Summary of Land Evaluation for Welkite Kulite Project

**• —-
Project ETH/88/013
United Nations Development
Programme
Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations
WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
(
/
LAND EVALUATION FOR IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT IN
WELKITE KULITE PROJECT AREA
By
M. Y. Javed Mirza
FAO Soil Survey Consultant
Addis Ababa
Oct., 1989TABLE OF CONTENTS
t
CONTENTS
1.    Introduction
PAGE
1
2. 
Location and extent of the project area 
2
3. 
Climate and length of growing periods
2
4. 
Climatic adaptability for crops
3
5. 
Physiography and geomorphology 
5
6. 
Soils
5
i
6.1     General characteristics
6.2     Soil taxonomic units
6.3     Soil mapping units
7.     Irrigation water quality 
8.     Land suitability for irrigated agriculture
8.1     General concept
8.2     Assumptions
8.3     Land suitability classification
8.4 Land suitability mapping units and their problems
9.     Cropping calendar
10.     Potential land use patterns
11.     Conclusions and recommendations
11.1     Main conclusions
11.2     Recommendations
References
TABLES
Table 1: Climatically adapted crops according to their degree of suitability
Table 2: Land suitability classification for irrigated crops
Table 3: Description of land suitability mapping 
units
5
6
7
8
9
9
10
11
12
14
16
17
17
18
20
* 
4
11
13
1Table 4       : Extent of various land suitability classes
according to the mapping units
FIGURES
Fig. 1:             Cropping           calendar           for           year-round           cultivation of crops
MAPS
Map 1 :           Location
Map 2:            Soils
Map 3:            Land suitability
Map 4 :           Potential land use patterns
ANNEXES
Annex I:              Methodology
Annex II: Climatic data for Welkite and Wolisso
Annex        III:        Detailed        description        of        soil        series        and laboratory analytical data
Annex        IV:        Chemical        analysis        and        suitability        of irrigation water from Kulite river
17
15
21.    INTRODUCTION
A          near-feasibi1ity          study          of          soils          and          land          suitability for       irrigated       agriculture       was       carried       out       and       reported       by       De       Pauw and        Touber        (1987)        for        the        project        areas        of        Welkite        Darge        and Welkite        Kulite        of        Shoa        region        in        Ethiopia        under        the        FAO/UNDP- assisted           project           ETH/82/008.           The           information           provided           in           the report          was,          however,          considered          inadequate          for          feasibility          studie of        the        two        projects.        An        18-day        consultancy        wai,        therefore,        offere to       the       author       by       the       FAO       under       the       project       BTH/88/013       for       the purpose to:
-          make       an       assessment       of       the       soil       studies       carried       out
earlier;
>
i
-   make further studies as appropriate; and
-          give        recommendations        on        suitable        cropping        patterns        and management         practices,         giving         due         consideration         to         land preparation and drainage problems.of the project areas
Under          the          agreed          terms          of          reference,          the          following additional        information        was        to        be        provided        for        each        of        the        two project areas:
i)                 A       soil       map       indicating       the       variations       and       distribution of different kinds of soils
ii)          Laboratory analytical data and moisture characteri
stics of the important kinds of soils
iii)         An extended list of crops adapted to the climate and
soils of the area
ivj A land suitability map delimiting areas of suitabili
ty for irrigated cultivation of the adapted crops
v)               A     map     of     the     potential     land     use     pattern     to     guide     in planning of maximum agricultural production
vi)         A cropping calendar for year-round cultivation
vii)        Recommendations on land development and solution of
soil management problema
The       project       was       sponsored       by       the       Water       Resources       Develop sent         Authority         (WRDA),         Ethiopia         with         the         financial         assistance         of the       United       Nations       Development       Programme       and       Food       and       Agriculture Organizations        of        the        United        Nations,        ^the        latter        being        the        execut ing agency.
The      assignment      was      undertaken      on      October      2,      1989      and      it
ended on October 19, 
under Annex I.
1989. The methodology of study is describedIt     may     be     pointed     out     that,     as     a     result     of     the     study     we extended        beyond        the        previously        marked        project        boundaries        as        th suitable       land       extended       beyond       those       but       had       to       be       restricted       t keep         the         extent         of         the         project         area         manageable         with         th provisions       already       made       for       the       feasibility       study       as       well       as       dt to         the         time         constraint.         Where         extendable,         the         boundaries         ar indicated        by        straight        lines.        Due        to        the        nonavailability        of        bag maps      of      the      required      scale,      the      maps      had      to      be      prepared      by      direc tracing        and        reductiion        of        the        mapping        unit        boundaries        from        th air-photos        which        did        not        have        a        uniform        scale.        Since        the        are under      different      mapping      units      was      measured      from      the      same      map,      th areal figures may be considered as only near approximations.
The      study      was      made      in      consultation      with      Ato      Mamo      Kifle the          National          Project          Coordinator,          and          Mr.          Thirugnanesambanthar the       Project       Team       Leader,       and       with       the       assistance       of       WRDA       staf including       Ato       Girum       Asfaw       (Soil       Chemist),       Ato       Surafel       Abay       (Agrc chemist).        Ato        Mekuria        H/Yohanis        (Junior        Chemist)        and        Ato        BiBrat (Irrigation Engineer).
The        terminology        used        for        soil        description        and        land        suit ability         classification         in         this         report         is         explained         in         the         USE (1951),         FAO(1976),         FAO(1977),         FAO(1979),         FAO(1985)         and         FAO(1988) The        soil        series        identified        in        the        project        area        have        been        name after          the          two          rivers          to          facilitate          understanding.          These          serie should       not       be       confused       with       some       other       soil       series       which       migh have       been       identified       with       the       same       names;       these       names       Bhould       t regarded as specific to this project area.
2.    LOCATION AND EXTENT OF THE PROJECT AREA
The        project        area        is        located        about        200km        southwest        c Addis       Ababa       and       about       45km       northwest       of       Welkite       town       in       She administrative         region,         stretching         along         the         left         bank         of         Kulit river.      The      location      of      the      area      is      indicated      on      Map      1.      The      are lies          roughly          between          08°20.6’-08°26.3’          N          and          37°36.6’-37°40.5          ’ coordinates       and       covers       about       3,820       ha       of       land       area.       It       has       a elevation of about 1640 to 1670 m amsl.
3.    CLIMATE AND LENGTH OF GROWING PERIODS
The       climatic       data       were       available       for       Welkite       and       Wolise towns       located       respectively       about       45       and       75km       in       the       southeast       c the      project      area      at      elevations      of      1950m      and      2014m      i.e.,      about      3C to       360m       higher       than       the       project       area.       These       data,       extracted       fre the previous report (De Pauw and Touber, 1987), are presenteII
I
Iunder Annex II. The data are fairly representative of the project
area for the rainfall pattern but the temperatures are probably 2
to 4 degrees higher in the project area than those of the reported
meteorological stations•
At       Welkite,       the       average       annual       rainfall       is       about       1200mm, about      70%      of      which      is      received      from      June      to      December      (the      main rainy      season)      and      about      20%      during      March      to      May      (the      short      rainy season),       while       the       period       from       October       to       February       is       almost       dry having only about 10% of the total annual rainfall.
At          Wolisso,          the          mean          maximum          temperature          fluctuates between      about      21      and      24*      C      during      the      main      rainy      season      and      bet ween     25     and     27*     C     during     rest     part     of     the     year.     The     mean     minimum temperature       varies       from       about       10       to       12.5*C       during       the       whole       year. The        mean        annual        temperature        is        about        18*        C.        This        temperature regime        may        be        classified        as        ’’Moderately        Cool        Tropics”        for        the whole        year        according        to        FAO        (1978-81).        However,        considering        the elevation          difference          of          about          450m,          and          hence          a          temperature difference       of       about       2       to      4       degrees       between      Wolisso       and      the       project area,         the         temperature         regime         for         the         latter         is         classified         as "Warm Tropics”
The           mean           monthly           potential           evapotranspiration           reported by De Pauw and Touber (1989) is as follows:
Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ET(mm): 110 113 132 124 126 94 82 84 93 121 108 111 
Annual
1298
According          to          the          available          climatic         data,         the         normal growing       period       for       rainfed       crops,       as       defined       by       FAO       (1978-81),       is about       240       days,       which       starts       from       March       (probably       mid       of       March) and      ends      near      the      mid      of      November.      It      implies      that      at      least      one crop       of       short       to       medium       duration       can       be       successfully       grown       during the        year        without        irrigation.        However,        as        the        rainfall        is        erratic, the        growing        period        may        be        frequently        interrupted        by        dry        spells with       a       high       moisture       stress,       especially       during       March       to       May,       so that       very       low       crop       yields       or       total       crop       failures       may       occasionally be           expected.           Under           irrigated           conditions,           the           growing           period extends over the whole year.
4.    CLIMATIC ADAPTABILITY FOR CROPS
Considering           the           climatic           conditions           described           in           the previous          section,          especially          the          temperature          regime,          the          adapted crops        may        be        listed        according        to        their        degree        of        suitability        as in Table 1.
3Table 1:            Climatically adapted crops according suitability
Highly 
crops
a)    Cerials
Maize
Sorghum *,
Millets 1
Teff ’•          •
b)    Oilseeds
^Groundnut
Sunflower
Safflower
Rapeseed
✓'Soybean
Nigerseed
c)    Pulses
Lentil
S Beans (Ph.) Cowpeas i ►
d)    Sugar crops
Sugarbeet
e)    Fruit plants
Citrus
Grape ’ »
Olive ’ /
f)     Vegetables
^Potato • '■
Sweet potato
Tomato
t/Onion
Garlic
✓ Pepper
g)              Fiber crops
Sisal
h)    Stimulants
Tobacco
suitable
Moderately  suit
able crops
Rice
to their degree of
Marginally able crops
suit
Wheat Barley
Oats
Linseed
Mustard
Sesame
}
-
’
Chickpea
Sugarcane
Banana
Papaya
Mango
Carrot
Radish
Turnip
-
Pear
Dates
Pea
Cotton
Coffee
-
45.    PHYSIOGRAPHY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY
The       project       area       has       an       almost       flat       to       gently       sloping land        surface        dissected        at        places        by        shallow        to        deep        gullies.        It haB      a      general      slope      from      north      to      south      and      local      slopes      towards the         gullies/rivers.         The         slopes         close         to         the         gullies         are         relative ly     sharp     ranging     from     about     3%     to     more     than     100%,     while     away     from
the gullies these are generally less than 1.5%.
The
sedimentB
consis
t
of
thick
, 
calcar
eous, 
dark
brown
silty        alluv
ium
(weathered
to 
silty 
clays)
which
are
buried
under
about      100 
to 
150      cm
thick
black
clays
p
robably 
weather
ed      from
old
The
underlying
rock
is
deeply 
burie
d, 
generally 
to
more
than
three
metres, 
and
comprises
mainl
y 
the
basaltic
sediments
volcanic ash deposits.  At places,  the browniah alluvial material is found exposed due to  truncation of the upper black clayey material.  The overlying  material is non to  slightly  calcareous while the buried material is strongly  calcareous and has high accumulation of medium to  coarse-sized lime concretions as well as powdery  lime.  A few lime concretions are also  found scattered in the overlying  material,  which are postulated to  have been brought to  the upper parts from the underlying  material through
the natural overturning process peculiar to Vertisols.
of lava flows with near horizontal stratification.
6.    SOILS
6.1         General characteristics
z
Soil       variations       in       the       project       area       are       mainly       due       to
the slope effecting  differences in drainage conditions,  soil colour,  distribution of lime and soil depth.  In general,  the flat or concave areas have poorer drainage conditions with periodic ponding  and deeper soils with darker colours and less lime content,  while the sloping  areas are better drained and shallower soils with lighter colours and more lime content.
Almost       all       soils       are       very       clayey       textured       with       a       good jstructyxe        and        suLficient        porosity        upto        40/50cm        depth        but        a        rela- IfTveTy         poor         structure         and         very         low/unstable         porosity         below,         all 'invariably            having            a            strongly            calcareous            substratum            containing abundant        lime        concretions        and        powdery        lime.        They        have        adequate amount      of      organic      matter      content      (3-5%      in      the      topsoil      and,      _2-3%      in (the       subsoi       I)       and       a^Kigh       b&se-saturation       (generaTly       >dO%J,       and       are [tKerefore         chemically         fertile.         Their         topsoil         tends         to         shatter         in ithe       form       of       fine       blocky       peds       upon       drying.       which       facilitates,       their
tillage even in relatively  dry__conditions,  as well as provides a natural mulch for’the soil moisture.  The basic infiltration rates,  as determined through field tests with double-ring  infil- trometer by  De Pauw and Touber (1987),  vary  from 0.05  to  0.2cm
5per        hour.        Their        available        water        capacity        is        moderately        high        and varies from about 140 to 200mm in the upper 100cm soil depth.
In       aggregate,       the       upper       about       40cm       layer       of       almost       all Boils         has         relatively         favourable         physical         and         chemi         cal         characteri- sjtics       for       plant       growth       while       the       lower       layers       "have       somewhat       poor pKysicaT         as         well         as         chemical         characteristics.         The         unstable         voids in        the        lower        layers        tend        to        close        with        extreme        pressure        upon wetting         (indicated         by         the         presence         of         many         prominent         intersecting slickensides),        so        that        the        roots        of        only        hardy        plants,        like        those of         Acacia         species,         can         survive;         the         latter         condition         is         more pronounced       in       soils       of       the       flat       and       concave       areas,       due       to       being wetted       more       frequently       and       to       greater       depths,       and       is       less       so       in Boils of the sloping areas.
