Check-in Chatter

Summary

​

The session included:

​

1. Answers from the previous Unit 6 on FMNR that were left unanswered on Thursday

​

How is FMNR is different to the farmer-managed agroforestry, is it different or is it just different naming?

 

Farmer Managed Natural Regeneration (FMNR) and farmer-managed agroforestry are related concepts, but they are distinct in their focus and methodology. 

 

FMNR is a specific practice that focuses on the natural regeneration of trees and shrubs from existing rootstocks, seeds, or stumps. It involves protecting and managing the natural growth of trees that are already present in the landscape, often by selectively pruning and allowing them to regrow. FMNR is a low-cost method aimed at restoring degraded lands and increasing biodiversity.
 

Farmer-managed agroforestry is broader and encompasses any agricultural system where farmers integrate trees into their cropping or livestock systems. This practice involves the deliberate planting, management, and use of trees or shrubs along with crops or livestock. Agroforestry systems can include practices like alley cropping, silvopasture, or the integration of fruit or timber trees with annual crops.

FMNR involves minimal intervention and leverages natural processes. Farmers identify and select naturally occurring tree stumps or seedlings and protect them from grazing and other harm, sometimes pruning them to encourage strong growth. The emphasis is on managing natural resources already available in the environment. On the other hand, Farmer-Managed Agroforestry is more proactive and planned, involving the intentional planting of specific tree species for various purposes (e.g., fruit production, timber, shade, or soil fertility). The emphasis is on the deliberate integration of trees into farming systems to optimize production and environmental benefits.
 

How do you regenerate areas that are affected by prosopis?

​

Participants talked about the two schools of thought when it comes to this invasive species. They shared insights on the species' widespread presence across the country, noting that it is overtaking native vegetation and becoming dominant in farmlands and ecosystems. The species is a concern for local farmers and communities, as it suppresses other plants, depletes groundwater, and reduces biodiversity.

Two main perspectives were discussed: some see Prosopis as beneficial due to its drought resistance and use in producing charcoal, constructing houses, and feeding livestock during dry periods. Others believe it should be eradicated or controlled, given its invasive nature. Examples of community-led initiatives to manage Prosopis were mentioned, such as cutting it down for charcoal and construction materials, though its rapid spread remains a challenge.

Suggestions for managing Prosopis included using biological control methods, introducing competitive species, and exploring innovative uses to increase demand for the plant, thus regulating its expansion. The conversation highlighted the complexity of balancing the benefits and drawbacks of Prosopis, emphasizing the need for careful management and further research into effective control strategies.

 

Sammy Carsan, our speaker replied he following:

Areas under invasives need a species replacement plan that suppresses spread of targeted invasive and promotes locally suited native species. FMNR here may be supplemented with enrichment planting that helps re-introduce native plant species to the area, using seeds, seedlings, or cuttings. Choose species that are adapted to the local environment and can outcompete invasive species.

​

Report from a workshop in Somaliland (external source): read here.

​

Since some of the trees compete with the crops for nutrients from the soil how does FMNR handle this issue?

​

​Tree-crop crop competition can be handled management practices involving selection of species that promote soil fertility such as Faidherbia albida, correct spacing and crown size management . Re-intengrating prunnings from FMNR back to the soil through mulching practice ca help build soil structure and nutrients.

​​​​​

2. Peer Group work update (from 33 min on)

​

Group 3 (Ali Abdi) gave an extensive update on their activities, especially on FMNR implementation in Bosaso. Group 6 (Hassan Ali)  gave an update on their action point of Group Performance. Some main key take aways:

​

Group 3​

Community Engagement

The group emphasized the importance of involving the community in the FMNR process. They conducted awareness and sensitization activities, engaging local elders, community members, and EMGs. A key achievement was securing community buy-in and support for FMNR through these engagements. They established community FMNR committees to ensure local ownership and facilitate the implementation of the initiative.
 

Resource and Landscape Assessment

The team conducted a comprehensive assessment of the local landscape to identify areas suitable for FMNR. This included:

• Identifying degraded areas, existing trees, and potential for natural regeneration.

• Gathering information on land ownership, tenure, and existing management practices.

• Assessing the availability of natural resources, like water, to support FMNR activities.

 

Capacity Building:

On-the-job training was provided to EMGs and community members to address knowledge gaps. Topics covered included FMNR techniques like selective pruning and the use of necessary tools.
A knowledge-sharing event was organized where farmers and community members showcased existing practices and learned from each other.

Challenges Faced:

The group encountered challenges such as limited resources and technical support within the communities.
Community land use priorities posed a challenge, as some areas prioritized agriculture and livestock grazing over natural regeneration. Negotiating these priorities required compromises to align with FMNR goals.
​

Group 6 

The group has been actively working on action points from previous meetings, including setting community rules and addressing potential conflicts that arise during the project implementation stages.

 

Highlights:​

• a recent assessment conducted in five villages to evaluate soil conservation and regeneration practices

• significant challenges, such as blocked roads and infrastructure caused by flooding, which hindered the community's movement and access

• community members expressed concerns about these issues, particularly the difficulty in maintaining roads and pathways, which even affected basic transportation, like donkey carts

In response to these challenges, the group took measures such as

​

• documenting the affected areas

• considering soil conservation solutions, like using soil bags to protect flood-prone areas

• They also discussed the need for regenerative practices in specific areas, despite some misconceptions that regeneration was unnecessary due to the presence of green vegetation. This greenery has very low soil organic content.

The discussion then turned to the challenges of maintaining tree planting and soil regeneration efforts. The speaker pointed out that maintaining these efforts, such as watering and protecting the plants from animals, is a significant challenge for the community, especially given their vulnerability and limited resources. Additionally, the threat of flooding from neighboring highlands, particularly from Ethiopia, was a major concern. The community feared that any regeneration efforts might be washed away by these floods, creating a sense of uncertainty and hesitation.

Despite these challenges, the speaker noted that the community was still willing to participate in these environmental initiatives, though they needed additional motivation and support from external organizations. Hassan also highlighted the technical challenges faced by the community, many of whom are illiterate, making it difficult to implement some of the more technical aspects of the projects.

​