................................................................26

7. APPENDIX......................................................................................................................29

iv
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Sex Composition of Sampled Farmers....................................................................17

Table. 2. Age Group of Sample Respondents......................................................................17

Table. 3. Educational Level Respondents............................................................................18

Table. 4. marital Statues of the Respondents.......................................................................18

Table. 5. Family Size the Respondents................................................................................19

Table. 2. The interest & imitative agency in W.S.M practices............................................20

v
 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACROMYOMS

CSA Central Statistics Authority

O
C Degree Centigrade

EMA Ethiopian Meteorology Agency

FAO Food and Agricultural Organization

Ha Hectare

HHs Households

Km kilometer

Masl Meter above sea level

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

WM Watershed Management

vi
 ASSESSMENT OF FACTORS AFFECTING WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT PRACTICE IN KEYAKELA KEBELE, GIMBO
WOERDAS, BONG ZONE

ABSTRACT

Watershed management is one of the important practices which helps to fulfilling the basic
needs of the human being as well as for the survival of animal and plant and improve the
economy of a country by increasing productivity. This study has been conducted to the
assessment of factors affecting watershed management practice in keyakela kebele.
Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the factors affecting of watershed
management practice. Both primary and secondary data sources were used. Data was
collected by using questionnaire, interviews, and filed observation. Keyakela kebele was
selected purposely from the woreda’s kebele. Out of 656 household 87 respondents would
be selected randomly. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the result of
study presented by table, graph and percentage. 48.27% indicates that the majorities of
respondents in study areas have less understanding and not actively participated on
watershed management. 59.77% indicates that the technique used for watershed
management in the areas is terracing including level terrace, sloppy terrace and check
dams. The of socioeconomic factors in watershed management practices who less
participate cover 48.27% of the total respondents. the main constraints on managing of
watershed area were devoting their time on during collecting and harvesting season.
47.12% indicates, most of the societal groups were limited time during harvesting season.
The outcome of the study would generate information for different stakeholders and
concerned bodies since it emphasized to seeking the alternatives for solving if inhibiting
factors in practicing of watershed management activity for different roles.

Keyword; factors affecting watershed management, keyakela kebela.

vii
 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

Watershed is an active delineate of drained water in a stream (drained to some point or in a

stream or river) to obtain goods and services without adversely affecting the water basin.
Watershed management practice must be carried out or formulated for sustainable
development and increased food productivities and surplus.

Watershed management is a landscape-based strategy that aims to implement improved

natural resource management systems for improving livelihoods and promoting beneficial
conservation, sustainable use, and management of natural resources. Watershed
management (WM) has been promoted in many countries as a suitable strategy for
improving productivity and sustainable intensification of agriculture (Bekele, 2007).

Ethiopia is one of the developing countries in which land resources are becoming
increasingly scarce, and the quality of resources such as soil, water, plants and animals are
decreasing as a result of improper use and management. Land degradation in the form of
soil erosion, sedimentation, depletion of nutrients, deforestation, and overgrazing is of the
basic problems facing farmers in Ethiopia and this limits their ability to increase
agricultural production and reduce poverty and food insecurity (Temesgen, 2012).

The imbalance between human needs and resource scarcity creates great challenges for
sustenance of natural resources. Based on their replenishment capacity, natural resources
are broadly categorized into renewable and non-renewable resources. Renewable resources
display significant rate of growth or replenishment within a relevant economic time scale
for which planning and management are meaningful.

1
On the other side, non-renewable resources are those resources which create difficulty for
replenishment. Renewable resources are part of the self-regulating process of our planet.
That is, removing some trees, fish, groundwater, forage, or lakes will not result in
permanent destruction of the resource stock. However, renewable resources can be
depleted if they are utilized far more than they are replenished for extended period of time
(Salvati and Marco, 2008). To curb the problem of natural resource depletion, for example,
rivers and lakes, substantial management works have been done so far.

In Ethiopia Watershed, management was merely considered as a practice of soil and water
conservation. The success stories of early watershed projects were marked as the basis of
major watershed initiatives in Ethiopia. Only technological approaches were adopted from
those early successful projects and the lessons related to institutional arrangements were
neglected. The newly implemented projects neither involved nor took effort to organize
people to solve the problem collectively. Where village level participation was attempted,
they typically involved one or two key persons like village leaders. These projects failed
due to their centralized structure, rigid technology and lack of attention to institutional
arrangements (MOARD, 2005).

In kyakea different watershed management practices were implemented (such as check

dam, trench, terraces,) to improve natural resource for improving livelihoods of local
people. Therefore, this study is initiated to assess the significance of watershed
management practices implemented and generate recommendations that would assist in the
further development and management of sub-watershed. Even though a number of
watershed management techniques were introduced to combat soil erosion, adoption of
these practices remains below expectations.

2
1.2. Statement of the Problem

Watershed management is one of the importance practices which helps to fulfilling the
basic needs of the human beings as well as for the survival of animal and plant, and
improve the economy of a region by increasing productivity. However, now a day’s soil
erosion and water resource degradation are becoming the burning issue of the most
developing countries which are bringing for reaching consequences on the livelihood of
people and environmental degradation. (Agricultural office 2023)

These essential components of watershed would be degraded for a long period of time due
to human activities to fulfill the immediate benefit (short term benefit) without considering
the irreversible long-term impacts. The past watershed management practice on the role of
soil and water conservation have been emphasizes on the technical rather than
socioeconomic aspects of the specific society.

