Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable

Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands:

Selected Foreign Experience

May 1983

NTIS order #PB84-102912
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 83-600535

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents,

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402
Preface

This report complements the forthcoming OTA assessment on water and agriculture in U.S. arid/semiarid lands. The full assessment focuses on U.S. experience.

Foreign experience is also important, however, particularly as U.S. agricultural,

economic, and foreign aid interests are increasingly linked with those of other countries. The global significance of agricultural research and development on arid/semiarid lands is underscored by the fact that as much as 20 percent of the Earth’s surface is arid and semiarid, containing nearly 16 percent of the world’s population.

Described are selected foreign experiences using technology to develop and

sustain agriculture in arid lands. The selection of examples was based on three

broad considerations: I) availability of current reliable information, 2) variety of

examples both in land use and technology type, and 3) projects of potential interest

and relevance to the United States. The examples include breeding crops for drought

resistance, game ranching, improving irrigation management, developing rubber

production from arid/semiarid plants, and adopting technology-intensive water programs and policies. U.S. cooperative efforts with some of these experiments and

technology transfer considerations for U.S. arid/semiarid agriculture are also

discussed.

This paper was prepared by OTA Project Director Barbara Lausche based on

extensive contractor research and with the assistance of OTA Food and Renewable

Resources Program staff listed in this paper. OTA wishes to thank and acknowledge

the Water and Arid/Semiarid Agriculture Advisory Panel and other contributors

noted in the footnotes to this document who provided helpful materials and reviews

to the OTA staff.

. . .

Ill
Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable

Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands

Advisory Panel

Vice President,

Alton A. Adams, Jr,

Adams & Associates

Virgin Islands

James B. Kendrick, Jr., Chairman

Agriculture and University Services, University of California, Berkeley

Thomas G. Bahr (resigned May 1982)*

Director, Water Resources Research Institute

New Mexico

Wilbert H, Blackburn

Department of Range Science

Texas A&M University

William T. Dishman

Farmer/Rancher

Idaho

Harold E. Dregne, Professor

Department of Plant and Soil Science

Texas Tech University, Lubbock

Chester E. Evans

(Retired, USDA Research Director)

Colorado

Larry J. Gordon, Director**

Albuquerque Environmental Health Department

Robert M. Hagan, Professor

Department of Land, Air, and Water Resources

University of California, Davis

David E. Herrick (Retired, USFS)

Western Agricultural Research Committee

Colorado

Helen Ingram, Professor

Department of Government

University of Arizona, Tucson

Cyrus McKell

Director of Research

Plant Resources Institute

Utah

Michael F. McNulty

Director

Tucson Active Management Area

Arizona Department of Water Resources

Milton E. Mekelburg

president

National Association of Soil Conservation Districts

Colorado

Clifford J. Murino

president

Desert Research Institute

Nevada

Alice Parker

Farmer/Rancher

Washington

Cynthia Reed

Rancher

South Dakota

Luis Torres

Program Director

American Friends Service Committee

New Mexico

Casey E. Westell, Jr.

Director of Industrial Ecology

Tenneco, Inc.

Texas

Norman K. Whittlesey

Professor

Department of Agricultural Economics

Washington State University, Pullman

*Resigned to head the Office of Water Policy, U.S. Department of the Interior.

**Until August 1982 Deputy Secretary of New Mexico Health and Environment Department.

iv
OTA Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable

Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands Project Staff

H. David Banta, Assistant Director, OTA

Health and Life Sciences Division

Walter E. Parham, Program Manager

Food and Renewable Resources Program

Barbara Lausche, Project Director

Phyllis Windle, Analyst

Rita Dallavalle, Research Analyst

John Willems, Research Assistant

Administrative Staff

Phyllis Balan, Administrative Assistant

Nellie Hammond Carolyn Swarm

Contractors

Daniel W. Gottlieb, Researcher

Grace I. Krumwiede, Editor

OTA Publishing Staff

John C. Holmes, Publishing Officer

John Bergling Kathie S. Boss Debra M. Datcher Doreen Foster

Joe Henson Linda Leahy Donna Young
Contents

Chapter Page

I.

II.

111.

IV.

v.

VI.

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........00.. .“”o””””*ooooo ● “ -

Breeding Beans and Cowpeas for Drought Resistance and Heat Tolerance . . . . . . . .

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. $$. ... OSOOOS. .OO. ... ”.O..

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “ “ . . .

Collaborative Research Support Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Bean CRSP—Guatemala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Bean CRSP--Mexico. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...””.”””

Cowpea CRSP–Senegal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Technology Transfer Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Game Ranching in Africa ...*** **.**** ....*.* .**.**. . . . . . . . ● ...*.** ..**...

Summary . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . $ . . . . . . . . . . .. ..4. .ss. ,$..s “O.a””””o””””.” o

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“ “ “ “ , “ “ ““. .

Experiments in Game Ranching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Hopcraft Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ““”

Discussion of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .”””.”

Technology Transfer Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Game Ranches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....””....””” ““

Native Herd Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Managing Water on Farms in Pakistan ......0. ● .**...** ● .....*.* ● *.....*. . . .

Summary . . . . . .. .. .. .. ... .. .$.......

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

AID Project in Pakistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Collecting and Evaluating Data . . . . . .

Project Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Project Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Other Projects as Outgrowth of Pakistan

Project in Egypt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Water Management Synthesis Project .

Technology Transfer Considerations. . . .

Interactive Field Research . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . ,.$,... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.,,... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$.,$

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

,,..,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Project .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .$ .. ... ... ...$... .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $,,..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Integration of Research Results With Government Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Multidisciplinary Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Information Dissemination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “.”.

Developing Guayule (Natural Rubber) as a Commercial Crop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Summary ..o.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Sources of Rubber . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Advantages and Disadvantages of

Research on Guayule in Australia

Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Current Research . . . . . . . . . . . .

Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . ..4$... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Developing Guayule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

....$.$ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

U.S. Guayule Production and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

U.S. Cooperation With Other Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Technology Transfer Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Israel’s Water Policy: A National Commitment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ● 0...... . . . . . .

Summary . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . .a..o..a,.a,... .O..oof”””””

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“” “ “ ““ . “ ““”

3

9

9

9

10

10

11

11

12

17

17

17

18

19

21

24

24

25

29

29

29

30

30

31

31

34

34

34

35

35

35

35

36

36

41

41

41

42

42

44

44

45

46

46

48

49

53

53

53

vii
Contents-continue d

Page

Water Use Programs ... ... ... ... DO....... ... ... ... ... DO....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

State Control of Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Supply and Distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Demand Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Technical Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Selected Irrigation Technology Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Wastewater for Reuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Drip (or Trickle) and Sprinkler Irrigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Computer-Controlled Irrigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Irrigation With Saline Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Technology Transfer Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Appendix A:

Appendix B:

Improving

Appendix C:

New South

Appendix D:

Tables

Table No.

I. Estimates

Contacts List (by chapter) ● .**..* ● . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.0.... ● .* 67

Preliminary Inventory of Materials Available for

Irrigation Water Management in Asia . . . . . . . ...0..0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

The Economics of the Commercialization of Guayule in

Wales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

BARD Abstracts ● ....0. ● .****.* .....0.0.0.0.0.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

Page

of Drylands Population by Region and Livelihood Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2. CGIAR-Sponsored International Agricultural Research Centers and Programs . . . . . . . . 6

3. Fiscal Year 1981 U.S. Financial Commitments to Bean/Cowpea CRSP Projects . . . . . . . . 10

4. Common and Scientific Names of Animals Cited in Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

5. Characteristics of Cropped Game Animals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

6. Monthly Deliveries to Nairobi and Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

7. Potential Domestic Crops and Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

8. Components of Harvested Guayule Shrub . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

9. Facts About Israel, 1979-80 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

10. Average Yearly Rates of Change in Percentages in the Major Components of the

Agriculture Sector Account, 1968-78 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

11. Production Comparisons for Various Crops Under Different Irrigation Systems . . . . . . . 61

12. Effect of Irrigation Methods on the Yield of Tomatoes and Cucumbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

B-1. Preliminary Inventory of Materials Available for Improving Irrigation Water

Management in Asia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

C-l, Estimated Costs of Producing One Acre of Dryland Guayule in

New South Wales, Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

C-Z. Per Acre Income Above Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

Figures

Figure No. Page

l. Dry Climates of the World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Z. Precast Concrete Slab Installation for Panel Turnouts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

3. Natural Rubber Prices per Metric Ton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

4. Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

5. Test Sites, Western Slopes, and Plains of New South Wales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

6. Efficient Use of Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

7. Trickle Irrigation System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

8. Typical Types of Sprinkler Irrigation Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

. . . Vlll
The Shaded Countries

3

_ T,op, c of Cap, tco,,

Chapter I

Introduction

Are Highlighted in This Paper

‘

%
—

Chapter I

Introduction

This background paper focuses on foreign

and cooperative examples of what other countries are doing in arid and semiarid agriculture

to cope with problems of aridity. The full assessment report, of which this is a part, focuses

principally on U.S. efforts domestically.

This paper is designed to assist Congress in

several ways. First, it provides information relevant to legislative activities on such broad topics as agricultural research, arid/semiarid land

resource productivity, and water management

schemes. Second, it illustrates approaches taken

by foreign leaders on technology and policy

issues affecting agricultural water use in arid/

semiarid lands. Third, several examples illustrate the collaborative role of U.S. agricultural

and scientific experts in international development and the mutual benefits to be derived by

all parties. Finally, by providing examples of

how other countries are coping with and using

their arid/semiarid environments for productive agriculture, this paper contributes to the

continuing congressional debate on ways to

sustain agriculture in U.S. arid/semiarid lands.

This paper touches on only a few of the many

examples of foreign and cooperative efforts in

arid/semiarid agriculture. Numerous opportunities exist through these efforts for information exchange and scientific advancement in

methods for making arid and semiarid lands

productive.

Approximately 20 percent of all potentially

arable land in the world is in arid and semiarid

climatic zones, with Africa and Asia accounting for slightly under 10 percent and the United

States about 3 percent (fig. 1).1 About 16 percent of the world’s population lives on these

arid and semiarid lands (table 1), and about 90

percent of them live outside the Western Hemisphere. Research and development in semiarid

IH. Dregne (cd.), Arid Lands in 71ansition (Washington, D. C.:

American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1970),

pp. 32-33.

and arid agriculture has global significance in

light of these statistics. *

The maintenance of some land productivity

in these fragile environments is a particular

concern for countries that have a major portion of their population engaged in farming or

livestock production. It is also of concern to

countries with more diversified economies,

such as the United States and the Soviet Union,

since populations and economies may also depend on the productivity of such lands. A number of countries are trying to cope with aridity and agricultural production. Israel has a

deliberate policy of settling its deserts and a

system for managing water. The Soviet Union,

with about one-fifth of its people living on

semiarid and arid lands, has under consideration a partial diversion of north-flowing rivers

to desert areas in the south.2 In the United

States, with about one-third of its land area (excluding Alaska) being arid and semiarid, water

availability and degradation are topics of growing concern.

Ancient civilizations in arid and semiarid

lands—whether located in the Southwestern

United States, along the banks of the Nile, in

the Tibesti massif of the Sahara, in the Negev

Desert, within the Persian Empire, or on the

banks of the Yellow River in China–all practiced agriculture through some form of irrigation. In some cases, great rivers, such as the

Nile or the Euphrates, provided an inexhaustible source of fresh surface water. Systems of

canals were constructed with ditches and

sluices and animal- or human-powered devices

for lifting water to higher ground.

*Arid and semiarid lands have been defined in a number of

different ways. Their main characteristic is a low average precipitation or moisture, a condition which is directly affected by

other variable elements of the climate, such as temperature, sunshine, wind, and moisture conditions.

‘M. Biswas, “United Nations Conference on Desertification

in Retrospect” (Laxenburg, Austria: International Institute for

Applied Systems Analysis, September 1978).

3
4 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

I I /

/ / / t

45”

30”

\

1 i \ 1

60”

75” \\\\ \ ~ Equatorial scale (km)

75” 105” 135” 165° ‘“

w E Arid = Cl Dry subhumid

= D Semiarid ❑ Humid

❑ Undifferentiated highlands

SOURCE: H. P. Bailey, “Semi-Arid Cllmates: Their Definition and Distribution,” p. 78, in Hall, et al., Agrlcu/ture In Semiar/d Environment, 1979.

Table 1 .—Estimates of Drylands Population by Region and Livelihood Groupa

Total drylands Livelihood populations in drylands

Population Urban based Percentage Cropping based Percentage Animal based Percentage

Region (thousands) (thousands) of total (thousands) of total (thousands) of total

Mediterranean Basin . . . . 106,600 42,000 39% 60,000 57% 4,200 4 %

Sub-Sahara Africa . . . . . . 75,500 11,700 15 46,800’ 62 17,000 23

Asia and the Pacific . . . . 378,000 106,800 28 260,400 69 10,300 3

Americas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68,000 33,700 50 29,300 43 5,100 7

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 628,400 194,200 31% 397,100 63% 37,100 60/0

aMeigg Cl=gification (lgMj including extremely arid, arid, and semiarid area. Secretariat of the United Nations Conference on Desertification, 1977. sums are not exact

due to rounding.

SOURCE: M. Biswas, United Nations Conference on Desertificatlon in Retrospect (Laxenburg, Austria: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, September 1978).

Archeological evidence also suggests that freshwater. Their apparent durability is a result

since the beginning of recorded history ground of a simple technology that used gravity for

water has been used to grow crops. The qanats energy and kept withdrawals balanced with reof Iran, built some 3,000 years ago, were under- charge.

ground gravity flow channels for distributing

water for distances up to 20 miles. They are Dryland farming, using runoff water collecstill in use and supply 35 percent of Iran’s tion and runoff waterspreading systems, also
Ch. I—Introduction ● 5

was well known in antiquity. These techniques

are still practiced in some arid and semiarid

lands of the world. For example, Israeli researchers have reconstructed a number of runoff systems from that period. These systems

work on the principle of collecting or diverting

precipitation that is not immediately absorbed

by the ground. One method has been to build

a dam in a riverbed during the dry season.

When heavy rains came, flood waters were collected and diverted to irrigate surrounding cultivated land, Runoff systems required large topographically suitable areas not under cultivation to collect rain that would not be immediately absorbed. This water would be carefully

managed to meet surrounding agricultural

needs,

Water runoff from slopes was enhanced by

removing stones from surface canals to release

the runoff to different fields. This system of

water management flourished some 1,500

years ago. In evaluating such ancient practices

one writer states, “for all their antiquity, these

methods can form not only a basis for survival

and income for many communities in developing countries, but a source of additional income to communities living in the deserts of

developed countries.”3

Ancient societies coped with their arid and

semiarid environments through technologies

which they tried to adapt to suit their natural

environments. Similarly, societies and technologies today in such environments also must

live within and respect certain natural limits,

including the vagaries of climate. This report

highlights a few examples of how some other

countries are attempting to maintain or increase agricultural productivity on their arid

and semiarid lands. For example, Israel has

undertaken a national program of total water

resource management (ch. VI). Several countries in Africa are experimenting with game

ranching (ch. III). Senegal and international

researchers are investigating the potential for

greater bean and cowpea production in arid

lands (ch. II).

3A. Issar, “The Reclamation of a Desert by the Combination

of Ancient and Modern Water Systems, ” Outlook on Agriculture,

vol. 10, No. 8, 1981, p. 393.

In many instances, foreign projects in arid/

semiarid agriculture are being aided by U.S.

funds and researchers. The United States,

through the Agency for International Development (AID), for example, has been working on

irrigation water management in Pakistan (ch.

IV). New South Wales, Australia, has received

assistance for its research program on developing natural rubber from the guayule shrub from

the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)

(ch. V). The Office of Technology Assessment’s

publication An Assessment of the United States

Food and Agricultural Research System, in

chapter VIII, “International Dimensions of Research, ” provides a historical overview of the

agricultural programs of these agencies.

At the start of the 1980’s, USDA alone was

involved in more than 300 international cooperative research projects. The Office of International Cooperation and Development,

USDA, initiates and administers these projects

abroad. Some of the countries with which the

United States has cooperative research or scientific exchange agreements are Australia,

Canada, Great Britain, Japan, Israel, the

Netherlands, and Spain.4

Besides bilateral agreements, the emerging

international agricultural research network

offers further opportunities to share in the

world’s agricultural expertise and knowledge.

Since 1960, 10 international agricultural research centers with budgets of nearly $140 million in 1981 have been established. The Consultative Group on International Agricultural

Research (CGIAR) sponsors them as well as

three other related programs. The United

States, through AID, is a charter member and

provides about 25 percent of their total funding. Two of them—the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics

(ICRISAT) in India and the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas

(ICARDA) in Lebanon–specialize in problems

of aridity and agriculture. See table 2 for a list

of these centers and programs,

4U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of International Cooperation and Development, Foreign Development, USDA Role

(Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, January

1981), p. 12.
6 Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

Table 2.—CGlAR-Sponsored International Agricultural Research Centers and Programs

Year Core funding, 1980a

Location established (in millions)

Centers

1. International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Philippines 1960

2. International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT). . . . . . . Mexico 1988

3. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nigeria 1988

4. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Colombia 1988

5. International Potato Center (CIP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Peru 1972

6. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics

(lCRISAT).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . India 1972

7. International Laboratory for Research on Animal Diseases (ILRAD). . . Kenya 1974

8. International Livestock Center for Africa (ILCA).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ethiopia 1974

9. International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas

(ICARDA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Syria, Lebanon 1975

10. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . United States 1975

Programs

11. West African Rice Development Association (WARDA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . Liberia 1968

12. International Board for Plant Genetic Resources (IBPGR) . . . . . . . . . . . Italy 1973

13. International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR). . . . . Netherlands 1979

$15,032

16,056

14,038

14,275

7,100

10,375

10,031

8,954

11,29 2

2,30 5

2,562

2,925

1,095

abs not Include ~wclal projects, some contributions remained to be allocated to individual centerS/Pro9rarnS.

SOURCE: U.S. Agency for International Development, 1981.

Collaborative agricultural research and information exchange is an increasingly important

requirement for countries concerned about

maintaining the productivity of their arid lands

in order to meet the needs of their economies

and people. U.S. attention to foreign experience and commitment to cooperative exchange

of research and knowledge in arid/semiarid

agriculture have several ongoing and long-term

benefits, including:

●

●

avoiding costly duplication by building on

the experience and research of other countries and of U.S.-funded international agricultural research centers;

assuring that the results of U.S. foreign

assistance activities in agriculture are

made available to U.S. citizens, adapted to

the fullest extent possible to U.S. lands,

●

●

and analyzed for relevance with future foreign assistance;

providing ideas for U.S. farmers who are

interested in direct field experimentation

or adaptation of foreign examples to make

their operations more economical as water

and energy costs rise; and

building good will and channels of international communication of benefit beyond

the agricultural sector.

Over the long term, diversification, rather

than duplication, of research and development

can help to strengthen economies. Development of productive agricultural systems that

can be sustained on arid/semiarid lands can

help meet growing worldwide demand for food

and fiber.
Chapter II

Breeding Beans and Cowpeas

for Drought Resistance and

Heat Tolerance
Chapter II

Breeding Beans and Cowpeas for

Drought Resistance and Heat Tolerance

SUMMARY

This international cooperative experience

with plant breeding provides insights for expanding food production in U.S. semiarid

lands. In particular:

●

●

beans and cowpeas are dryland staples in ●

many developing countries and, in the future, they may provide an alternative dryland crop for U.S. semiarid lands;

collaborative plant breeding programs are

these crops under conditions of drought

and heat stress by combining native varieties of Central American and African

plants with high-yielding Californian

strains; and

this international research has benefited

foreign farmers and U.S. researchers and

shows potential for directly benefiting

American farmers and consumers.

expected to increase the productivity of

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally, plant breeding and testing

have focused more on improving yield, quality,

and resistance to disease and less on adapting

plants to natural environmental stresses. Recently, however, problems associated with environmental stresses such as heat, drought, and

salinity have attracted more attention. About

four-fifths of the gap between average and record crop yields in the United States results

from such stresses. The factors that make

plants do better or worse under stress are not

well understood. One path to such understanding is through crossbreeding of high-yield

strains with those that have survived under

harsher climates and conditions.1

Some crops grown in the United States under

rainfall or irrigation have the potential for

being grown with less water and producing

higher and more stable yields. Beans (common

beans that are grown to produce dry beans) and

cowpeas are two semiarid crops with such

characteristics. Both are legumes and have

long been grown overseas under dryland farmIB. Hiatt, “To Increase Survival, ” Mosaic (Washington, D. C.:

National Science Foundation, May-June 1982), p. 27.

ing regimes that have produced hardy strains.

In Senegal, for instance, the local cowpea is

so hardy it has been called “the crop of security.” The cowpea and bean have been dependable crops, producing food in arid and semiarid

regions when sorghum and pearl millet crops

failed.’

For many developing countries, beans and

cowpeas are dietary staples. In Mexico, for example, where 40 percent of the bean production comes from semiarid lands, beans are a

staples These legumes provide a major source

of high-quality and affordable protein and carbohydrate. In addition, they are an important

source of the B complex vitamins.4 For this rea-

—.

2A. E. Hall, “International Cooperation in Agricultural Research to Develop Improved Cowpea Cultivars for Semiarid

Regions of Africa and the United States, ” Office of Technology

Assessment commissioned paper, April 1982. Supplemented by

telephone interview with Dr. Hall, University of California

(Riverside), April 1982.

sM. Wayne Adams, Michigan State University, former director of the Bean/Cowpea CRSP, April 1982, telephone interview.

4Annual Report of the Bean/Cowpea Collaborative Research

Support Program [CRSP) 1981, BeanlCowpea CRSP Management

Office Staff, Michigan State University (East Lansing, Mich.:

December 1981].

9

98-353 r - 83 - 3
10 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

son, U.S. technical assistance programs have of improving food and nutrition abroad, particfocused on these legumes as a possible means ularly for subsistence and low-income peoples.

COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH SUPPORT PROGRAM

In September 1980, the Bean/Cowpea Collaborative Research Support Program (CRSP) was

established through funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development (AID) under

Title XII of the Foreign Assistance Act of

1975.5 The purpose of the program has been

to help eradicate hunger and malnutrition in

Africa and Latin America. The program’s research focus is on the production and use of

dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and cowpeas

or black-eyed peas (Vigna unguiculata (L.)

Walp.). Research on environmental stress on

these plants is a major component.6

—

SThe Bean/Cowpea CRSP is one of several programs funded

by AID. CRSPs generally involve U.S. universities, research institutions in developing countries, and international agricultural

research centers. All contribute resources to the projects. Their

main purpose is to assist development of research capacities

abroad, but they are also designed to benefit U.S. agriculture.

The description of CRSP is from Bean/Cowpea CRSP Annual

Report and An Assessment of U.S. Food and Agricultural Research (Washington, D. C.: Office of Technology Assessment, U.S.

Congress, 1981), p. 164.

OAnnual Report, op. cit.

The Bean/Cowpea CRSP is managed by

Michigan State University. Nine other universities also participate. The collaborating countries include Brazil, Cameroon, the Dominican

Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras,

Kenya, Malawi, Mexico, Nigeria, Senegal, and

Tanzania. The total fiscal year 1981 contributions by all parties are shown in table 3. About

25 percent of the total U.S. contribution comes

from private and public U.S. institutions, reflecting some sense that potential benefits

might accrue to U.S. agricultural research interests, especially the private sector. A description of the CRSP bean projects in Guatemala

and Mexico and the cowpea project in Senegal

follows, to illustrate the kinds of activities and

benefits coming from the Bean/Cowpea CRSP.