Under            natural            conditions            of            alternate            wetting            and drying,       these       soils       form       wide       and       deep       cracks,       as       well       as       get their         surface         level         disturbed         due         to         the         formation         of         small basins and knolls, which create additional management problems.
6.2         Soil taxonomic units
i
On          the          basis          of          significant          differences          in          morphology and          expected          behaviour          towards          plant          growth,          two          main          soil taxonomic        units        i.e.,        the        Darge        series        and        the        Kulite        series,        wer recognized          in          the          project          area.          Their          main          characteristics          are outlined below.
Darge series: Almost flat (0.5-1.5% slope), deep to very
deep, moderately.well drained, slowly perme able, slightly calcareous, black clayey soils having a strong calcic horizon within 125cm depth (Pelli-Calcic Vertisols)
KUlite series: Flat to slightly concave (<0.5% slope), very
deep, imperfectly drained, periodically ponded, slowly permeable, noncalcareous, very black clayey soils having a strong calcic horizon within 125cm depth (Stagnic-Pel1i-
Calcic Vertisols)
These
series
are
described
in
detail
under
Anne
x 
III,
alongwith
the
laboratory 
data 
on
physical, 
chemi
cal
and
m
oistur<
characteristic
s.
The         Darge         series         occurs         in         five         different         phases,         in addition to the normal phase described above, as defined below.
Darge gently sloping phase: It is similar to the Darge series except that it has 1.5 to 3% slope and a slightly erosional surface indicated by the presence of rills and shallow gullies.
6Darge moderately deep phase: It is similar to Darge gently
sloping phase but is relatively shallow, under
lain by bedrock at 50 to 100cm depth.
Darge shallow phase: It is similar to  Darge gently  sloping phase but is shallow,  underlain by  bedrock within 50cm depth.
Darge gullied phase: It represents shallow to moderately
deep, part stony, soils of the Darge series having
sloping to steep surface with a few deep gullies.
Darge steeply dissected phase: It represents steep to very
steep gully/river banks dissected by gullies.
6.3         Soil mapping units
On       the       basis       of       the       differences       in       soil       characteristics affecting       land       use       for       irrigated       agriculture,       the       project       area       is
divided into  four different units which are delimited on Map 2. These mapping  units are described below as "Soil complexes"  which have a  major component covering  about 60  to  80  percent of the unit area  and minor components which collectively  occupy  less than 20  to  40  percent area  of the unit.  The minor components can be separated on the map only  through detailed wor very  detailed soil surveys.
Mapping unit 1: KUlite complex. This unit covers about 115
ha of the project area, occurring in the
form of flat to nearly concave parts having <0.5% slope. Its major soil component is the KUlite series while the minor component is the Darge series. Most of its area is
currently under natural grassland with a few very small patches being dry-farmed to maize, sorghum and teff. The unit is subject to ponding for significantly long periods
during rainy season, which seldom allows timely tillage and adversely affects the standing crops. However, the risk of soil erosion is the least expected.
Mapping unit 2: Darge complex. It covers about 1,905 ha of
the project area and represents almost flat land having main slopes of 0.5 to 1.5%. Its major soil component is the Darge series while the minor components include Kulite series and Darge gently sloping phase. Most part of this unit is presently under rainfed cropping of maize, sorghum, teff, pepper, beans and nigerseed, mainly under a system of shifting cultivation. Surface ponding with rain water may occur but in small
7MAP 2
3patches and for short durations. Whereas
the drainage problem is less severe in this
mapping unit, there exists a minor problem
of soil erosion.
Mapping unit 3: Darge gently sloping complex. This unit rep-
represents about 820 ha of land with mainly
gently sloping surface (1.5-3% slope). Its
major component is Darge gently sloping
phase, while the minor components include Darg
series and moderately deep and gullied phases
of the same series. ThiB unit is relatively dr
and almost free of the ponding problem. It is,
however, prone to the water erosion hazard of
moderate to severe degree. Most part of it is
currently under rainfed cultivation of mainly
maize, sorghum, teff and pepper.
Mapping  unit 4: Darge steeply  dissected complex.  This unit
comprises
about
980 
ha 
of
undulating 
to
steep
areas
dissected
by 
deep
gullies
and
♦ 
very  steep banks of the river streams.  Major component of this unit is Darge steeply dissected phase; the minor components are
the shallow,  moderately  deep and gullied phases of the same series and the exposed bedrock.  This unit is dominantly  uncultivat ed except in very  small patches having  rela tively  gentle slopes.  The soils have an acute hazard of gully  and bank erosion,  with the gully  heads extending  to  the adjoining
flat land.
7.    IRRIGATION WATER QUALITY
The
project
area 
is
intended
to 
be
irrigated
by
constructing
a 
dam
on
the
Kulite
river. 
JThe
riv
er
water
was
sampled
and
analysed
in
the
WRDA
water
laborator
y 
and
was
found
to  b_e__hjghly  suitable for permeable soils but moderately  suitable for the soils of the project area  which generally  have slow permeability.  It has an inherent minor hazard of slow sodication for soils of the area  over its long-term use,  as well as has a minor problem of Boron toxity  for crops.  The detailed chemical analysis of the water is presented under Annex IV.
88.    LAND SUITABILITY FOR IRRIGATED AGRICULTURE
8.1         General concept
The       soils       and       climatic,       as       well       as       the       topographic       and hydrological,         characteristics         are         integrated         in         the         form         of         land characteristics       and       matched       with       the       requirements       of       the       land       use i.e.,         irrigated         cultivation         of         the         climatically         adapted         crops,         to arrive         at         the         land         suitability.         The         degree         of         suitability         is described         in         terms         of         the         land         suitability         classes         which         are determined       by       the       extent       to       which       the       requirements       of       the       land use        are        satisfied        and        by        the        severity        of        limitations        posed,        if any, to the land use.
The        various        land        suitability        class        symbols        used        for        this report are defined as follows:
51    - Highly suitable land: Land class with the expected
productivity 
under
a 
certai
n
inputs
level
remaining 
above
about
60% 
of
that
achieved
from         an         ideally         suitable         land         under         the
same inputs level.
52      - Moderately suitable land: Land class with the
expected productivity under a certain inputs
level remaining between about 40 and 60% of
that achieved from an ideally suitable land
under the same inputs level.
53      - Marginally suitable land: Land class with the
expected productivity under a certain inputs
level remaining below about 40% of that
achieved from an ideally suitable land
under the same inputs level; occasional
crop failures may be expected.
N1 - Currently not suitable land: Land class which is
not suitable under the current infrastruct
ural and socio-economic conditions but may
be considered in some future time with the
changed conditions.
N2 - Permanently not suitable land:Land class which can
' not be economically improved for the envis
aged use in any conceivable future time.
The         major         kind         of         limitation         affecting         the         productivity is        indicated        by        the        subclasses        by        using        a        lower        case        letter suffix      with      the      class      symbol      (except      for      class      SI      which      has      no      or a minor limitation) as defined below:
9e - erosion hazard
w - workability difficult for seedbed preparation
d - problems due to inadequate surface or internal
drainage
r - restricted rootability due to inadequate soil depth or lack of stable voids in the subsoil
m - relatively low moisture availability
\
c - climatic limitation.
8.2    Assumptions
The land use to which the project area would be put after irrigation development was not clearly defined in the terms of reference, especially with repect to the adequacy of irrigation water, irrigation system to* be appli >red, crops to be grown, farm
/
equipment and power to be used, level of inputs (ferti1izers,seed,
biocides etc.) to be adopted and infrastructure to be developed
for management of the irrigated land. The land suitability is,
therefore, assessed under the following general assumptions.
i)                  The       availability       and       quality       of       irrigation       water       will not         Be         a         limitation         and'the         water         will         be         applied through surface "irrigation method.
ii)          The crops to be grown would be those described as
climatically suitable under section 4 of this report.
iii)                   The          rainfed          crops          receiving          supplemental          irrigation during periods of drought are considered as irrigated.
iv)         The crops will be grown during the proper season (See
cropping calendar under section 10).
v)           All major operations, like land level1ing/terracing and
construction of drains, will be carried out by the
government; thereafter, the lad will be tilled by an
,            average farmer under a cooperative system with the
bullock        power        and        improved        farm        implements,        and        will be managed at a medium level of inputs.
vi)     The farmer will be properly trained in the application
of irrigation water as well as in the cultural
practices required for the specific kinds of soils of
the project area and for the new crops to be
I                 introduced in the area.
vii)           The          infrastructure          required          for          cultivation          of          the proposed        crops         and        use/disposal         of        the         farm        produce will be timely developed.
108.3         Land suitability classification
Under          the          above-made          assumptions,          the          land          suitability classification           for           the            two           soil           series           and           their           phases recognized in the project area is presented in Table 2.
’ Table 2 : Land suitability classification for irrigated crops
\
; Darge
Kulite
Darge
Darge
Darge
Darge
Da
Crops A Soils
! series
ii
series
gent .
mod.
shal-
gull-
8t
\
8lpg
deep
low
ied
ds
a) Cerials
Maize
S2w            S3d            S2e              S3a             N2b               N2e           N2
•           Sorghum                         SI               S2d            S2e              S3b                     N2b '      N2e           N2
/A Millets
Teff
Rice
Wheat
Barley
Oats
b) Oilseeds
Groundnut'
7 Sunflower
V Safflower
Sesame
Rapeseed
Soybean
" Nigerseed
Linseed
Mu8tard
c) Pulses
Lentil
Beans ( Ph . )
Cowpeas
Chickpea
d) Sugar crops
e) Vegetables
SI               S2d             S2e              S3b                N2b               N2e           N2
S2w            S2d            S2w              S3b                N2b               N2e           N2
S2c             S2c             S3e              S3b                N2m           N2e           N2
S3c             S3c             S3c              S3b                 N2b               N2e           N2
S3c             S3c             S3c              S3b                N2b               N2e           N2
S3c             S3c             S3c              S3b                N2m           N2e           N2
S3d            Nld            S2d              S3m            N2a            N2e           N2
S2d            S3d             S2e              S3b                N2b               N2e           N2
S2d            S3d             S2e              S3b                N2b               N2e           N2
S3d            S3d            S2e              S2e             N2a            N2e           N2
S2w            S3d            S2e              S3m            N2b               N2e           N2
S2d            S2d             S2e              S3b                N2m           N2e           N2
S2w S3d S2e S3b N2m N2e N2.
S2w S3d S3e S3m N2b N2e N2
S2d S3d S3e S3 a N2b N2e N2i
i
S2w S3d S2e / S3b N2b N2e N2< S2d S3d S2e / S3 tn N2b N2e N2<
S2w            S3d            S2e
S2d            S3d            S2e
' S3m
S3tn
N2m N2e N2<
N2m N2e N2<
Sugarbeet
S2d
S3d
S2e
S3m
N2m
Sugarcane
N2e
N2<
S2c
S3d
S3e
S3m
N2b
N2e
N2<
Potato
S3d
S3d
S2e
S3m
N2b
N2e
N2<
Sweet potato
S3d
S3d
S2e
S3m
N2b
N2e
N2<
Tomato
S2w
S3d
S2e
S3m
N2b
N2e
N2<
Onion
S2d
S3d
S2e
S3m
N2b
N2e
z Garlic
N2<
S2w
S3d
S2e
S3b
N2m
N2e
N2<
Pepper
S2w
S3d
S2e
S3b
N2m
N2e
N2i
Carrot
S2d
S3d
S2e
S3m
N2m
N2e
N2<
Radish
S2d
S3d
S2e
S 3m
N2m
N2e
N2<
Turnip
S2d
S3d
S2e
S3m
N2m
N2e
N2<
Pea
S3c
S3d
■e
S3c
S3m
N2m
N2e
N2i
11f) Fiber crops
Sisal
Cotton
g) Fruit plants
Citrus
Grape
• Olive
Banana
Papaya
Mango
Pear
Dates
h) Stinulants
S2d            S3d            S2e               S3r           N2m           S3r             N2e
32c            S3d            S2e               S3b              N2b               N2e            N2e
S3r            Mid            S3r               S3r           N2b               N2e            N2e
S3r            Nld            S3r               S3r           N2b               N2e            N2e
S3r            Nld            S3r               S3r           N2b               N2e            N2e
S3r            Nld            S3r               S3r           N2b               N2e            N2e
S3r             Nld            S3r               S3r           N2b               N2e            N2e
S3r             Nld            S3r               S3r           N2b               N2e            N2e
S3r            Nld            S3r               S3r           N2b               N2e             N2e
S3c             S3c             S3c               S3r           N2b____    N2e            N2e
--- 1
P Tobacco
S2d
S3d
S2e
S3b
N2b
N2e
N2e
Coffee
S3r
Nld
S3r
S3r
N2b
N2e
N2e
8.4         Land suitability napping units and their problens
Based        on        the        degree        of        suitability        for        irrigated        culti vation       of       crops       and       the       nature       of       linitations       posed       to       cropping, the       project       area       nay       be       divided       into       four       land       suitability       units which       are       delimited       on       Map       3.       These       units       are       described       under Table       3       with       respect       to       their       areal       extent       ,       main       soil       character istics,           slope,           major           soil           management           problems           with           remedial measures and specific requirements for irrigation development.
12MAP 5Table 3: Description of land suitability lapping units
Land suit.
Iitent
Main soil
Slope
Major limitations/
Suggested reaedial
Specific develop-
■ap. unit
(bi)
characteristics
(XI
soil igt. problens
leasaures
lent requirements
1. Moderate
1,905
Very deep.