So, effective watershed management practices will be highly substantial for

socioeconomic importance of a certain society and important for climate resiliency, a little
study have been conducted on the current status of watershed management practices in our
country, particularly in case of south western region, Bonga Zone, Gimbo woreda,
keyakela kebele, watershed area. Keyakela Keble many watershed management activities
have been done. However, level of factors affecting and challenges to the community for
implementing the watershed management were not studied.

Therefore, the reason why we conducting this research in was show the gap between the
factors affecting on the study area.

1.3. Objectives of the Study

1.3.1. General Objective

The general objective of the study was to assess the factors that affecting watershed
management practices in the keyakela Kebele

1.3.2. Specific Objectives

Based on the general objective the specific objectives are:

 Assess the socioeconomic factors in watershed management practices?

3
  To identify watershed management practice for reducing soil erosion
 To assess major challenge of in the watershed management practice

1.4. Research Question

This research is expected to address problems related to exploring the significance of

watershed managements practice in the case of significance of watershed management. At
the ends this study would be able to attempts to answer the following questions:

 What are the socioeconomic factors in watershed management practices?

 What are the techniques of watershed management practices to reducing soil
erosion?
 What are constraints of watershed management practice?

1.5. Significance of the Study

The outcome of the study would generate information for different stakeholders,
engineering, researchers, policy makers, governmental and nongovernmental organization,
and farmer’s local level organizations to design and develop effective sustainable
watershed management practices and strategies. Since it is not possible to cover the whole
aspects of the study area with the available time and resources, it is advisable to limit the
study size and scope of the problem to a manageable size. Hence, the study focused on the
representative sites of one kebele from Gimbo woreda.

Moreover, the methodology that will develops in theses study and the result will be found
caserne as background information to undertake in similar setting.

1.6. Scope and Limitation of Study

The scope of the study is focusing only on to investigation of the factors affecting
watershed management Since it is not possible to cover the whole aspect of the study with
limited, unfulfilled data and another constraint when we do research, it is advisable to limit
the scope of the problem to a manageable objective. The study will be focused on the
kyeakela kebeles district in the Bonga watershed In this study there was several limitations
are exist such as lack of transport, shortage of time, lack of budget as a result of these
constraints I used 39 respondents and there were lack of internet, service.

4
1.7. Organization of Paper

The study paper was consisting five chapters which included introduction, related
literature, method and material, discussion and result and finally conclusion and
recommendation that provided important solution concerning the factors affecting
watershed management practice.

5
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Concept of Watershed Management

In the past the concept of watershed management focused mainly on the management of
natural resource. At present the overall objective of watershed management and
development problem take the watershed as the hydrological unite and aim to adopt
suitable measure for soil and water sustainable erosion conservation provide adequate
water for agriculture and domestic use ad improve the livelihood of the inhabitant ( Paul
D,1997).

Managing watershed for sustainable rural development in developing countries in

relatively new concept .It is concerned not only is stabilizing soil, water and vegetation but
also with enhancing the productivity of resources in a way that are economically and
institutionally sustainable (Farrington et al, 1999). Water shade management is practiced as
a means to increase rain fed agricultural production. Conservation of natural resource and
reduce poverty in the semi-arid tropical region of south Asia and sub Saharan Africa,
which are characterized by low agricultural productivity, river natural resource
degradation(Kerr,2002).

2.2. Watershed Management in Ethiopia

The productive land in Ethiopia in particular has been seriously threatened by land
degradation. Threading land leads to sever effect on both the economic and survival of the
people. Land degradation is a severe problem that contributes to low agricultural
productivity which aggravates food security problem. The governments of the region have
for a long period of time recognized the serious implication of continuing soil erosion to
mitigate environmental degradation and as a result large appraisal and processed programs
were implemented in recent years

The government has supported rural land rehabilitation, this aimed to implement natural
resource conservation and development programs in the particular regions of the watershed
management (MOARD, 2005). Since 2011, the Ethiopian government advocated collective
action on physical soil and water conservation works that all regions are implementing the
action by motivating and giving awareness for farmers. Collective action is one of the best

6
participatory actions, which have its own by-lows lead by local leader assisted by the
community itself.

In 1991, the Ethiopian government designed a new economic policy based on Agricultural
Development-Led Industrialization. Natural resource conservation-based agriculture
development became the primary objectives of industries. Industries gave impetus to
improved watershed management adopting, different soil and water conservation practices,
and rehabilitation of watershed through afforestation, community woodlots development
and construction of micro and small-scale irrigation projects. Watershed development and
management in Ethiopia has been taken up under poverty alleviation and environmental
conservation program. It started through Community based Watershed Development
Program as a comprehensive development concept for sustainable and efficient utilization
of natural resources for the benefit of the local community with special attention to the
rural poor (Delgadoet al. 2011).