Bean CRSP--Guatemala7

Cornell University and the Instituto de Ciencia y Technologiá Agrícolas (ICTA) of Guate7Annual Report, op. cit., app. D.

Table 3.—Fiscal Year 1981 U.S. Financial Commitments to Bean/Cowpea CRSP Projects

Percent of total project

U.S. AID U.S. institution contribution from

Country/institution Plant contribution contribution U.S. institution

INCAP, a Central America/Washington State . . . . . . .

Honduras/Puerto Rico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Guatemala/Cornell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Brazil/Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Brazil/Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Brazil/Boyce Thompson Institute. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dominican Republic/Puerto Rico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dominican Republic/Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Senegal/UC-Riverside. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Cameroon/Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nigeria/Michigan State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nigeria/Georgia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kenya/UC-Davis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tanzania/Washington State. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Malawi/Michigan State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dry bean

Bean

Bean

Bean

Bean

Cowpea

Bean

Bean

Cowpea

Cowpea

Cowpea

Cowpea

Bean

Bean

Bean

$159,700

50,500

89,250

83,900

83,900

83,900

92,350

92,350

140,000

126,000

67,200

67,200

134,400

117,460

92,482

$73,130

20,075

27,871

11,617

26,809

29,704

31,168

48,320

48,830

31,546

31,542

21,333

44,840

63,682

12,928

$1,480,592 $523,395

31‘!0

28

24

12

24

26

25

34

26

20

32

24

25

35

12

260/o

alnstitute for Nutrition in Central America and panama.

SOURCE: Tfre Annual Repoti of the Bean/Cowpea Co//aborathe Research Supporf Program (CRSP), 1981, Bean/Cowpea CRSP, Management Office Staff, Michigan State

University, December 1981.
Ch. II—Breeding Beans and Cowpeas for Drought Resistance and Heat Tolerance ● 11

mala are collaborating on bean research to determine, on a worldwide basis, how variations

in day length and temperature affect plant development, maturity, and adaptation. These

plant characteristics, in turn, affect how much

water a crop requires. Cornell University scientists have found, for instance, that the time it

takes the bean plant to grow to the flowering

stage is important in determining its yield. The

time factor, in turn, is influenced by length of

daylight and day/night temperature differences.

A number of factors make U.S.-Guatemalan

cooperation in this research beneficial. Plant

geneticists who work on breeding to produce

a particular characteristic, such as optimum

time from planting to flowering, need a variety

of beans with that characteristic from which

to draw genetic material. Guatemala, one of the

areas in Central America where the bean originated, offers a greater diversity of bean plants

than does the United States, since the plant has

had a comparatively longer time to develop

there. Guatemala also has both high and moderate altitude locations in close proximity. This

provides a greater variety of day/night temperature ranges in which to field-test new strains.

Bean CRSP--Mexico8

Collaborative bean research began in 1982

between the Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Agrícolas (INIA) in Durango, Mexico,

and U.S. universities. Two initial considerations make Mexico a natural partner for bean

research. First, the bean originated in the highlands of Mexico as well as Guatemala. Thus,

the genetic material available in Mexico also

is rich in diversity. Second, Mexico is the second largest bean-producing nation in the

world.

The United States and Mexico have collaborated on research in two specific areas. Mexican researchers have made some progress developing bean varieties that are drought resistant. U.S. researchers have worked on improving the process by which beans convert atmos-

‘3 Adams interview, op. cit.

pheric nitrogen to a usable form, allowing production without the need for supplemental nitrogen fertilizer. If drought resistance and

greater biological nitrogen fixation can be

merged, bean farmers in both countries may

be able to get along with less fertilizer and

water, Drought resistance in bean production

may not seem immediately critical to U.S. agriculture. However, beans already are grown in

some semiarid U.S. areas, and nationally the

bean is a major crop. As world food demand

increases, production of drought-resistant

beans on U.S. water-limited lands may become

increasingly important to make optimal use of

those lands and help meet world food needs.

The second area that the joint Mexico/U.S.

bean research has been pursuing is the further

development of strains with a structural adaptation that deters water loss through transpiration. Such bean plants turn their leaves in dry

periods so that the surface through which water is lost is pointed away from the Sun. Five

of the top yielding strains of beans being researched through this program at Michigan

State University have this capability.

Cowpea CRSP--Senegal9

The Cowpea CRSP is especially active between the University of California at Riverside

and the Senegalese Institute for Agricultural

Research, This program began 6 years ago as

a small component of an AID-funded effort by

UC/Riverside to assist with rural development

in semiarid Africa with emphasis on the Sahel.

The principal reasons that Senegal was so attractive for this collaborative research were

that: 1) the cowpea probably originated in

Africa, and 2) Senegalese plant breeders had

begun using the available diverse cowpea

genetic stock to develop cowpeas specifically

adapted for semiarid zones.

The objectives of the cowpea research program include: 1) developing improved cowpea

varieties and management methods for subsistence farmers in the semiarid zone of Senegal,

and 2) developing cowpea varieties with imgIbid.
12 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

proved drought adaptation, heat tolerance, and

yield stability for use in semiarid zones

throughout the world, including the United

States.10 During the first 2 years (1980-82) of the

project, a number of significant findings were

made by the joint efforts of U. S., Senegalese,

and other researchers. The major findings

follow.

Improving Drought Adaptation

Field screening techniques are being used in

California to select cowpeas with: 1) roots more

able to extract water from the soil, 2) earlier

flowering, and 3) greater proportions of total

carbohydrate in the pods. For example, some

of the material produced will mature in 60

days, the length of the short rainy season in

parts of Africa. Cowpeas with these improved

characteristics are being crossed to produce

superior progeny. About 30 of the advanced

cowpea lines originating from crosses between

Senegalese and Californian cowpeas have been

evaluated for drought resistance and yield stability in cooperative tests in Senegal and California.

Screening for Heat Tolerance

Hot weather in both Africa and the United

States causes flowers to drop and therefore

pods never form. This reduces cowpea yields.

Research by a Sudanese student at UC/Riverside has established a connection between excessive flower drop and high night temperatures just before flowering. Cowpeas from

throughout the world have been grown during

hot weather in the Imperial Valley, Calif., to

search for strains with tolerance to heat. Two

African strains were discovered that have

greater heat tolerance than both the local varieties grown by farmers in Senegal and the

blackeye pea types grown in California.

The challenge in research is to overcome the

problems caused by the harsh environments in

semiarid zones by breeding into the high-yielding California varieties the heat tolerance and

drought adaptation characteristics identified

in the more hardy Senegalese and other African cowpeas. According to one UC/Riverside

scientist on the project, “the cooperative yield

tests have demonstrated that some of the advanced cowpea lines are adapted to California

and have improved drought resistance, whereas other lines are extremely early and require

only 60 days from sowing to harvest in African

conditions. During extreme droughts, with a

short rainy season, these early lines have the

potential to produce substantial yields while

most cowpeas would fail to produce seed.”11

loHa]l, op. Cit., pp. 1-2.

TECHNOLOGY

The bean/cowpea collaborative

‘l Ibid., pp. 3-4.

TRANSFER CONSIDERATIONS

research yields and water use efficiency through this

projects are relatively new and have not yet collaborative plant breeding research. Cowpea

been implemented directly in commercial agri- varieties developed by this program with imculture. Initial signs indicate, however, signifi- proved drought-resistance and heat-tolerance

cant potential for improved bean and cowpea characteristics could increase the productivi-
Ch. II—Breeding Beans and Cowpeas for Drought Resistance and Heat Tolerance ● 13

ty and profitability of dryland and irrigated

agriculture in semiarid regions of both developed and developing countries.

Agricultural productivity of arid and semiarid lands will become increasingly important

to help meet growing food demands. Crops

such as the cowpea may not now be of major

importance to U.S. diets, but they could become an important export crop in the years

ahead. This could become a factor in helping

maintain a favorable U.S. balance of payments

as well as providing a means of foreign assistance. Such foodstuffs would be particularly important for feeding children and pregnant

women in countries where protein shortages

develop.12

Promotion of this collaborative research and

its potential benefits depends almost entirely

IZHall interview, op. Cit.

on efforts of the involved scientists. In the

views of some United States scientists participating in this international research, general

U.S. interest in and use of the knowledge generated so far is insignificant. The matter has

been given little attention by the U.S. Government. 13 In contrast, both Canada and Australia

have specific organizations and programs designed to encourage international agricultural

collaboration for use in foreign assistance as

well as in their own agriculture.14 The benefits

to U.S. agriculture from the brief collaboration

to date in the Bean/Cowpea CRSPs suggest that

more U.S. participation in this kind of international research could provide important future benefits for U.S. farmers in arid and semiarid agriculture,

lsAn Assessment of U.S. Food and Agricultural Research, op.

cit., pp. 151-169 (see footnote 5).

lqDona]d p]ucknett, Science Advisor to the CGIAR Secretariat,

World Bank, May 1982, telephone interview.
Chapter III

Game Ranching in Africa
Chapter III

Game Ranching in Africa

This use of dry grasslands in Africa provides ● analogous efforts in the United States

a striking contrast to most uses of U.S. range- which relate to and draw on the African

lands. In particular, this chapter illustrates: experience, and

● attempts to make productive use of de- . difficulties inherent in developing animal

graded grasslands and to prevent their fur- agriculture tailored to long-term resource

ther deterioration by relying on native ani- sustainability.

mal species,

INTRODUCTION

In years past, the low rainfall grassland

plains of Africa, with their immensely rich and

varied wild animal populations, formed a major natural resource of the continent. Today

these once beautiful and productive areas are

in varying degrees of degradation.

Both climatic factors and human exploitation

have influenced the condition of these lands.

In many instances, wild animal populations

have been eliminated or threatened as the land

has become degraded and moved increasingly

toward arid and semiarid conditions.

Human activity has played a large role in destroying the delicate natural balance between

vegetation and wild animals.1 Desert shrubs

have been stripped from the land for use as

firewood to the extent that local supplies have

virtually disappeared, and charcoal must now

be shipped 100 to 200 miles for use in some

cities. Such woody ground cover normally

served to hinder erosive water runoff and enhance retention of water in the soil. Overgrazing and compaction of the soil by domestic animals, in a region where land is considered

common property by stock owners, also has

contributed to the degradation. 2

‘Southwest Research Laboratories, “The Establishment of

Wildlife Ranches in Developing Countries” (Los Alamitos, Calif.:

November 1981), p. 1.

ZL. Chatterton and B. Chatterton, “Combating Desertification

in Winter Rainfall Regions of North Africa and the Middle East, ”

Outlook orI Agriculture, vol. 10, No. 8, p. 397,

Commercial production of imported domesticated livestock (primarily cattle, sheep, and

goats) continues in the African savanna in spite

of the impact on the land. The animals are

maintained in African countries with the assistance of much livestock research and social expenditure, in part because they have become

an integral part of the local social and economic systems. Owning a large herd is a mark of

prestige; it also ensures a constant milk supply despite the low productivity of milking

cows and the shortness of their milking period.

A herd provides insurance for survival through

its meat, dairy, and other products should a

calamity such as an outbreak of disease or

drought occur. Sheep are retained because

mutton is the preferred meat of the region. The

consumption of goat meat is generally restricted to the poor. Nevertheless, goat is of particular value in arid lands because it survives

when sheep and cattle perish, thus providing

a more secure supply of milk, meat, and skins

in emergencies.3 These multiple social benefits

have tended to override the fact that the quality of beef is often inferior to that of beef produced in a more favorable climate. Moreover,

seasonal variations in water and forage availability are not conducive to the rapid growth of

cattle, sheep, or goats.

sSmithsonian magazine, vol. 10, No, 5, August 1979, p, 38.

17
18 . Water. Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

In contrast, indigenous animals have naturally adapted to the arid and semiarid environment of the African savanna. In one important

aspect they are particularly adapted: they require little water. If fresh grass is available,

camels, for example, require virtually no water.

Even when water is available in such areas as

central Sudan, camels are often not given water

more than once every couple of months. The

Sudan exports tens of thousands of camels to

upper Egypt for meat each year. Because of

their adaptability, camels in the Sudan are valued more highly for their milk and for transportation than for their meat.4

Antelopes, gazelle, oryx, and other game species also are well adapted to life in arid regions.

(See table 4 for scientific names of common

African game species.) The eland, for example,

can endure fairly large variations in body temperature without sweating, so they can reduce

water loss. The ostrich can survive a 25 percent loss of body weight, much of which is

water that can be replaced in a single drinks

Game animals also have potential as an excellent source of high-quality meat. With its

higher proportion of protein to fat, some game

meat may be nutritionally superior to domestic

meats. And if allowed to grow naturally on the

range, game meat may contain lower levels of

the kinds of chemicals, including growth hormones, commonly used in modern ranching.6

4

J. L. Cloudsley-Thompson, “Animal Utilization,” Arid Lands

in Transition, Harold E. Dregne (cd,) (Washington, D. C.:

American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1970),

p. 67.

SIbid., p. 68.

qbid., p. 58.

Table 4.—Common and Scientific Names of Animals

Cited in Text

Since much information about animals is classified by

scientific names, this list is provided to help readers locate

additional data. There may be cases where disputes in

synonomy or regional variation are not reflected.

Domestic and wild cattle and their relatives:

Domestic cattle . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Domestic goats . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Domestic sheep. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

African buffalo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

American bison

(buff ale).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Antelopes and their relatives:

Dik-dik . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Duiker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Eland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gerenuk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Grant’s gazelle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hartebeest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Kudu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Impala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

oryx . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Springbok . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Steenbok. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Thomson’s gazelle . . . . . . . . . . .

Wildebeest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Deer and their relatives:

Axis deer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

North American elk. . . . . . . . . . .

White-tailed deer . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Other animals:

African camel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Giraffe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Zebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Birds:

Ostrich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ring-necked pheasant . . . . . . . .

SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment.

Bos taurus

Capra hircus

Ovis aries

Syncerus caffer

Bison bison

Madoqua spp.

Sylvicapra spp.,

Cephalophus spp.

Taurotragus spp.

Litocranius walleri

Gazella granti

Alcelaphus buselaphus

Tragelaphus spp.

Aepyceros melampus

oryx spp.

Antidorcus marsupials

Raphicerus campestris

Gazella thomsoni

Connochaetes spp.

Cervus axis

Cervus canadensis

Oedicoileus virginiana

Came/us dromedaries

Giraffa camelopardalis

Equus spp.

Struthio came/us

Phasianus colchicus

A growing awareness of the serious impacts digenous wildlife species in order to help predomesticated cattle, sheep, and goats are hav- serve them.

ing on the African savanna has spurred interest

in game ranching of native species. In the The feasibility of game farms in several

IWO’S a number of ranches in Africa began ex- African countries is an area of ongoing reperimenting with a mixture of domestic and search in the more productive use of arid and

game animals to counter growing land degra- semiarid lands. On both experimental and comdation and to boost the economic value of in- mercial ranches, workers are testing the hy-
Ch. Ill—Game Ranching in Africa ● 1 9

potheses that indigenous species are better

adapted to the savanna environment and thus

more easily and profitably raised than common

domestic animals. For these reasons, game

ranching has been called the use and enhancement of “nature’s technology.’” The basic concept is to take economic advantage of the natural balance between vegetation and wild animals.

Major projects at the following ranches were

started in the 1970’s: Ubizana and Theunis in

Natal, South Africa; Doddieburn and Mkwasine in Zimbabwe; Kruger in South Africa; and

Athi River in Kenya. The limited data reported

on these ranches to date indicate that the most

significant costs of game ranching are in capturing and stocking animals, erecting a perimeter fence, and, when necessary, building processing facilities. Stocking costs have ranged

from $50,000 at the Ubizana Game Ranch to

$146,000 over 3 years at the Theunis Game

Ranch in South Africa. Fencing costs were es7David HopCraft, “Nature’s Technology,” 19, Technological

Forecasting and Social Change (1980).

timated at $1,044 per kilometer in South Africa

in the early 1970’s. The Mkwasine Game Ranch

in Zimbabwe spent over $56,600 to fence

59,304 acres (24,000 hectares). Processing facilities that comply with veterinary and health

standards have been found also to be costly.

A canning and drying facility in the Kruger National Park in South Africa, for example, cost

the equivalent of $1.5 million. However, that

facility returned the investment within 3 years.

A smaller, less sophisticated facility on the

Theunis Game Ranch, which prepared fresh

cuts and sausage, cost about $146,000.8

One of the largest experimental game ranches

in Africa is the Athi River, Kenya ranch, established in the mid-1960’s by David Hopcraft.

This experiment has attracted interest from

both developed and developing countries and

is the focus of a major portion of the remainder

of this chapter.

%. Mossman and A. Mossman, “Wildlife Utilization and Game

Ranching,” IUCN Occasional Paper No. 17 (Merges, Switzerland: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 1976).

THE HOPCRAFT PROJECT9

Athi River, Kenya Demonstration Wildlife

Ranch is located about 25 miles from Nairobi.

It contains 20,000 acres, some of which are

used for cattle ranching. Hopcraft began his

project with the help of a 1966 U.S. National

Science Foundation research grant for a 3-year

comparison of the land effects and the meat

and hide yields of cattle and game raised on

Kenya grasslands. In the study, he fenced off

and halved a uniform 300-acre plot of land. One

side was stocked with cattle, the other with

gazelle.

Hopcraft found the physical effects of the

two species on the land to be substantially different. The cattle significantly reduced grass

cover and other types of stable vegetation, created serious tracking problems, and trampled

QDavid Hopcraft, op. cit.

the vegetation on their daily trek to the water

hole, compacting the soil. In contrast, according to Hopcraft reports, the gazelle left an area

that retained 32 percent more grass cover and

100 percent more self-perpetuating species.

The gazelle area did not show either tracking

problems or land devastation around the water

hole.

Economically, Hopcraft found the gazelle

carcass to be more profitable than the cattle

carcass. His figures indicated that 47 percent

of the gazelle was lean meat, compared to 32

percent in cattle; the cattle in this experiment

yielded 7.9 pounds per acre per year, the gazelle produced 14.6 pounds per acre. Cattle

raised under traditional stock raising methods,

according to Hopcraft, would yield much less

lean meat than those on his farm.
20 Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

Income from the gazelle substantially exceeded that from cattle because of the gazelle’s

higher market price, almost double that of domestic meat, and production of 50 to 100 percent more meat per acre. Hide sales favored

the game species as well, the gazelle hides returning a price roughly 25 percent higher than

that received for cattle hides. Approximately

10 acres per head and 3 years were needed to

produce one cowhide, while Hopcraft estimated that 1 acre could produce eight gazelle

hides in only 1 year.

Hopcraft interpreted his findings to indicate

that adaptation to the environment is a very important factor. “An indigenous animal spends

far less energy than an imported beast in overcoming the harsh environmental conditions

such as disease, weather, and vegetation. Thus,

more energy becomes available for growth. ”

The advantage is augmented, he maintains, by

the negligible costs of herd maintenance.

Gazelle, for example, require no pesticide dippings, inoculations, or night enclosures. Hopcraft estimated that expenses on a cattle ranch

consume about 66 percent of income, compared to only 20 percent on a game ranch.

In 1976, Hopcraft received a grant from the

Lilly Endowment of Indianapolis for the largescale application of his findings. This grant was

increased in 1977. The funding covered construction of an 8%-foot-high fence around the

31-mile perimeter of his ranch, a project requiring 15 months to complete. This fence enclosed

more than 5,000 indigenous animals of 20 different species–giraffes, eland, wildebeest,

dik-diks, impala, zebra, hartebeest, and others.

About half were from the gazelle family.

According to Hopcraft, this variety of game

has helped maximize the productivity of the

vegetation. The treetops are forage for the giraffe; the higher bushes are eaten by the eland,

kudu, and gerenuk; the lower bushes by the

gazelle and impala; and the grasses by buffalo,

zebra, wildebeest, and hartebeest. Smaller

shoots and leaves serve the duiker, steinbuck,

and dik-dik. The seeds are eaten by the ostrich

and other game birds. There is some overlap

in browsing, but according to one report this

Photo credit: A@ncy for lnternatbna/ Development

The eland of East Africa is the largest of the plains

animals that graze across the vast savannas

,

Photo credit: Agency for International Development

Herds of zebra and wildebeest roam across the grass

fields inside Ngorongoro Crater in Tanzania

arrangement is conducive to helping the vegetation remain in natural balance.10

Erecting the perimeter fence was a major

endeavor in the large-scale project. Once operational, the project faced a second hurdle and

one of its greatest impediments: securing the

Kenyan Government’s permission to market

the game meat. Hopcraft lobbied for 7 years

before obtaining an exemption from gaming

and food laws. Cropping game on the Hopcraft

ranch began early in 1981. Plans are to crop

about one-quarter to one-third of the game

population annually. * Now, the ranch’s game

losouthwest Research Laboratories, OP. cit., p. 8.

*Gabriel Von Latham, April 1982, telephone interview. Von

Latham and Hopcraft have formed a French-based firm, Wild

Indigenous Livestock Development (WILD), to export game

ranching to other countries.
Ch. IlI—Game Ranching in Africa ● 2 1

——- — —- —

meat is sold in hotels and restaurants in

Nairobi as a luxury item, and outlets are being sought outside Kenya.

Some of Hopcraft’s preliminary findings are:

1. it is possible to live within the natural balance of land and animals in this part of

Africa and to use extremely profitably the

natural increase of animals for production

2. ranching indigenous animals requires little input and little imported energy; and

3. far greater production of meat is attained

per acre, gaining profits of nearly five

times those of traditional livestock rearing,

in a sustained multicultural environment.11

of meat and hides;

Some controversy exists

DISCUSSION

over Hopcraft’s

findings and extrapolation of results obtained

on his relatively small plot of land. The advisability of game ranching as an approach to increased economic productivity is under question because of the high capital outlay needed

to establish and outfit a fenced range of adequate size.

In general, substantial costs are involved

with game ranching where the project must acquire land, construct perimeter fences, stock

and harvest the animals, and construct slaughterhouse facilities. Hopcraft was able to avoid

many of these costs. Local circumstances, for

example, helped Hopcraft minimize stocking

costs. In fencing the ranch, several thousand

animals were trapped within, saving the time,

money, and effort of capturing and transporting them from outside. The weaving of the

fencing material onsite from local materials

further reduced operating costs. Hopcraft also

was able to purchase inexpensively a mobile

slaughterhouse from the United Nations Food

and Agriculture Organization.

Similar economizing may be possible in

other game ranching developments in the African savanna and elsewhere if indigenous species are used. Certain other experiments, however, which must trap and transport game from

outside, may find their initial costs much higher. Many game ranchers may have to construct

slaughterhouses because of the distance of their

operations from commercial facilities.

IISouthwest Research Laboratories, op. cit., p. 9.