0.5-1.5
Difficulty in seed-
Tillage at proper
Minor local levelling/
irrigable
loderately veil
bed preparation,
loisture conditions
terracing with care
land
drained, slowly
restricted oxygen
and with lechanical
not to reaove >20ci of
perieable, black
availability due to
iipleients if avail-
the topsoil; infra-
clayey soils
iipeded internal
able*, avoidance of
structure for lechani-
drainage and slight
over-irrigation and
cal cultivation‘.control
erosion by water
proipt disposal of
of gullies with effect-
V
excess rain water;
ive vegetation cover;
contour ploughing;
installation of a
1
providing crop cover
closely spaced open
during rainy season.
ditch drainage system.
2. Moderate
820
Deep to very deep.
1.5-3.0
Difficulty in seed-
Tillage at proper
Construction of
to narginal
loderately veil
bed preparation,
loisture coiditions
sloping terraces
irrigable
drained, slowly
slight to aoderate
and with lehanical
with care not to
land
perieable, black
erosion by water
iipleients if avail-
reiove >20ci of
clayey - soils
able; avoidaace of
the topsoil and
over-irrigation;
with provision of
provision of vegeta-
grus water ways
cover on soils daring
I drop structures;
rainy season; grass
control of gullies
/
-
strips alternating
through effective
with the cultivated
vegetation cover
fields.
and plugging of
gully heads.
3. Marginal
115
Very deep, iiper-
( 0.5
Difficulty in seed-
Tillage at proper
Construction of
irrigable
fectly drained,
bed preparation)
loisture conditioos,
a closely spaced
land
slowly perieable,
low oiygen avail-
avoidance of over-
drainage systei
very black clayey
ability due to
irrigation, proipt
of open field
Boils
iipeded surface
disposal of ponding
ditches and ston
and internal
rain water; eiphasis
water drains or
drainage
on rice cultivation
developieat ns
pasture land
4. Hon-
980
Moderately 6lop-
>3
Steep slopes and
lone practical
Bstablishient of
irrigable
ing to steeply
irregular/high
loisture conditions,
forest/range plants
land
dissected or
relief
and stabilisation
high ridge land
of gullies end ridge
slopes9. CROPPING CALENDAR
Traditional         growing         periods         of         various         rainfed         crops,         as reported          by          George          (unpublished)          from          the          agricultural          statistics collected for the project area during 1985-86, are as follows:
Crops
Maize
Sorghum
Growing
Sowing
April/May
April/May
p e r i o d s
Harvesting
/
September/October*
September/October*
Teff
H. beans
July
June
December
October
Red pepper
June
December
Sesame
June
Nigerseed
June
October
October
Wheat
June
September
May
December
Chickpea
Potatoes
February
September
*  Harvesting period for these crops not reported; the inform
ation is based on field observations during soil survey.
The       data       given       above       indicate       that       the       sowing       dates       for the       commonly       grown       crops       fall       between       April       and       July.       These       dates fairly        correlate        with        the        rainy        periods.        Maize        and        sorghum        are sown       in       the       beginning       of       the       short       rainy       season       while       the       other crops       are       sown       with       the       start       of       the       main       rainy       season,       probably from     the     mid     of     June     to     mid     of     July.     The     maize     and     sorghum     being the        staple        food        crops        are        planted        at        the        earliest        start        of        the rainy        season;        probably        another        crop        of        these        foodgrains        is        sown in       June/July       i.e.,       in       the       beginning       of       the       main       rainy       season       for harves in November/December, to ensure the food production.
Under          irrigation,          the          temperature          regimes          during          differ ent       parts       of       the       year       are       more       important       for       crop       scheduling       than the        rainfall        pattern.        However,        as        much        economy        in        the        use        of irrigation       water       can       be       made       if       the       rainy       season       is       utilized       for producing         a         rainfed         rather         than         irrigated         crop.         Thus,         with         the introduction           of           irrigation           system,           two           distinct           cropping           seasons may        be        recognized        i.e.,        the        relatively        moist        or        wet        period        from the      beginning      of      May      to      the      mid      of      October      (See      section      3),      when casual          irrigation          may          be          required          only          during          droughty          spells, and      the      dry      period      from      mid      of      October      to      the      end      of      April      when regular         irrigation         will         be         necessary         for         growing         of         the         crops; these         two         seasons         are         henceforth         designated         as         ''Season         I”         and /’Season II" respectivey.
Whereas        the        optimum        dates        of        sowing        of        different        crops can           be           determined           only           through           experimentation,           a           tentative cropping         calendar         for         year-round         cultivation         of         crops,         based         ^on the available climatic data, may be suggested as in Fig 1.
14)
Fig. 1: Cropping calendar for year-rouod cultivation of crops
Crops
i*
i
i
■
i
i
■
■
■
SEASON I (Mainly rainfed with supp
lemental irrigation only
during dry spells)
SEASON II (Regularly irrigated)
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
X
X
X
Cerials:
Maize
Sorghum
Millets
Teff
Rice
Oilseeds
I May Jun Jul Aug Sep
i
. i_____________________________ _____ _
i
■
i
■
i ___________ _
• — ———•
i
i•  — ———.              _ „
• 
i
7
•
a
a
a
Sunflower!          —
Safflower! - — -
....
..—
•«•
a
a
Rapeseed !
Soybean !
Nigerseed J     i
a
Pulses: !
— -.
—
••■•
..—
—
••••
••••
Lentil
!
—
r
Ph. beans!
Chickpea !
Cowpea  !
—
••••
—
....
•■••
••••
a
■
—
—
i
i
i
ia
Vegetables:
Potato              !
Tomato            !
Onion'             !
Garlic              !
Pepper             !
Carrot             !
Radish             !
Turnip             !
Fiber crops:
Cotton J
Stimulants:
Tobacco !
Sugar crops
Sugarbeet!
Sugarcane!
- .—
•
....
/'7
—
---- — .
—
/3-£ .
—
••••
—
—
*
i
i
I
••
■
»
•_____________________________________ _______________________________
i
i
■
-------
■ • • •
 Sowing/planting period Harvesting period
Main growing per
1510.    POTENTIAL LAND USE PATTERNS
Based        on        the        suitability        for        irrigated        (and        rainfed        with supplemental            irrigation)            cultivation            of            the            climatically            adapted crops        as        well        as        considering        the        sustainability        of        the        agricultu ral         production         from         different         cropping         systems         and         the         possibili ties         of         alternative         land         uses,         the         following         four         potential         land use patterns are suggested for the project area.
Pattern 1 - General rainfed cui irrigated cropping:
a) Rainfed* farming of maize, sorghum, millets, pepper, pulses and oilseeds in season I.
y b) Irrigated farming of rice**, ateff, maize,
(Cotton, sugarbeet, chickpea, tobacco and vege- VabTes in season II.
\'c) Irrigated cultivation of sugarcane in seasons I
and II.
Pattern 2 - Limited rainfed cum irrigated cropping:
a)    Rainfed* farming of maize, sorghum, millets, pepper, pulses and oilseeds in season I.
b)    Irrigated farming of teff, maize, cotton, sugarbeet, chickpea, tobacco and vegetables in
season II•
All cultivated fields to be alternated with strips of grassland.
Pattern 3 - Restricted rainfed cum irrigated cropping:
a)    Rainfed* farming of teff, sorghum and millets
in season I.
b)
Irrigated farming of rice** and teff in
 season I
Pattern 4:
N
atural forests and range
lands.
The relevant land use patterns for different parts of the project area  are indicated on Map 4.  The selection of crops from those grouped under each land use pattern will,  however,  be dictated mainly by the local requirements.
16MAP 4
UNITED RAINFED CUN IRRIGATED CROPPING
2
4
RESTRICTED
RA'MED
CUM
IRRIGATED
CROPPING
NATURAL FORE
STS AND
RANGE L
ANDS
0 HE Q11.     CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
11.1      Main conclusions
Out of the the total area ( 3,820 ha) studied
for the project, 2,305 ha_have.moderate potential_and 555 ha have low potential, whi r? rest of the area has nd^potential for irrigation development. The break-up of each land suitability mapping unit with respect t£, the extent of different land suitability classes^ considering the overall suitability for irrigated cultivation of most of the forty five crops studied,
is as in Table 4.
Table 4: Extent of various land suitability classes according to the mapping units
! Land suit.!
• __
1  Total
i
EXTENT (ha)
♦ ! mmn TiapT>-pi n itnS g              * — —__________________________________ _____________ . _ __________________________
i
! unit
• ■
:   SI    :                s2
11
11»1
I
S3       1      N1
N2 !
■                              ■                        1                      1                             _»                                  1
1
1
i
i
i
i
1111
1
1
1
1
: ' i
1
: i         905                     : 1620                  285
11
1
1-
11
»
•
““ 1
1
•1
1
1a11
820 1 - : 660 11 80 <1 -
I
a1
I
•
r
I
:2
1
»
1
1
1•
1
»
1*1
I
1
!              3               1                     115       1      -              :        25
1•
11
1
90    1      -
t
1
1
1
11         1                1                                  1
1
:              4                            980
»
1
1
1
«
I
11
1 — 1 “ 11 100 1
1
—
so r
1I
- 11-
11
880 ;•
•
•1i
1a
1
1
1
1
11                       1
•It
! Total:
»
: 3        820
1 11i
1 1 1 _i
♦
I
: 2305
i
i
i
555
1
1
1
1
1•
1
1
960        :
1
1
2.       The        soils        encountered        in        the        area        are        generally        very deep       but       invariably       have       very       clayey       texture       with       the
peculiar             characteristics
of             developing             deep             wide
cracks and a  very  fine blocky  structure in the top soil upon drying; the latter acts as a  natural mulch and helps in conservation of the soil moisture.
3.             All         of         the         soils         have         highly         favourable         chemical characteristics          to          about          100cm          depth          and          moderately
favourable             physical
characteristics
to             about             50cm
depth; these conditions are most suitable for
i          relatively          short-roote.d          crops          and          unsuitable          for          the orchard plants.
4.  The important soil management problems faced to  the
irrigable
(suitable
for
irrigation            development)            land
include           i)           impeded           internal,           and           partly           external,
drainage              conditions, 
ii)              difficult              workability              and
iii) slight to moderate soil erosion by water.
175. 
The
continu
ed
use
of
the
proposed
riv
er
water
for
irrigation
of
the
slo
wly 
permeable
so
ils
of
the
project
area 
has
a 
mj.
njor
risk      of
soil
sodif
ication
as
well       as       a       slight~to       moderate       risk       of       boron       toxity       for the common crops.
11.2 Recommendations
1.           The        relatively        promising        area        for        irrigation        develop ment      is      that      occupied      by      the      soil      mapping      units      2      and 3,      which      should      be      demarcated      as      the      project      boundary; those      parts      of      the      unit      3      having      slopes      of      more      than 2%,       if       located       away       from       the       main       irrigation       block, should      be      left      out      of      the      project      area.      The      soil      map ping        unit        1,        though        is        a        marginal        irrigable        land, falls         mostly         within         the         main         irrigation         block         and may,         therefore,         be         considered         for         irrigation         develop ment but should be given a low priority.
2.          The      slope      of      soil      mapping      unit      3      should      be      graded locally         by         constructing         sloping         terraces         so         as         to keep,the      slope      around      1%;      utmost      care      should      be      taken to      avoid      removal      of      >20cm      of      the      topsoil      while      terra cing.      The      area      under      the      soil      mapping      unit      2      should not          be          considered          for          general          level1ing/terracing          ; this       process       may       cause       an       irrepairable       damage       to       the area        by        adversely        affecting        its        surface        drainage        and lowering        the        soil        fertility        while        removing        the        upper most important part of the soils.
/      3. A closely spaced open ditch drainage system should be
constructed by  the Government for disposal of excess rain water from the fields during  wet periods.  The drainage system would also  help leaching  of soils which otherwise are likely  to  get deteriorated by  the continuous use of the irrigation water of somewhat low qua 1i ty.
4.            An        infrastructure        for        use        of        mechanical        implements for        tillage        should        be        developed        to        gradually        replace bullock power by tractor power.
5.           A       programme       should       be       arranged       for       training       the farmers of the project area especially in:
-   control and use of irrigation water so as to avoid over-irrigation of soils
-   preparation of proper seedbed by tilling the soils at optimum moisture level
-   prompt evacuation of excess rain water from the fields during wet periods
18-            alignment          of         the          furrows         across          the          slopes (contour ploughing)
-   provision of effective crop cover (like groundnut
and teff) on sloping soils during the rainy season
-            leaving            grass            strips            alternating            with            the cultivated        fields        on        the        soils        with        >1%        slope        to avoid soil erosion.
6.            Wherever        irrigation        development        is        considered        on        the land       with       >2%       slope,       the       terracing       should       be       acoompa- nied        with        provision        of        proper        water        drop        structures and grass water ways.
7.            The        existing        gullies        and        rills        should        be        controlled by         establishing         an         effective         cover         of         the         adapted natural vegetation and plugging of gully heads.
19REFERENCES
USDA, 1951.       Soil     Survey     Manual,     Agri.     Handbook     No.     18.
USDA, Washington D.C.
FAO,   1976.       A      Framework      for      Land      Evaluation.      Soils      Bulle tin No. 32, FAO, Rome.
FAO,   1977.       Guidelines for Soil Profile Description, 2nd
Edition. FAO, Rome.
FAO,   1979.       Soil         Survey         Investigations         for         Irrigation.
Soils Bulletin 42. FAO, Rome.
FAO,   1978-81. Reports of the Agro-ecological Zones Project
World Soil Resources Reports No.48/1-4. FAO,
Rome.
FAO,   1985.       Guidelines:        Land        Evaluation        for        Irrigated        Agri culture, Soils Bulletin No. 55. FAO, Rome.
FAO,   1986.        Irrigation      Water      Needs:      Irr.      Water      Mgt.      Trng Manual No. 3, Prov. Ed. FAO, Rome.