Participatory watershed planning and management is fostered by community participation

under diverse socio-economic and biophysical situations and suitable organizational
institutional structures that are being established in Ethiopia. It is often argued that
watershed planning and management program should restructured so that it is site-specific,
embraces livelihoods, productivity and sustainability to varying socio-economic condition
(Gashaw, 2014). Well managed watershed plays a key role in the improvement of the life
of watershed community through access to fodder for their livestock, expansion in off-farm
economic activities, reduction in natural resource degradation and socio-economic
conditions. Access to employment opportunities outside farming could help to reduce the
pressure on natural resource and emerging landlessness. Land tenure certification
encourages farmers to invest in long-term soil and water conservation activities, to obtain
credits, to adopt intensive farming practices and to make sustainable use of watershed land
(Wolde 2010).

2.3. Community Participation in Watershed Management

Environmental deterioration can best be reversed through involving local people directly
with the state transforming the common experience of conflict in to cooperation (Teffery
and Vireos 2001, cited in Dube and Sustule, 2002).

7
Government and NGOs have recognized that protection of watershed cannot be achieved
without the willing participatory local people (Pretty Walled, 2001). For successful and
sustainable watershed management, people’s participation is essential.

Farmer’s participation is essential not only for implementation of soil and water
conservation activities like; terracing, bounding by food for work but also during planning
of land and water resource (Stocking,1996). Furthermore farmer’s participation in
conservation work is also considered important providing the adoption of recommended
technology (Ashby, et al, 1996).

In most of the country planned project like Ethiopia soil and water conservation program
are promoted with standard technical solution such as terracing, benching trenching,
contour bunding, etc on the assumption of soil conservation measures are universally
applicable and local farmers are unaware of soil erosion and ignorant of its cause and
consequence (Pretty and shah, 1999 cited in; Jhason et al, 2001. MARD).

However, these measure which over often forced on the people may cause more erosion
than their own indigenous practice, either because the new conservation works are not
maintained or technical less well adopted existing practice (Kerret, at 1999). Managing
water involves not only individual but also common property resource like forest, gullies
roads foot path and vegetation along stream and rivers and rivers (Swallow et.al, 2001). By
seeking information from farmers about their constraint and priority for new technologies,
appropriate policies and technology can be designed for each watershed.

Therefore, participatory watershed management involves all factors to jointly discuss their
interests, priority their need, evaluated potentials alternative, implement, monitor and
evaluate the project outcome (Azene and Gathriu, 2006).

2.4. Watershed Management Development on Socio Economic Aspect

Considering the potential impacts of watershed management are indicates the watershed
contribution to cope with climate change risks and hazards. Watershed management
contributes to all sectors (agriculture such as crop production and livestock, water
availability and quality, health, ecosystem service, socio economic and all human
livelihood activities) directly or indirectly through chain reaction available between sectors
(MOARD, 2005).

8
For watershed management practice, socio-economic factors include both social issues,
such as individual beliefs, related institutions, and stakeholder involvement, and economic
issues, such as monetary costs and benefits. Watershed management goals are determined,
in part, by political, economic, institutional, and social demands. Choosing between these
demands and balancing them with ecological goals is the challenge of watershed
management. Developing a successful watershed management project requires integrating
the complexities of the physical and biological systems with the rules and constraints of the
underlying socioeconomic systems.

Values and attitudes of stakeholders towards possible restoration outcomes must be

considered and incorporated at the beginning of a project, as must the economic costs and
benefits, community goals, and institutional constraints related to those outcomes. A
successful watershed programmed in any area will have its impact on the skill
development of the people as well as on their social aspects besides economic impact in
terms of increase in the incomes as well as on household expenditure (Prabhakar et al,
2010).

The effects of social and economic factors on watershed management have received
increasing recognition in the literature (for example, Joshi and others 2004, Mansoor2008,
Stinchfield 2009, Dr.Nafo 2010, Prabhakar and others 2010). These studies argue that both
socioeconomic and ecological knowledge is necessary for successful IWM.

Benefits of watershed management practice with respect to socio-economic aspects

 Obtain more rational structure of land use

 reduced cultivated farmland
 Increased forest and grasslands reduced waste lands.
 Increase the productivity of land and the per capita income of farmers.
 Increase the grain production in the course of the construction of basic farmlands.
 Reduce water and soil losses.
 Achieve significant ecological and social benefits.

Along with the improvement of ecological environment the habitat of flora and fauna as
well as the adjustment of land utilization structure, the renewable resources have been
conserved, and the aquatic production, animal husbandry and processing industry are all
developing. Hence the livelihood of farmers has been much improved.

9
2.4.1. Water Allocation

Water allocation will become an increasing issue as growth proceeds. Increasing

population and intensification of agriculture both result in an increase in water use. In
stream demands include recreational and industrial uses (i.e., hydroelectric production,
navigation). The aquatic ecosystem, including fisheries, wetland and riparian habitats, is
also dependent on a sustainable supply of water for its existence.

The major impact of watershed interventions was seen in improving the surface and
groundwater availability. Increased water availability resulted in increased cropping
intensity and diversification to more remunerative land use systems involving livestock,
horticultural and vegetable production (ICRISAT, 2007).