A group of Cornell University researchers

visited Hopcraft’s ranch several times to conduct research and to report their findings to

the Lilly Endowment. * They have gathered

data on range ecology and the digestibility of

various plant species by game animals. Codirector Daniel G. Sisler has concentrated his

study of the project on the economics of meat

production, handling, and marketing. Dr. Sisler

raises a number of points about the economics

of game ranching:

1. Costs of establishing and operating a

game ranch. Although Hopcraft has shown

that game meat sales will cover variable operating costs, according to Dr. Sisler, he has not

shown that their sales will cover all the fixed

costs associated with setting up a ranch. If the

fence, slaughterhouse, cooling facilities, vehicle, capture of animals, and labor were all included, the net income might be well below

that of a well-managed cattle ranch. The costs

of establishing a cattle ranch would have to be

compared with those of establishing a game

ranch, or the assumption would have to be

made that both kinds of ranches are operational at the time of the comparison.

*This section discussing the controversy over Hopcraft’s results is based on information from Daniel Sisler and Robert

McDowell, Professors of Agricultural Economics, and Robert

P. Bauer, graduate student, Cornell University, April 1982, and

with McDowell again in August 1982.
22 Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

Cropping, handling, and marketing game

meat are distinctly different from similar

operations associated with domestic animals.

Table 5 shows some of the characteristics of

cropped game animals to consider in handling

and marketing. The initial investment in

slaughterhouse and refrigeration facilities and

their operating expenses may be substantial.

The services of a veterinarian maybe needed

to meet inspection requirements. These costs

are in contrast to cattle ranching, where animals are typically sold live, with slaughter and

inspection taking place at a publicly owned

slaughterhouse.

In contrast, harvesting at the Hopcraft facility was labor intensive and unusual. Cropping of all animals took place at night, with a

crew of three men shooting the animals from

a Land Rover. Cropping was reasonably efficient, and dead animals were at the slaughterhouse within 1 hour. During the first year of

operation, the game meat was found to be of

high quality and accepted by customers. Fat

content was low. Statistics relative to cropping

indicated that there was no significant seasonal

variation in carcass weight of game animals.

Sisler estimates that the establishment costs

are roughly equal to those in establishing a cattle ranch. Net operating income may be about

equal if the price received for game meat is approximately twice that for cattle (the price ratio

in the first year of the Kenya ranch operation).

2. Game ranch management. A well-managed game ranch requires highly sophisticated

technical knowledge as to rates of growth for

each game species, plant food preferred, degree

of predation by other species, fawning rates,

growth rates, sex composition, compatibility

of species, gestation period, and age of sexual

maturity of differing species. The availability

of this expertise adds cost to the project.

3. Use of energy. Although the energy used

for a game ranch is less than that for cattle

ranching, Sisler estimates imported energy for

a game ranch is approximately 40 percent of

that required for a comparable cattle ranch.

Vehicles use diesel fuel, as does the operation

of the slaughterhouse and chilling facilities.

4. Development of markets. A ready market

existed for all game meat produced from the

Hopcraft ranch during 1981 operations. This

does not mean that there would necessarily be

a consistently adequate market for game meat

within Kenya. The absolute quantity of game

meat marketed is a small proportion of total

red meat consumption in Nairobi. It seems

probable that any sizable increase in game

meat production could cause prices to decline.

The most serious obstacle facing continued efficient marketing of game meat in Kenya is assuring a strong market for all would-be producers. Hopcraft was successful as the only

producer operating on a small scale in the

capital city of Nairobi.

The majority of Hopcraft’s clients were restaurants, although one butchery was a steady

client. The meat was sold at 25 shillings per

kilo, approximately twice the price of quality

beef. The clientele of these restaurants and

butcheries has been more than 90 percent expatriate, and wholesale purchasers knew that

the high price could be passed onto their customers. When surveyed, clients stated that

game meat constituted about 5 percent of total

sales. Restauranteurs estimated that the cost

of preparing a game meat meal was 20 to 30

Table 5.—Characteristics of Cropped Game Animals

Percent total weight dressed

Species Body length (cm) Shoulder height (cm) Dressed weight (kg) Annual range Average

Thomson’s gazelle . . . . . . . 78 67 13 53-55 54

Grant’s gazelle . . . . . . . . . . 108 91 33 52-61 55

Kongoni . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 119 69 49-52 52

Wildebeest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 132 125 49-60 53

SOURCE: “An Economic Analysis of Harvesting Techniques, Game Meat Characteristics and Marketing Prospects,” tables 1, 2, and 3, paper by Daniel Sisler, Professor

of Agricultural Economics, Cornell University, prelimina~ draft, October 1982.
Ch. III—Game Ranching in Africa 23

— ——

percent more than that of a beef, poultry, or

pork meal. Retail price per plate, however, is

usually about the same for game and traditional

meats. Table 6 shows the monthly average of

kilos of game meat delivered to four or five

clients each week and the corresponding revenue from each delivery.

Limited quantities of sausage have been produced from the game meat. The market appears to be strong for this high-value product,

which could be marketed at a lower expense

than chilled meat. However, equipment for

sausage manufacturing is costly, as are some

ingredients, notably fat. While sausage production shows signs of profitability, more effort

is needed on marketing and promotion of this

specialty item.

According to Sisler, game meat will continue

to be a high-priced specialty meat if game meat

production is to be profitable. Because of its

cost, it seems likely that in the foreseeable

future game meat will not be a source of low

cost animal protein for native peoples.

5. Price of hides when sold in quantity.

Sisler found hide sales extremely difficult to

calculate. If they can be sold at a favorable

price, this would be an added source of revenue for game ranching. The development of

a market for specialty hides, however, was difficult for Hopcraft’s 1981 operations.

6. Water use. Theoretically, the expense of

drilling wells or installing dams and watering

facilities can be considerably less than what is

required for cattle. However, a perimeter fence

may prevent migration of animals to natural

watering points and better range. So any area

would need to be large enough to take care of

this requirement.

7. Stocking ranches. The financial breakeven point for game ranches of Hopcraft’s size,

calculated by Cornell University reviewers, is

roughly 2,000 animals-about twice the current

level of Hopcraft’s harvest. This figure represents about 40 percent of the 5,000 game that

Hopcraft estimated in his 1980 report. More

recent estimates from Cornell indicate that the

game animals on the ranch number about 2,500

to 2,800. The costs of establishing a similar

ranch elsewhere would be extremely high. Also

the cost of importing animals would be high.

In the first year of operation, only four species

of adult males—Thomson’s gazelle, Grant’s gazelle, wildebeest, and kongonis were harvested.

It is unclear what will happen to the ecology

when all cattle are removed and game animals

expanded.

Other questions remain. What will happen

to the off-take rate of game animals when

younger animals and a part of the females of

each species are harvested? Will the price of

game meat be less when it is sold in larger

quantities? At present, cropping is completed

in accord with what can be sold rather than

in a manner to regulate or sustain species composition and number. Achieving a balance between meat production and the natural sustainability of the animals in their local environment

will be one of the most critical facets of ranching.

Table 6.—Monthly Deliveries to Nairobi and Revenues (game meat only)

Number of deliveries Total monthly Mean weekly Monthly revenue

Month per month delivery (kg) delivery (kg) Kenyan shillings U.S. dollars

January . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 954 239.6 23,962 $2,188

February . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 769 192.3 19,227 1,756

March . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1,008 252.0 25,200 2,301

April . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 857 214.3 21,430 1,957

May . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1,469 293.8 36,725 3,354

June . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1,614 403.5 40,345 3,685

July . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1,481 296.2 37,025 3,381

August . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1,276 319.0 31,898 2,913

SOURCE: “An Economic Analysis of Harvesting Techniques, Game Meat Characteristics and Marketing Prospects,” paper by Daniel Sisler, Professor of Agricultural

Economics, Cornell University, prelimina~ draft, October 1982.
24 ● Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CONSIDERATIONS

Data are not available to make definitive

statements about the economic feasibility of expanding game ranching to other parts of

Africa. However, because of the optimism for

Hopcraft’s efforts, the U.S. Agency for International Development (AID) has funded a game

ranching feasibility study by Hopcraft for the

Department of Wildlife in Botswana. Hopcraft

is looking at the possibility of establishing two

demonstrations similar to the Kenya ranch, one

in a communal area and the other on a private

ranch in Botswana. The communal area would

involve some 20 farm families living on 5,000

acres, who would be trained to manage the

animals. *

Developing international markets for game

meat would help assure game ranching profits

and increase the desirability of starting such

operations. Hopcraft has proposed that Rhodesian and Botswanan game be shipped to Europe through South African ports and airports.

The development of widespread markets for

these high-priced specialty meats will take a

major effort, although some researchers believe

that a market is there.12 Game meats are still

an insignificant factor in world food production and world trade. According to U.S. Department of Commerce figures, the United

States imported less than $1 million of game

meats in 1981. Both the United States and Europe (especially West Germany, Switzerland,

and England) could prove to have substantial

potential as markets if a reasonably priced,

secure supply became available.

Some research on game ranching, parallel to

that in Africa, is under way in the Western

United States assessing the advisability of a

partial shift to native or imported stock. As

much as 85 percent of agricultural land in the

American West is used as range, and a growing awareness of the problems of overgrazing,

reduced water availability, and lower econom-

*Reservations expressed by AID officials in telephone interviews in August 1982 are strongest regarding the economic feasibility of game ranching without a major export market.

IZFred Wagner, Associate Dean, College of Natural Resources,

Utah State University, June 1982, telephone interview.

ic return from ranching operations has influenced American ranchers to look into alternative ranching systems. Experimentation with

native American bison is under way, and the

adaptation of imported African species as a

U.S. cash crop is being considered. In light of

this American interest in importation, the objectives pursued and results identified by game

ranchers in African countries may provide insight for U.S. consideration.

Two types of operations in the United States

are similar to the wildlife management schemes

in Africa: 1) game ranches that permit hunting

of wildlife, and 2) native game farming or herd

management of a single indigenous species

such as buffalo or elk to produce meat, hides,

and other products.

Game Ranches

The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department reports more than 800 game ranches in that State.

The Exotic Wildlife Association, a group of

game ranches, has 200 members. The State’s

boom in game ranches has been encouraged,

in part, by the promotional efforts of energy

companies that provide their top executives

with trips to such ranches.13

Many ranches have game indigenous to the

United States, as well as imported animals. The

50,000-acre Y. O. Ranch in Mountain Home,

Tex., for instance, has 10,000 game animals.

Half are drawn from native species. The balance are animals culled from 35 African and

Asian species. These include antelopes, axis

deer, zebras, ostriches, and giraffes.14

Game ranches in the United States are almost

exclusively focused on sport. They might become more profitable if excess animals could

be slaughtered and marketed. A major factor

in marketing game meat is Federal and State

legislation that bars such sale except under

very restrictive conditions. For example, legIsCharles Schreiner IV, manager and co-owner of Y. O. Ranch,

Mountain Home, Tex., April 1982, telephone interview.

laIbid.
Ch. ///—Game Ranching in Africa 25

islation requires inspection of wild animals

before they are slaughtered for public consumption. Federal laws also require slaughterhouse facilities for game that are separate from

those for domestic meat. If game animals have

to be first captured and then transported to a

specific slaughterhouse for inspection before

being killed, the process may make the final

product cost prohibitive.15

Native Herd Management

One of the principal wild species being managed for commercial exploitation in the Western United States is the American bison (buffalo). Some herds are being raised on semiarid

rangeland, particularly on those lands where

precipitation for forage production for cattle

is inadequate. The National Buffalo Association has some 800 members, of whom approximately 500 have herds. Ironically, the demand

for buffalo meat from some supermarkets and

restaurants exceeds the available supply, mainly because of the lack of both a centralized marketing system and uniform health inspection

regulations. l6

Experts on game ranching abroad are divided

on the feasibility and advisability of introducing foreign (exotic) species to U.S. domestic

ranges or expanding native species. Raymond

Dasmann, who helped set up one of the pioneering game ranches in Rhodesia, believes

that wild ungulates (hoofed mammals), in some

settings, are capable of producing more meat

than domestic animals.17 Certain areas of scrub

vegetation in California, he estimates, could

yield up to 550 kilograms of meat per square

kilometer, or more than seven times the average yield from domestic livestock. While the

evidence is far from conclusive about the efficiencies of wild ungulates versus cattle in converting biomass to meat, advocates suggest it

is sufficient to justify more research on managlsIbid. 16Jud1 Hebbring, Executive Director of the National Buffalo

Association, July 1982, telephone interview.

1

7R. Dasmann, “Biomass, Yield, and Economic Value of Wild

and Domestic Ungulates, ” Transactions of the 6th International

Union of Game Biologists (London: Nature Conservancy), pp.

227-233.

ing ungulates for meat production. Raised in

proximity with domestic cattle, they do not

necessarily compete with the latter for vegetation but instead actually may assist in maintaining a better balance of forage for both.

To help develop a U.S. market for game meat,

Texas Tech University is evaluating mixed

ground meats comprised of venison, pork, and

beef for palatability and nutrition .18 Generally,

landowners with large stocks of wildlife are not

yet investing much capital and other resources

into its management. They are turning instead

to more intensive production of livestock and

other primary activities.l9

Other experts state that imported animals

would bring little, if any, ecological benefit.

They suggest that such animals usually compete with the range of domestic or native species already competing for forage and may carry parasites that can be transmitted to animals

or humans. One expert who holds this view

suggested five ecological principles to consider

in determining the efficacy of introducing an

exotic animal to a new environment:20

Every habitat tends to be full. Nature abhors a vacuum and there are few vacant

spaces in natural communities. Physical

space alone does not constitute a vacancy

in the animal community. Sufficient vegetation, preferably not that favored by existing animals, must exist to support new animals.

Each species has a specific set of tolerances and must be placed in an environment to which it can adapt. Ecological

homologs are the best candidates for introduction to new lands. These are animals with identical counterparts, frequently found on another continent. They are

often look-alikes, have identical habits, and

IBRobert Warren, Assistant Professor, Department of Range

and Wildlife Management, Texas Tech University, April 1982,

telephone interview.

IE’G. Burger and J. Teer, “Economic and Socioeconomic Issues

Influencing Wildlife Management on Private Land” (unpublished

paper).

‘“James G. Teer, “Introduction of Exotic Animals, ” Wildlife

Conservation Principles (Washington, D.C.: Wildlife Society,

1979), pp. 173-175.
26 ● Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

●

●

●

occupy similar habitats. The axis deer, for

instance, is a homolog to the white-tailed

deer.

Plastic species have higher probabilities

of succeeding. A plastic species is one that

is able to adapt to varying conditions. Such

a species often has large variations in its

appearance as indicated by large numbers

of races. North American ring-necked

pheasants, for example, have subtle differences in coloration and other attributes

which reflect the underlying genetic variation that makes them successful in a variety of locations.

Introduced species in direct competition

for resources with closely related animals will fail. Although dislocations of

native species can occur, they usually have

the advantage because they evolved in

place.

Transplanting animals from complex

communities, such as their natural habitat, to relatively simple communities,

such as farms or game ranches, has been

successful. The significantly decreased

presence of other types of life may give exotics an advantage in their new environment.

This same expert suggests that the Sonoran and

Chihuahua deserts of the southwestern

United States and northwestern Mexico might

be suitable for oryx, gazelle, or springbok. But

such marginal lands are few in North America,

and good rangeland is almost fully used by domestic animals.21

Advocates of game ranching believe that the

technological and ecological aspects of game

ranching are favorable. They believe institutional factors such as encroachment of wildlife

on neighboring lands, lack of marketing mechanisms, and health regulations are the main

barriers to future development.22 The long-term

potential of game ranching, whether in the

United States, Africa, or elsewhere, will depend on economic, social, and ecological conditions of the area.

If the potential exists for eventually marketing low-cost game meat in quantity, game meat

could provide a more significant source of protein than now exists. With more secure markets, game ranching operations that fit into the

ecology of the area in their use of the water,

land, and vegetation also could provide one

more means of economic productivity from

arid and semiarid lands. As human exploitation destroys the natural habitats of wild

animals, their existence as a wild species is

threatened. This technology may have the

added benefit of helping to preserve them for

future generations.

ZIJames G. Teer, Director, Welder Wildlife Foundation, April

1982, telephone interview.

ZZRaymond F, Dassman, Professor of Ecology, University of

California, Santa Cruz, August 1982, telephone interview.
Chapter IV

Managing Water on Farms

in Pakistan
Chapter IV

Managing Water on Farms in Pakistan

SUMMARY

This foreign irrigation experience with onfarm water management provides insights for

problem analyses and technology adoption relevant to irrigated agriculture in the United

States, in particular:

● use of a multidisciplinary team approach

to problem analyses, data collection and

evaluation, and design of the most appropriate technology package for effective onfarm water management;

● maximum farmer participation in development and adoption of technology solutions, including farmer involvement in water-use planning, design of the technologies and irrigation practices, and training

in maintenance requirements for such

technologies; and

● information synthesis and dissemination

of project results and water management

knowledge and techniques so that other

projects can analyze the experience for

possible relevance to their own agricultural water-use needs.

INTRODUCTION

Meeting future needs for increased food production will depend heavily on improving existing agricultural schemes that manage water.

One study, for instance, projects that about

one-third of the increased food production

from 1975 to 1990 in Asia on irrigated lands

would come from improvements to existing

systems. l To what extent these increases can

be achieved depends, in the opinion of many

development experts, on successful water management and other practices at the farm level.

As one U.S. Agency for International Development (AID) paper stated:

The present drama in irrigation is not one

of simply more large dams and reservoirs, but

the improvement of water management for the

total system with a special focus at the farm

level to help farmers make more efficient use

of water for increased crop production. z

IInternationa] Food Policy Research Institute, Investment and

Input Requirements for Accelerating Food Production in Low

Income Countries by 1990 [Washington, D. C.: IFPRI, September

1979), p, 26.

‘Agency for International Development, ‘‘Planning Concepts

for a Flexible Irrigation Water Management Strategy in Asia, ”

Asia Bureau memorandum, Jan. 25, 1982, p. 4.

Modern agricultural irrigation systems have

involved billions of dollars in dams, reservoirs,

and water conveyance works. At the same

time, there is growing recognition that little emphasis has been placed on water allocation and

application on farms.3 Instead, irrigation planners often have assumed that delivering more

water to farmers would improve crop yields

without the need to consider actual farmer

practices and participation. Yet an obstacle to

increased agricultural production in many

countries is poor on-farm management of water supplies.4 A recent World Bank paper5 proposing the establishment of an International Irrigation Management Institute identified the

following problems with current irrigation

schemes:

1. uneven distribution of water to farms

along the canals, with lower productivity

——.———

tIbid.

Wolorado State University, “Evaluation of the On-Farm Water

Management Research Project, Colorado State University, ”

report to the Agency for International Development, September

1979, p. 6.

sProposal by the Technical Advisory Committee to the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research for the establishment of an International Irrigation Management Institute,

April 1982.

29
30 ● Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

2.

3.

4.

at the plots farthest from the diversion

point in the canal;

low crop yields caused by water loss in

transmission;

unreliable and untimely water deliveries;

and

waterlogging (the condition in which the

water table rises to near the surface of the

soil) and salinity.

Methods exist to improve on-farm water

management, but implementing these methods

has been difficult for a number of reasons.

Close cooperation among farmers and between

farmers and irrigation technologists is required. However, institutional mechanisms for

involving farmers generally have developed

piecemeal and without regard to deriving lessons that may have general application for future projects. Lack of systematic documentation of methods or results has constrained

transfer of successful experiences from one

country to another. An analysis by AID states

that “the flow of scientific knowledge in irrigation is slow, erratic, and piecemeal” and that

“seldom does one country know what works

under what conditions at what costs in a neighboring country.”6

A recent AID project in Pakistan was an attempt to address these problems by improving

on-farm water management.

@Agency for International Development, Asia Bureau memorandum, op. cit., p. 11.

AID PROJECT IN PAKISTAN*

In 1968, AID contracted with Colorado State

University (CSU) to help Pakistan address its

problems of low water-use efficiency** on

farms and low food production. A unique

aspect of the contract was the requirement that

CSU analyze and report the processes developed during the project, so that AID might

draw from these experiences for use in other

developing countries. CSU also was asked to

develop information and training materials for

use in graduate courses on water management.

The focus was the small farm. The pilot research area, the Mona Reclamation Experimental Project, covered 30 villages and more

than 10,000 acres. Project work was later extended to other areas of Pakistan. The key participants were the CSU team, local Pakistani

universities, farmers, and local and provincial

governments.

*The description of this project is based on the evaluation report, other project reports, and telephone interviews in April

and May 1982 with Max Lowdermilk, senior water management

specialist consultant to AID, and Colorado State University project personnel, including Gaylord Skogerboe, project coordinator,

1974-80, and Thomas Trout, project agricultural engineer,

1976-78.

**Water-use efficiency refers to crop production per unit of

water used, irrespective of water source, expressed in units of

weight per unit of water depth applied to unit area.

Background

The broad objective of the AID-Pakistan

water management project was to improve the

effectiveness of water use through better control of irrigation water. This ultimately would

help to increase economic returns to the farmer.

Pakistan has about 25 million acres (10,125,000

hectares) of land under irrigation through the

use of canals which divert water from the Indus River and its tributaries. This irrigation system is the largest contiguous system in the

world. The river diversion process, large primary canals, and the distributional network of

smaller canals are outstanding engineering

achievements in diverting and conveying water. Yet little attention traditionally had been

given to agricultural use of the water once it

was delivered to the farm. The farmers were

left to fend for themselves. Water distribution

to the fields after release from the canals was

poorly managed. Despite multibillion-dollar investments, crop yields remained low, and problems of waterlogging and salinity frequently

were severe.7 Salinity control and reclamation

programs in the 1960’s attempted to lower wa7Colorado State University evaluation op. cit., p. 7.
Ch. IV—Managing Water on Farms in Pakistan ● 3 1

ter tables and provide additional water supplies, but they were not so effective as had been

anticipated. 8 In 1976, as a result of research

findings, Pakistan approved a $44 million

matching loan agreement with AID for an onfarm water management pilot program to partially line and reconstruct 1,500 watercourses

(out of more than 80,000 in the Indus River System). The research project continued under

three successive contracts until AID activities

ceased in 1980. The World Bank and the Pakistani Government are supporting many of the

programs started during the AID/CSU project.

Collecting and Evaluating Data

One of the first tasks of the project was to

measure watercourse losses that occur between

the time water is diverted from canal turnouts

to when it reaches the farmers’ fields. Instead

of 10- to 15-percent seepage losses as had been

assumed by planners in Pakistan, real losses

were found to be 40 to 60 percent.

Once the extent of watercourse losses was

determined, the CSU team and farmers discussed various technologies and practices that

could reduce those losses. They concluded that

most of the losses could be prevented by rehabilitating earthen watercourses, lining critical reaches, and installing manufactured turnouts (devices to allow water to flow from the

watercourse into the field).

The findings about losses of water in delivery

to the fields also led to recommending less emphasis on large water supply works (such as

dams) and more emphasis on water conservation and management.

Project Actions

Major project efforts were in technology

adaptation, farmer participation, training, and

information transfer.

Adapting Technology To Meet

Local Needs

In traditional Pakistani irrigation systems,

waterflow to the field is controlled by temporary earthen dams that are removed to release

water and then rebuilt. This constant destruction and reconstruction has weakened watercourse walls, decreased efficiency of water delivery, and required considerable time and

labor. Working with the farmers to find the

most suitable system, the project staff went

through several design phases of a new turnout

device for controlling water flow to the fields.