FAO, 1988. FAO/UNESCO Soil Map of the World,  Rev.  Legend.
World Soil Resources Report No. 60. FAO, Rome.
De Pauw, E.         and Touber, L. , 1987. Soils and Land Suitabi
lity of the Welkite Darge and Welkite Kulite
Project Areas. WRDA, Addis Ababa.
George (unpublished). Irrigation Systems in the Catchment Basin of the Kulite River. WRDA, Addis Ababa.
1ANNEX I: METHODOLOGY
The methodology
following main steps.
Stereoscopic study of aerial
scale (1986), delineating the
adopted for
the study
photographs
differences
includes the
of 1:10,000
in landforms,
slopes, land use, natural vegetation cover, hydrological conditions, erosion features and photo tones,, resulting in a base map of different land types.
ii)
- C ft *■
Field
profiles
depth on representative sites;
investigations in each land type by exposing soil through deep pits and augering to about 3m
rapid checking on some
sites with
the help of auger holes.
iii ) Collection of soil samples
study of soil moisture
moisture capacity), and of
suitability for irrigation.
Correlation of soil survey
for          laboratory          analysis          and
characteristics
water samples to assess its
data with specific features
(available
of        different        land        types,        preparation        of        the        soil        mapping
legend, and final delineation of soil mapping
the        air-photos,        preparation        of        the        soil        map        of scale and its photographic reduction to 1:25000
units on
1:10000
scale.
v)    Analysis        of        climatic        data        and        listing        of        the
adapted
crops according to their suitability.
vi)
Integration of soils and climatic data  and matching  with the crop requirements for assessment of land suitability for the selected crops and preparation of the land suitability map.
vi i ) Formulation of suitable cropping  .patterns on the basis of land suitability  and that of the cropping  calendar on the basis of climatic data,  and preparation of the potential land use patterns map.
i
viii)
Preparation
of
specific               management
recommendations
keeping regard of the soil and climatic limitations.
Six        soil        pits        were        exposed,        three        deep        augerings        done and        twenty        seven        soil        samples        were        collected        for        detailed        charac terization         of         soils         through         laboratory         analyses         and         to         determine available        water        capacity        of        the        important        soils.        The        soil        samples and       the       water       samples       were       analysed       in       the       WRDA       laboratories       , while       '       the       core       samples       were       studied       in       the       soils       laboratory       of the       Ministry       of       Agriculture,       Addis       Ababa.       The       data       on       climate       and basic infiltration rates were taken from the previous report.
i
1I
Annex II Climntic data for Welkite and Woliaso
Mean annual and Monthly rainfall 1954-63 and 1969-82 for Welkite
YEAR
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
1197.   5
24.0
33.7
68.3
71.7
101.1
143.2
263 ._4
265.2
148.0
59.5
7.5
11.9
Mean
annual
and aonthly ra
infall
1952-83
for Woliafco
YEAR
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
1269.   7     22.4   •      31.0          80.5            71.6         85.3          105.8       304.2         209.4      180.3      80.4          12.4          6.4
Mean   monthly        bbxibub.       ■inimun and         average          teaperature 1953*59        and 1967    -72 (xC)
for Woliaso
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
1 max
26. 1
26.9
26.7
26.6
26.9
24.2
21.5
21.6
23.3
24.6
24.8
25.4
Twin
10.7
10.4
12.3
12.5
11.5
11. 1
11.5
10.3
10.4
10.6
10.1
10.0
Tmean
18.4
18.7
19.5
19.6
19.2
17.7
16.5
15.9
16.8
17.6
17.6
17.9
X-I
ANNEX III. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF SOIL SERIES AND LABORATORY ANALYTICAL DATA
1. PARGE SERIES
a) General soil
Parent material
characteristics
River
alluvium
overlain
by 
volcanic
ash
deposits
Landform
Topography and
slope
Present         land         use/
natural vegetation
Erosion        status
Drainage and
moisture conditions
Permeability
(estimated)
Presence of sur
face stones/rock
FAO classification
b ) Typical prof i1e characteristics
v
Old level plain
Almost flat to gently sloping.. areaS with
general slope of 0.5 to 1.5%  locally
>1.5%.
Mainly rainfed farming of maize, sorghum,
teff and pepper; part under long grass
with >70% cover.
Slight        to        moderate        (in        parts        severe)        water erosion; common rills, few gullies.
Moderately        well        drained;        moist        to        wet        upto about lm depth, moist below.
Slow
No stones or rock.
Pelli-Calcic Vertisols
in the Darg£ project area.
Prof ile:
Location:          Observation        site        No.        1        on        air-photo        No.        07/0230
Ap 0-18cm Black (2.5Y2/1) moist; clay; massive breaking  to
plastic,           firm
noncalcareous;
boundary;
EC(1:2.5H2O) 0.21mS/m; pH 6.4.
1
fine
blocky;
very 
stic
ky, 
very 
moist, 
very 
hard
dry;
no 
pores;
common
fine
roots
;
clear
smoothBw 18-45cm
C 45-88cm
Black (5Y2/1) moist; clay; moderate medium and coarse angular blocky; very  sticky,  very plastic,  very  firm moist,  very  hard dry; few fine tubular 'pores; common pressure faces; slightly  calcareous; common medium and fine roots; gradual smooth boundary; BC(1:2.5H2O) O.33mS/m; pH 6.7.
Black (5Y2/1) moist; clay; moderate to  strong medium and fine angular blocky; very  sticky, very  plastic,  extremely  firm moist,  extremely hard dry; few very  fine tubular pores; many
prominent
intersecting 
slickensides;
slightly
calcareous          (moderately          to          strongly          calcareous in      pockets);      few      medium      lime      concretions;      few medium      and     fine     roots;     gradual     smooth     boundary;
BC( 1.-2.5H2O) 0.32mS/m; pH 7.5.
Ck 88-130/145cn>
Black
(5Y2/1)
moist;
clay;
moderate
medium
angular
blocky;
very 
sticky, 
very 
plastic,
extremely  firm moist,  extremely  hard dry; few
very  fine tubular pores; many  prominent inter
secting 
slickensides;              moderately              calcareous
Ckg 130/145-280cm+
(strongly  calcareous in pockets); common coarse and medium lime concretions and pockets of soft powdery  lime; few fine roots; clear wavy boundary; BC(1:2.5H2O) O.53mS/m; pH 7.8.
Olive grey (2.5Y5/2) moist, many medium faint yellowish brown and common fine distinct brownish black (many prominent reddish brown below 200cm) mottles; silty clay; moderate medium angular and subangular blocky; very sticky, very plastic, very firm moist, very
hard dry; no pores; common slickensides; common fine and medium Fe-Mn nodules; strongly calcareous; many coarse and medium lime con cretions and pockets of soft powdery lime; no roots; BC(1:2.5H2O) 0.57mS/m; pH 7.8.
2LABORATORY ANALYTICAL DATA*
1. PARGE SERIES
a) Profile No. 1,               AP 07/0230
Horizon
AP             BW               c
ck
ckg
Depth (cm)
0-18
18-45
45-88
88-130/145
130/145-280*
Texture
c
c
c
C
SiC
Sand %
3
3
4
6
8
Silt X
37
32
37
36
49
Clay X
60
65
59
58
43
PH(H2O)
6.4
6.7
7.5
7.8
7.8
EC(1:2.5H20)(n6/m)
0.21
0.33
0.32
0.53
0.57
Exc.Cations (me^lOOg soil)
Ca
25
24.5
21.0
35.4
31.0
Mg
3.4
2.4
2.7
2.8
4.6
K
1.6
1.2
2.6
2.8
2.1
Na
.41
J).8
1.0
3.9
3.6
Sum of Cations
Base saturation (X)
95
100
100
100
100
CEC(me$/100g soil)
32
29
27
44
41
ESP
1.3
2.9
3.7
8.8
8.8
CaCo3(X)
Nil
Trace
Nil
8.3
2.4
Organic Carbon(X)
2.21
2.18
1.35
0.98
0.80
Organic Nitrogen(X)
0.14
0.13
0.06
u.04
0.03
Organ ic Phosphorus (ppm)
44 -
Trace
5
Trace
Nil
Available Mater Capacity
17.4
18.2
11.5
-
-
(mm/dm)
Avail. Water Capacity
143.7
-
-
-
-
(rm/ipper 100 on)
* The Soil samples were analysed at WRDA Soil Laboratory and the moisture characteristics were studied at the Soil Laboratory of the Ministry of Agriculture, Addis Ababa.LABORATORY ANALYTICAL DATA*
1. PARGE SERIES
b) Profile No. 2, AP 08/0269
I
Horizon
Ap
Bw
c
Bbk1
Bbk2
Depth (cm)
0-17
17-30
30-108
108-122
122-160
Texture
c
c
c
-
SIC
Sand X
2
3
10
-
14
Silt X
33
41
39
-
39
Clay X
65
56
51
-
47
PH(H2O)
7.1
7.0
7.8
-
8.6
EC(1:2.5H20)(n6/m)
0.04
0.1
0.14
-
0.15
Exc.Cations(mt|/100g soil)
Ca
23
21.4
25.2
.-
22.6
Mg
2
1.5
0.8
-
1.1
K
2.6
2.8
2.8
-
3.4
Na
1.3
1.3
3.2
-
1.6
Sum of Cations
I
Base saturation (X)
100
100
100
-
100
CEC(me^/100g soil)
27
25
30
-
29
ESP
4.9
5.3
10.5
-
12.3
CaCo3(X)
nil
nil
nil
-
trace
Organic Carbon(X)
1.9
1.5
1.4
-
1.1
Organic Nitrogen(X)
0.13
0.11
0.08
-
0.04
Organ i cPhosphonjs(ppn)
trace
nil
nil
-
nil
Available Water Capacity
•
(mm/dm)
Avail. Water Capacity
(rrrn/ipper 100 cm)
* The Soil samples were analysed at WRDA Soil Laboratory and the moisture characteristics were studied at the Soil Laboratory of the Ministry of Agriculture, Addis Ababa.LABORATORY ANALYTICAL DATA*
1. DARGE SERIES
' c) Profile No. 5, AP 04/0111
Horizon
Depth (cm)
0-18
18-54
54-94
94-113
113-280
Texture
c
c
c
c
SiC
Sand X
4.0
4.0
9
11
14
Silt X
28
36
35
31
43
Clay X
69
61
55
58
42
PH(H2O)
6.9
7.2
7.6
8.6
8.1
EC( 1:2.5H20) (nfi/m)
0.03
0.05
0.13
0.07
0.15
Exc.Cations(meyi00g soil)
Ca
24.6
27
23.4
.28
32
Mg
2.8
3.6
3.0
4.2
5.4
K
2.8
2.7
3.3
1.8
2.8
Na
0.7
2.4
3.8
3.4
3.9
Sum of Cations
Base saturation (X)
100
100
96.9
100
100
CEC(me /100g soil)
28
34
35
36
39
ESP
2.6
7.2
10.9
9.6
9.3
CaCo3(X)
Nil
Nil
Nil
2.1
3.2
Organic Carbon(X)
1 67
r
1.62
1.47
1.28
1.01
Organic Nitrogen(X)
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.04
Organ i c Phosphorus(pfm)
Nil
trace
10
trace
Nil
Available Water Capacity
(mm/dm)
1
Avail. Water Capacity
*
(rnn/ipper 100 cm)
* The Soil samples were analysed at URDA Soil Laboratory and the moisture characteristics were studied at the Soil Laboratory of the Ministry of Agriculture, Addis Ababa.LABORATORY ANALYTICAL DATA*
1.    PARGE SERIES
d) Profile No. 1A, AP 03/0088
Horizon
Depth (cm)
0-18
18-43
43-122
122-138
138-175
Texture
c
c
c
c
SiC
Sand %
2
3
4
9
15
Silt %
34
30
34
31
40
Clay X
64
67
63
60
45
pH(H20)
7.05
7.19
7.65
8.17
8.10
EC( 1:2.5H20) (n6/m)
0.07
0.03
0.10
0.11
0.04
Exc.Cations(ir»yi00g soil)
Ca
22.8
24.0
27.2 .
28.0
22.4
Mg
3.4
2.0
3.0
2.6
2.4
K
3.1
2.8
2.6
3.1
2.4
Na
0.57
0.80
2.9
6.6
7.9
Sum of Cations
29.9
29.6
35.7
40.3
35.1
Base saturation (X)
100
100
81.1
89.5
69.4„
CEC(me|/100g soil)
28
28
44
45
51
ESP
2.0
2.9
6.5
14.6
15.6
CaCo3(X)
nil
nil
1.4
2.4
nil
Organic Carbon(X)
2.79
1.47
1.16
1.08
0.86
Organic Nitrogen(X)
0.266
0.154
0.098
0.07
0.056
Organ i cPhosphorus(ppm)
nil
30
trace
trace
nil
Available Water Capacity
16.4
19.6
13.5
-
-
(mm/dm)
Avail. Water Capacity
15.05
•
•
—
•
(irm/ipper 100 an)
* The Soil samples were analysed at URDA Soil Laboratory and the moisture characteristics were studied at the Soil Laboratory of the Ministry of Agriculture, Addis Ababa.2- KULITE SERIES
a) General soil characteristics
Parent material
River alluvium overlain by volcanic ash
deposits
Landform Topography
and
slope
Present        land use/ natural        vegetation natural        vegetation Erosion                  us
Old basins
Flat areas with <0.5% slope.
Mainly natural grass land; a few patches used for rainfed farming of maize, sorghum
Drainage and
and teff.
Slight to no erosion.
Imperfectly drained; wet upto about lm
moisture conditions Permeability
(estim /ated)
Presence of sur face Btonea/rock FAO classification
depth, moist below.