2.4.2. Livelihood Diversification

Surface and groundwater availability increased due to the various water storage structures
and biological and physical soil conservation resulted in increased cropping intensity and
helped households to find new ways to raise incomes and reduce environmental risk. The
watershed management helped households to diversify their livelihood activity. Income or
livelihood diversity is important to cope with climatic risks. If one income source were lost
then still have other sources of income which make households and communities better
able to cope during hazards and therefore make them resilient (Adger, 1998).

2.4.3. Source Water Protection Area Delineation

In delineating the source water protection area, zones and pathways through which
contaminants could migrate and reach surface or groundwater systems must be considered.

For surface water systems, the source water protection area generally includes the
watershed area upstream of a water supplier's intake. It is delineated by the boundaries of
drainage basins that supply streams, lakes, and reservoirs that serve as source water. Basins
can also be divided into smaller sub basins that drain to tributary systems. In areas with
Tran’s basin diversions, the entire source water protection area may include watersheds
that are geographically far removed from the point of use.

For groundwater systems, the source water protection area, also known as the wellhead
protection area, is defined as the zone of recharge around a well. The wellhead protection

10
area can be delineated using one of several methods, including the following: an arbitrary
radius around a well (e.g., 2–3 miles), a calculated fixed radius that is determined as a
function of hydraulic gradients, analytical modeling, or hydrogeology mapping (Colorado
State Department of Public Health and Environment, 1998; EPA, 1989).

2.4.4. Watershed Management Practices for Soil Conservation

Watershed management is very essential to reduce soil erosion especially in developing

countries as the main source of income and food is agriculture soil erosion causes very
severe effect on communities’ livelihood. Between 1976 and 1988, some 800,000 km of
soil and stone bunds were constructed on 350,000ha of cultivated land for terrace
formation, and 600,000 ha of steep slopes were closed for regeneration in Ethiopia (Burke
et al. 2015). These conservation structures were introduced with the objectives of
conserving, developing and rehabilitating degraded agricultural lands and increasing food
security through increased food production/ availability (Dawa D, 2012)

In addition, soil erosion is the main cause of land degradation that affects soil properties
and ecosystems in Ethiopia. Ethiopia loses annually 1.5billion metric tons of top soil
erosion out of this 30% of soil loss are reduced due to watershed management practices in
the past decades. At present, the overall objectives of watershed development and
management programs take the watershed as the hydrological unit, and aim to adopt
suitable measures for soil and water conservation, provide adequate water for agriculture
and domestic use, reduce soil erosion and improve the livelihoods of the inhabitants.
Watershed management is practiced as a means to increase rain fed agricultural
production, conserve natural resources and reduce poverty in the highlands of Ethiopia
which are characterized by high soil erosion, and severe natural resource degradation
(Wani, S.P., 1977).

2.4.5. Land Cover and Uses

Source water quality is directly and profoundly influenced by land cover and land uses,
both natural and human. For this reason, quantifying land cover and land uses is a
necessary step in watershed management. Information on land ownership, land
11
jurisdictions, and water rights is also needed to help determine the potential to manage land
uses and mitigate impacts.

Important categories of land cover to measure include forests, open spaces, bodies of
water, agricultural cover (e.g., pastures, row crops), and impervious surfaces. Activities
within watersheds can affect water quality by producing contaminants from discrete point
sources or from diffuse nonpoint sources. Those deserving special consideration in a
watershed inventory include industrial and municipal wastewater treatment plants,
individual sewage disposal systems, permitted storm water discharges, agricultural
activities, forestry, mineral extraction, and the generation, storage, and disposal of
hazardous materials. Recreational activities, both within watersheds and on bodies of
water, can also affect water quality (EPA 1994).

2.5. The Challenges to Successful Watershed Development and Management

One of the biggest challenges to watershed management practice is that its costs and
benefits are distributed unevenly, yet cooperation is required to make it work. Uneven
impacts result from spatial variation and multiple, conflicting uses of natural resources.
The conflict between using upper watersheds for protecting them for regeneration to
support downstream irrigation is a good example.

If the benefits are large and quickly maturing, those who lose in the short term may be
willing to wait for gains, and devising mechanisms to diffuse costs may be manageable.
But this is more difficult in the majority of cases where benefits are gradual and
incremental. Accordingly, watershed projects need to create mechanisms to encourage
natural resource utilization consistent with the common good. After the failure of early
projects that focused only on technology, beginning about 1990 they more commonly
incorporated efforts to promote watershed governance to share net benefits that are simpler
task in village-level micro watersheds with established social relationships than in macro
watersheds spanning multiple villages (Kerr, 2007).

3. METHODS AND MATERIALS

12
3.1. Description of Study Area

3.1.1. Location

The study is conduct in keyakela kebeles which is found in Gimbo woreda which found in
Bonga Zone, 449 km south –west of Addis Ababa. It is situated between 7 0 1607 N latitude
and 36014,E Longitude, and within the altitudinal range from 1600 to 19000 m above sea
level. (Documents that available in the office written in 2008.)