The final modified version was a simple, durable, locally built, and easy-to-install concrete

turnout (see fig. 2). In addition to saving labor

and water, the turnouts eliminated weak spots

in the canal walls, improved control over water

flow, reduced seepage loss, and contributed to

local industry. The choice of concrete, a material of little intrinsic value in Pakistan, meant

the turnouts would not be stolen or salvaged

for other uses. Existing technology was thus

adapted by the local artisans, the farmers, and

the CSU team to solve a common local problem.

Uneven fields were another major factor in

overirrigation. When a field is uneven, farmers

overwater to cover the high areas; this leads

to waterlogging of the lower areas, possible increased soil salinity, and uneven crop growth.

To address this problem, the CSU team began

a precision leveling program. Local artisans

manufactured the equipment for land leveling,

and local companies performed the work. In

contrast to the concrete turnout, however, the

land leveling program was not entirely successful for a number of reasons. *

1. It was less efficient, and thus more expensive, on small farms than on large.

qbid.

*In spite of these problems, in 1973 the Pakistani Government

embarked on a multimillion-rupee program of land leveling

under an AID loan agreement.
32 Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

Figure 2.— Precast Concrete Slab Installation for Panel Turnouts

(dimensions shown are for a 50-cm diameter turnout)

I

I

33 cm

1

/’
Ch. IV—Managing Water on Farms in Pakistan ● 3 3

2.

3.

4.

Leveling a typical small field in the Mona

area required careful scheduling of equipment and nonuse of the field for a season.

Most Mona area farmers, and in fact most

of Asia, have small farms and cannot afford to take land out of production for a

season.

Land leveling actually reduced yield for an

additional season because topsoil was

shifted. Most small-farm operators cannot

sacrifice the yield necessary to have their

fields leveled.

There may be additional environmental

problems with erosion, since the soils will

have been redistributed and infiltration to

stabilize the soils may be reduced for the

first season at least.

Farmer Participation

Social and economic constraints to effective

water use and watercourse maintenance centered on the lack of: 1) effective local organization to mobilize labor and other resources,

2) knowledge among farmers regarding the

magnitude of watercourse loss, and 3) technical

knowledge among farmers for improving their

watercourses.

Project workers recognized that, without

farmer participation and cooperation on a longterm basis, technological solutions would have

limited impact and any improvements made

would be short-lived. The farmers were therefore involved in water use planning, designing

experimental technologies and irrigation practices, and learning the maintenance requirements for such technologies.

The first step was enlisting farmers to assist

in improving their watercourses. It was necessary to convince the farmers that if something

needed to be done, the farmers would have to

take the lead responsibility. Farmers were

shown examples from other villages that had

undertaken watercourse improvements with

visibly beneficial results. They were encouraged by these demonstrations to reline and reconstruct their own local watercourses at sites

where water loss had been greatest. The result

was that water transport loss was greatly rePhoto credit: Kay Muldoon for World Bank and IDA, December 1970

Using the traditional Pakistani method, a farmer opens

his irrigation ditch to water his wheatfield on his

5-acre farm near the village of Bal

duced in the area and farmers gained a sense

of responsibility for their own watercourse

maintenance.

The next step was to setup water user organizations to help distribute the increased flow

more equitably. Unfortunately, since water

management in Pakistan is handled on a provincial basis, laws to assist the process had to

be enacted one at a time. Nevertheless, far-

-reaching legislation was adopted in 1981 in a

number of provinces to give legitimacy to the

farmer organizations and provide them with

legal status for bargaining purposes.9

Training and Information Transfer

The need for training local personnel became

apparent early in the project. Pakistani research associates were brought to the university campus in Colorado for this purpose. This

exchange proved valuable over the long term.

According to one AID report, most of the train-

‘M. Lowdermilk, “State of the Art on Water User Associations

for Improved Farm Water Management, ” paper for AID (undated].
34 ● Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

ees who earned doctorates or masters degrees

at Colorado “are involved in finding solutions

to Pakistan’s problems today.” In addition,

nearly 100 Pakistanis were trained in Pakistan

for on-farm water management teams. The research and training functions also provided the

opportunity for U.S. graduate students to study

the problems firsthand in Pakistan.10

Perhaps the most significant result of the

Pakistan project was the development and documentation of methodology for possible transfer to other settings. Project coordinators realized that in order to reap full benefits from the

project, information would need to be circulated both within Pakistan and to other developing countries.

AID has published numerous manuals and

technical reports explaining in detail the Pakistani process of onsite problem identification

and the development of site-specific solutions

and their implementation. It has produced

handbooks describing the concrete-turnout design and manufacture, plans for encouraging

farmer participation, and land leveling techniques. These handbooks are published in

French, Spanish, and English. Within Pakistan,

agricultural extension agents trained by the

program continue their outreach work with

farmers. A series of lectures has been videotaped for university instruction. (See app. B for

a listing of AID-produced materials on irrigation water management.)

IOCo]orado State University evaluation, op. cit., p. 27.

Project Evaluation

Project evaluators identified several important factors that helped the project achieve

some level of accomplishment:

●

●

●

●

●

focus on a real world problem—i.e., “the

poor management of existing irrigation

systems;”

use of an interdisciplinary approach, with

a CSU team including a civil engineer, an

agricultural engineer or agronomist, and

a rural sociologist;

CSU’s collaboration with a number of Pakistani organizations responsible for varied

aspects of on-farm water management;

CSU’s working relations with Pakistani

colleagues (a large proportion of the project publications were of joint U.S.-Pakistani authorship); and

CSU’s contribution to the project design,

made possible by AID’s flexible management strategy .11

Broadly based data on crop yields as the result of this joint U.S.-Pakistan effort at improved water management are not available.

On test plots, however, the project team found

that good fertilizer responses and good yields

were consistently obtained with irrigation levels as much as 40 percent below those previously considered to be optimum. CSU researchers

have estimated that yields could be doubled if

Pakistani farmers made some simple adjustments in their practices to reduce crop loss

risk.12

llIbido

‘zIbid., p. 23.

Project in Egypt worked in Pakistan, the Egyptian project also

had as its goal improving the productivity of

Based on the successful efforts in Pakistan, the small farm. The project components inAID embarked on a similar project in Egypt in eluded study of the economic effects of water

1978. Designed by many of the experts who distribution methods, fostering farmer organ-
Ch. IV—Managing Water on Farms in Pakistan ● 3 5

izations and better communications between Synthesis Project. Its purpose was to stimulate

farmers and the Ministry of Irrigation, and con- international exchange of irrigation water manducting research on techniques to increase agement knowledge and techniques. The projagricultural productivity. This project is ect is managed by the Consortium for Internascheduled to continue until mid-1984. tional Development, a group of universities

with experience in providing technical assistWater Management Synthesis

ance to developing countries. The effort involves both information transfer and technical

Project* assistance. Information on irrigation developDrawing on the Pakistani and Egyptian projments worldwide is regularly analyzed and systematically distributed to about 700 officials, ects data, AID launched a Water Management researchers, and other individuals in some 30

countries. A few countries have requested as-

*This discussion is based on information received from a tele- sistance applying the Pakistani/Egyptian probphone interview with Wayne Clyma, Colorado State University,

codirector of the Water Management Synthesis Project, in lem-solving process to their own agricultural

August 1982. Utah State University shared project responsibility. water-use needs.

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

There is some disagreement within the U.S.

agricultural community about the degree to

which the approach to problem analyses and

technology adoption used in Pakistan is now

used in U.S. irrigated agriculture. Nevertheless,

with billions of dollars of new irrigation investments being planned by the United States and

other bilateral and international lenders, many

opportunities exist for validating and developing further some of the processes used in the

Pakistani and Egyptian AID projects. Elements

that have broad value for planning and implementing improved water management schemes

include:

Interactive

In both projects,

Field Research

research teams worked

closely with local officials, farmers, and researchers to identify the practical problems

and those areas that appeared to have high

potential for payoffs. This interaction also was

important to obtain feedback as the new technologies and methods were tested. The projects

demonstrated that when farmers perceive potential or actual benefits from improved water

management, they become more active in contributing their ideas, labor, and capital.

CONSIDERATIONS

Integration of Research Results

With Government PoIicy

In Pakistan, the project findings of 40 to 60

percent water losses were received skeptically by many Government agencies and officials.

The project team, in conjunction with Pakistan’s Water and Power Development Authority’s planning unit, persisted in its efforts to

convince policy makers of the validity of the

findings through individual discussions, seminars, publications, and the replication of the

research on additional watercourses.13 The result was a draft “Revised Action Programme

for Irrigated Agriculture” calling for lining

24,000 watercourses and rehabilitating 48,000

more by 1990. In Egypt, the government has

high expectations for the project, and both the

Ministries of Irrigation and Agriculture already

are looking to the project personnel for general

guidance on the design of further programs

that will increase agricultural production.14

IsCo]orado State University evaluation, Op. Cit., p. 43.

14Mid.Project Evaluation Report of the Egypt Water Use and

Management Project prepared for the Agency for International

Development, November 1980, p. 19.
36 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

Multidisciplinary Approach

This was considered a significant factor by

project participants and evaluators. The multidisciplinary approach brought together economics, institutional aspects, and sociology,

along with the traditional disciplines of engineering and agronomy, in planning, implementation, and training. The multidisciplinary

training of water management specialists is

one of the major innovations required in the

future. Demand for broad-based water specialists may exceed supply, given the scale of

planned investments in existing and new irrigation schemes. The International Food Policy

Research Institute (IFPRI) estimates, for instance, that in eight Asian developing nations

alone, an additional 55,000 professionals, technicians, and extension personnel will be required annually until 1990 to manage and operate new irrigated areas. 15

An outgrowth of CSU’s work in Pakistan and

other developing countries was a grant from

the Ford Foundation for partial support of

an intensive interdisciplinary course. * The

course, offered in 1981, is noteworthy in its

coverage of social, institutional, and technical

aspects of improved irrigation water management. Most participants were from foreign

countries.16

Information Dissemination

Worldwide

The Water Management Synthesis Project is

a step toward creating an information system

to meet irrigation management information

needs. Such an organization would need to be:

international in scope, cross-disciplinary, concerned with improving irrigation systems management, focused on developing countries and

ISIFpRI, op. cit., p. 63.

*The Ford Foundation also has considered support for an

international center to conduct interdisciplinary research and

training in the irrigation management field. This idea, which

was viewed as having a high priority by the Consultative Group

on International Agricultural Research, a multidonor-sponsored

organization with headquarters in Washington, D. C., was rejected, however, for budgetary reasons.

16 David M. Freeman, Associate Professor of Sociology, COlorado State University, August 1982, telephone interview.

small farms, directly linked with action on research, able to identify and report on improved

management practices, and backed by sufficient resources. No organization currently publishing and distributing information on irrigation combines all these features.17

United States

Irrigation technologies and the institutional

arrangements for implementing them are generally site-specific. Nevertheless, U.S. project

participants in the Pakistan and Egypt efforts

maintain that the experience gained in those

projects provides insights for solving irrigation

problems in the arid lands of the American

West. One of the Pakistan project participants,

for instance, applied the problem analysis and

techniques he developed abroad to work being

conducted with Colorado farmers. The project

involved organizing farmers to use water management technologies to reduce the salinity of

discharge into the Colorado River from the

Grand Valley .18 This demonstration project,

funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA), was later expanded with support from USDA’s Soil Conservation Service.

Another example comes from the feedback

of Pakistan’s project and the development of

CSU’s interdisciplinary short course on water

management. Although practically all of the attendees have been foreign students, administrators, and researchers, the course is open to

U.S. citizens. The cofounder of the course,

Everett Richardson, recognizes that the institutional setting for irrigation in the Western

United States is different from that in Pakistan

or many other developing countries. Nevertheless, he feels that “the principles of problemsolving and organization building are directly

applicable to U.S. situations. ” In addition, a

number of potential applications of these foreign projects to the Colorado situation were

identified. They include:

● the research development process;

ITCons~tative Group on International Agricultural Research,

op. cit., p. 28 (see footnote 5).

‘e’’ Modest Technologies,” A40saic (Washington, D. C.: National

Science Foundation, January/February 1977), pp. 46-47.
Ch. IV—Managing Water on Farms in Pakistan . 37

●

●

●

●

foliar spray techniques for applying nutrients, which are not used widely in Colorado but could be and which are being

used in the Columbia Basin;

an inexpensive canal outlet for water control and measurement;

project publications covering such items

as the design of buried pipelines and furrow irrigation systems; and

improved surface methods and water management techniques that do not involve the

costly investments for sprinkler, bubble, or

drip irrigation systems which many Colorado farmers feel are the only means to increase water efficiency. *

*Mr. Richardson prepared an informal paper, “Egyptian Experiences Applied to Colorado, ” for AID in 1982. He said in a telephone conversation in August 1982 that one or two Colorado

farmers were interested in working with him to implement some

of the methodology from the Egyptian project. Irrigation farms

in Colorado face a fivefold increase in their water charges in

1983 because of assessments on irrigation districts for construction of new dam spillways. Before these assessments, Colorado

farmers could afford to hold on to extra shares of water. Richardson believes the increase from $20 to $100 per share (each share

equals 7 acre-feet) will make it more attractive to sell shares and

to become more water efficient.
Chapter V

Developing Guayule (Natural

Rubber) as a Commercial Crop
Chapter V

Developing Guayule (Natural

Rubber) as a Commercial Crop

SUMMARY

This report of Australian and U.S. efforts to forts have used and advanced those cardevelop guayule suggests that new agricultural ried out earlier by the United States; and

uses exist for arid lands. In particular: ● continued cooperation is expected to enhance U.S. commercialization of guayule

● guayule is a water-conserving plant, native

to the United States, which has important production and to protect both countries

from threats to other supplies of natural potential strategic and industrial uses;

● Australian research and development ef- rubber.

INTRODUCTION

The United States depends on other nations

for a number of industrial materials that are

important to U.S. industry. Some are called

strategic, meaning critical to our national defense, and must be acquired and stored in the

United States to meet national defense needs.

Study and research is taking place to determine

the economic and political feasibility of producing some of these industrial materials from

plants. (See table 7 for a list of selected potential domestic crops and the materials they

could replace.)1 One such strategic material, the

——

IHoward C. Tankersley, Soil Conservation Service, USDA, and

Richard Wheaton, Program Manager, Natural Rubber Program,

USDA, “Strategic and Essential Industrial Materials From

Plants—Thesis and Uncertainties,” (OTA draft), November 1982.

subject of this chapter,

cause natural rubber is

is natural rubber. Bea strategic material, it

is advantageous to have domestic control of

supplies rather than importing and stockpiling

them.

In 1981 the world’s natural rubber supply fell

short of demand by 110,000 metric tons.2 The

World Bank has estimated that world rubber

needs will increase by 5 percent annually for

the remainder of this decade; recent changes

in the international economy may make that

‘Natural Rubber IGuayule) Research in the United States, A

Combined 1980 and 1981 Report on Implementation of the

Native Latex Commercialization and Economic Development

Act of 1978, Joint Commission on Guayule, U.S. Department of

Agriculture, August 1982 (draft), pp. 2-3.

Table 7.—Potential Domestic Crops and Uses

Crop To replace

Guayule (Parthenium argentatum A. Gray) Hevea natural rubber, resins

Crambe (Crambe abyssinica Hochst. ex High erucic rape oil and petroleum

R. E. Fries) feedstocks

Jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis (Link) C. Schneid) Sperm whale oil and imported waxes

Lesquerella spp. Castor oil

Vernonia spp.—Stokesia spp. Epoxy oils

Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) Imported newsprint and paper

Assorted oilseeds Petrochemicals for coatings

SOURCE: L. H, Princen, Alternate Industrial Feedstocks From Agriculture (Peoria, Ill.: Northern Regional Research Center,

1980). Agricultural Research Service, US. Department of Agriculture in “Strategic and Essential Industrial Materials

From Plants-Thesis and Uncertainties,” OTA draft, November 1982

41
42 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

—...—— —

estimate high. During this decade, however,

natural rubber, as opposed to synthetic, is expected to retain its one-third share of the total

rubber markets

As the largest single user of natural rubber,

the United States greatly influences the world

supply-demand formula and the price of natural rubber. Contributing to the rising demand

for natural rubber is the boom in radial automobile tires, which require about 40 percent

natural rubber, almost twice as much as that

required in nonradial tires. While radials wear

longer, their growing popularity creates additional demand for natural rubber. Moreover,

synthetic rubber still lacks the elasticity, resilience, and resistance to heat buildup of natural

rubber, indispensable factors for bus, truck, and

airplane tires.4 Consequently, radial tires have

captured an increasing market share of the

original auto equipment package in the United

States. For example, radial tire sales expanded

from 25 percent for the 1973 car models to 99.9

percent for the 1981 models.5

sNational Academy of Sciences, Guayule: An Alternative

Source of Natural Rubber, 1977, p. 54.

Most of the world’s rubber comes from two

sources: the hevea rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis (wind. ex A. Juss.) (Muell.-Arg.) and synthetics made from petroleum feedstocks. A number

of factors raise doubt about the reliability of

Hevea as a secure and expanding source of natural rubber?

●

●

●

Hevea only grows within a restricted area

of the tropics.

Brazil, a major natural rubber supplier,

had its production wiped out by leaf blight

early in the 20th century. Leaf blight has

been a serious constraint to further production, although blight-resistant strains

are being developed. Chemical control also

may be a possible, but expensive, answer

to controlling future blight.

Hevea is one of the most labor-intensive

crops in the world.

‘3 National Academy of Sciences, op. cit., pp. 2 and 60; and interview with Richard Wheaton, Program Manager, Domestic

Rubber Program and Executive Secretary, Joint Guayule Commission, April 1982.

‘Ibid., p. 2.

sEarl Kraher, Statistics Office, Motor Vehicle Manufacturers

Association, July 23, 1982, interview.

●

●

Several of the primary producing countries, mindful of Hevea's production costs,

are switching to less labor-intensive and

more profitable crops.

Southeast Asia, which accounts for about

90 percent of world production, has been

subject to political instability.

Simultaneous with the uncertainty of an adequate future natural rubber supply, the production of synthetic rubber is being affected by rising costs of the petrochemical feedstocks from

which it is produced. This relatively recent development reinforces the prediction in a National Academy of Sciences report that the demand for natural rubber will continue.7

These factors have contributed to a growing

interest in guayule (Parthenium argentatum

Gray) as a promising alternative source of natural rubber. Guayule is a shrub which grows

wild in some semiarid regions of North America.

7National Academy of Sciences, op. cit., p. 2.

ADVANTAGES AND DlSADVANTAGES OF DEVELOPING GUAYULE

Guayule has a number of properties that ● Its rubber has chemical and physical propmake it attractive as a source of commercial erties virtually identical to those of Hevea.

rubber: ● It grows well under plantation conditions
Ch. V—Developing Guayule (Natural Rubber) as a Commercial Crop ● 43 — —.—

and can be improved through crossbreeding.

● It appears to be only slightly affected by

latitude or altitude and therefore may be

of interest to nations lying outside the

Tropics that cannot produce synthetics.8

Certain characteristics of guayule make it

particularly suitable for semiarid land cultivation. These relate to temperature and drought

tolerance, yield, and durability. Guayule grows

well in temperatures ranging from 770 to 1040

F (250 to 40

0 C), and wild guayule can survive

temperatures below 32° F (0° C). Most literature suggests 16 inches (40 millimeters

[mm]) of rainfall is optimal for growth. U.S.

plantings during World War II showed that 11

to 25 inches (280 to 640 mm) were needed for

commercial production. Experience with the

shrub also indicates that if precipitation falls

below about 14 inches (350 mm), supplemental irrigation may be needed. Within this moisture range, however, rubber yield is only slightly affected as water is reduced toward the

lower ranges of tolerance. Finally, the root system can penetrate to a 20-foot depth (6.5 meters), with plants living for 30 to 40 years in

their native environment.9

Despite these apparent advantages, guayule

faces many technical and economic barriers

to commercial development. Much technical

refinement is required to reduce the cost of producing guayule to a level that is economically

attractive. Some of the major difficulties involve solving problems at the early stages of

agriculture production, such as developing

guayule strains that contain uniformly high

quantities of rubber.10 The rubber content of

aIbid., pp. I-10.

BFor a more complete description of guayule’s characteristics,

see L. W. Owens, Report on Guayule Potential and Research in

South Australia, February 1981, sec. 3 (unpaginated); and A. R.

Bertrand, “A Review of Guayule Research: 1941 -1981,” memo

to Chairman of Joint Guayule Commission, in Joint Commission

Report, appendix.

10 Nationa] Academy of Sciences, op. cit,, p. 12; and E. G. Knox

and A. A. Theison (eds. ), 1981 Feasibility of Introducing New

Crops: Production-Marketing-Consumption [PMC) Systems, ch.

VI, Guayule, G. L. Laidig, pp. 100-I2o (Emmaus, Pa.: Rodale

Press].

harvested shrubs, for example, can vary from

8 to 26 percent of dry weight (table 8). Verticillium and Phytopthora root rots are the major

disease problems, both of which are aggravated

by excessive soil moisture. In its native habitat,

guayule is rarely affected by disease, but under

cultivation its susceptibility increases. Another

problem is providing a secure supply at a production level that could meet demands consistently. In addition, the economics of the international rubber market must shift if there is to

be commercial guayule development. One estimate is that guayule will be competitive when

Hevea reaches 90 cents per pound.11 The average price of Hevea from January to June 1982

was only 46.6 cents per pound, even though

it reached a peak of nearly 74 cents in 1980 (fig.

3). If the international economy revives, market

prices might again rise, providing incentive for

guayule investment.

In spite of these difficulties, one country with

considerable arid and semiarid land, Australia,

has begun to research the feasibility of the commercial production of guayule. The next section reviews some of the principal elements of

the Australian experience as one example of

the growing interest in the commercialization

of guayule.

II Wheaton interview (see footnote 6).

Table 8.—Components of Harvested Guayule Shrub

Moisture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45-60 percent

Rubber. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-26 percenta

Resins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-15 percenta

Residue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-55 percenta

Leaves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-20 percenta

Cork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3 percenta

Water solubles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-12 percenta

Dirt and rocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Variable

aDry weight basis.

SOURCE: National Academy of Sciences, Guayu/e: An Alternative Source of

Natural Rubber (Washington, D. C.: NAS, 1977)
44 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

Figure 3.—Natural Rubber Prices per Metric Ton

1,600

1,500

1,400

1,300

1,200

= 800

700

600

500

400

300

1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985

Price per metric tona

Price per pound

0

/0 increase or decrease + 20%

aNew ‘fork price R.S.S. 1 Rubber bJan.-June Average

SOURCE: Joint Commission on Guayule, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural l?ubber(Guayu/e) Research in the United States, A Combined 1960 and 1981 Report

on Implementation of the Native Latex Commercialization and Economic Development Act of 1978, August 1982 (draft), P. 3.

Background

Australia became interested in guayule in

1941, when the Japanese takeover of Malaya

(now Malaysia) cut off its natural rubber supplies. A guayule project was particularly attractive to Australia, a country where three-quarters of its land area—1.9 million square miles

(490 million hectares)-–was arid and not in any

competing use at that time. As can be seen in

figure 4, the entire interior of the country is a

large arid basin, experiencing high temperatures and an evaporation rate of 100 to 120

inches (2.5 to 3 meters) per year.12 Some of the

area is favorable for guayule production. In July 1942, Australia began a wartime project to

investigate alternative sources of natural rubIzR. 0. S]awer and R. A. Perry (eds,], Arid Lands of Australia

(Canberra: Australian National University Press, 1969), p, 56.