Slow to very slow
No atones or rock.
Stagnic-Pelli-Calcic Vertisols
Ap 0-20cm
Black (5Y2/0) moist; clay; massive breaking to
fine
b) Typical profile characteristics
Location:        Observation        site        No.        3        on        air-photo        No.        05/0169
in the Kulite project area.
Profile:
plastic,           firm
noncalcareous;
clear          smooth
boundary; EC(1:2.5H2O) 0.15mS/m; pH 6.6.
blocky;
ver
y 
sticky,
very 
moist, 
very 
hard
dry;
no 
pores;
common
med
ium
and
fine
roots;
1Bw 20-42cm                Black (5Y2/0) moist; clay; moderate medium and coarse angular blocky; very sticky, very plastic, very firm moist, very hard dry; few fine tubular pores; common pressure faces; noncalcareoua; few fine roots; gradual smooth boundary; BC(1:2.5H2O) 0.13mS/m; pH 6.5.'
Cl 42-73cm                 Black (5Y2/0) moist; clay; moderate to strong
medium and fine angular blocky; very  sticky,
very  plastic,  extremely  firm moist,  extremely
hard dry; few very  fine tubular pores; many
prominent
intersecting 
slickensides;
noncalca-
reous;       few       fine       lime       concretions;       few       very       fine
roots; clear smooth boundary; BC(1:2.5H2O)
0.29mS/m; p
H 6.8. 
’
- ---
C2 
73-130/140cm
Black
(5Y2/0)
moist;
clay;
moderate
coarse
and
medium
angular
blocky;
very 
sticky, 
very 
plastic,
extremely 
firm
moist, 
extremely
hard
dry;
few
very       fine       tubular       pores;       many       prominent       inter
secting            slickensides;
slightly            calcareous;            few
fine and medium lime concretions; no  roots; clear wavy  boundary; EC(1:2.5H2O) 0.34mS/m; pH
7.9.
Ckg 130/140-200cm+ Brownish black (10YR 2/2) moist, many medium
faint yellowish brown and black mottles increasing withdepth in contrast and abundance; clay; moderate fine angular blocky; very sticky, very plastic, very firm moist, very hard dry; no pores; many shiny ped surfaces and slickensides; common fine and medium Fe-Mn nodules; strongly calcareous; many coarse and medium lime con cretions and pockets of soft powdery lime; no roots; EC(1:2.5H2O) 0.12mS/m; pH 8.6.
2LABORATORY ANALYTICAL DATA*
MJUTE SERIES
a) Profile No. 1b AP 03/0088
Horizon
Depth (cm)
0-18            18-35            35-100              100-143             143-300+
Texture
c
C
c
c
Sand X
5
4
9
16
Silt X
32
28
35
38
Clay X
63
68
55
46
PH(H2O)
7.05
6.80
7.20
8.20
8.70
EC(1:2.5H2O)(nfi/m)
0.07
0.02
0.05
0.13
0.08
Exc.Cdtions(me| 100g soil)
/
Ca         ‘
20.8               21.4 .
18.9
22.0
Mg
3.0
2.8
4.0
1.2
K
1.5
2.3
5.9
6.4
Na
3.8
2.2
2.8
1.9
Sum of Cations
29.1
28.8
31.6
31.5
Base saturation (X)
79.7
81.2
80.2
86.0
CEC(me^100g soil)
37
35
39
37
ESP
10.3
6.3
6.9
5.2
CaCo3(X)
Nil
Nil
2.1
3.2
Organic Carbon(X)
1.50
1.44
1.22
0.92
Organic Nitrogen(X)
0.07
0.056
0.042
0.028
Organ i cPhosphorus(ppn)
25
Nil
Trace
Trace
Available Water Capacity
-
-
-
(mm/dm)
Avail. Water Capacity
(nrn/upper 100 am)
1
-
-
-
-
-
* The Soil samples were analysed at WRDA Soil Laboratory and the moisture characteristics were studied at the Soil Laboratory of the Ministry of Agriculture, Addis Ababa.LABORATORY ANALYTICAL DATA*
2.    MUTE SERIES
b) Profile No.           3,  AP 05/0.169
Horizon
Depth (cm)
1-20        20-42          42-73            73-130/140         130/140-200
Texture
ct
c
c
c
Sic
Sand X
3 U'
3
4
5
10
Silt X
♦
' 31
35
32
30
42
V
Clay X
60...
62
64
65
48
pH(H20)
6.62
6.54
6.80
7.87
7.86
EC( 1:2.5H20) (n6/m)
0.15
0.13
0.29
0.34
0.27
Exc.Cations(m»yi00g soil)
Ca
24.1
19.6
20.1
.22.4
21.0
Mg
2.8
2.0
2.4
3.6
2.2
K
3.1
1.3
2.3
2.1
2.8
Na
0.91
1.4
2.5
3.1
3.4
Sum of Cations
30.9
24.3
27.3
31.1
29.4
Base saturation (X)
100
93.5
96.5
90.5
90.2
CEC(m«|/100g soil)
29
26
29
34
33
ESP
3.1
5.4
8.7
8.9
10.5
CaCo3(X)
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Trace
Organic Carbon(X)
2.39
1.62
1.13
1.06
0.76
Organic Nitrogen(X)
0.140
0.112
0.084
0.056
0.028
Organ i cPtosphorus(ppn)
18
18
10
Trace
Nil
Available Water Capacity
19.2
14.7
18.7
-
-
(mm/dm)
Avail. Water Capacity
179.2
-
-
-
-
(irm/ipper 100 on)
* The Soil samples were analysed at WRDA Soil Laboratory and the moisture characteristics were studied at the Soil Laboratory of the Ministry of Agriculture, Addis Ababa.I
ANNEX IV: CHEMICAL ANALYSIS AND SUITABILITY OF IRRIGATION
KAILR -FROM KHLITF RIVER
;
_________
(Sampled on i?7in/,89)
I
ECwIdSm' )
1
PH
Cations(meq/1
Na
K
Ca
Mg
AnionsCmeq/1)
Cl
F
HCOj
COj
Boron (mg/1)
0.169
8.56       '
NH4-N (Mg/1)
NOj-N  (mg/1  )
PO4-P (mg/1)
Fe (mg/1)
SAR
J
Adj. SAR
RSC (meq/1 )
Suitabi1i      ty
0.70
0.12
0.72
0.48
0.25
0.01
1.08
0.16
0.15
0.01
0.79
0.28
5.35
0.24
0.35
0.90
1.01
0.16
Moderately-suitable:
for       surface
minor problems of slow sodication
irrigation
over long-term use on slowly permeable
, soils and boron toxity for crops.PROJECT ETH/88/013
WELKITE-KULIT
MEDIUM-SCALE IRRIGATION PROJECT
AGRICULTURE
REVIEW OF CROPS & CROPPING PATTERNS
ADDIS ABABA
APRIL 1991
R.CESTABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages
Acknowledgement
Summary
X
1-5
1. Introduction
1
Section I
3
2.      Over-View on the Previous Project Documents
3
Project Report Preparation
3
3.       Proposed Components for Further Study Inputs
4
3.1 General
4
3.2 Resources Inventory
4
3.3 Agriculture
6
3.4 Social Study
7
3.5 Soils
7
4.       Land Utilization Options -
8
4.1 Introduction
8
4.2 Background Information
9
4.3 Options
12
4.3.1
Option
A
13
4.3.2
II
B
14
4.3.3
II
C
-
14
4.3.4
II
D
15
4.3.5 Recommendation
16-2-
Section II
5. Proposed Cropping Systems
5.1 Background to Crop Selection
5.1.1 Introduction
5.1.2     Objectives 
5.1.3     Specific Objectives 
5.2 Existing Cropping
5.3 Livestock
5.4 Research Base
5.5 Soils and Climate Potential & Limitations
5.6 Some Negative Impacts on Irrigation Development 5.7 Agronomic Criteria
5.8 Crop Compatibility
5.9 Proposed Crops
6. Summary of Agronomic Characteristics for Proposed Crops
6.1     Soybeans
6.2     Haricotbeans
6.3     Potatoes
6.4     Onions
6.5     Groundnuts
6.6     Pepper
17
17
17
18
18
19
21
21
21
21
22
22
23
24
24
25
26
26
27
28-3-
7. Fanning Systems 
7.1    Cropping Pattern
7.2    Cropping Combination
7.3    Crop Rotation Scheme
7.3.1      Benefits 
7.3.2      Rotation Scheme in the Project
7.4    Cropping Calendar
8. Yield Estimate
8.1 General
8.2 Yield Estimate From Various Sources
8.3 Projected Yield
8.4 Expected Yield Under Rainfed Conditons
9.      Agricultural Operation
9.1 For Large Scale Commercial Farm(s) 9.2 For Small Holder Private fArms
10.      The Need For Establishing a Pilot Scheme
29
29
30
30
30
31
34
35
35
35
37
38
40
40
40
40
11.      Climatic Tables
12. Annexes
12.1      Reference
12.2      ClimateJables
12.3      Cropping Calender figure
12.4      Crop - ^ater Requirement Tables
13.5      Crop water Requirementr~ --------------- - _ i--------- --------- -
i--------- zz :
J
izz zzr .' t .
31 -        “ " ftjfrYc v !iur *
” f^<\6€w q( +l»g
Crcppivy Pot fa" _______________________
1
1 -■■
J____________Acknowledgement
I like to extend my sincere gratitude to Ato Mekuria Taffesse, Chief Engineer and National Project Coordinate
untiring effort and valuable contributions made the timely completion of this report possible. My thanks also goes to Mr.S.Thirugnanesambanthar,
■ ■, whose
SIDDE, Team Leader, ETH. FAO/UNDP 88/013, whose encouragement and personal envolvement is reflected in this report preparation.
My compliment goes also to Ato Kinfe Mamo Agronomist, for his \
envaluable advice and participation in the formulation of, and the write up of the report. Ato Samson Haile Selassie, whose resourcefulness to effectivly utilize the computer facilities for preparing tables and
figures vital for the report compilation and his eagerness to accommodate all other pertinent issues I had towards the preparation of this report, deserves my profound appreciation.
<
I would like to record my indebtedness to all the staff in the Secretariat^, especially to W/ro Elisabeth Damena, who was always ready to help in typing and willing to look after all other administrative issues 
that concern^ me; to W/t Buznesh Debela secretary in the Project Office,
who always met my request for stationery and other writing materials; to
the WRDA Librarians who provided me with a make-shift office accommodation in the libarary.
This report would have not been possible without wyt Kedija Mohammed who patiently and deligently typed the manuscript to give it the present form, and I am profoundly grateful for that.
Last but not l;‘st, I like to express my appreciation to all the young engineers and staff in the first floor of WRDA, whose smiling faces and cordial greetings created a very conducive working climate and made me no more a stranger.Senary & Recommendations
6eneral
The major portions of time spent in preparing this review report depended largely on desk studies and short field trips. Two reconnaissance field trips were made to the project area to assess first-hand, the existing agricultural situations. In addito^n,
another brief but useful visit was made to the Zeway Horticultural Enterprise to acquire information on flowers growing and other
horticultural crops able to the project derations
data to inhance the
and their cropping pattern, which may be applic- area's conditions. These trips, though of short
, have however helped to provide additonal already available data-base. During these trips
relevant government officials, regional agricultural officers, experts on various  disciplines, as  well as  some farmers, were met during which time useful exchangesof ideas have transpired.
This report is made up of two sections. Section I is entirely 
devoted to the elaboration of additional inputs to uplift the over-all
document status to an all-inclusive and a comprehensibly studied
project and,Section II is an effort put in to the re-assessmentof
the agricultural development aspect. In effect the preparation taken
to re-appraise the agricultural sector is tantamount to producing an
entirely new approach to cropping systems comparable to a fully fledged
feasibility study document.
Section I
Resources Inventory
During the course of this  project review certain unattended and yet very  crucial topics,which must have been considered initially  as  an integal part of the study compenent.were recognized.
• •
/ ..-2-
In the considered opinion, and without the risk of overstepping his mandate, the Consultant finds it his duty and obligation to bring these omissions to the attention of the concerned officials of WRDA. This does not imply however, that this flaw in the report has
not  been  already  recognized  by  WRDA  ’  that  stepps  are  not  being  ccritenplated to correct the deficiencies.
— At any rate, it is recommended that studies on the following add
itional issues, whose study components have been treated in-sufficient
detail in the main report, be carried out before the final present
ation of the Project Document.
Topics   to   be   studied   and   included   in   the   W.Kulite   Project   Document are:-
-    forestry
-    watershed management
-    grazing lands
-    animal resources
-    agriculture
-    social study
Land Utilization Options
At present it is envisated to adopt two different types of land
exploitation in the W.Kulite and W.Darge Project? areas i.e., the
small holder private settler farms and the large scale commercial
farm4(s).
The   following   4   options   are   dicussed   and   some   advantages   and   dis advantages on those options have been indicated.
Option A - joint development of the small holder private fanners 
with the large scale commercial farmer(s)on each of the
two projects,
Option   B   -   the   entire   farming   system   of   the   two   project   areas   be alloted to large scale commercial farmer(s) only,
cr
.-3-
Option C -       the   entire   farming   system   of   the   two   project   areas   be left to the small holder private farmers only,
Option D -       either W.Kulite or W.Darge be exclussively utilized by either the small holder private farmers and the other by large scale commercial farmer(s) as a separate development option.
Recommendation: Both    optioniA and D have been considered, but option D happens to be most meritorious.