3.1.2. Climate

According to the data obtained from the kebele office and Ethiopian Meteorology Agency
(EMA), November, 2008, the climate of the sub-district ranges from woynadega 45% to
dega 55% that influence the suitability for development of different crop species and forest
related activities. The distribution of rainfall in the kebele is well distributed from April to
October. The mean annual rainfall is around 1200mm. The lowest temperature starts in
November and becomes lowest in December. The mean annual temperature has been
estimated between 12.80cand 14.70c. The mean annual rainfall is around 1200mm. The
lowest temperature starts in November and becomes lowest in December. (From written
documents that available in the office written in 2008).

3.1.3. Topography

The topography of the kyeakela kebele land area varies from undulated land slope to
mountain; the altitude ranges from about 2800-4000m above sea level. Many small rivers
starting from natural forests or from Chilalo Mountain (office manual 2008)

3.1.4. Population

The population and housing census conducted in 2008 by Central Statistics Authority as
well as the information obtained from kebele administration office is considered here to
see the trend of the population size of the kebele under the study. According to 2008
population and housing census of Central Statistics Authority (CSA). The total households
of the kebele are 656 the total populations of the kebele are 1568,from these 757 are men
and 811 are women.

13
3.1.5. Land Use

The major land uses of the area are rained agricultural land use and the total land of the
kebele is 1366ha. From this land 938ha is cultivated, 380ha is grazing, 41ha is covered by
forest and 7.08ha is uncultivated land. Agriculture is the main source of lively hood for
population of the kebele as well as for the District. It is the major source of cash income
for rural population and the dominant sector to generate employment opportunity in the
district. The major crops are grown cereals like wheat, barley, and pulses like bean, peas.
The total livestock population is 6518 livestock units with the typical herd or flock
composition of cattle, sheep, goat, donkey, horse, mule as well as chickens and bees(from
written documents that available in the office written in 2008).

3.1.6. Soil and Vegetation

As informed from the kebele office, the soil types of the kebele will similar to that the
District, which includes vertisols with texture ranging from black clay to loamy clay.

The black clay soil constitutes 80%, red clay soil 15% and loamy clay 5% of the total area
of the kebele. The fertility status of the soil ranges from good to good, but has a limitation
due to water logging susceptibility to water erosion. The Vegetation types of the kebele are
divided into natural and manmade.

3.2. Sampling Technique and Sample Size

Two stage sampling procedure was used to draw sample household . In the first stage,
kyeakel kebele was selected purposely as because the research has not enough budget and
requires a short time line and to minimize the risk of data. Second the frame list simple
random sampling technique was used to draw individual respondent to avoid sample bias
in respondent.

In order to get the households, that are representative of the kebele, we would use the
Yamane (1960) Formula for sample size technique calculation. There are a total number of
656 HH in the kebele, out of this 656 HH in kebele 87 respondents /HH would be selected
randomly.

To get sample size;

14
n= N = 656 = 656 = 86.7 HH~87HH

1+ (N*e2)) 1+ (656*(0.12)) 8

Where n= Sample size

N= Sampling Units (Total HH)

E= Acceptable level of error 10%

HH=Household

So, 87 HH would be selected randomly from total households 656.

3.2. Data Type, Sources and Methods of Data Collection

To know the significance of watershed management practice in the kebele, the data used in
this study were primary and secondary. The primary data were generated from randomly
selected sample households using a questionnaire.

The primary data collections were collected through interviewing, field observation, and
questionnaire. Secondary data were collected from different literature and reviewing the
relevant reference material such as research documents, internet, books, and documentary
source.

Materials used during the study were different stationary materials (like pen, paper, ruler,
binder) during field observation and interview

3.2.1 Questionnaire

For many good reasons, the questionnaire is the most widely used technique for obtaining
information from the subjects. The questionnaire contains both open and close ended items
were prepared for sample farmer. Obviously, questionnaire is much easier to score a close
ended item. On the other hand, the open ended items were prepared to give opportunity for
the respondents to express their feelings, perceptions, problems and intention related to the
watershed management to household income and challenges and opportunity of factors
affecting watershed management. The closed type items of the questionnaire were prepared
in the form of Yes or No question. The questionnaires initially were prepared in English

15
and translate in to Amharic language to avoid any unnecessary communication in
responding to the items as well as to make communication easier.

3.2.2. Field Observation

Field observation was conducted throughout the whole process of the research in order to
make sure the validity of information obtained. It was done with the purpose of getting
guidance for development, for the formal question, and to be acquainted with the values of
local people especially the “goods” “bad” and “worst” of the society’s idea on the factors
affecting watershed management of for improving household income and the challenges of
watershed management development.

3.2. Methods of Data Analysis

The data was generated by both qualitative and quantitative data. The first is summarized
and code all qualitative response in to numeric values, the qualitative data for analysis of
various parameters. The quantitative data collected from the respondents were analyzed by
using descriptive statistics, and the results were described through graphs, percentage and
tables. The qualitative data was interpreted by narrative.

16
 4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 General Characteristics of the Respondents

The demographic basic rounds of the respondent such as sex and have their own relation
directly/ in directly with respondent’s attitude on the role of watershed management
practices.