10O—

20°—

30°—

Figure 4.—Australia

—10°

—20 0

–30°

Arid

v

—40 0

0 500 1000 mi

SOURCE: Distribution of Arid Homoclimates. Eastern Hemisphere. Western

Hemisphere. U.N. Maps No. 392 and 393, Revision 1, by Peverill

Meigs, UNESCO, Paris, 1960,
Ch. V—Developing Guayule (Natural Rubber) as a Commercial Crop ● 45

ber. A principal focus was guayule, a plant not

native to Australia. The United States, which

was conducting a similar experiment in the

U.S. Southwest, provided Australia with seeds

and technical information.13

This early Australian experiment made some

progress in determining plant growth and rubber production potential. The project ceased,

however, when the war situation improved for

the Allies in 1943 and Hevea rubber became

more plentiful. Limited guayule cultivation

continued into the 1950’s entirely as a research

effort with no goal of commercialization, and

was abandoned at the end of the war.

In 1980, guayule research was resumed in

Australia in New South Wales, a state in the

eastern corner of the country. Figure 5 shows

the shaded region considered potentially suitable for guayule development. This area consists of the western slopes and plains which fall

—.

along a north-south belt through the traditional

lsFor an account of this early project see R. L. Crocker and

H. C. Trimble, Investigations of Guayule in South Australia

(Melbourne: Commonwealth of Australia, Council for Scientific

and Industrial Research, Bulletin No. 192, 1945).

Figure 5.—Test Sites, Western Slopes, and Plains

(shaded) of New South Wales

r

SOURCE I A. Siddiqul and P Locktov, A Feasibility Study on the Commerclallzatfon of Guayule m New South Wales, Australia, December 1981, California Department of Food and Agriculture

cropping areas in New South Wales. Nine test

plots in this region were planted with guayule

–Condobolin, Yanco, Narrabri, Trangie, North

Star, Warialda, Hillston, Wagga Wagga, and

Deniliguin. The project was funded for 3 years.

Its overall goal has been to determine the feasibility of guayule commercialization under dryland conditions in New South Wales. (See app.

C for estimated costs of producing 1 acre of

guayule in New South Wales.) The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) in Australia is assisting with

the research. In addition, the United States is

exchanging research and development information through a joint agreement with the New

South Wales Government. The priority research objectives of the project are:14

●

●

●

●

Developing techniques for direct seeding

of guayule under dryland conditions.—

CSIRO anticipates that higher yields of

rubber can be gained by spacing guayule

plants in a manner similar to that used in

growing cereal grains.

Understanding the physiology of guayule

growth and rubber production.—Information from test plots about the effects of

solar radiation, temperature, and soil water on key plant parameters will be used

to identify the most favorable environments for guayule production.

Developing guayule strains best suited to

Australian dryland environments.—The

United States is providing some of its highest yielding rubber varieties for testing in

Australia. 15

Investigating alternative processing methods for guayule.

Results of this Australian research already

show a number of promising signs. First, there

appears to be the potential for considerable savings in seedling costs, one of the more expensive aspects of guayule production. Consultants

to CSIRO have projected eventual seedling

14G, Alan stewart, Convenor, CSIRO Working Party on Guay -

ule. Correspondence to Dr. B. T. England, May 17, 1982.

IUI. A. siddiqui and P. Locktov, A Feasibility Study on the Commercialization of Guayule in New South Wales, Australia, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Division of Plant

Industry (Sacramento: December 1981), p. 12.
46 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

—- —

costs of $6 per 1,000. This is significantly below

the price of $80 to $100 per 1,000 seedlings

charged by two California nurseries in 1982,

although such costs were affected by relatively

low production volumes.16

Second, Australia is making progress in developing technology for processing the guayule. Table 7 from chapter III shows the components of a harvested guayule shrub. The

method preferred by researchers at CSIRO to

extract the rubber from the debris includes

shrub deresination and solvent extraction of

the rubber. This complicated chemical process

involves parboiling and cleaning the shrub,

hammermilling it through a fine-grade screen

to extract the resin, and finally extracting the

rubber by dissolving it in a solvent. With this

separation process, up to 95 percent of the rubber can be recovered.17 An alternative extraction method involves a pressure vessel to

waterlog the debris accompanying the rubber,

which in a subsequent slurry tank sinks, leaving the rubber afloat. But the water requirement for this alternative process is a major disadvantage in arid areas.18

Future Research

A report of U.S. scientists who visited Australia in 1982 indicates that the New South

Wales project has already made progress. The

trip was made under the Memorandum of

Agreement between New South Wales and the

U.S. Department of Agriculture for the interchange of research information, germ plasm,

161nterim Report, Guayule Working Party, Commonwealth

Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Mar.

25, 1982, p. 16.

17pJational Academy of Sciences, op. cit., p. 35.

InIbid., pp. 50-52.

and scientists involved in guayule research. Extensive research data and information were exchanged, accompanied by discussions in reviewing the problems and potential areas of research in New South Wales. Sites visited included Narrabri, Trangie, Condobolin, and

Hillston. The U.S. research team, which

traveled some 700 miles (1,100 kilometers) by

auto throughout the project site, obtained important information on the environmental conditions under which guayule would be grown

in New South Wales. The report recommends

priorities for future research in a number of

areas, three of which have particular relevance

for arid and semiarid lands:

evaluation of existing varieties, both for

resistance to drought and for high rubber

yield;

determination of water requirements under various plant spacings and with cultural practices which conserve or collect water; and

evaluation of direct seeding in the field

under irrigation versus using transplants

from nurseries.19

In addition, the report recognizes the need for

research in areas involving infrastructure for

commercial guayule production—namely, harvest mechanization, processing, and marketing. The challenge, as summarized by Australian scientists, is that guayule is “a new crop

to Australia and to the world” and “will require

a significant research and development effort

before becoming a commercial crop on a large

scale.”20

lgTechn ica] Report, U.S. Scientific and Technical Exchange

Team Visit to New South Wales, Mar. 26 to Apr. 17, 1982 (draft).

ZOInterim Report, CSIRO, op. cit., p. 57.

U.S. GUAYULE PRODUCTION AND RESEARCH

Guayule has been periodically exploited for ever, when the wild plants were overused and

commercial purposes in the United States. not replanted. In 1910, guayule mainly from

Early in this century, for instance, wild stands Mexico provided nearly 50 percent of the natin parts of Texas were harvested. The guayule ural rubber consumed in the United States and

rubber industry in Texas disappeared, how- 10 percent of world consumption. Production
Ch. V—Developing Guayule (Natural Rubber) as a Commercial Crop 47 —.—— . -

resumed briefly in the 1920’s when British control of Malaya’s rubber monopoly caused

prices to triple.21

The United States again became interested

in guayule, as did Australia, in December 1941

when Malaya fell to the Japanese. The United

States, like other Allied nations, lost more than

90 percent of its natural rubber supply. The

U.S. Government started the Emergency Rubber Project (ERP) in February 1942 to develop

guayule commercially. This project involved

more than 1,000 scientists and technicians.

Supported by a work force of 9,000 workers,

ERP planted almost 32,000 acres of guayule at

13 sites in 3 States. The project produced 1

billion guayule seedlings. Toward the end of

the project, 15 tons of rubber were being produced daily at mills near the California towns

of Salinas and Bakersfield.

In spite of its promising future, the ERP had

a short life. By the end of the war, synthetic

rubber was being produced in commercial

quantities, and surplus stocks of natural rubber began arriving from Southeast Asia. With

these developments, the wartime economic

and strategic justification for guayule production in the United States faded. When the project formally ended in 1946, about 21 million

pounds of rubber on 27,000 acres had to be

burned or plowed under so that the land could

be used for other crops. Most of the seeds from

the genetic improvement program were destroyed along with hundreds of millions of

seedlings. 22

In recent years, several factors have created

renewed interest in developing a domestic natural rubber industry based on guayule. Included among these are larger deficits between

world production and consumption, total U.S.

dependency on foreign sources, and the increase in Hevea prices over the past decade. 23

In 1978, the Native Latex Commercialization

and Economic Development Act was passed,

calling for the establishment of a U.S. Joint

ZINatiOnal ACadernY of Sciences, op. cit., pp. 17-23.

ZZIbid,

~sJ[]int (~ornrn lsslOn Report, op. cit., pp. 2 and 3 (See fOOtnOtC g).

Commission on Guayule Research and Commercialization, The goal of this Commission

has been to determine the potential for U.S.

commercialization of guayule.24 Commission

members are drawn from the U.S. Departments

of Agriculture, Commerce, and Interior, and

the National Science Foundation. In fiscal year

1981 these agencies had a combined budget of

about $2.6 million for guayule research, and

in fiscal year 1980, $1.4 million. The funds have

been used for research in genetics, agronomic,

and processing technology. Since its founding,

the Commission has developed an additional

7-year program to carry forward research and

development beyond the initial authorization

period which ends in 1983. The Commission

plan calls for refining the technology for growing and processing guayule to the point where

it can be transferred to the private sector for

commercialization. 25 The future of the Commission and its work under the Latex Act is

uncertain.

Also, in 1978 the California legislature enacted a pilot program to determine the feasibility of the commercial production of guayule in

California. The State of California in 1980 entered into a cooperative agreement with the

New South Wales Government to assist in establishing a guayule research and development

program .

The modest program of guayule research in

the United States is being conducted under

government auspices or with government assistance. Firestone and Goodyear Tire and

Rubber Companies, for example, have been engaged periodically in research on guayule

plantings, some of which involves government

support. 26 Texas A&M University, New Mexico State University, Los Angeles State and

County Arboretum, and the University of Arizona also have been doing selected guayule

research with some government assistance,

Generally, the move toward a massive U.S.

commercialization project has been tempered

ZqNa~iVe LateX cornrnercia]hat]on and Economic Development

Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-592). j, 25 ol nt Corn mi ssion Report, 01]. (: i t., [). 14 ( sf?t> foot Ilott: ~]).

zfi~~~he;lton inter~,ieli, ( see foot Ilot(: 6 ].
48 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

by political and economic constraints. To replace completely the imported Hevea with

domestically produced guayule, the United

States would have to plant more than 5 million

acres, an area about the size of New Jersey .27

Even if this were possible, the implications of

total U.S. rubber independence for U.S. balance of payments and foreign trade with present rubber-producing countries make the undertaking politically complicated at present.28

A small step in the direction of U.S. commercialization was made, however, in September

1982 when the Department of the Navy awarded

a $400,000 contract to the Gila River Indian

2TlgTT NatiOnal ReSc3UrCeS Inventory (revised 1980), Soil Conservation Service, USDA.

ZeIbid,

Community of Sacaton, Ariz., for growing and

processing guayule. The contract calls for the

preparation of 10 technical reports on growing and processing a prototype domestic guayule rubber industry in the United States. It also

provides for a $20 million guaranteed loan

from the Federal Financing Bank to undertake

pilot research work. Under this contract, the

Gila River Indians will cultivate approximately

5,000 acres of guayule shrubs with harvest

planned for 1987. They will negotiate a subcontract with the Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. for

research and development of the prototype

processing facility. The Indians will own and

operate the facility. 29

Jopress Release, Senator Barry Goldwater (Arizona), Sept. 29,

1982.

U.S. COOPERATION WITH OTHER COUNTRIES

The United States has entered into a few cooperative arrangements with other countries

on guayule research. As mentioned earlier, the

United States and New South Wales (through

their Departments of Agriculture) signed a cooperative agreement in 1982 to help expedite

their respective research projects with the exchange of information on research and development several times each year.30 Exchanges

of seed lines, plant materials, and raw rubber

products also are planned.

The U.S. and Australian projects complement each other, the former focusing on irrigated guayule production, the latter on dryland

production. If Australia is able to fulfill the

findings of feasibility studies on guayule commercialization, it could become not only selfsufficient in natural rubber but also “a major

exporting nation.”31 This development could

serve both U.S. and Australian national security interests by providing them with an additional, stable source of supply for natural rubber and its products.32 In addition, the commer-

~Summary Report (draft), U.S. Delegation, Scientific and Technical Exchange between Departments of Agriculture, New South

Wales, Australia, and United States, Apr. 9, 1982.

Sl]bid.

Szowens, op. cit. (see footnote 9).

cial production of guayule in New South Wales

may be more favorable than in California. First,

the New South Wales land is available at relatively low cost. Second, rainfall is evenly

distributed in the proposed planting areas;

thereby requiring little or no irrigation.33

The United States is also cooperating with

Mexico on a less formal basis in guayule research and development through a Joint Working Group on Agriculture, formed under the

U.S.-Mexico agreement for scientific cooperation.34 Of particular interest to American researchers is the Mexican Government’s pilot

processing plant in Saltillo, Mexico. This plant,

the world’s only commercial processing plant

for guayule, uses a flotation extraction process

and has a capacity to process 1 ton of wild

guayule daily.35 Joint projects will be developed

based on exchanges of plant material, information, and scientists associated with specific

projects.36

Sssiddiqui and Locktov, op. cit., p. 10.

sqJoint commission Report, op. cit., pp. 12-13 (SH? fOOtnOte 9).

s~wheaton interview (see footnote 6).

s8Joint commission Report, op. cit., app. 15 (see footnote ~).
Ch. V—Developing Guayule (Natural Rubber) as a Commercial Crop ● 49

Other countries have expressed interest in These include Brazil, Chile, India, Kenya,

cooperating with the United States in develop- Israel, and Egypt.37

ing guayule as a potential commercial crop. 371 bid., p. 13.

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CONSIDERATIONS

The United States can expect to gain much

scientific and technical information about

guayule growth and production from cooperative research with other countries. With respect

to the U.S.-Australian exchange, benefits include: 38

●

●

●

speeding up the solution of many of the

problems of agronomic production, genetic improvement, and new plant selections;

developing scientific data relative to dryland cultivation and new varieties that will

significantly aid U.S. natural rubber development; and

strengthening the U.S. and Australian alliance, which is important in case of any future interruption of Hevea supplies from

Southeast Asia.

More specifically, the United States has recently considered dryland guayule production

in Texas, and studies in New South Wales

should particularly benefit this U.S. effort. For

aOTechnica] Report, U.S. Scientific and Technical Exchange

Team Visit to New South Wales, Mar. 26 to Apr. 17, 1982.

example, in New South Wales, different methods for extracting rubber from guayule are

being compared. Both the United States and

New South Wales are interested in finding a

use for byproducts of guayule processing. Research has begun in New South Wales to identify oils, waxes, and volatile compounds that

can be obtained from guayule leaves. U.S. researchers such as those at the USDA Biomaterials Conservation Laboratory in Peoria, Ill.,

should find exchange of information most helpful to them in their work.

As these cooperative exchanges have already

shown, there can be complementary value to

each country in such an effort. Research and

international cooperation are important not

only for guayule, Plant research and development for industrial feedstocks as well as for

food products has national and international

benefits. Such research not only provides alternative sources of supply but also develops a better scientific knowledge and research base for

extrapolation to other areas where potential

may exist for greater use of arid and semiarid

plants (see ch. II).
.-

Chapter VI

Israel's Water Policy:

A National Commitment
—

Chapter VI

Israel's Water Policy:

A National Commitment

SUMMARY

Israel’s concerted national response to its severe water problems involved the use of several

measures that may have relevance for some of

the arid/semiarid U.S. agricultural regions.

These include:

● development of a vigorous water-data collection and evaluation project, including

the mapping of ground water resources to

determine their sources and ages;

● close monitoring of withdrawals and

recharge to predict ground water level

changes and allowable withdrawals;

● management of water demand through the

use of such tools as water-use metering,

pricing, and allocation; and

● extensive and ongoing research, training,

and technical assistance programs that involve the farmer in the design, manufacture, and application of new water management devices and techniques.

Israel’s approach to water management has

been defined largely by limited freshwater resources, poor natural distribution of those resources, and an expanding and dispersed population. 1 The latter aspect has been nearly as

important a factor in determining water policy

as the physical characteristics of the land and

water resources (see table 9). The population

of Israel has more than quintupled since the

country’s founding in 1948, increasing from

about 800,000 to nearly 4 million largely because of a liberal immigration policy. To accommodate this growth, Israel directed its new

citizens away from established population centers to new settlements throughout the country. This created not only a demand for more

water but also a need to distribute the water

to dispersed and remote users at an equitable

cost.

The major obstacles to meeting these demands have been:2

IS. Arlosoroff, “Israel-A Model of Efficient Utilization of a

Country’s Water Resources,” paper prepared for United Nations zM. Ben Meir, “Development and Management of Water ReConference on Water. Much of this section is derived from this sources in Israel, ” Water and Irrigation Review, Journal of the

article and an interview in April 1982 with the author. Water Workers Association of Israel (Tel Aviv), July 1981, p. 15.

Table 9.—Facts About Israel, 1979-80

Total population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,921,700

Number employed in agriculture . . . . . . . 83,200

Total area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,021,000 acres (2,032,000 hectares)

Cultivated area , . . . . . . . . . . . ., ... , . . . . . 1,055,117 acres (427,000 hectares)

Irrigated areaa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469,490 acres (190,000 hectares)

Total freshwater available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,378,400 acre-feet 1.7 billion cubic meters/year

Agricultural water available . . . . . . . . . . . . 973,000 acre-feet 1.2 billion cubic meters/year

aFrom Central Bureau of Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Jerusalem.

SOURCE: Statistical Abstract of Israel, 1981.

53
54 . Water. Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

There is no rainfall during the 6 months

of summer, and total rainfall varies greatly

from year to year.

The principal sources of water, the Jordan

River and Sea of Galilee, are located mainly in the northern half of Israel, while more

than half of the arable land is in the south.

Capacity in the Sea of Galilee and the two

major aquifers is insufficient to meet both

perennial and seasonal storage needs.

Most of the water is needed at elevations

much higher than these main sources of

supply; the Galilee, actually a lake, is more

than 200 meters below sea level. Water

must be pumped, and its distribution is

energy intensive.

The coastal areas next to the Mediterranean contain ground water, but withdrawals must be controlled to prevent seawater

intrusion.

Freshwater in deeper limestone reservoirs

is adjacent to highly saline water bodies.

To prevent intrusion of brackish water

into the reservoirs, withdrawals must be

kept below the annual recharge rate.

Israel’s available freshwater resources amount

to about 1,378,400 acre-feet (1.7 billion cubic

meters) annually. By 1985, an estimated 1,621,700

acre-feet (2 billion cubic meters) per year will

be needed or about 15 percent more water.3

Israel has limited options for increasing water

supply. Virtually no untapped sources of freshwater exist, and present ground water levels

3Arlosoroff, U. N., op. cit.

are not likely to increase. Other water sources

are questionable, particularly in terms of quality, and not yet fully developed. They include

reclaimed sewage, brackish water, and storm

waters. The Israeli Government’s plan for agricultural development during the first half of the

1980’s estimates that the total volume of water

available to agriculture in 1985 will grow only

slightly—from a 1980 level of about 973,000

acre-feet (1.2 billion cubic meters) to 1,135,200

acre-feet (1.4 billion cubic meters).4

By the end of this century, it is expected that

30 to 40 percent of the water used for irrigation will be reused effluents, and 10 percent

of the total amount of water used for agricultural purposes will be brackish water of high

salinity.5 This projection reflects a shift in focus

in water resources during the last decade from

the development of additional supplies to management of demand.6 Demand management

aims to make a given physical volume of water

provide the maximum possible benefit to the

community. Since the early 1970’s, Israel has

followed a policy by which development of

new water resources has been considered and

weighed against the investments and benefits

of demand strategies. This policy has been informally called “drip and automation versus

dams, deep boreholes and pipes.”*

4Six Year Plan for Agricultural Development, 19801985 (Jerusalem: Ministry of Agriculture, 1981), p. 84.

SIbid., p. 141,

8Meir, op. cit. p. 2.

*Comments made by S. Arlosoroff, former Deputy Water Commissioner for Israel in correspondence, Oct. 28, 1982.

WATER USE PROGRAMS

Israel has pursued a concerted, integrated response in dealing with its severe water problems. Managing demand for water is a major

element. Other elements include national control of water resources, development of a national water supply system, and technical assistance to farmers and to all sectors of water

use.

These programs have been possible for a

number of reasons. Israel is a small country;

its size has facilitated the widespread installation of water-related technologies. Consequently, distribution of water has not required prohibitive investments in pipelines and canals.

The country as a whole has had a serious commitment to the development of a strong nation-
Ch. VI—Israel’s Water Policy: A National Commitment ● 5 5

—— —

al water policy and program effort. The lack

of a traditional farming community or a strong

private water property rights system at the

birth of the nation also has reduced opposition

to an extensive national water legislation with

strict enforcement provisions.7

State Control of Water Resources

Under Israeli law, the water resources in the

country are public property. They are subject

to the control of the state and are intended for

the use of its inhabitants and for the development of the country. The country’s first water

law regulations were drafted and enacted in

1949. The legislation was gradually amended

and perfected until the current comprehensive

water law went into effect in 1959.8

Supply and Distribution9

Israel embarked on an ambitious scheme in

the late 1950’s to create a national water supply

system to meet the demands of a growing population and to distribute water equitably. The

backbone of the system, known as the national

water grid, is the National Water Carrier,

which began operation in 1964.

The Carrier, Israel’s largest single development project, consists of a 155-mile (250-kilometer) system of pipelines, canals, and tunnels

extending from the Sea of Galilee in the north

to the Southern and Western Negev Desert

with an extension up to Eilat on the Gulf of the

Red Sea. From 1964 to 1975 it transferred an

average 283,800 acre-feet (350 million cubic

meters) of water annually, operating to maximize use of the land’s storage capacity. Regional exchanges of water between sources with

high and low salt concentrations have helped

to mitigate problems of salinity, During the wet

period, when demand is not so great, water

from the carrier is used to artificially recharge

wells and aquifers. Thus, heavier withdrawals

7Arlosoroff interview.

‘%. Arlosoroff, ‘‘Water Resources Development and Management in Israel, ” KIDMA, published by the Israel Chapter of the

Society for International Development (Jerusalem), vol. 3, No.

2 (No. 10/1977), p. 5.

‘Arlosoroff, U. N., op. cit.; and Meir, op. cit.

Photo credit” .Ernbassy of Israel

Israeli’s National Water Carrier, known as

the national water grid

are possible during the dry season. Recharging

has the additional effect of mixing high-quality

water with lower quality ground water. Wastewater, after tertiary treatment, also is used for

recharging. The flexibility of this system of recharge and water transfer enables Israel to

achieve a very high degree of efficient water

use.

As part of this program, the Government conducts a vigorous water exploration and research project, including mapping of ground

waters to determine their source and age, prospecting for new resources, and increasing the

flow and use from sources already known. The

national grid and close monitoring of withdrawals and recharges allow Israel to predict

ground water levels to within a few centimeters. Wastewater reuse, desalinization research

and application, and operational cloud seeding

for enhancement of precipitation also area part

of this effort.

Demand Management10

In view of its limited water supplies, Israel

has chosen to focus heavily on demand management. This policy has required a complete

package of elements, including legislation, administration, sanctions, funds for research and

IOArloSoroff inh?rvietir.
56 Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

demonstration projects, and in some cases

funds to support adoption of the preferred technology. It has been justified in light of the need

to maintain or increase irrigated agricultural

production under arid/semiarid conditions,

when government resources for development

of new water resources are limited.