Section II
Proposed Crops & Agricultural Progra—es Salient Feature;of the Project area
SoiIs
* 1 "Almost all soils are very clayey textured with good structure and sufficient porosity up to 40/50 cm depth———--. Have adequate amount of organic matter content (3 - 5% in the top soil and 2 -3% in the subsoil)and a high base saturation (general > 80%) and are therefore chemically fertile'/
Existing Farming Population in the project area:-
family head 520
total population 2600
*2proposed land allocation per head&5ha. Net total irrigable area
1116ha.
Total   annual   rainfall   (9   years   average   of   4   stations)   1194.72   mm. Annual mean temperature 17.95°C extrapstated from Wolisso.
- Major existing  crops under rainfed conditions
Maize
chickneas
Sorghum             nou^
Teff
haricotbean
pepper sesame
vegetables.
J^!.Land Evaluation for Irrigation Development in Welkite Kulite Project Area NB *2Not suggesl^by this consultant
•«/..-4-
Crop Selection:-
In spite of some unomodifiable, topographic, soil or agronomic 
constraints a wide range of crops have been suggested in the docunent
of the "The Land Evaluation For Irrigation Development in Welkite - Kul it Project Area" ✓.selection of only 6 crops have been made however, on the
basis of their agronomic adaptability, marketing opportunities, logi stical consideration and production economics such as land utilization.
The crops selected are:-
Wet Season
Dry Season
Crop
Small holder
Priv. farms
Large Scale
Commer. farm(s)
Small holder
Priv. farms
Large scale
Conner. farm(s^
Area (ha)
%
Area
X
Area
X
Area
X
Soybean Haricotbean
Gromtut
Pcrtatoe
Onion
Pepper
60
100
100
-
-
-
5.38
8.96
8.96
-
-
-
300
200
356
-
-
•
26.88
17.92
31.90
-
-
-
-
-
-
55
75
70
-
-
-
4.93
6.72
6.27
-
-
-
250
250
180
-
-
-
22.40
22.40
16.13
TOTAL
260
23.30
850
76.16
200
17.92
680
60.93
The cropping density is 178.8 %
Yield Projections
Although accuratfyield data from the project area are hard to come by, on the basis of the rudimentary data acquired from the region and by extrapolated data obtained elsewhere,it has been possible to make yield estimate both for the small holder and large scale Connerical farms. There is a relatively faster rate of growth for the large
scale commercial farm(s) where the anticipated ultimate yield will be attained in year 5 of project implementation and for the small holder farmer it may take about 8 years to reach at the same yield level as that of the large scale commercial farmes.Establishment of a Pilot scheme
The agricultural potential for the W.Kulite Project area is generally considered good. To bring it to yet a higher productive area all
the supporting agricultural
must work in unison. Highly
organized well motivated extension service on one side, research
oriented backup on the other .will agriculturally.
up-lift the region1.      Introduction
This report is devided into two sections. Section I deals with
the present project status and makes inventories of the study components. Recommendations are made on additional study inputs to upgrading the
project document.
As   the   plan   of   project   implementation   for   the   project   is   based on   small   and   large   scale   commercial   farming   system,   alternative   appro aches for the coordination of the work programme have been proposed.
Section II is entirely devoted to the reviewing of the existing documents on the agricultural sector. The studies of this project were prepared initially by the Water Resources Development Authority (WRDA) in 1986 and finalized by the Ethiopian Valleys Development Studies Authority (EVDSA) in 1989 with the financial and technical assistance from UNDP and FAO respectively. The final designing of the project is being carried out by WRDA.
However, to complete its study WRDA was required to bring in additonal expertise for additional inputs. In pursuit of that aspiration
an agronomist was required to review the cropping aspect of the study.
Needless to say, this agricultural appraisal has endeavoured to prepare this report by including more important inputs hoping to improve the scope of the study document over and above the terms of contract service entered between WRDA and the ionsultant. The nature of work envolved in the agricultural sector is to determine the types 
of crops and cropping pattern and other related requirements. Potentially profitable crops have been selected on the basis of the Land Evaluation For Irrigation Development In Welkite-Kulite Project Area Project
ETH/88/013. Although the crops proposed are potentially adaptable to the area and also are high-yielders, only an estimation of the actual yield-build-up has been indicated based on available data.As these proposed crops have limited long-standing data on their performance under large scale irrigation schemes, it was found necessary to
determine their adaptability and cultural requirements by committing them to a field trial scheme. A recommendation has been made therefore, for establishing as soon as possible, a pilot project within the project area.SECTION I
2.      Overview on the Previous Project Documents
‘Project Report Preparation
When the study programme for Welkite-Kulite was embarked upon the major effort then was to make the irrigation oriented study programme workable at the exclusion of some of the most crucial study components, i.e. the integrated development aspect of the whole watered system.
Another flaw in the project study that could be cited is the degree of completeness on some topical (sectoral) projects. For example, a soil survey (project FAO/ETH/82/008) completed on 16C0 ha. just within a span of 4 days serves to illustrate the
point.
Out of necessity therefore, WRDA has to request a land evaluation expert (Project ETH/88/013) to carry out further a more consolidated soil study for the project area. This last
land evaluation study may have taken the soil study process further a-field, but it still lacks some refinement which is characteristic to a feasibility level studied project.
Similar traits are also found in the agricultural sector.
There are some serious reservations on the detailed character ization and defin/ition on parameters used both by project ETH/82/008 and Project ETH/88/013 to proposed crops.For instance .while some of the crops selected are crops that could be grown under rainfed conditions other unsuitable crops are designated for irrigation. Yet again, to re-appraise
the study in this sector an agronomist was put in place for that task.
Because the socio-economic study input was in the same predicament, the obvious natural step has been taken for an add itional socio-economic evaluation.
It is hoped that the reiteration of these remaks will not
be construed as bjng prejudicial against the excellent work already carried out. It is merely an attempt to put the whole issue in
its proper perspective so that, if possible at all a reconsider
?
ation is made for the inclusion of these ignored study components 
in the project study documents. This could have been avoided any 
way had all the different desciplines been assembled in a consortium
during the initial planning stage.
3.      Proposed Components for Further STudy Inputs
3.1       General
To   bring   the   W.Kulite   Project   study   to   a   conclusive   and   all- embracing    study    document    the    following    additional    study    inputs    are suggested.
3.2    Resources Inventory
One of the first steps towards the preparation for develop ment of a river basin is to make inventory of its resources for
an integrated plan in mind. An integrated development of a valley must therefore be considered as a homogenious system of study corresponding to rainfed agriculture, irrigated agriculture, stock raising (animal resources) forestry, watershed management, fisheries if possible, wildlife if any and grazing land.-5 -
Scope of study includes
A.  Forestry
Prolonged neglect of the non-agricultural land of the surounding area in the project zone has already re sulted and may continue to result the accelaration of soil erosion, rapid siltation of the water storage
reservoir to be constructed and scarcity of constructing material (as experience gained elsewhere indicates) and fuel wood and fodder. It is therefore, suggested that
the study component under this item include:-
-  problem of meeting growing wood requirement,
-  protecting watershed and range lands,
-  protecting and rehabilitating of the forest on
the hilly catchment areas which could inturn
have a crucial bearing on the amount of sediment ation entering the reservoir.
B.  Watershed Management including
-  ecology,
-  erosion,
-  practice of shifting agriculture,
-  overgrazing,
-  social habitation,
-   impact to down-stream users.
C.  Grazing Land
with particular emphasis on inhancing the rehabilit ating and protecting the grazing resources which may be severely degraded through years of over-use.
D.  Animal Resources
In the project area livestock has become, an integral' part of livelihood for nearly all the farming popul ation.
Furthermore, the strategy of irrigation development for W.Kulite is envisaged to include two groups of users - the small holder farmers, using animal traction as a mode of production and the second group, largescale commercial farmer(s) using totally mechanized method of production. This recommendation addresses the small holder who will now more than ever, requires the service of his oxen. It is therefore incumbent
upon this review to take stock of the situation.
It is therefore recommended that the study includes, among other things, evaluation of the various reso urces and other potential factors for animal production within and around the project zone.
Equal attention should also be paid to the wildlife and their habitat.
The dam that is going to be constructed could be
a potential source of fish development for the project area. This aspect of the study should be looked into.
3.3    Agriculture
Production of major food crops such as maize, sorghum, teff, noug, chickpeas, etc can be increased substantially if application
of existing knowledge in the form of coordinated rainfed and irrigated agricultural development plan for the region as a whole is initiated. The following outline of study components are suggested:-
- Agricultural system, within which
. crop type and varieties,
. cropping pattern and rotation,
. husbandry and productivity,
. mixed 1ivestock/crop production,
. farm management,
are included
intensification of plant protection scheme
utilization       of       hybrid crop production,
plant protection -insects
-diseases -weeds
rigor for intensifying
-  birds
- mamaIsAgricultural extension
Establishment of research
Agricultural technology
-  farm mechanization /animal draught,
-  drainage/water supplies/soil conservation,
-  farm transport
-  farm power/crop handl ing/storage/on-farm processing.
Crop introduction
-  food crops
-  fibre crops
-   industrial crops
-  fruits 4 vegetables
3.4    Social Study
Social study aspect includes:-
quality of labour and its availability,
possible impact of the project on the local population,
essential social-oriented measures for first stage
development,
means of maximizing local participation,
recruiting of small holder farmers,
community planning especially under the envisaged
irrigation progranme on:-
. education,
. health,
. location of villages and
other community centres,
. organization of existing rainfed agriculture
vis-a-vis proposed irrigated agriculture.
3.5    Soils
In the docunent of the Land evaluation for Irrigation Development in Welkit-Kulite Proje Area the observation density of 6 pits and 3 augerings for a total
of 2300 ha. puts one into serious reservations as to the detailed characterization and definition of the soil survey. The maps presented are so raw that it becomes nessary at times to fill in by- 6-
inference the missing charaterization. Normally, the required observation density  is  one per 50 ha., which makes  the present study  deficit by  some 37 observations  for the claimed 2305 ha. observed.
4.       Land Utilization Options
4.1 Introduction
For ease of presentation, this part of item 4 covers both Welkite - Kulite and Welkite - Darge Projects as both havesimilar setup and almost identical development programmes.
At present it is envisaged to adopt two different types of exploitationsof the land in the W.Kulite and W.Darge Proejct areas; i.e., the small holder (private) farms and the large scale commercial farm(s). The small holder farmers are basically those who are the existing rainfed farmers to be reorganized under irrigated agriculture. These farmers are going to use mainly 
animal traction for their agricultural programme. The large scale commercial farmer(s) would, on the other hand, employ full fledged mechanized farming systems. Now the question is how best to incorporate or organize these totally different group$ of users without hampering the economic vaibility of the two projects.
This reality will be more apparent when one realises the
fact that cropping opportunities vary according to the management adopted. One must not underestimate the problems inherent into the organization of small holder (private) farmers into a cohisive
and manageble entity. For one thing, unlike the large scale commercial farmer(s) their readiness to accept the highly disci
plined and strictly programmed irrigation efficiency is open to
debate.
This problem would be further compounded by the fragmented nature of the individually. alloted. lands of»5 ha. whether the holding-10 -
Although it is not absolutely necessary, additional land, which will be communially fanned by the small holder farmers be put aside on the periphery of the irrigable land to grow crops 
such as maize and sorghum under rainfed inorder to cater for the food requirements. It is anticipated that each family head would
be suffciently provided with cash from the proceed he would get by selling his cash crops anyway, to enable him buy the food crops he would require-
Table 1 Land Utilization Pattern
Fanning
Population
Land
Distribution (ha)
Project area
Fani ly Head
Total fam
population
Net irrigable
area(ha)
Total for small
holder fanners
Total for
Conner.
famer(s)
Welkit - Kulite
Welkit - Darge
520
793
2600
3965
1116
1380
260
^B8(-16)
856
1000
Total
1313
6565
2496
640
1856
Earlier in this discussion more have been said about the livestock population and the role they play in generating additional income to the fanning connu-
nity in and around the two projects. The following table (Table 2 ) is prepared to indicate the magnitude of the livestock population^present-'                ?
At this point in time, it is appropriate to reiterate that a study input in the livestock sector for a more realistic appraisal of the situation is most vital.
According to recent surveys conducted, the following livestock population has been recorded (Table 2).Livestock Population
Table 2.
Type
Total head
Total Livestock unit
W.Kulite
W.Darge
W.Kulite
W.Darge
Cows
Oxen
Bull calwes
Heifers
Calves
Goats
Donkeys
1410
830
550
450
450
366
105
900
523
450
600
450
270
40
1128
664
440
360
360
36.6
84
720
418
360
480
360
27
32
TOTAL....
4161
3233
3072.6
2397
, O^€ raiA rtT kt !fj b
r‘^
tAi’c Ittfer/oofc p c p -/ !r -/< 0^ ri t* r
€ .cr! c-f 9/ 6> * rani/H r rZ r a t .b ? uscrfai svf in ? f O^4.3 Options
- (Z-
If reasonable targets particularly in projected yield levels 
are to be achieved the two projects will need timely execution of
all farm operations and precise water control. The need for good
Integrated management places certain constraints, especially when considering all the enterwind issues, on management options appro-
priat to the proposed development.
In practice, there is at present no organization with the
responsibility and necessary resources to undertake the development
of high value cash cropping under intensive irrigation. At present
RRC, after several years of assistance, is pulling out all together
from the area and the settlers are on their own. On the other hand,
the MOA is normally organized to assist such a development only 
when it becomes a legal entity at the stage of a fully fledged
producer co-operative with joint ownership and management of the production resources, and the farmers have a very strong antipathy 
for that.
Basically, four possible options considered feasible for the management systems of the two irrigation projects are presented
hereunder
Option A - Joint development of private small holder
farmers and large scale commercial farmer(s)
at each project area.
Option B - All large scale commercal farmer(s) on both
project areas.