4.1.2 Distribution of Sampled Farmers by Sex

Table 1 Sex Composition of Sampled Farmers

Sex No of Respondents Percentage

Male 50 57.5%
Female 37 42.5%
Total 87 100%

Source: - own Survey, 2019

The above table shows the respondent’s sex composition on watershed program in
which41 of farmers out of 61 sampled farmers was male and 20 farmers out of 61 sampled
farmers were female population. From these the researcher found that watershed
management program was both sex inclusion and nearly equal participation of male and
female were practiced in the study area.

4.1.3. Background Information of Respondents

Table. 2. Age Group of Sample Respondents

Age No of Respondents Percentage

18-30 30 34.5%
31-42 40 45.9%
Above 17 19.5%
Total 87 100%
Source: - owen Survey, 2019

17
The table above shows, age groups of watershed activities of participants in which (40.9%)
of population were youth 49.1%) were adult and (10%) nearly old age. The shows
watershed management activities were mostly dominated by youth peoples.

4.1.4. Distribution of Sampled Farmers by Educational Level

Table. 3. Educational Level Respondents

Educational level No of Respondents Percentage

Cannot read and write 25 40.98%
Grade 1-8 20 32.78%
Grade 9-12 16 26.22%
Total above 61 100%
Source: - own Survey, 2019

As the above table indicates, the number of respondents about (40.98%) was showing
nearly half of the sampled farmers were uneducated at all in the case of study area. And
remained respondents of education were having been no more difference percentage of
education level

4.1.4. Description of Sample Respondents of Farmers by Marital Status

Table. 4. Marital Status of the Respondents

Marital status No of Respondents Percentage

Married 38 43.67%
Unmarried 30 34.48%
Divorced 15 17.24%
Widowed 4 4.59%
Total above 87 100%

Source: - Own Survey, 2019

The above table indicates that from the sampled farmers 31 out to 61 were married and 16,
10and 4 were unmarred, divorced and widowed respectively. Therefore, the researcher

18
fund that most of the sampled groups in study area (50.81%) were married that participate
in watershed management practice 4.1.3 Family size of the respondents

4.1.5. Family size of the respondents

Table. 5. Family Size the Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Family size (%)
small size(1-4) 40 45.97%
medium(5-10) 30 34.48%
large >1o 17 19.54%
Total 87 100.0%

Source: own survey data 2019

As could be seen from table 3 shows primarily, most of the respondents (56.7%) had medium (5-
10) family size, secondly 23.3% of the respondents had small (1-4) family size and the rest 20.0%
of respondents had large family size (above 10 family size). Most of the respondents had moderate
household, labor for agro forestry is very necessary particularly the people with higher family size
watershed management

4.2. The Community Participation in Watershed Management Practices

People are organized in participating watershed management practices to get services and
increase their livelihood improvement. The general interest and responsibility of
participant in water shed management practice are analyzed in the following table.

19
Table. 2. The interest & imitative agency in W.S.M practices

Level of participation No of respondent %

Actively participatory 30 34.49
Medium 15 17.24
Less participatory 42 48.27
Total 87 100

Source: Surveyed data and from agricultural office of the kebele.

The above table 3, show that the of socioeconomic factors in watershed Management
practices who less participate cover 48.27% of the total respondents. This indicates that the
majorities of respondents in study areas have less understanding and not actively
participated on watershed management. And 34.49% respondents have high understanding
and actively participating and also 17.24% respondents have medium understanding in to
watershed management practice.

4.3. The Socioeconomic Factors Watershed Management

The socioeconomic factors regarding watershed management can be understood by

different perspectives. As the respondent indicated factors affecting the area of watershed
management.

Table. 4.3. Socioeconomic factors of watershed management

Item No of respondent %
Positive 37 42.53
Neutral 10 11.5
Negative 40 4 5.97

Total 87 100

Source: Own Survey date 2019

The above table shows the factors affecting of watershed management practices in the area.
45.97% of the respondent indicated that there is no environmental change shown so fare

20
and it is not practically improved on the area. As they indicated most farmers have not the
knowledge and less understanding about watershed management practice. 11.5% of the
respondent indicated there is neither negative nor positive, there are neutral attitude
regarding watershed management practices in the area .because it is a careless peoples
about watershed. 42.53% of the community revealed that they have positive attitude
regarding watershed management practices in the area.

Most of positive attitude respondent’s actively participate in to watershed management

practice and showing environmental change such as grass coverage on the grassing land,
reduction of soil erosion and reduction of water pollution. While some positive attitude
respondents are not actively participated due to, need incentive and lack of extension
worker to motivate the farmers to participate in to watershed management practice.

Overgrazing. This shows according to respondent perception the least cause for erosion
well due to overgrazing of their plot of land (i.e. has less the contribution for erosion
problem).

Table. 4. 4. Degree of problem they face: -

Items No of respondent %
Very sever 48 55.17
Medium 22 25.29
Low 17 19.54
Very low - -
Total 87 100

Source: own survey Jun, 2019

The table describes that the degree problem they face due to erosion problem, very sever
55.17%, medium 25.29% and low 19.54%. Most of the time very severe erosion problem
may be they face due to lack of proper watershed management practice application. The
low problem they face is due lack of understanding what was they cause for decline their

21
productivity activity (i.e. in real cause they are face with problem of erosion but they are
not understand it).