Under this policy, water use is strictly regulated within a licensing and allocation system.

The water law prohibits inefficient water use.

The primary tools used to discourage inefficient water use are metering, pricing, and

allocation.

Metering

All water users, whether in agriculture, industry, or the domestic sector, are metered.

Water users are licensed by the Government

and the license must be renewed annually.

Failure to use water in a manner consistent

with the license can lead to its forfeiture. Each

license prescribes the quantity of water that

can be withdrawn from any source, including

underground, runoff, * and sewage effluent

sources. Underground sources supply 60 percent of the water consumed by Israel. The

water commission has the right of unlimited

access to water meters and inspects them regularly. Most water meters must be installed outside buildings. If a meter is inside under lock,

the state inspector must be given the key. Farm

units are included within the metering requirements, and all farm wells are metered and

inspected.

Pricing

The price of water is state controlled. Those

people living in areas where water costs less

to produce, such as the coastal Mediterranean

sector which has access to a shallow aquifer,

must pay a levy (based on cubic meter of use)

to a national Water Charges Adjustment Fund.

In the more remote or high-elevation regions

where water costs are high, the Fund pays a

subsidy to users. In addition, water rates are

*Runoff is that portion of the precipitation on a drainage area

that is discharged from the area in stream channels. Types include surface runoff, ground water runoff, or seepage.

set on a progressive block basis—that is, as

more water is used, the marginal unit cost becomes higher.

Allocation

As much as 70 percent of Israel’s water withdrawal is designated for agricultural water use

(table 9). So it is important that allocation of

water for farming be strictly managed. Each

farmer, cooperative rural settlement (moshau),

or collective farm settlement (kibbutz) receives

a yearly allocation, based on the type of crop

and the average water use for the particular

area over time. A citrus grower, for instance,

will be told that the allocation for the coming

year will be “x” amount. Moreover, the grower

may also be told that, in the following year, it

will be “x” minus an amount which should be

saved because of increased water use efficiency. * This policy of further restricting allocation for the next year is not implemented every

year.

The farmer may appeal an allocation judgment to the water commissioner, then to a special Water Tribunal which serves as a court

dealing with water disputes. In the event of an

adverse decision of the Water Tribunal, the

farmer may appeal to the Supreme Court of

Justice. Once the allocation is set, however, the

farmer must either: 1) implement new techniques to use water more efficiently, or 2) let

yields drop as water supplies are reduced and

plants are overly stressed using the existing

practices. The incentive in this system is that

any surplus water a farmer can gain by efficiency may be used to irrigate more land, and

thus farmers have a strong motivation to adopt

innovative techniques because most of them

have more land than available water can irrigate.

As might be expected, the Government’s

strict regulation of water use has caused a number of problems in administration and enforcement. For instance, it has been suggested that

farmers who want to use water without pay-

“Water-use efficiency refers to crop production per unit of

water used, irrespective of water source, expressed in units of

crop weight per unit of water depth applied to unit area.
Ch. VI—Israel’s Water Policy: A National Commitment ● 5 7

ing the per-cubic-meter equalization charge or

a higher rate block charge could simply reverse

the flow of water through the water meter so

that increased water use is subtracted from the

reading. 11 This is a criminal offense. However,

it forces the water commission to police water

users regularly.

On the other hand, the Israeli system encourages farmers to develop and use water-efficient

technologies and farming practices. Even

when water is restricted, the farmers generally

cooperate when they are assured that by adopting new technology and practices they can

manage with less water, still boost crop yields,

and in most cases increase their net income

over time even with the additional capital

investments.

Technical Assistance12

Finally, the Israeli Government assists farmers in implementing more water-efficient technologies by providing technical assistance.

This assistance includes:

● promoting the research and development

of efficient cropping and irrigation methods and systems,

● offering technical assistance in their introduction,

● granting loans at attractive interest rates,

● reducing temporarily market prices

water-efficient appliances,

of

llAr]osoroff interview.

IZIbid.

SELECTED

● providing applied research and demonstration projects, and

● wide-scale immediate dissemination of the

positive and negative results throughout

the country.

The key to Israel’s technical assistance and

adoption success is the link between the research effort and the farmer. The Israeli Government conducts ongoing agroeconomic studies to convince farmers to adopt new techniques and methods. These studies cover

crops, irrigation techniques, and methods that

improve water efficiency and profits. Then, by

working with progressive farmers, the Government field-tests new technologies such as plastic sprinklers, drip irrigation techniques, automatic metering, and computerized irrigation

controls. New irrigation devices and techniques commonly are manufactured by farming communities themselves, an important feature of Israel’s technology adoption success.

The manufacturers, being also the users, are

unlikely to market something that does not

work.

Similarly, researchers and kibbutz farmers

often are the same individuals. They may work

in research in the morning and on the farm in

the afternoon, or take leave from the kibbutz

to work full time in research. Almost every kibbutz sends a significant proportion of its members for advanced studies (master- and doctorate-level programs) each year. Consequently,

there is an ample supply of agricultural

engineers and scientists.

IRRIGATION TECHNOLOGY APPLICATIONS

Israel is recognized as one of the most ad- and other management aspects to improve agrivanced nations-in applying certain irrigation

technologies. These include: 1) irrigation with

treated effluent water, 2) drip and sprinkler irligation, * 3) computer-controlled irrigation,

and 4) saline water irrigation. The technologies

have been introduced along with new cropping

systems, fertilization regimes, plant varieties,

—.—

“Drip or trickle irrigation is a system for supplying filtered

water directly onto or below the soil surface, Water is carried

to each plant through an extensive pipe network which is generally stationary once installed. Sprinkler irrigation is a system

cultural yields. ‘Application of fertilizers, pesticides, and other agricultural chemicals with

the water through the drip or sprinkler systems

has forced farmers to be very careful about

each unit of water applied in order to achieve

optimal water, nutrient, and chemical application and distribution.

—.

of applying water to a field with the use of one or more rotating

sprinklers, spray nozzles, or perforated pipes. With each method,

water is sprayed into the air under pressure and falls to the

ground in various sized drops.
58 . Water. Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

It is difficult to obtain data on increased crop

yields resulting from the application of these

irrigation technologies because they are an integral part of the larger management packages.

Overall, Israel has reported a net agricultural

production increase over the decade 1968-78

of an average of 6.8 percent annually. For the

same period, purchased inputs rose at an average annual rate of only 4.7 percent (table 10).

This was achieved with an approximate 21 percent reduction over the same period in the

amount of water allocation per unit of irrigated

land (fig. 6). Among the kinds of new technologies Israel has used to increase water efficiency and crop yields are those discussed below.

Agricultural and other reuse of domestic

sewage and industrial waste is a high priority

in Israel. Under the water law, wastewater is

publicly owned and is treated legally as if it

were freshwater. Although a separate ministry

is responsible for wastewater, a legal mechanism exists to coordinate freshwater and

wastewater management. According to one report, by the end of the century more than 30

percent of Israel’s total wastewater flow will

have been recycled for irrigation or industrial

use.13

1’J. Shalhevet, “Deciding on Agricultural Research Priorities

in Israel, ” KIDMA, vol. 7, No. 1 (Jerusalem: spring 1982), p. 24.

Table 10.—Average Yearly Rates of Change in

Percentages in the Major Components of the

Agriculture Sectora Account, 1968-78 (percent)

1968-73 1973-78 1968-78

Real rate of change in:

Agricultural production . . . . . . 5.6 5.5 5.5

Agricultural outputb . . . . . . . . . 5.9 5.8 5.8

Purchased input in agriculture 6.3 3.2 4. 7

Agricultural net domestic

product c d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 8.4 6.8

a#@~ultU~al sector rnean9 all agricultural ~tlvity (including livestock Production, etc.).

bAgrlcultural output Ig defined as agricultural production less intermediate Produce plus production for investment.

cNe

t domestic product is defin~ as Income originating in agriculture less cOmdpansation for damage by nature.

Reflects total income includlng nonwater-related production.

SOURCE: Centrat Bureau of Statistics and Computations of the Survey and Advice Department, Plannlng Authority, Ministry of Agriculture, published

in S/x-Year P/an for A@cu/tura/Oeveloprnerrf, 1980-85 (Jerusalem:

Ministry of Agriculture, 19S1), p. 34.

Figure 6.— Efficient Use of Water

Irrigated area (hectares) 8

1948 1956 1967 1973 1978 1960 1981

SOURCE: Adapted from Israel Water Commission, from J. Shavalet, KIDMA

(Jerusalem), vol. 7, No. 1, spring 1982, fig. 1, p. 24.

A major effort to use wastewater in Israel is

the Dan Region Sewage Reclamation Project.14

The first stage (1975-80) of this project involved

treatment of 12,200 acre-feet (15 million cubic

meters) of wastewater for reuse. Preliminary

findings indicate that the treated water could

be fully integrated with the National Grid System if the supply network in the south were

converted to a dual system separating water

for potable and nonpotable uses. With tertiary

treatment and the addition of water from other

sources, reclaimed water may be suitable for

widespread agricultural use.

The Dan Region Project plans to use 113,500

acre-feet (140 million cubic meters) of wastewater annually from the metropolitan Tel Aviv

area for irrigation in the south of Israel. The

effluent from Tel Aviv is treated in oxidation

lagoons or algae ponds, which eliminate much

of the contamination. Additional biological,

chemical, and physical (sand filtration) treatments are also employed. Besides agriculture,

the project also plans to produce treated water

14J3. I&]Ovit&, “wasteWater Reclamation by Advanced Treatment,” KIDMA, vol. 3, No. 2 (No. 10/1977), pp. 30-35.
Ch. VI—lsrael’s Water Policy: A National Commitment

for recharging ground water sources and supplying water for industrial and domestic nonpotable purposes.

Irrigation with treated effluent has not been

without problems. In 1970, a cholera outbreak

was traced to the illegal irrigation of salad

crops with raw sewage effluent from East Jerusalem in the West Bank. The water had been

collected from the discharge stream. Regulations for effluent quality were tightened, and

efforts to broaden the scope of wastewater

treatment and use were intensified.15 A 1971

amendment to the water law now limits the use

of treated effluent in irrigation to industrial

crops, such as cotton, or to food crops where

either the water does not contact the produce

directly or the produce is normally cooked before being eaten.16

Drip (or Trickle) and

Sprinkler Irrigation

Israel has focused heavily on improving lowpressure sprinkler and drip irrigation technologies. In normal gravity fed field or furrow irrigation, plants do not use much of the applied

water because of evaporation, percolation past

the root zone, and runoff from the surface.

With standard sprinkler systems, evaporation

and runoff losses also can be heavy. The problem is compounded with heavy runoff because

the runoff water takes with it natural or added

nutrients critical for the plant growth. In contrast, low-pressure sprinklers and drip irrigation systems deliver virtually all of the water

and any added nutrients directly into the plant

root zone. The national water grid supplies

water under pressure which accommodates

these systems, so the use of drip irrigation is

expanding. Drip irrigation today accounts for

about 10 percent of Israel’s total irrigated

area. 17 Figures 7 and 8 show the trickle and

sprinkler systems of irrigation, respectively.

IS1bid., p. 30.

leAr]oSoroff, KIDMA, p. 10.

“’’Irrigation in Israel, “ in special issue of Zrrinews (No. 25,

1982), Newsletter of the International Irrigation Information

Center, Bet Degan, Israel.

● 5 9

Figure 7.—Trickle Irrigation System

Lateral

emitters

Trickle irrigation is a system for supplying filtered water

directly onto or below the soil surface. Water is carried

through an extensive pipe network to each plant. The outlet

device that emits water onto or into the soil is called an

“emitter.” After leaving the emitter, water is distributed to a

“wetted zone” by its normal movement through the soil.

Surface application by the trickle method. Water is applied

very slowly onto the surface of the soil through special

outlet emitters in plastic pipe.

SOURCE: J. Howard Turner and Carl L. Anderson, P/amr/n67 form Irrigation SYsterrr (Athens, Ga.: American Association for Vocational Instructional

Materials, 1980).

Traditional irrigation technologies used portable metal pipe systems that were towed along

the fields and stationary irrigation grids with

permanent pipes laid in the soil. The increasing cost effectiveness of using plastic tubing

is causing a shift toward stationary irrigation

systems because portable systems are labor intensive and unwieldy.
60 ● Water. Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

Figure 8.—Typical Types of Sprinkler Irrigation Systems

Self-propelled II Hand- or tractor-moved

Single-sprinkler

Tractor-moved I Self-propelled

,

Boom-sprinkler

SOURCE: J. Howard Turner and Carl L. Anderson, Planning for an Irrigation System (Athens, Ga.: American Association for Vocational Instructional Materials, 1980).

However, for large rectangular plots of field

crops, such as grains, cotton, maize, and sorghum, Israel is experimenting with dragline

sprinkler systems. * These systems use pipes or

sprinkler booms positioned across each field

and supported on tall towers mounted on tractor-like vehicles on each side of the field. These

vehicles move back and forth picking up water

from a channel that parallels the field, pumping the water through the pipes for distribution on the soil by means of dragline hoses. The

system uses lower water pressure and causes

less runoff damage than most other sprinkler

————

*The United States is experimenting with a similar system

called in some publications the linear-move lateral system.

systems. It can apply water more uniformly

and can cover a considerably larger area.

In contrast, the drip or trickle irrigation systems involve the placement of plastic tubes

with low rate emitters along rows of plants.

There is one emitter per plant or a pattern of

emitters in the case of orchard trees. Using this

method, water flow is continuous and slow,

evaporation loss minimal, and plants can be

fertilized at the same time they are watered.

This technique is particularly well suited to

perennials such as fruit trees. It also is being

applied successfully to cotton and other row

crops. The continuous flow method saves labor

by eliminating the necessity of turning the irrigation system on and off.
Ch. VI—lsrael’s Water Policy: A National Commitment . 61

. — . —

To overcome some of the problems with drip

irrigation lines, Israeli technicians have developed a variety of filters that solve most of the

clogging problems resulting from water that

contains organic and colloidal suspensions.

The problem of chemical clogging when fertilizer is fed through the lines is being solved by

using acids mixed with water.18

Results with drip irrigation, according to an

Israeli Ministry of Agriculture report, have

been favorable for such vegetable crops as table

tomatoes, peppers, eggplants, squash, strawberries, artichokes, and grapes. For fruit trees

such as apple, apricot, peach, and almond, drip

irrigation also is the preferred method for saving water and maintaining water quality. Percolation of water to the ground water table and

extra runoff to surface water is eliminated or

reduced, avoiding agricultural, chemical, and

natural salt contamination of those water bodies. This method appears to be the least expensive of the irrigation systems for these crops.19

Tables 11 and 12 are the results of experiments in the Negev conducted under extreme

arid zone conditions with brackish water,

showing comparative yields using drip, sprinkler, and furrow irrigation.

Computer-Controlled Irrigation

Irrigation can be almost totally automated by

using pressurized irrigation systems. This requires linking the irrigation water lines to a

remote control mechanism that uses small

IBMoshe Boaz and Irzhak Halevy, Extension Service, Ministry

of Agriculture, Israel, “Trickle Irrigation” (unpublished paper,

undated).

Ye Ibid.

Table 11 .—Production Comparisons for Various

Crops Under Different Irrigation Systems

Muskmelon yields

Yield (tons per hectare, t/ha)

Irrigation methods Total Export grade

Sprinkler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23.8 13.0

Furrows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.2 16.7

Drip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43.0 35.0

SOURCE: D. Goldberg, B. Gornat, and D. Rimon, Drip Irrigation (Kfar Shmaryahu,

Israel: Drip Irrigation Scientific Publication, 1976). Published in Ilan Amir

and Benjamin Zur, “Irrigation in Arid Zones: The Israeli Case, ” in Arid

Zone Setflerrtenf Planning (New York: Pergamon Press, 1979)

computers. Israel introduced these computerized controls into its farm management systems in the early 1970’s, At that time, the principal reason for the program was protection

for farmers who were in danger from land

mines and snipers when they went to the fields

to maintain irrigation controls. Later, automated irrigation was developed into a waterefficient technology and a means of increasing crop yields.

Over the past decade, Motorola Israel Ltd.

(a subsidiary of Motorola, Inc., U. S. A.) has

been the principal company marketing computerized irrigation control systems in Israel.

The company manufactures one system for

small farms of up to 320 acres (130 hectares)

and another for farms of 1,000 to 5,000 acres

(400 to 2,000 hectares) or more. In the larger

units, a central computer can send instructions

via wireless radio or cable to field units equipped

with sensors to relay information back to the

main system. For large farms, many control

mechanisms are run from a central computer.

Since the 1970’s, more than 50 large units and

1,000 smaller ones have been installed in Israel.

They have been exported and are now gradually coming into use in the United States (primarTable 12.—Effect of Irrigation Methods on the

Yield of Tomatoes and Cucumbers

Arava Valley growing season El Arish (Coastal Sand Dunes)

yield (t/ha) growing season yield (t/ha)

Crop Drip Sprinkler Drip Sprinkler

Tomatoes . . . . . . Sept.-March 65.3 39.0 Sept.-March 79.0 30.0

Cucumbers . . . . . Nov. -Feb. 39.0 0.0 Apr. -Junea

1.5 3.6

%ummer growth–out of season in this region.

SOURCE: D Goldberg, B. Gornat, and D. Rimon, Drip Irrigation (Kfar Shmaryahu, Israel Drip Irrigation Scientific Publication,

1976). Published in Ilan Amir and Benjamin Zur, “Irrigation in Arid Zones: The Israeli Case, ” in Arid Zone Settlement

Planning (New York: Pergamon Press, 1979).
62 ● Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

--- — .

ily in California, Arizona, and Hawaii) and

other countries.20

In either the small or large systems, the computer can control water flow; detect leaks; shut

off faulty lines; adjust water application for

wind speed, air temperature, and soil moisture

content; and apply fertilizer on schedule. An

added advantage of the computerized systems

is their ability to locate malfunctions and alert

the operators to make necessary repairs before

the faulty element causes too much damage or

water loss.

On the basis of systems implemented in Israel, Motorola Israel reports the following benefits:

●

●

●

●

increased efficiency in water and energy

use in the range of 10 to 30 percent;

increased yields in the range of 2 to 10 percent;

accurate and precise application rates, resulting in minimized return flow, aquifer

and stream pollution, and related drainage

problems;

labor savings in such areas as the operation of valves, gates, and checking of laterals.21

The kibbutz Kfar Aza in the Negev provides

an example of a successful computerized irrigation control program. An evaluation of the

computerized system installed at that kibbutz

reported an overall water savings of 15 percent

of the kibbutz allocation.22 Crop height remained

uniform, indicating even plant development.

Other advantages cited by a kibbutz official included reduced labor, energy, fertilizer, and

maintenance costs. Exact yield increases caused

by the computerized controls are difficult to

estimate because other management factors

also played a large part in crop production. But

one estimate put the general yield increase at

about 3 percent for vegetables. In addition, the

system saved an estimated 25 workdays per

season. Furthermore, 25 breakdowns were located in one season, saving an estimated 20

acre-feet (25,000 cubic meters) of water as the

system automatically shut the faulty lines

down. As a whole, the Israel experience has

been that automated systems pay for themselves within 3 to 5 years, even when installed

at market interest rates.

Irrigation With Saline Water

Israel has sizable supplies of brackish water,

much of it underground in the Negev Desert.

At 2,500 parts per million total dissolved salts,

the concentration of salt is too high for use in

traditional irrigation or for most industrial

uses. However, it has been estimated that if

uses were found for the water, approximately

81,100 acre-feet (100 million cubic meters)

could be drawn from this source annually without serious effect.23

Israel has an intensive program of research

and development in the use of brackish water

for agriculture. In particular, irrigation techniques are being fine-tuned and adapted to

local conditions to minimize buildup of salts

in the soil while making use of brackish water.

At the same time, the genetic improvement of

salt-resistant crops is being studied. Brackish

water management packages are being used

successfully with vegetables, wheat, and cotton. Expectations are that with more research

and intensive management experience, additional production advances will be made. *

ZOTelephOne interview with Motorola official.

ZIElisha Yanay, “Computerized Irrigation Control Systems and

Their Application in Drip Irrigation, ” Drip/Trickle Irrigation

(Fresno, Calif.: Agribusiness Publications, spring 1981), p. 23.

ZZAmi Kaham, “A Computer Controlled Irrigation SJMWII irl

Kibbutz Kfar Aza” (unpublished paper, undated).

ZsArlosoroff, U. N., op. cit., p. 49.

*In the United States, a salinity level that has been considered

high and has led to the construction of desalinization plants is

considered a low level in Israel as the result of their brackish

water management (S. Arlosoroff, correspondence, Oct. 28,

1982).
Ch. VI—lsrael’s Water Policy: A National Commitment 63

—— — . —— —

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER CONSIDERATIONS

Israel’s success in implementing its agricultural and water-use policy has been the result

of a unique combination of factors, including

country size, a national program commitment,

the public status of water, and special characteristics of its agricultural technology program.

The agricultural element has involved educated

farmers who have become manufacturers of

water appliances and technologies, and leading

agricultural researchers who verify and test

these technologies,

Water has always been a limiting and critical

factor in the national development of Israel’s

agriculture. Israel’s generally arid land leaves

little alternative for agriculture other than a

strong national effort at total management of

the scarce water resource. In addition, the status of Israel’s water as a public resource subject to total public control avoids some of the

legal complexities related to management and

control likely to be encountered in the United

States. The United States can still learn, however, from the Israel experience in application

of technologies.

The United States and other countries have

adapted, to varying degrees, many of the irrigation technologies used by Israel. For example,

Motorola Israel Ltd., which first introduced its

line of automated irrigation control systems in

Israel, subsequently began manufacturing them

for the United States and other markets. About

100 small units and four large systems had been

sold in the United States as of 1982.24 Drip irrigation is another technique that has become

more popular in the United States following

Israeli commercialization proving the technique to be highly efficient, The experience of

Israel with the use of drip, trickle, and sprinkler

irrigation systems is also being shared with

—..—

z4C. G. Karasov, “Irrigation Efficiency in Water Delivery,”

Technology, March/April 1982, p. 71.

other countries. Israel’s methods of allocating

and pricing water and reusing effluents are attracting more interest in such areas as the

Western United States as demands increase for

limited water supplies.25

In light of the mutual benefits to be derived

in arid and semiarid agriculture, the United

States and Israel have been cooperating to promote agricultural research for many years. The

United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF) was established in 1972 by an endowment to promote continued cooperation in

science and technology research between the

two countries. Through this program, proposals are submitted by collaborating U.S. and Israeli investigators. Of the proposals submitted

between 1974 and 1981, 223 were for agricultural research; 69 of these (8 percent of the total

number of grants) were approved. 26

In 1977, the United States-Israel Binational

Agricultural Research and Development Fund

(BARD) was established to provide a more formal mechanism for the United States and Israel

to share and collaborate on agricultural research of mutual benefit. Since this program

is devoted entirely to agricultural research and

development, the number of BSF grants in agriculture has been reduced. In 1978 BARD began

funding proposals out of the income from its

$80-million endowment.27 A Technical Advisory Committee comprised of five U.S. and five

Israeli scientists makes recommendations on

the research proposals submitted. Most of the

projects have been for 3 years, and many of

them are with the University of California at

Riverside and Davis. Administration of the program in the United States is handled by the

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Appendix E

ZsArlOSOrOff interview.

zounited stateS-lSrael Binational Science Foundation, Annual

Report 1981, Jerusalem, Israel, 28 pp.