Option C - All small holder private farmers on both
project areas.
Option D - Separate and indtpendant development of small holder private fanner and large scale commer cial farmer(s) at either project areas.
As cropping opportunities do not vary according to management considerations these options will be separetly discussed.-IS -
4.3.1 Option A
Advantages
-    small holder private farmers will have an oportunity to learn at close range different
farm practices and techniques.
-   remain in their present area avoiding the inconvenience of dislocation.
-   they could be cutgrower producers and sell close at doorsteps, their produce to the large-scele commercial farmers.
-   may have opportunities for hiring tractors in groups for the initial land preparation.
-   surplus members of the fanning community may have oportunity of employement in the large-scale commercial farmer(s) during slack times.
Disadvantages
-    complicates plant protection programmes.
-    risk of cattle trespassing into large scale commercial farms cropped areas.
-   wasting land resources by trying to establish social infrastructers for two separate land users.
-    laxity of desciplines in social activities.
-    duplication of efforts in setting up of training, education, health service and other human amenities.
-   over burdens the xater management aspect of the P.C.C.
-    creats undue strain or the extension agents in the assistances and training services aspect.--
4.3.2 Option B
Advantages
-    economic viability of the projects will be in
safe hands.
-    uniform development and strict adherence to
water usage and soil protection will be assured.
-    facilitates monitoring of planned programmes.
-    introduce agricultural technology and nethod of
production in the area.
-    creats high job oportunity.
-    encourages the establishments of different
social infrastructures, like villges, shops,
trading centres, etc.
Disadvantages:-
-    creats animosities between .the already existing
farmers who have been denied the use of the irrigable areas and the new ccnmers of the large scale ccnmercial farmer(s).
-    contravenes the government's policy of resettl- ment.
-    farmers at large will loose confidence in the government as regards future settlement progranmes under irrigation.
-    will have tendency in weakening the rainfed agricul tural development.
4.3.3 Option C
Advantages
-    it is only a social proposition where it may 
relive population pressure and change the life
style of the fortunate few.
-   may influence the acceleration of food habit of
the surrounding population.
-   may have a widly distributed wealth among the farming community
-    may influence the creation of cottage industries and other interrelated social activities.- Z4T-
Disadvantages
-    it is no longer an economic proposition.
-    the presence of tsetse fly would place at
risk agricultural systems dependent on animal cultivation.
-    will demand a highly organized extension services .
-    the infrastructure of the irrigation system would be at risk of disruption.
-    creat social injustice.
-    the clay soils of th^two project areas are
very difficult to work with during wet season using animal draught-
-     long term project viability will be ijpredicatable.
4.3.4 Option D Advantages
-    creats a sense of well being and confidence,
as well as cohision among the farmerscomnunity.
-    the initiation and execution of different farm operations can be easily effected through a
single and elected body executive board.
-    separate development would assist in quickly identifying flaws in management rendering quick remedy to the problem.
-    management would be simplified.
- economic development and progress could be precise
-    the service ability and /or the mantainances of irrigation structures would be facilitated.
-    village organization and other community centres could be planned and executed precisely.
-    areas for livestock and livestock husbandry will be effectively managed and systemitized.
-    duplication of management, skill^inanpower and other efforts will be minimized.Disadvantages
-   farmers training will be centralized
resulting in creating an efficient management skills among the farming communities.
-   centralized demonstration centres could
be established within easy reach where
all the fanners may have a chance to
obsorve the many facets of crop husbandry techniques.
-   the size of the small holder fanners.Land holfing will improve substantially i.e. upto
1.05ha. or 84 ha instead of the .5ha allotment, if either W.Darge or W.Kulite is assigned in its entrirely for their exclusive utilization.
-   moving these fanners from their present dwelling places to either W.Kulite or W.Darge project area may cause serious but temporary problems.
-   increases area for their increased livestock population.
Recommendation:-
Both option A and D have been considered, but option D is prefered.SECTION II
5. Proposed Cropping Systems
5.1 Background to crop selection
5.1.1 Introduction
This report is presented in accordance with the \ contract of service agreement of the 11th of February, 1991 for providing consultancy service on the agronomic I aspect of the Welkite-Kulite Project*currently under
A
review by the Authority for the purpose of,among other
things, to:-
-    study all the reports available pertaining to
the agronomy.
-    prepare reports in respect to the work carried
out on the projects.
-      visit   project   areas   and   contact   relevent   organiz ations   to   obtain   necessary   data   pertaining   to   the work assignment.
As required by the agreement, this report outlines 
the basis on which the principal agricultural project com ponents are to be formulated.
The report on crop selection and cropping is pre
pared on the basis of the data found in:-
-Welkite-Kulite Irrigation Project Feasibility Study 
of FAO/UNDP assisted project ETH/82/088,
-  Land Evaluation for Irrigation Development in Welkit Kulite report of FAO/UNDP assisted project ETH/88/01
and - surveys conducted to the project area-.
Inlight of new revelation in the soil survey report
(ETH/{i'/O13), suggestions and proposals have been made on crop selection and cropping pattern as well as on approaches to the overall agricultural development pattern. In crop
• . / • .selection, from a relatively extended list of 48 crops, only 6 have
been considered.
5.1.2. objectives:-
The recommendation on crop selection for Welkit-Kulite Project is not in any way contravening the Government's policy 
in relation to increased food production and rqw materials 
but rather complements it. The concept of selecting the particular crops it is hoped, is to encourage incentives for the increased production of the other food crops produced under rain- fed conditions thusyresulting in the accelaration of the comprehansive agricultural development programme in the area by mutually supportive effors.
Agriculture under rainfed conditions for cereal production
is so well developed in thfregion. To again bring in these same crops to be cultivated under irrigaiton even during the dry 
period, is found to be economically unjustifiable, although agro- nomically feasible.
5.13- specific objectives:-
Crops under irrigaiton development were preferred due
to:-
-    crops selected are high value cash crops,
-    the growing of these crops under irrigation fanning throughout the year was found feasible,
-    the total water requirement for these candidate
crops will not be met under the existing rainfed conditions,
-    an opportunity of a contineous supply of moisture (irrigation) throughout an extended period has been found favourable for double cropping,
-    the land utilization capacity will be made to
increase through wet and dry seasons cropping system.5.2  Existing Cropping
Cropping   in   Welkite-Kulite   Valley   is   not   limited   by   lack   of moisture.  The  region  is  suitable  for  many  of  the  crops  grown  in the "Woinadega" regions of Ethiopia.
Some of the major crops widely grown in and around the project area are listed in the following Table 3 .
Crops grown in the project area under rainfed conditions. Table 3
Crops
Sowing date
Harvesting date
Maize
Sorghum
Teff
Chick peas
Haricotbeans
Sesame
Noug
Pepper
Potatoe
April / May
II          II
July
September
June
July
June
June
Nov. or May 
(irrigation)
Sept /Oct.
II         II
December
Jan / Feb.
October
November
October
December
Feb. or Sept.
Although accurate yield records are hard to come by, it has been possible however, to acquire some raw data from the area as tabulated in th following Tables 4 and 5. According to report received during
< IM
the survey,Athe factorfthat contributed to low yield,is the farmers reluctence to follow advice of the extenssion agents in the use of fertilizer application.Crop grown in Teddele & Harole Settlement Villages for the year 1981 / 82 E.C.
Table 4
Crop
Cultivated
Plamed(ha)
Cultivated
Actual(ha)
Yield / ha.
Maize
Sorghum
Teff
Haricot Bean
Pepper
Chickpea
Sesame
Ntug
Wheat
Vegetables
Beans
1221.00
478.70
861.00
210.00
138.00
447.00
34.00
73.50
10.00
4.00
-
1093.00
473.50
774.00
253.00
56.50
445.50
42.50
40.00
5.00
4.00
9.00
16
16
9
7
5
5
3
3
10
50
9
T o T a 1...
3477.2
3196.00
-
Crops grown under Irrigation within Taddele and Harole Settlement Villages for the year 1981/82 E.C.
Table 5
Crop
Planned
(ha)
Actual
(ha)
Yield/ha
quentals
Tomato
Onion
Potatoe.
Green Pepper
Cabbage
Beet root
Papaya
8.50
6.20
3.50
6.70
2.05
0.35
0.75
6.17
2.82
2.62
1.47
0.68
0.43
0.75
73
64
51
37
76
-
-
Total
28.05
14.94
-5.3   Livestock
The fanning population are sedentary and their livelihoods next to crop fanning, conies from livestock keeping. In addition,
the income from the crops is dependent on fanning ty oxen.
5.4   Research base
No known research or trials work on agronomic aspects have been carried out in the project area. The nearest trials under
rainfed conditions .awey from Welkite-Kulite Project area is situated
'
;
near Woliso Town at a place called Goro. In spite al 1 attempts, no
o(
A
data could be secured from this station.
5.5   Soils, Climatic Potential and Limitations
The soils of the Welkite-Kulite Project area are considered
"favourable" for a wide range of crops under rainfed and under irrigation conditions. Temperature and humidities will not constrian
. well irrigated and well husbanded crops. However, this agreeableness for crop growing
is subject to further results to be gotten from pilot scheme trials 
in the future. Factors, like variation in yield levels between
early ard late plantings, soils, assumptions adapted in the selection of the crops, crop husbandry and other unquantifiable factors may influence the future crop production under irrigation. A pilot
project would determine the most appropriate crops and cropping pattern for the area.
5.6   Some Negative Impacts on Irrigation Development
Somej?f tpe^onstraints mentioned hereunder are those which
f
will have someAindirect influencfpn the future agricultural development pattern under irrigation.
- lack of long-standing data on experience under large- scale irrigation schemes for the selected crops,
*. / • •-    absence of a pilot or a research station within the project proximity,
-    the presence of trypanosmiasis,
chances of farmers
patterns
completely alien to their traditional methods 
of farming,
-    the type and frigile nature of the soils,
-    lack of studies in the resources inventory
important for an integrated development programme, 5.7   Agronomic Criteria
Consideration made to the:
-    suitability of the crops to be grown under
irrigated conditions,
-    ease of their cultural adoptability to either
mechanized or animal tractior operation,
-    availability to suitable crop varieties and
the adequate supply of planting material,
-    existing knowledge and experience within the
project area about the crops under consideration,
-    handling, storage and perishability characteristics 
of the produce,
-    level of management required for successful growing of the crops in conjunction with the existing management and technical skills available.
-    suitability of the crops to leave behind much crop residues thus maintaining a high level of soil
fertility and soil amelioration.
5.8   Crop compatibility
According to their climatic adaptability, some 25 hihgly suitable crops have been recommended for the project area by the last survey on "Land Evaluaiton for Irrigation Development" project ETH/88/013. However, after assessing their compatibility,6
only 6 crops have been proposed (see table). The crops lend them selves to agreeable sequence of relay cropping. Their compatibility 
to be incorporated with or in sequence to each other is of consider able importance when aiming for optimum and steady yields over many years and the minimization of diseases and pest incidence within
- the crops. tM other assets with these crops are their soil amelioration and soil fertility build up characteristics.
Nonetheless, optimum sowing dates, irrigation water applica tion, band use pattern and care to the fragile soil, until determined through prolonged trials, the crops have to be treated with some degree of flexibility.
The remaining crops listed in the land evaluation report have been precluded here for reasons that they are either:
-    not fit for irrigaiton (teff) or, have parameter less defined which ought to be tried on a pilot scheme inorder to determine their adaptability and cultural practice, or
-    can be grown more cheaply under rainfed conditions.
5.9   Proposed Crops
Many different crops were initially considered as adaptable in the project area. But for resons given earlior most of them are discarded and only 6 have been proposed. These crops and their soil requirement as indicated by the Land Evaluation Report, are presented in Table 7 .
For Wet Season
For dry Season
Say bean
Haricotbeans Ground nuts
Potato
Onion
PepperThe Proposed crops and their soil requirement
Table 7
Crop
Proposed
—
Net available land with moderate to rarginaly suitable
for irrigaiton(ha)2760
Reconmended land
utilization
Small holder
settlenerrt fron
Large scale
carmercial farmer(s)
S3 -
Wet seasen
Dry season
Wt season
Dry sea
so
Soybeans Groundnuts Harisotbeans Potatoe
Onion
Pepper
*
4
*
*Mr
*
*
*■
*
4-
4
4
Nid* Land class which is not suitable under the current infrastructural
and socio-economic conditions but may be considered in the future with the changed conditions.
6. Sirmary of Agronomic Characteristics for the Proposed Crops.
6.1      Soybeans - Glycin «ar
Soybean is a good provider of vegatable oil and proi^n. It
is also an important organic matter and nitrogen replinisher.
Further more, it is a useful precedent crop, which in this proposal
is to be followed by potato in the rotation scheme.
The crop is aranged to be grown during the wet season and will occupy a total of 360 ha. (32.25%) dK<ded into 60/^.and 300ha
for small holder private and large scale commercial farms respectively. With proper management and adequate water supply yield increase up to 3.5 tonnes /ha. is estimated.Basically a yield up to 8.2 tonnes/ha is 
the potential for the crop.So far Coker 240 and Clark 63K have been the cultivars 
utilized in the country. Which are also recommended in this 
cropping programme. The crop can be grown on a wide range of soils except very sandy ones.
Seeding rate is 55 kg/ha.
Soybean is capable of fixing atmospheric nitrogen which meets its requirement for high yields. However, a liberal dose of DAP is required for its productive growth. A number of factors, like, water availability, fertilization and row spacing, affect its yield. Under
rainfed condition and with an optimum cultural practices, yields up
to 1.5 to 2.5 ton/ha. can be attained, but under irrigaiton yields 
up to 2.5 to 3.5 ton/ha. have been recorded with improved varieties.