4.5. Techniques of Watershed Management Practices to Reducing Soil Erosion

There are various techniques which are used for reducing soil erosion. Some of them
which are practiced in the study area list in the table below.

Table. 4. 5. Techniques of watershed management practices

Item No of respondent %
Terracing (including level, 52 59.77
slop and check dam)
Contour ploughing 19 21.84
Other 16 18.39
Total 87 100

Source: Surveyed data and from agricultural office of the kebele.

The above table shows (tried to indicate) that the value technique of practices. 59.77% of
the respondents said that the technique used for watershed management in the areas is
terracing including level terrace, sloppy terrace and check dams while 21.84% of
respondent stated that their watershed management practices were through contour
ploughing and 18.39% of respondents stated that other mechanisms used for watershed
management which is technologically supported but do not widely implemented activity in
the community. So, the majority of the respondent, mechanisms for watershed
management practice were terracing activity.

4.6. Challenges on Watershed Management Practices

As respondent indicated there is low level of community practices participation on

watershed management practices.

The problem that encounters peoples or community participation is lack of labor and lack
of extension worker to perform watershed management practice.

More over people who are willing to attend the personal meeting of the kebele needs
incentives from government this is also one of the problems. The other problem related

22
with watershed management on the area is limited time during seed sowing and harvesting
season most people give time for agricultural activity in the crop season and not volunteer
to attend the meeting.

Table 4. 6. Challenges of watershed management practice

Constraints No. of respondents’ %

Lack of extension worker 18 20.69

Lack of labor 7 8.05
Strongly needs subsidies and 21 24.14
incentives
At the time of collecting and 41 47.12
harvesting season

Total 87 100

Source: Surveyed data and from agricultural office of the kebele.

Based on the above table, the main constraints on managing of watershed area were
devoting their time on during collecting and harvesting season. Since 47.12% indicates,
most of the societal groups were limited time during harvesting season.

23
 5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1. Conclusion

As it was clearly stated in the result and discussion the female respondents were not
actively participated for watershed management practice than male respondent, due to lack
of power, lack of extension worker to motivate female’s respondents. Most peoples have
negative attitude for the significance of watershed management practice and some peoples
have a positive attitude but not actively participated due to carelessness, lack of power,
need incentive and lack of extension worker. Most of geographical features of the study
area was sloppy and valley. This indicated that sloppy land scope highly affected by
erosion problem. The main cause of this erosion was miss management like improper
terracing of their land and they do not know the main cause for declining of their
productivity. As the area become sloppy and affected by erosion the community was not
participate in watershed management practice to protect the problem. The problem related
with watershed management on the area is limited time during seed sowing and harvesting
season most people give time for agricultural activity in the crop season and not volunteer
to attend the meeting. More over people who are willing to attend the personal meeting of
the kebele needs subsidies and incentives from government.

24
5.2. Recommendations

This research was conducted with limited time and budget further study should be
conducted and enhance an improved watershed management. Based on the finding we
would like to recommend the following point

 Creating awareness to the society about the importance of watershed

management.

 Strictly setting an environment act policy to protect soil from erosion.

 We work together with government and other extension workers to develop

watershed management practice.

 We should create awareness about soil and water conservation mechanisms to the
farmers.

 To minimizing factors affecting watershed management the government should

give high priority to the significance of watershed management practice.

 The natural resource management kyeakela should have encouraged the farmer to
participate in watershed management practice.

 The kyeakela should open a training center in the study area which help the rural
farmer to get technical and theoretical knowledge which enable them to better
understanding about the role of water shade management practice on soil and
water conservation

25
 6. REFERENCE

Adger W. N., 1998. Observing Institutional Adaptation to Global Environmental Change:

Theory and Case Study from Vietnam. Working Paper GEC 98-21.

Ashby et al., 1996. Analysis of Soil and Water Conservation Development in improving
the adoption of the recommended technology

Azene and Guthrie, 2006. Participatory agro forestry approach to soil and water
conservation in Ethiopia, tropical resource management paper 17, Wagningen
University the Netherland.
Bekele-Tesemma, A. 2007. Profitable agro-forestry innovations for eastern Africa
experience.
Burek, C. V, Bonwick, G. and Alexander, R., 2015. No Title. , 3(3), Pp.11-24.
Dawa, D., 2012. (Managing Environmental Resources to Enable Transitions). ,
(November)
Delgado, J.A. Et Al., 2011. Adapt To Climate Change. , 66(4), Pp.118-129.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1989. Wellhead Protection Programs—Tools for
Local Governments. EPA 440/6-89-002. Washington, DC: EPA.
EPA. 1994. The Watershed Protection Approach: Statewide Basin Management. Office of
Water. WH-55. Washington, DC: EPA.
FAO. 2000. Rural poverty, Risk and Development, by M.Fafchampus, FAO economic and
social.
Farrington et al. 1999. Managing watersheds for sustainable rural development in
developing countries is a relatively new concept institutionally sustainable.
Gashaw, T., Bantider, A. &Selassie, H.G., 2014. Land Degradation In Ethiopia: Causes,
Impacts And Rehabilitation Techniques. , 4(9), Pp.98-105.
ICRISAT. 2007. To assess on-site impacts of improved watershed management, in terms
of increased productivity.
Joshi PK, 2004. Socioeconomic and policy research on watershed management in India:
Synthesis of past experiences and needs for future research. Global Theme on
Agro ecosystems Report no. 7.Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics. 88 pp.