Z7BARD Ab~ractS of SupWrted Projects 1979-1980, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Federal Building, Hyattsville, Md., 259 pp.
—

64 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

contains abstracts of some of the proposals re- tion between the two scientific communities

lated to water management in Israel. Although and the exposure of different approaches

it is too soon to determine specific techno- should contribute to new developments and

logical benefits from this research, the coopera- discoveries of mutual benefit.

Appendix A

Contacts List (by chapter)

General

Thomas G. Bahr

Office of Water Policy

U.S. Department of the Interior

James Cowa n

NASULG

Washington, D.C.

Robert M. Hagan

(advisory panel)

Gerry J. Hammond

USDA/SCS

Washington, D.C.

David E. Herrick

(advisory panel)

Carl Hodges

University of Arizona

Tucson

William Long

U.S. Department of State

David McClintoc k

(formerly with AID )

Cyrus McKel l

(advisory panel)

Clifford J. Murin o

(advisory panel)

Don Plucknet t

Consultative Group on Internationa l

Agricultural Researc h

The World Ban k

Washington, D.C.

Steve Rollin s

USDA/AR S

Beltsville, Md.

Chapter I

Contacts

Harold E. Dregne

(advisory panel)

M. Evenari

Department of Botany

Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Rehovot, Israel

Frederick L. Hote s

The World Ban k

Washington, D.C.

A. Issar

Ben Gurion University of the Negev

Beersheva, Israel

James Walker

AID

Chapter II

M. Wayne Adams

Department of Crop and Soil Sciences

Michigan State University

East Lansing

Anthony E. Hall

Department of Botany and Plant Sciences

University of California

Riverside

Don Isleib

Bean/Cowpea CRSP

Michigan State University

East Lansing

Don Plucknet t

(see general listing )

Djibrail Sen e

Minister of Rural Developmen t

Senega l

Donald H. Wallac e

Department of Plant Breedin g

Cornell Universit y

Organizations

Centro International de Agricultural Tropical

Cali, Columbia

Instituto de Ciencia y Technologiá Agrícolas

Guatemala

International Crops Research Institute for the

Semitropic s

Andhra Pradesh, Indi a

National Center for Agronomic Researc h

Bambey, Senega l

67
68 ● Water-elated Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience — —.-

Chapter

Contacts

L. H. Blankenship

Texas A&M Research Extension

Uvalde, Tex.

Lewis Cohen

AID

Raymond F. Dasmann

University of California, Santa Cruz

Charles DeYoung

Dean, College of Agriculture

Texas A&I University

William Goodwin

Lilly Endowment

Horace Gore

Texas Parks & Wildlife Department

David Hopcraft

Athi River, Kenya

Robert McDowell

Department of Animal Science

Cornell University

Art Mossman

Humbolt University

John Neave

AID

Charles Schreiner IV

Y-O Ranch

Mountain Home, Tex.

Daniel Sisler

Department of Animal Science

Cornell University

James G. Teer

Department of Wildlife

Texas A&M University

Gabriel Van Latham

N H Bank of Paris

New York

Frederic H. Wagner

and Fisheries Sciences

College of Natural Resources

Utah State University

Logan

Charles Williams

National Center for Housing Management

Washington, D.C.

Organizations

Africare

International Livestock Center for Africa

Nairobi, Kenya

Max McGraw Wildlife Foundation

Dundee, Ill.

National Buffalo Association

Custer, S. Dak.

Southwest Research Laboratories

Los Alamitos, Calif.

Welder Wildlife Foundation

Sinton, Tex.

Chapter IV

Contacts

Michael Cernea

World Bank

Wayne Clyma

Colorado State University

Fort Collins

Ralph Cummings

(former chairman, Technical Advisory

Committee to CGIAR on proposed

International Irrigation Management Institute)

Worth Fitzgerald

AID

David M. Freeman

Department of Sociology

Colorado State University

Fort Collins

Tejpal S. Gill

AID

Max K. Lowdermilk

ASIA/TR/ARD

Everett Richardson

Engineering Research Center

Colorado State University

Fort Collins

Gaylord Skogerboe

(from Colorado State University)

Visiting Professor at Department of Agriculture

Utah State University

Logan
App. A—Contacts List (by chapter) 69

Thomas Trout

Snake River Conservation Research Center

Soil and Water Conservation Division

USDA/ARS

Fort Collins, Colo.

Organizations

Bureau for Program and Policy Coordination

Studies Division

U.S. Department of State

Consultative Group on International

Agricultural Research

World Bank

International Center for Agricultural Research

in the Dry Areas

Beirut, Lebanon

Aleppo, Syria

International Crops Research Institute

for the Semi-Arid Tropics

Hyderbaad, India

International Food Policy Research Institute

Washington, D.C.

International Irrigation Information Center

Bet Dagan, Israel

Water Management Synthesis Project

Colorado State University

Fort Collins

Chapter V

Contacts

Robin Claxton

Chief, Division of Plant Industries

Department of Agriculture

Sydney, Australia

Frank Cutting

Principal Agronomist

Department of Agriculture

Sydney, Australia

Gary Day

Commissioner for North America

Government of New South Wales

Los Angeles, Calif.

Kenneth Foster

Office of Arid Land Studies

University of Arizona

Tucson

Gerald Gleason

Secretary, Premier’s Department

Sydney, Australia

W. C. K. Hammer

Agricultural Counselor

Embassy of Australia

Enrique Campos Lopez

Director, Centro de Investigaciones en Quimica

Aplicada

Saltillo, Coahuila

Mexico

Richard Wheaton

Domestic Rubber Program

USDA

Organizations

Board on Agriculture and Renewable Resources

National Academy of Sciences

Division of Plant Industry

Institution of Biological Resources

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial

Research Organization

Canberra City, Australia

The Joint Commission on Guayule

USDA/Department of Commerce

Chapter V I

Saul Arlosoroff*

World Bank

Jacob Avni

Agricultural Counselor

Embassy of Israel

Marvin E. Jensen

USDA/ARS

Fort Collins, Colo.

Jan van Schilfgaarde

U.S. Salinity Laboratory

Riverside, Calif.

Elisha Yanay

Motorola Israel Ltd.

Tel Aviv, Israel

Organizations

Applied Research Institute

Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

Beersheva, Israel

*Mr. Arlosoroff's comments are personal and given from his previous

work experience. They do not represent or reflect the views of the World

Bank.
.

70 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

.——.— —...—— -————

Faculty of Agricultural Engineering

Israel Institute of Technology

Haifa, Israel

Faculty of Agriculture

Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Rehovot, Israel

Institute for Desert Research

Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

Sde Boker, Israel

International Irrigation Information Center

Bet Dagan, Israel

Irrigation and Soil Field Service

Ministry of Agriculture

Tel Aviv, Israel

Israel Center of Waterworks Appliances

Ramat Aviv, Israel

Israel Water Workers Association

Tel Aviv, Israel

Rural Planning and Development Authority

Ministry of Agriculture

Jerusalem

Soils and Water Institute

Bet Dagan, Israel

Technical Assistance and Foreign Relations

Department

Ministry of Agriculture

Jerusalem, Israel

Water Commission

Ministry of Agriculture

Tel Aviv, Israel

Israel Chapter of the Society for International

Development

Jerusalem
Appendix B

Materials

Irrigation

Preliminary Inventory of

AvaiIabIe for Improving

Water Management in Asia*

The ASIA/TR/ARD Irrigation Team Studies of

five Asian countries to identify major issues and

strategies for the 1980’s found a critical need for

transfer of irrigation knowledge within and across

countries,

In the field of Irrigation Water Management,

ASIA/TR/ARD is making an effort to bring together

relevant technical handbooks, manuals, and training materials which will be useful to Mission staff

and host country individuals. It is hoped that

technical materials produced by projects and having potential transfer value will be added to this list

over time. (The above text has been condensed from

the original,)

*Evaluated and compiled by Max K. Lowdermilk of ASIA/TR/ARD staff

as a resource to Missions and host countries, June 1981. These are to

be updated periodically.

Table B-1 .—Preliminary Inventory of Materials Available for Improving Irrigation Water Management in Asiaa

Technical Report AID: Project name

Type/name of materials No. (TR)b

and number

A. Technical Reports/Manuals

1. Problem Identification Manual by Lowdermilk, et al., 1980 TR 65B Pakistan Water Management

Research Project Contract

AIDllR-c-1411

2. Development of Solutions Manual by Sparling, et al., 1980

3. Project Implementation Manual by Hautaluoma, et al., 1980

4. Analysis of Basin-Furrow Irrigation by Peri and Skogerboe, 1980

5. Development and Design of Water Course Function Jet

Pumps by Kemper, Trout, and Aust, 1980

6. Recalibration of Small Cutthroat Flumes by Skogerboe, 1979

7. Watercourse Improvement Manual by Trout and Kemper, 1980

8. Evaluation and Improvement of Basin Irrigation Systems by

Peri and Skogerboe, 1979

9. Evaluation and Improvement of Basin Irrigation Systems by

Peri, Skogerboe, and Norum, 1979

10. Summary of Skimming Well Investigations by Meworter, 1980

11. Evaluation and Improvement of Border Irrigation by Peri,

Norum, and Skogerboe, 1979

12. Matching Cropping Systems to Water Supply Using an

Integrative Model by John Ruess, 1980

13. Installation and Field Use of Cutthroat Flumes for Water

Management by Skogerboe, Bennet, and Walker

14. Design of Irrigation Drop Structures by Soon-Kuk Kwan

15. Calibration and Application of Jensen-Haise Evaporation

Equation by Clyma and Chowdhry

16. Optimization of Lengths of Alternative Watercourse

Improvement Programs by John Reuss, 1980

TR 65C, 1980

TR 65D, 1980

TR 61

.

“

.

TR 64

(Special report)

TR 58

.

.

.

TR 49A .

TR 49B

TR 63

.

“

TR 49C “

TR 62 .

TR 19

TR 33

.

“

TR 40 .

TR49 .

Type/name of materials AID publication number

17. Farm Irrigation System Evaluation: A Guide for Management by J. L. Merrian and Jack Keller PN-AAG-745

18. Water Requirements Manual for Irrigated Crops and Rainfed Agriculture by G. H. Hargreves PN-AAB-676

19. Irrigation System Evaluation and Improvement by J. L. Merrian, Jack Keller, and J. F. Alfaro PN-AAB-439

20. Small Wells Manual: Location, Design Construction, Use and Maintenance by U. P. Gibson

and R. D. Singer, U.S. Office of War on Hunger Health Service AN-9351236

21. Dryland Agriculture in Winter Precipitation Regions of the World: Status of State of the

Technical Art by Oregon State University, Office of International Agriculture, 1979 PN-AAH-329

71
72 ● Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

Table B-1 .—Preliminary Inventory of Materials Available for Improving

Irrigation Water Management in Asiaa—Continued

Type/name of materials AID publication number

22. The Impact of Groundwater Development in Arid Lands: A Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography, Arizona State University, Office of Arid Lands Studies, 1977 PN-AAH-500

23. Solar Energy, Water, and Industrial Systems in Arid Lands, Techno-ecological Overview

and Annotated Bibliography by C. Duffield, University of Arizona, Office of Arid Lands

Studies, 1978 PN-AAH-499

AID project name

Type/name of materials AID Duplication number and number

24. Technical Reports to Accompany Planning Guides under C2 to

C6 headingc will be made available on the topics of Precision

Land Leveling, Small Pumps, Farmer Involvement and Small

Structures by DS/AGR Water Management Synthesis Project

(WMSP) during late 1981 and early 1982

25. Optimization of Lengths of Alternative Water Course Improvement

Programs, by John Reuss

26. Trapezoidal Flumes for Egyptian Water Use Project by

Robinson, 1980

27. Cutthroat Flume Metric Equations by Helal, 1980

TR 57 Water Management

Synthesis Project

AID DSA N-C-0058

Pakistan Water

Management

Research Project

AID/TR-C 1411

Staff Report FC-1 AID/NE-c-1351

Staff Paper No. 6 .

Type/name of materials Available from

28. On-Farm Water Management Field Manual, December 1980,

Volume I Reference Manual on soils, inventory and planning,

soil-water-plant relationships, agronomy, engineering, equipment, economics, and management

29. On-Farm Water Management Field Manual, Volume II,

Precision and Leveling, 1980

30. On-Farm Water Management Field Manual Ill, Water Course

Equipment, 1980

31. On-Farm Water Management Field Manual III, Volume IV,

Irrigation Water Management, 1980

32. On-Farm Water Management Field Manual Standards for

Practice Materials and Studies, 1980

33. Annual Reports which contain technical material and

methods

a) Pakistan Water Management Project, 1970-80

b) Egyptian Water Use and Management Project, 1978

34. Technical Papers from Egyptian Water Use and Management

Project

Volume lV Technical Articles

a) Optimal Design of Furrow Irrigation Systems by

J. Mohan Reddy and Wayne Clyma, 1980

b) Irrigation System Improvement Concepts by Wayne

Clyma and Thomas W. Ley, 1980

c) A Data Management System for Interdisciplinary

Research in Agricultural Water Use by J. C. Loftis and

Wayne Clyma, 1980

Volume Ill

d) STAFF PAPER #23: A Procedure for Evaluating the Cost

of Lifting Water for Irrigation in Egypt by Hassan

Wahby, Gene Quenemoen, and Mohamed Helal, June 1980

e) STAFF PAPER #28: Roller Bedshaper for Basin-Furrow

Irrigation by N. Illsley and A. Cheema, 1980

f) STAFF PAPER #29: Economic Feasibility of Concrete

Lining for the Beni Magdoul Canal and Branch Canal by

Gamal Ayad, G. Nasr Farid, and Gene Quenemoen,

April 1978

g) STAFF PAPER #30: Programs for Calculators HP-67 and

HP-97 by Gamal A. Ayad, 1980

Water management wing ministry of food,

agriculture, and cooperation, Government of

Pakistan, Islamabad

.

.

“

.

AID/Ta-C-1411

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351
App. B—Preliminary Inventory of Materials Available for Improving Irrigation Water Management in Asia ● 73

Table B-1 .—Preliminary Inventory of Materials Available for Improving

Irrigation Water Management in Asiaa—Continued

Type/name of materials

h) STAFF PAPER #45: Optimal Design of Border Irrigation

Systems by J. Mohan Reddy and Wayne Clyma, 1980

i) STAFF PAPER #46A: Irrigation System Improvement by

Simulation and Optimization: 1, Theory by J. Mohan

Reddy and Wayne Clyma, 1980

j) STAFF PAPER #46B: Irrigation System Improvement by

Simulation and Optimization: 2, Application by J. Mohan

Reddy and Wayne Clyma, 1980

k) STAFF PAPER #37: A Systematic Framework for Development of Solutions by Max K. Lowdermilk, April 1980

1) STAFF PAPER #39: Evaluation of Furrow Irrigation

Systems by Thomas W. Ley and Wayne Clyma, 1980

m) STAFF PAPER #40: Evaluation of Graded Border Irrigation Systems by Thomas W. Ley and Wayne Clyma, 1980

35. Special Technical Reports from FAO on Irrigation and

Drainage (order direct from FAO Sales Agents in your

country or FAO, via della Terma di Caracalla 00100, Rome, Italy)

Available from

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID/NE-c-1351

AID project name

Type/name of materials AID publication number and number

B. Water Management Training Materials (manuals and audio visuals)

1. Training Manual for Agricultural Water Management Specialists,

edited by Westfall, 1980

2. Monitoring and Evaluation Manual: Diagnostic Analysis on Farm

Irrigation Systems (Volume 1, Systems Analysis Conceptual;

Volume 11, Specific How-to-do Procedures)

3. Investment in Water Management (137 slides and cassette tape,

written script) by Kemper, et al., 1979

4. Pakistan Land of Promise (slide show, cassettes, written script)

shows system problems and potential, by Lowdermilk, et al., 1978

5. Water Management on Small Farms (slides, cassettes, written

script, strategy

6. Precision Land

7. Technical Film

Land Leveling,

guide, and technical guide)

Leveling (16mm movie), 1970

on Survey and Steaking a Field for Precision

1970

8.

9.

10.

Research-Development Process for Improvement of Farm Water

Management, a Videotape Interdisciplinary by Colorado State

University, Instructional-Media Division, Fort Collins, Colo.,

expected completion fall 1981 by Clyma and Lowdermilk in

spring 1982

Improving Agricultural Production through On-Farm Water

Management by Lattimer, et al.

Training Manuals for On-Farm Analysis of Irrigation Systems,

Volumes I and II, summer 1981

C. Planning Guides for improved Water Management

1. Planning and Implementing Procedures for Constructing

Agricultural-Related Research Programs in Low-Income Nations

by Lowdermilk, et al.

TR 64

TR 64

with ASIA/TR/ARD

with ASIA/TR/ARD

AID Southwest

Research Institute 1980

with ASIA/TR/ARD

with ASIA/TR/ARD

available from CSU

no number

no number

TR 46

Pakistan Water

Management

Research Project

AID/Ta C-1411

Water Management

Synthesis Project

AID-DSAN-C-0058

Pakistan Water

Management

Research Project

AlD/Ta C-1411

Pakistan Water

Management

Research Project

AID/Ta C-1411

AID/Ta-1479

Pakistan Water

Management

Research Project

AID/Ta C-1411

Pakistan Water

Management

Research Project

AID/Ta C-1411

No project

Pakistan Water

Management

Research Project

AID/Ta C-1411

AID

Pakistan Water

Management

Research Project

AlD/Ta C-1411
74 ● Water. Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

Table B-1.—Preliminary Inventory of Materials Available for improving

irrigation Water Management in Asiaa—Continued

AID project name

Type/name of materials AID publication number and number

2. Planning Guide for Precision Land Leveling Programs (available No. 1 Water Management

summer 1981) by Clyma, et al. Synthesis Project

AID-DSAN-C-0058

3. Planning Guide for Low-Lift Pumps in Irrigation Projects Water Management

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

(available winter 1982) by Keller, et al.

Planning Guide for Farmer Involvement in Irrigation

Improvement Projects (available summer 1981) by Lowdermilk, et al.

Planning Guide for Small Structures for Water Management

Improvement (available spring 1982)

Planning Guide for Water Management for Small Farmers

(available fall 1981)

A Research-Development Process for On-Farm Water

Management by Clyma, Lowdermilk, and Corey, 1977

Development Process for Improving Water Management on

Synthesis-Project

AID-DSAN-C-0058

No. 2 Water Management

Synthesis Project

AID-DSAN-C-0058

No. Water Management

Synthesis Project

AID-DSAN-C-0058

No. Water Management

Synthesis Project

AID-DSAN-C-0058

TR 47 Pakistan Water

Management

Research Project

AID/Ta C-1411

TR 65A Pakistan Water

Farms by Skogerboe, Lowdermilk, Sparling, and Hautaluoma, 1980 Management

Research Project

AlD/Ta C-1411

D. Other Materials

1. Social Organizational Aspects of Irrigation Water Management: A Bibliographic Resource (write to Dr. David Freeman, Sociology

Department, Natural Resources Group, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colo. 80523)

2. Water Management News: occasional Newsletter on WM developments around the world. Send request to be placed on

Mailing List to Water Management Synthesis Project Coordinator, Engineering Research Center, Colorado State University,

Fort Collins, Colo. 80521

3. Asian Regional Irrigation Communication Network (a newsletter of which the 10th issue was September 1980. Provides list

of reports, monographs, and descriptions of new research projects, with a primary focus on socioeconomic dimensions

of water management). Write to Agricultural Development Council Office, Bangkok, P.O. Box 11-1172, Bangkok 11, Thailand

4. /RR/NEWS: Newsletter of the International Irrigation Center, lsrael-Volcani Center, P.O. Box 49,50250 Bet Dagan or Canada,

P.O. Box 8500, Ottawa KIG3H9

5. WAMANA: A quarterly newsletter on water management. Indian Institute of Management, 33 Langford Road, Bangalore, India

560027

aFAO ~aterlals ~rlglnally li~t~ by AID have been omitted from this table, since they did not result from AID’s Pakistan and other Asian lrr19ation prolects.

~Td;n~d#&chnical Report. The AID Technical Reports and Manuals are gradually being placed in the AIDIDIU file, and copies are made available through that office.

SOURCE: Max K. Lowdermilk, U.S. Agency for International Development, 1981,
Appendix C

Economics of the Commercialization

of Guayule in New South Wales*

Guayule as an Alternative Crop

in New South Wales

In addressing the subject of guayule as a potential dryland crop in New South Wales, it must be

realized that it is not suitable as a replacement for

any currently profitable cash crop but for use on

land which can no longer support crops that require an excess amount of water.

Various crops are dryland farmed along the western slopes of New South Wales including wheat,

barley, sorghum, and sunflowers. Of these, wheat

is by far the most predominant crop.

There is not sufficient data on guayule to accurately make a comparison with other crops. Taking into consideration that such factors as rubber

yield per acre and price per lb/rubber are strictly

projections, a budget can be developed that will

contribute to a broad understanding of the economic potential of guayule in New South Wales.

Due to the fact that there is no commercial guayule that has reached productive maturity in either

the United States or Australia, budgets must be developed from information attainable from other

crops and meager data on guayule.

The Office of Arid Lands Studies in Tucson,

Ariz., under a contract with the State of California,

Department of Food and Agriculture, has recently

developed budgets for guayule production in four

different areas of California including the San Joaquin Valley, Southern California desert, Sacramento Valley, and the central coast area. Of these

four budgets, the San Joaquin Valley area is the

most favorable of the four locations because of its

low cost of production per acre. This particular

budget will serve as a model from which to develop

the estimated costs of producing 1 acre of dryland

guayule in New South Wales.

*Source: A. Siddigui and P. Lockton, A Feasibility Study on the Corn.

mercialization of Guayule in New South Wales, Australia, Division of

Plant Industry, California Department of Food and Agriculture,

Sacramento, Calif., December 1981.

Estimated Costs of Producing 1 Acre

of Guayule in New South Wales

With respect to the estimated cost of producing

1 acre of dryland guayule, the following points

should be made.

A 5-year growing cycle is used in this budget

although this time period is variable due to the

amount of rainfall a specific site would receive.

Plant density varies according to irrigated or dryland cultures. Because of an increase in potential

climatic uncertainties contributing to plant loss

(due to a longer production period of 5 years), a

total of 15,000 seedlings/acre is used at a cost of

$().() S/seedling. Seedlings cost approximately $0.04

each delivered, although growers anticipate that an

increase in commercial plantings will result in a

drop to $0.03 per plant.

Weeds have been a problem in various experimental guayule plantings and will invariably present a problem in New South Wales, In this budget

chemical weed control, cultivation, and hand hoeing are all included. No herbicides are registered

for guayule and, therefore, the chemical weed control cost is an estimated amount. Fertilizer is also

included in this budget, although exact amounts

would typically be dependent on results from soil

analyses taken from specific sites.

Although rent value of land, interest on variable

costs, and a charge for management profit are not

necessary out-of-pocket costs, they are legitimate

charges. If the land was not planted with guayule,

the landowner has the option of leasing the land

for other crops. An interest charge of 15 percent

on borrowed production costs is included. This has

been calculated on variable production costs and

rent value of land,

A return to management of $26 per acre per year

is used. In various parts of California a percentage

of the gross is the accepted method, but with the

time lag of 5 years between planting and harvesting

for guayule, a uniform charge per year is used.

Scenarios A and B represent two different yields

of rubber per acre. It must be stressed that these

75
76 . Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

— — .

are estimated amounts and are not necessarily applicable to typical dryland yields.

Following these calculated production costs is a

break-even table that is based on the estimated total

production costs and a variety of yields and prices.

Yields vary from 1,000 to 3,000 lb of rubber per

acre, while rubber prices run from $0.40 to $1.00/lb.

Scenario A Australian $

Total production costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $-1,099

Processing ((),235/lb X 1,500 lb rubber) . . . . . . . . +353

Subtotal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,452

Less byproduct value

(0.244/lb X 1,500 lb rubber) ., , ., . . . ... , ... , –366

Total costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . $1,086

Break-even price for rubber (1,500 lb/acre) , . . . . $0.724

11/30/81 New York price of rubber 0.485 ..., . . 0.422

Loss/lb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... , . . . $0.302

Loss/acre . . . . . . ... , , ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $657

A yield of 1,500 lb of rubber per acre over a 5-year

period represents a current realistic figure of a dryland situation. This figure is based on personal interviews with various California guayule researchers and estimates of yield conducted by the Emergency Rubber Project.

Scenario B Australian $

Total production costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,099

Processing (0.235/lb X 3,000 lb rubber) . . . . . . . . +705

Subtotal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,804

Less byproduct value

(0.244/lb X 3,000 lb rubber) . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . –732

Total costs ... , . . . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . ., $1,072

Break-even price for rubber (3,000 lb/acre) . . . . . $0.357

11/30/81 New York price of rubber 0.485 ., . . . . 0.422

Profit/lb , . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... , . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . $0.065

Profit/acre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $195

Research conducted by the California Department of Food and Agriculture in conjunction with

various other guayule researchers has resulted in

the belief that new improved varieties of guayule

should produce more rubber in less time, and,

therefore, a yield of 2,500 to 3,000 lb of rubber per

acre is a representative estimate of future yields.

It is hoped that seed from these varieties will become available in approximately 5 to 10 years,

Table C-1 .—Estimated Costs of Producing 1 Acre of

Dryland Guayule in New South Wales, Australiaa

Australian $

First year

Establish stand (idle farm land)

Disk (2 x). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

List and shape beds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Fertilizer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chemical weed control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Seedlings—15,000/acre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Planting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Culture

Cultivate (2 x). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Cash farm overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Second year

Cultivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chemical weed control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Cash farm overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Third year

Chemical weed control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Cash farm overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Fourth year

Chemical weed control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Cash farm overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Fifth year

Cash farm overhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dig plants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Windrow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Bale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Haul (field to processing plant) . . . . . . . . . . . .

Subtotal . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Rent value of land @ $8/acre/yr x 5 yrs. . . . .

interest—5 yrs @ 150/0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Profit to management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Subtotal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Total production costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14

12

4

13

392

80

515

13

9

22

13

7

7

27

7

7

14

7

7

14

5

39

9

78

44

175

$767

40

162

130

$332

$1,099

aBa~~ on the rate of exchange as of NOV. 30, 19S1: $1.00 U.S. = $0.87 Australian.

Table C-2.—Per Acre Income Above Costs (processing costs included)

Yield Price of rubber per pound

Pounds of rubber per acre . . . 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00

1,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –690 –590 –490 –390 –290 –190 –90

1,500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –486 –336 –186 –36 + 114 +264 +414

2,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –281 –81 +11 9 +319 +519 +719 +919

2,500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –77 +173 +42 3 +673 +923 +1,173 +1,423

3,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +128 +428 +728 +1,028 +1,328 +1,628 +1,92 8

NOTE: If 2,000 lb of rubber per acre were produced, rubber prices would have to be near $O.6011b to break even or pay all production costs. In December 19S1, smoked sheets of rubber in New York were priced at less than $0.501ib. At current

prices, guayule Is not an economical crop to grow at present estimated yields of 1,500 Iblacre.

New improved varieties of guayule should produce more rubber in less time, and therefore a yield of 2,500 to 3,000

lb of rubber per acre is a reaiistic projection of future yieids. The table shows that at 2,500 lb of rubber per acre, rubber

prices would have to be near $(X50/lb to break even, and at 3,000 ib of rubber per acre they would have to approach $&IO/lb.
App. C—The Economics of the Commercialization of Guayule in New South Wales . 7 7

Conclusions and Recommendations

Conclusions

The development of a guayule industry in New

South Wales would have a significant impact on the

state’s economy. Most importantly, it would create

a viable agro-industry to supply local and export

markets and would lessen Australia’s reliance on

imported rubber. In addition, it would create employment opportunities in remote areas.

An optimistic assessment of the potential of developing a guayule rubber industry in the western

slopes and plains of New South Wales is based on

the following factors:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Millions of hectares of light textured soils, especially the “Mallee” types, are available.

The economics of growing guayule in New

South Wales is more favorable than in the

United States because of the relatively low cost

of land along the north-south belt stretching

through central New South Wales.

With the average annual rainfall of 350 to 500

mm distributed evenly throughout the year in

the central north-south belt through New South

Wales, guayule would require little or no irrigation.

Prevailing temperatures and soil types in the

central north-south belt appear suitable for

guayule cultivation.

Unlike the hevea rubber industry, guayule is

not a labor-intensive crop, as it is easily

adapted to mechanization.

The New South Wales Department of Agriculture has a successful record of introducing new

crops (e.g., cotton, rapeseed, and lupins) into

the state. The Department, therefore, has a capable staff and the necessary facilities to initiate a guayule development program in New

South Wales.

Recommendations

The establishment of guayule as a commercial industry in New South Wales is dependent on not

only environmental conditions but such factors as

land prices, the present-day agricultural situation,

and, most importantly, the implementation of a successful development program,

The following are recommendations that were

made by the senior author to the Premier of New

South Wales and the Department of Agriculture at

the conclusion of his trip to New South Wales in

November 1980. At this point, all of the recommendations have been accepted and are being implemented. The program is now 1 year old.

Along with each recommendation is a summary

of the corresponding action that has been put into

effect by the New South Wales Department of Agriculture, This information has been excerpted from

the Initial Report of Guayule Research and Develop

ment in New South Wales by P. L. Milthorpe.

1. A 3-year guayule development program

similar to the one in the State of California be initiated immediately in New South Wales to determine whether or not a viable industry can be established.

Early in 1981, a special Treasury grant was approved by the Premier which allocated the required

financial support necessary to implement a 3-year

guayule development project. The project consists

of four steps as follows:

a) identification of the most suitable soils and

climate for guayule cultivation;

b) development of the optimum package of agronomic technology;

c) evaluation of genetic material to identify the

best material developed in overseas breeding

programs; and

d) evaluation of the rate of rubber accumulation

in the laboratory.

2. Guayule test plots ranging from 0.25 to 5.0

hectares be established at Narrabri, Trangie, Condobolin, Hillston, and Yanco. Both transplant and

direct seeding methods of planting should be explored under irrigated and dryland farming situations.

Initial plantings of seedlings were made at Condobolin and Yanco in November 1980 followed by

further plantings at the research centers at Narrabri

and Trangie in mid-January. Additional plantings

were made at North Star, Warialda, Hillston,

Wagga Wagga, and Deniliguin.

Generally, the same procedure was adopted for

planting at each site. This involved hand planting

8- to 10-week-old hardened-off seedlings. These

were initially grown in 10 cm plastic pots and later

in 4 x 4 x 15 cm tubes, The plants were immediately irrigated when planted and then were watered

periodically until the rain began,

To date, no work has been conducted on direct

seeding, Once pelleted seed is available, this

method of planting will be evaluated.

3. A guayule genetic resource collection of all

varieties received from California and other

sources should be established at Condobolin with

the goal of increasing the seed of these varieties.
Appendix D

BARD Abstracts

Supported Projects 1979-80

Soil and Water

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Soil Salinity Effects on the Spatial Variability of

Hydraulic Conductivity

Solute Transport in Heterogeneous Unsaturated

Field Soil: Measurements, Prediction, and Application to Crop Production

Water Management Model for Drainage of Irrigated Lands in Semi-Arid Zones

Salinity Control in Irrigated Agriculture Under

Dynamic Conditions

Application of Pesticides via Drip Irrigation

Systems

Effect of Moisture Content, Soil Texture, Soil

Structure, ESP, and Soil Solution Concentration

on Bulk Soil EC

The Chemistry of Soil Crust Management

Use of Solar Energy for the Detoxification of

Organic Pollutants in Water for Agricultural

Reuse

The Effect of Clay-Organic Complexes in Soils

on the Behavior “and ‘Activity of Soil Applied

Herbicides

Agricultural Engineering

1. Utilization of Waste Heat From Power Plants for

2

3

4

Agricultural Uses

Greenhouse Operation for Best Aerial Environment

Engineering Analysis of Mechanical Damage to

Fruits and Vegetables Resulting From Impact

Separation of Clods and Rocks in a Fluidized Bed

5. Determining Optimum Performance for Milking

Equipment, Procedure, and Systems

6. Engineering and Horticultural Research on Improving the Mechanical Harvesting of Peppers

7. System Analysis and Design of Biofilters for the

Three Components of Macrobrachium Production

Plant Protection

10

2.

3.

78

Spiders as Biological Control Agents of Agricultural Pests

Plant Protection by a Plasmid Induced Killer

System for a Plant Pathogen

Development and Epidemiology of FungicideResistant Plant Pathogens in an Integrated Pest

4

Management Program for Pome and Stone

Fruit Production

Forecasting Epidemics of Non-Persistent Viruses in Annual Crops by ELISA and Use of the

“Helper” Factor for Resistance Breeding

5. Characterization and Mode of Action of Phvto6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

200

toxins Produced by Alternaria dauci and Other

Alternaria spp., and Their Potential Use in Selection for Disease Resistant Crop

Management of Scale Pests Through Utilization

of Their Pheromones, Kairomones, and Natural

Enemies

The Role of Epiculticular Leaf Waxes in Resistance of Plants Against Powdery Mildews

Ascorbic Acid Deficiency in Phytophagous Insects—Its Biochemical Nature and Its Role in

Insect Hostplant Relationship

Control of Soil-Borne Plant Pathogens by Solarization of Soils by Means of Polyethylene

Mulching: Phytopathological, Microbiological,

Agronomic, Chemical, and Physical Approaches

Responses of Tephritid Fruit Flies to Baits

A Study of the Mechanism of Photosynthetic

Herbicide Action With the Aim of Improving

Weed Control and Thereby Increasing the Efficiency of Water and Soil Utilization

Genetic Studies of Meal-Fly Preparatory to Biological Control Using Pseudo-Y Chromosome

Meiotic Drive

Resistance and Interference phenomena in

Plant-Virus Interactions

Quantitative Evaluation of Natural Enemy Impact Against the Homopteran Pests of Citrus

Management of Bulb Mites (Rhizoglyphus spp.)

Through a Study of Their Biology and Ecology

Biological Control of Sap Beetles Attacking

Fruit Crops (Dates and Grapes)

Serological Detection of Strawberry Mild Yellow-Edge Virus

Studies on Baculoviruses as a Potential Agent

for Pest Control

Studies of Plant Root-Knot Nematode (Meloidogyne incognita and M. javanica) Interrelationships

Epidemiology and Control of Bacterial Leaf

Spot Diseases in Vegetables: Pseudomonas lachrymans—Angular Leaf Spot of Cucumbers,

Xanthomanas vesicatoria–Bacterial Scab of

Pepper and Tomato, Pseudomonas tomato—

Bacterial Speck of Tomato
App. D—BARD Abstracts 79

Food Technology

1. Design and Delivery of Optimal Thermal Sterilization Processes for Low-Acid Canned Foods

2. The Role of Calcium in Fruit Ripening and in

Alleviating Post-Harvest Physiological Disorders

3. Biochemical Aspects of the Effect of Altered

Compositions of Atmospheric Gases on Stored

Product Insects

4. Production, Regulation, and Mode of Action of

Ethylene in Fruit Ripening, Senescence, and

Decay

5. Kinetics of Oxidation of Dehydrated Food at

Low Oxygen, and Development of Accelerated

Tests

6. Mechanism of Heat and Irradiation Synergism

7. Physiology and Prevention of Latent Infections

in Fruits

8. Application and Mode of Action of Plastic Film

to Extend Life of Fruits and Vegetables

9. Improving the Keeping Quality of Agricultural

Perishable Commodities Under Controlled Atmospheres

10. Prevention of Browning in Fruits and Vegetable

Foods

Field Crops

1. Breeding Potential of the Wild Genepool of

Lentil

2. The Collection, Evaluation, and Utilization of

Wild Emmer (Triticum dicoccoides) for Wheat

Breeding

3. Genetic Resources Information System for

Israel and the United States: A Feasibility Study

4. The Effect of Water Stress on Solarium Species

of Potential Use as Source of Steroidal Drugs;

Physiological, Biochemical, Agricultural, and

Genetical Aspects

5. Physiological Disorders in Vegetable Crops:

Basic and Practical Aspects

6. Development of Melons Suitable for Once-Over

Mechanical Harvest

7. Physiological Genetics of Cold Tolerance in the

Tomato

8. Development of a Management-Oriented Dynamic Simulation Model for Cotton Production

9. Pennisetum americanum X purpureum: A Potential Forage Crop for Maximum Production

of Digestible Nutrients Under Subtropical Conditions

10. Utilization of System Analysis for the Development and Implementation of Improved Decision Criteria for Cotton Crop Management

11. Peanut Breeding for Higher Yields and Quality

and Evaluation of Methodology

12. Heritability and Physiology of Anther Culture

and Inhibitor Selections in Wheat

13. The Dynamic Aspects of Heterosis in Interspecific Crosses of Cotton—A Plant Modeling

Approach

Horticulture

1. Concentration and Metabolism of Indolyc

Growth Hormones in Fruit Trees

2. Citrus Protoplasm Fusion

3. Climatic Requirements for Rest Completion in

Dormant Peach and Apple Buds

4. Improvement of Yield Levels in Citrus With

Special Emphasis on Shamouti and Valencia

Oranges: Hormone and Carbohydrate Interactions

5. Administration and Management of Citrus

Groves With Aerial Color Infra-red Photography

Using Low-Cost Microprocessors

6. Development of a Mechanized Meadow Orchard

System for Fresh Market Peaches

7. Vegetative Propagation of Selected Clones of

Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehn

Animal Production

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11,

Optimization of Dairy Cattle Breeding Strategy

in Israel and in the United States

Investigation of Genetic and Physiological Variability of Milking Cows by Biochemical and

Metabolic Studies of Milk Production in Udder,

on the Cellular Level

Oyster production in the Outflow of Salt Water

Fish Ponds

Introduction of the Giant Malaysian Prawn

Macrobrachium rosenbergii (de Man) Into

Brackish Water Aquiculture

Nutrition and Reproduction of Turkeys Under

Different Environmental Conditions

Genetic Variation in Minimum Body Weight

Required for the Onset of Sexual Maturity in

Broiler Chickens, and Its Genetic Covariation

With Growth-Rate Components

Breeding Efficiency and Milk Yield of Dairy

Cows in Relation to Nutritional Status and

Planned Differences in Conception Intervals

The Control of Meiotic Maturation in Mammals

Study of Systemic Granuloma, a Diet Related

Disease of the Cultured Marine Fish Sparus

aurata

Selective Breeding of Farmed Fish

Hormone Production by the Bovine Blastocyst
80 ● Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

12. The Promotion of Prolific Strains of Sheep by

Crossbreeding and by Nutritional and Managerial Means

13. Rotifer Resting Eggs and Their Application to

Marine Aquiculture

14. Development of Systems for Integrating Aquaculture With Water Storage and Irrigation

Animal Protection

1. Genetic Factors Affecting the Rate of Development of Immunological Maturity With Respect

to Disease Agents in Poultry

2. Studies on the Ecology of Animal Influenza

Viruses in Israel

3. Virologic, Immunologic, Epidemic, and Pathogenetic Studies of Slow Viral Lung Diseases in

Sheep

4. Study of the Lymphoproliferative Disease of

Turkey and Its Causative Virus

5. Specific Biochemical Test for Detecting Fatty

Liver in Farm Animals

6. Early Embryonic Environment and Early Embryonic Death in Dairy Cattle

7. Development of a Method for Obtaining Salmonella-Free Poultry Feed. Pilot Scale Study for

Subsequent Large Scale Implementation

8. Physiological Age-Grading and Survival Rate in

9

10

Culidoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) as a

Means of Determining Vector Capacity

Endocrine Control of Prolapsed Oviduct in

Hens

Bacterial and Leucocytic Contents and Enzyme

Levels in Milk as Methods for the Determination of Milk Quality and for the Early Detection

of Mastitis

11. Interaction of Newcastle Disease Virus Strains

of Different Virulence With Cell Receptors

12. Vaccination of Chickens Against Mycoplasma

gallisepticum

Agricultural Economics

1. Agricultural Planning With Production Rigidities: Theory and Practice

2. Grain Stocks and Price Policies in Israel

3. Some Dynamic Aspects of Technological Change

in Agriculture

4. Multi-Product Agricultural Supply Response Estimation in Israel and the United States

5. Analysis of Efficient Regional Allocation of Irrigation Water With Emphasis on Salinity and the

Related Cost Sharing Scheme

6. Agricultural Growth-Methodology, Measurement, and Applications to Israeli Agriculture

i’. Welfare Implications of Price Stabilization Policies Implemented by Israeli Agricultural Marketing Boards

8. The Impact of Inflation on Investment in Agricultural Capital

9. Estimation of an Agricultural Production Function From Data Obtained From Complex Sample Surveys

General

1. The Mechanism of Osmotic Accommodation to

Water and Saline Stress in Plant Cells; and the

Role of Hormones in Modulating This Response

2. The Role of Polyamides in Growth and Senescence of Plants Under Stress Conditions With

Special Reference to Horticulturally Important

Organs and Tissues

3. The Chemical Identity and Physiological Action

of Regulatory Peptides in Reproductive Maturation of Insects

4. Drought and Freezing Damage to Plants in Rela5,

6.

7.

8.

9.

10,

110

12.

13.

14.

15,

tion to the Structure and Function to the ATP

Synthesizing Enzyme From Chloroplasts

Improvement of Salt Tolerance in Higher

Plants—Research on the Levels of the Whole

Plant, Isolated Tissues, and Cells

Development of Somatic Hybridization Systems

Involving Cytoplasmic Traits

Plastom Manipulation in Plant Protoplasm Systems

Planning of Research in Agricultural Extension

and Extension Training

Interactions Between Ethylene and Other

Growth Regulators in Aging Tissues

The Effect of Plant and Environmental Factors

on Photosynthetic Efficiency

Factors Determining the Sensitivity of Abscising Plant Organs to Ethylene, With Special Reference to Auxin Metabolism and Transport

The Introduction of Vesicular-Arbuscular Mycorrhizae Into Modern Crop Production Practices

Development of Gene Transplant Technology

for Crop Plants

A Comparison of the Mechanism of Cellulose

Synthesis in Bacteria and Higher Plants

Resistance to Water and Salt Stress Through

Somatic Cell Selection

Approved Subjects 1982

Soil and Water

Slow-release water-borne microparticles for incorporation of pesticides into soils
App. D—BARD Abstracts 81

The mineralogical and chemical forms of boron,

molybdenum, and selenium in fly ash and their

mobility and interaction in soils

Reactions in soil and response of plants to various

fluorine sources

Control of nonfumigant nematicide distribution

and activity in irrigated soils

Improving estimates of evapotranspiration from

meteorological data for the control of irrigation

for cotton and other field crops

Managing multi-source irrigation water of different

qualities for optimum crop production

Crop response to saline water management in the

presence of spatially variable soil water

properties

Developments of methods for designing drainage

systems for irrigated lands with nonuniform

boundary conditions

Agricultural Engineering

Separation of extraneous matter from agricultural

products by the difference in the coefficient of

restitution

Long distance vertical spreader for granular

materials

Plant Protection

Naturally occurring steroids from solanaceous

plants as potential insect antifeedants

Natural arthropod defense mechanisms of deciduous trees, adaptable for use in agriculture

Evaluation of parasitoids for the control of whiteflies

Genetic and biological control of Septoria diseases

of wheat

Double stranded RNA-infectious hypovirulence factors in plant protection

Genetic manipulation of almond moth (Ephestia

cautella) populations as a means of reducing

or preventing insecticide resistance

Enhancement of citrus resistance to tephritid fruit

flies

Studies on nutrition, physiology, and molecular

genetics of spiroplasmas with reference to

diagnosis and pathogenesis

Food Technology

Chilling injury during avocado and mango fruit

storage: development and prevention

Mechanisms and prevention of lipid oxidation in

muscle foods

Protection of grain from insect damage through

storage in semiarid and arid regions

Post-mortem quality changes of the freshwater

prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii during

refrigerated/ice-chilled storage

Factors influencing the quality characteristics of

frozen and dehydrated fruits and vegetables

Field Crops

Regulation of corn dormancy

Testing the efficiency of different lamps and illumination regimes for photoperiodic irradiation of

agricultural crops

Development of cantaloupe varieties and advanced

breeding lines with resistance to the fungus

disease complex in both the USA and Israel

with special emphasis on resistance to downy

mildew

Genetic diversity of wild emmer wheat, Triticum

dicoccoides, in the Near East in relation to

wheat breeding

Genetic and chemical control of alkaloid biosynthesis in Papaver bracteatum and Papaver

somniferum

Studies on carcinogenic solarium plants of potential value as source of active vitamin D-like

derivatives

Study of cytoplasmic male sterility in lentil

Horticulture

Isozyme markers as a tool in avocado research

Avocado fruit abscission

Response of peach and nectarine germ plasm to an

annual top removal pruning system

Animal Protection

Physiological criteria for improvement of production efficiency in beef cows subjected to nutritional and environmental ‘stress’ due to fluctuating seasonal grazing conditions

Development of improved methodology for estimating genetic merit of bulls and cows in the USA

and Israel

Nutrition-physiology-environment interactions in

turkeys

Stable isotope ratio as naturally occurring tracers

in the aquiculture food web

An integrated approach to the breeding, nutrition,

reproduction, and management of geese

Animal Protection

Detection of rift valley fever ELISA antibody and

antigen in livestock

Studies of pathogenesis and prevention of milk

fever of dairy cows
82 ● Water-Related Technologies for Sustainable Agriculture in Arid/Semiarid Lands: Selected Foreign Experience

Immunization of cattle with antigens derived from Economic development and changing structure of

continuous in vitro cultures of Babesia bovis the family farm

Evaluation of polyethylene intramammary device

(IMD) in mastitis control General

Agricultural Economics Photoacoustic monitoring of plant leaves, in combination with photothermal radiometry and fluoGrain stocks and price policies in Israel; an evalua- rescence—tools for assessing plant condition,

tion of alternative policy combinations and photosynthesis, and productivity

their performance under rapid inflation

Pricing and R&D for quality of agricultural products: the case of tomatoes

o