26
Kerr, J (2002); Watershed management, environmental services and poverty alleviation in
India world development Vol.30, No.8, 1387-1400.
Kerr, J. (2007). Watershed Management: Lessons from Common Property Theory.
International Journal of the Commons. Vol 1, pp. 89-109 Publisher: Igitur,
Utrecht Publishing & Archiving Services for IASC.
Mansoor, B. (2008). Socio-economic characterization of communities in integrated
watershed development, a MS Thesis, Arid Agriculture University_ Department
of Agri. Economics & Economics Faculty of Sciences, Rawalpindi, Pakist.
MOARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development). (2001). Soil and Water
Conservation Manual, Guide Line for Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: Reviewed by Daniel
et al MoA.
MOARD (2005). Guidelines for integrated watershed management, Addis Ababa Ethiopia.
Panda (2006). What do we mean by participatory research in agricultural productivity
participatory research and gender analysis for technology development CIATE
publication No.294 in Ethiopia.
Paul D, k. (1997); Rain fed farming system development in India retrospect and prospect in
Kaytal.j, c.
Pia (2000); forest conservation-soil degradation farmers perception nexus implication for
sustainable land use in South West of Ethiopian WELD(ed).
Prabhakar K., Lath K.L. and Rao A.P. (2010). Watershed Programmed: Impact on Socio-
agricultural and Socio-economic Spheres of the Farmers. © Kamla-Raj, J Agri
Sci.1(1): 31-37
Pretty and Shah, 1999, Progress report of activities in Debretabor Ethiopia.
Pretty, J., Ward, H. 2001. Social capital and the environment, World Development, Vol.29,
Salivate and Marco Petitta. Renewable water resources as estimated on the basis of the
monthly water balance first published: 07 April 2008.
Stocking M. 1996, Land management for sustainable development: farmer’s participation.
Stocking, 1996 statuse and dynamics of natural resource in Ethiopia in food security
through sustainable land use.
Stinchfield H. M., Koontz L, and Sexton NR (2009). Social and Economic Considerations
for Coastal and Watershed Restoration in the Puget Sound, Washington: A
Literature Review Open-FileReport 2009–1079 U.S
Temesgen and Zewdie, 2012. Factors influencing land degradation in the Bilatte
watershed: The case of Dimtu and Shelo sub-watersheds, Southern Ethiopia.

27
Teffery and Vireos, 2001. Participatory watershed management challenge 20 th c Oxfored
university press new deshi.
Wani, S.P., 1977. Integrated Watershed Management For Sustaining Crop Productivity
And Reducing Soil Erosion In Asia. , Pp.1-8.
Zenebe A. The impact of land tenure system on soil and water conservation.

28
 7. APPENDIX

Demographic Characteristics of the Household

Zone ------------- Woreda ----------- Kebele ---------------------

1. Sex of the household: A. Male B. Female

2. Age of household _________years

3. Education level of the household: A. Illiterate B. Read and writ C. Diploma D.

Degree and above

4. Marital status of household: A. Single B. Married C. Widowed D. divorces

5. Family size: Male _____ Female ______ total______

I. Survey concerning Community Participation and attitude

1. is there watershed management in your Kebele?

A. Yes B. No C. Not sure

If yes say yes what type of watershed management practice available the area?

2. How do you rate your level of participation?

A. Active participation C. Medium B. Less participation C. Not at all

participation

It you say not participate please list the reason you not participate:-

3. What is your attitude towards the watershed management?

A .positive B .negative C. neutral

III. Survey Type of SWC Practice

1. What are the major techniques of soil erosion control in your area?

A. Tracing B. Check dam C. Counter ploughing D. Other technique

29
What type of technique available in your area?

IV. Survey Challenges

1. Is there any challenges you faced on the watershed management?

A. yes B.no

If say yes, which challenges present in your watershed management practice?

A. Lack of extension worker B. Lack of labor C. Strongly needs subsidies and incentives

D. At the time of collecting and harvesting season E. if have other list…

General comment

Please follow the given writing guideline:

Please check your research paper written based on the guideline

Check your cover page based on the written guideline

Check the table content matched with each page and heading title

Check if you use appropriate font type

Check if you use appropriate font size

Check if you use appropriate spacing , margin , layout

Please check your result and data appropriate

Check the research paper have necessary elements included

Lastly you have to study more and understand the paper every parts special objective.
Statement of the problem research question ,scope , significance , methods( data type . data
source, technique of data collection , sampling technique and data analysis method , result
and discussion conclusion .

30
Prepared PPT the content includes:

INTRODUCTION (background, objective Statement of the problem research

question ,scope , significance) ,

METHODS( data type . data source, technique of data collection , sampling technique and
size data analysis method) ,

(RESULT AND DISCUSSION)

(CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION) .

31