6.2    Haricotbean - Phaseolus Vulgaries
Like soybean, this crop is highly useful for soil-nitrogen
build-up and for the betterment of the physical soil condition.
This crop has been grown in the project area as an important food and cash generating crop.
Although this practice in the country has yet to develope on
a larger scale, in other countries the crop is also grown as green
beans and for dry seed.
Optimum mean daily temperatures range between 15°C and 20°C.
The total land allotment for the crop as shown in Table 6, is 450 ha. (40.3%) divided into 100 ha. (8.96%) and 350ha (31.36%) for small holder private farm plots and large scale commercial farm plots 
, respectively. The crop is to be grown in the wet season and followed by onion in the dry growing season (see Tabled) in the 4 year rotation programme.
The provisionally recommended variety is Mexican 142.6.3   Potatoes -SolaniM tuberosum
In nutritive value and palatability, potatoe is better than
most cereals.
Potatoes, sometimes called European, Irish, English or Solanum pototoes, to distinguish them from sweet potatoes. In other parts 
of African countries, like Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, etc, and to some extent in Ethiopia, they are important subsistence crops.
Temperature, more than anything else affect the yield of the crop, and optimum daily temperature of 18°C to 20°C is required during most of the growing period.
It is preferred to grow potatoe on ridges under irrigaiton.
The total area-designation for the crop is 305 ha. (27.321), divided into 55ha.(4.92%) for small holder private farmer and 250ha (22.401) for large scale commercial farms as indicated in Tabled. In the Rotation system it is going to be grown in the dry season and after soybeans, see table $.
6.4    Onion - Alliua cepa
This very important bulb crop in the Ethiopian diefc is believed to have originated in the Near East.
The optimum range of altitude for onion production is between 700 and 2200 m.a.s.l. and the optimium growing temperature lies b/n 15Oc and 20°C .
The crop is strongly influenced by day-length temperature and the varieties are accordingly classified as long, intermediate or
short day. Only short day variety are adapted in Ethiopian condition, that is to say, a day length of approximately 12 hours.
For the project area, a total of 350 ha (29.12%) is assigned to be divided into 75ha (6.75%) and 25 ha (22.40%) for small holder private farm plots and large scale commercial farm plot respectively and is envisaged to be produced in the dry season. It is to be preceded by haricot beans in the rotation system.The traditional jnion of Ethiopia is the red shallot, which
is well adapted for growing by small farmers under rainfed condition^ but unsuitable for large scale irrigated production.
It is recommended therefore that Mermiru white, mermiru - brown, Adama Red or any other better variety available be adopted for the proposed project area.
The following 3 different onion production methods are considered*.
- Growing onion by direct seedign,
"         " from seeding transplant,
or -
11           " shallot onions.
Direct seeding is becoming more popular and the whole produc
tion process can beaechanized, but saline soils should be avoided. Growing onion from seedling transplant is a highly labour -intensive operation.
6.5    Groundnut - Arachis   hypogaea
Groundnut is a valuable food crop as well as an important source of vegetable oil. It contains 40 - 50X of oil, about 30X of albumin and upto 18% carbohydrates. The oil is also processed for
stap making, lubricant, cosmetics, etc.
. butter is also
made from the seeds. The cake is a very useful feed for cattle.
It has also an added advantage, in that it is one of the best compatible crops to be incorparated in crop-rotation system.
Although the crop is best adapted to well-drained,
friable medium textured soil, it has got a rating of as ontof
"highly suitable crops" in the "Land Evaluation Report", there is also some reason to belive that this crop would indeed be grown successully by-and-by provided the incorporation of a libral amount of plant material is turned in the soil and the cultural practies recommended are adhered to . Also a green manure crop in the rotation system would accelarate the improvement of the physical condition of the soil. In south India ground-nut has been grown sucessfully in a black cotton soil.In the rotation system, groundnut is to be followed by pepper (Table (?). It is projectd to be grown during the wet season.
The total land coverage for the crop is 300ha. (26.88%) divided into small holder farmer plot and large scale commercial farmer farm of 100 ha.(8.96) and 200 ha.(17.92%) respectively, refer to Table9 .
The recommedned variety is shulamit and Manipitter or any other reliable variety that may have been released in the last few years.
6.6 Pepper - Capsicum fructecens
Pepper also called red pepper, is one of the most important and earliest -known spice crops, in Ethiopia. It is consumed either in green form or as dry hot and red powdered form. It is an indispensable ingridient in practically every Ethiopian dish. It is grown extensively under rainfed conditons on a wide variety of agro-
climatic zones. ...
,        1      1.
--
.. It takes about 30 days for seedling
development and another 150 days for the crop to be ready for harvest
after transplanting.
This crop is in high demand by the Ethiopian spice and Oil Extraction corporation. The corporation extracts the red colour to
impart pungency and colour to foods which makes it one of the most lucrative enterprise for the corporation in its export marked.
Pepper   thrives   in   climates   with   growing   season   temperature in  the  range  of  18°C  to  27°C  during  the  day  and  15  to  18°C  during the wight.
The varieties available currently are the Mareko Fana and Bako local.Seeds are sown in nursery beds for which temperatures in the range of 20 to 24°C are considered optimum for germination. Seedlings of 10 to 20 cm height are transplanted in the field after 25 to 35 days
Under the W.Kulite Project the scheme of developing this crop will be 250 ha. (22.40%). It will be further devided into small
holder private farm and large scale commercial farms with a share of 70 ha. (6.27%) and 180 ha. (16.12%) respectively.
In the crop rotation it is preceded by Ground nut.
7. Fanning Systems
7.1 Cropping Pattern
The areas to be cultivated to the different crops is indicated in Table
As stated earlier, the region around and within the project area, is suitable for many of the crops grown in a "Woinadega Zone" (1500 - 2000 m.a.s.l.) of Ethiopia. Most of the crops proposed in this farming systems under irrigation have also been grown under rainfed conditions in the W.Kulite Proejct area for decades.
Out of the net irrigable area of 1116 ha. in the project area, 260 ha. of .5ha. per family head distribution, will be taken up by the small holder private settlers and 856 ha. would be left to the large scale commercial farmer(s).A green manuring programme of some 240 ha. has been proposed
in the cropping pattern for soil amelioration purpose. It has been estimated that a leguminous plant, in this case preferably crotalaria which develops a high propertion of root systems, and yield as much as 400 - 500 qt./ha. of green matter. To obtain steady increased yields, plant require considerable amount of nutritive boi-mass. Crops under irrigation in particular, within incorporation of organic fertilizer
(straw, legumes, green manures or other plant residues) have better advantage in much greater yield gains than thos grown under rainfed where these types of operations are limited.
The following advantages inherent in most of the proposed leguminous crops are recognized in that they are:-
good food supplies and excellent sources of vegetable oils fit for human consiumption,
important in soil fertility build-up and soil amelioration,
good sources of oil meal cakes animal feeds,
potentially high value cash crops,
. for mixing in
good preceders in the envisaged rotation system.
7.X Croppiiy bi 1
On the basis of their benifits to be had in relay cropping
the following twining programme in the rotation scheme is proposed: Soybeans - Potatoes
Groundnuts- Pepper
Haricotbeans- Onions
7.3     Crop Rotation Scheme
73.1 Benefits
In crop production, whether under rainfed or irrigated condition, crop rotaiton programme is an integral part of the scheme.Crop rotation may be defined as a system of growing
different kinds of crops in recurrent succession on the same
land. A good rotation that provides for maintainance or
improvement soil productivity usually includes a legume crop
to promote fixation of nitrogen as well as the improvement of
the soil physical characteristics by way of added plant residues (humus).
The salient features on the benefits of crop rotations in
a farming system can be summarized in the following manner:-
-    The supply of organic matter in the soil is mantained
and increased,
-    The supply of nitrogen in this case through the legumineous crops is increased,
-    Soil nutrients are utilized more effectively,
-    Erosion losses are reduced,
-    Weeds, diseases and insects are better controlled,
-    Labour is more uniformly distributed, .
D>! faaje i and {-
Hazards are reduced.
7.J.2 Rotation Scheme in the Project
All the wet season crops (soybeans, haricotbeans and ground nuts) are planned to precede the dry season crops (potatoes, pepper and onion) so as to raise the fertility and improve the physical characteristics of the soil.
The green manure crop planned in the rotaiton system will augment the supply of the orqanic matter and further improve the physical soil condition.
The rotation system is planned in a 4 years sequential planting as is shown in table S.Crop Rotation Scheme Table g
1
2
3
4
Wet
Dry
Wet
Dry
Wet
Dry
Wet
Dry
1
Soy.
Pot.
Gvn't.
Pep.
Hb.
On.
-
Gr.ma.
2
Grn't.
Pep
Hb.
On.
-
Gr.ma.
Soy.
Pot.
3
Hb.
On.
-
Gr.ma.
Soy.
Pot
Grn't
Pep.
4
-
Gr.ma.
Soy.
Pot.
Grn't
Pep
Hb.
On.
Key:-         Soy.      = Soybeans
Pot.
= Potatoes
Grn't
= Groundnuts
Pep.
= Pepper
Hb.
= Haricotbeans
On.
= Onions
Gr.ma.  = Greenmanure
The plot layout in the small holder fanning system under the different crops, ranges between 60 ha. to 100 ha. However, the entire 260 ha. for the small holder farmers could be maintained as a unit. On the large scale commercial farm(s) these plots are 200 - 350 ha. units which could be left as manegeable units for tractor operations,Artribution of Crop Rotation Pattern
for
The Small Holder 4 Comercial Farms (Project size 1116 ha.) Table
►
Wet Season
Dry Season
Crop
SttbII
Hol.Farm
Ccnnr.
Farm
Crop
Small
Hal.Farm
Comr.
Farm
Soybeans
60
300
Potatoe
55
250
Groundnut
100
200
Pepper
70
180
Haricotbean
100
350
Onion
Green manure
crop
75
60*
250
180*
Total
260
856
260
855
1116
1115
Crapping i n-te. 
* The Green Manure crop's hectarage is excluded from the C.I. summation.
i 1
The major operations of crop husbandry by the small holder fanner would envoived animal traction, although this method has been recommended by th Land Evaluation Report*gradually be replaced by tractor power. The large scale commercialized farm(s) will be fully mechanized.
The crop growing period is devided into wet and dry seasons. The wet season covers the month of April/May through September/October while the dry season last from November to April. It is envisaged that 100% of
the net irrigable area would be utilized during the wet season and soybeans, haricatbeans and groundnut . will be grown. During the dry season irrigation 78.8% of the area will be under Potatoes, Onions and pepper. These highly rated crops have been moved to this season inorder to maximize their productive capacity. The cropping density as indicated in table 9 will be 178.8% excluding the green manure crop (21.5%).-3^
Plat Layout in the Rotation System
(in respect to wet season growing Period) Table 10
Pit. No.
1
2
3
S.Holder
Farm
Commer.
Farm
S.Holder
Farm
Commer.
Farm
S.Holder
Farm
Coomer.
Farm
1
60
300
100
200
100
350
2
100
200
100
350
60
300
“T”
----- TUO-----
350
60
300
100
200
7.4 Cropping Calendar
Two distinct cropping seasons are considered for the year round cultivation. The period between ealry May to late October is the
relatively moist season when suplementary irrigation may be required only in the event of dry spells. The dry period is from early December to the end of April during which time regular irrigation would be the only means of water supply to the crops (see Figure ).
The optimum dates of sowing /planting for the different crops suggested should be treated with some degree of flexibility until they 
are verified by trials in the
proposed pilot      project.
The green manure crop        is included in        the calendar          for    reasons
expressed earlier and it is a
knee high it will be ploughed
60 days crop. As soon as it reaches some
under while it is lush green and this is
the permanent feature in the rotation cycle.
The   range   of   temperatures   and   rainfall   as   well   the   optimum   of these havebeen included in the figure to facil . quick reference.
• • / a a8.    Yield Estimate
8.1    General
Normally, yeild projections are dependent upon climate and soils conditions. In this case the climate of the project area is considered
most ideal for the crops proposed but equal confidence can not be expressed on the soils, if one considers the Land Evaluation Report, Project ETH/88/013. Nevertheless with careful soil management and cultural practeces it is feasible to realize the projecWyields.
For accurate determination of yields, long standing data on large scale operation under irrigation for the crops are not available. The better
of the options, is therefore,to collect and colla tea 11 available data
on the crops grown elsewhere under different conditions and circumstances for extrapolation purposos. The following data are prepared on
available information either experimental or actual, on yield variables which influenced the yield projection.
8.2    Yield Estimate from Various Sources
1.
field Estimate Presented by              Project ETH/82/008
Crop
7T                     3                     4
Potatoes                     100                125                 150               175             200
Pepper                          100
125                  150               175             200
2.
Yields From Baro-      -Akobo Basin Study
Haricotbeans                   15                  17                   18
19               20
Soybeans                       15                  17
18                 19               20
Potatoes                     107                116                 123
129             134
Onions                           107                116
123                129             134
Groundnuts                      20                  23                   26
28               30
3.
Estimate from the Pre-feasibility Study
on Birr         Project
Haricotbeans            ' 10                      15                     20                  25               25
Soybeans'                        10                12
15                  20               25
Groundnuts 10 12 15
Pepper 10 12 14
20 25
18 20
»From data secured from the project area (av.yield).
Haricotbeans
5.74  qt/ha
Pepper
7.00
II
Onion
21.10
n
Potatoes
34.90
ii
National yield Average          Estimate Hariotbeans
Groundnuts Soybeans
9.24  qt/ha 5.46      u 3.49      N
Potatoes.
100-150 u
Onions                                 60      II
Pepper
8-12      II
Data from Handbook on Crop Production in Ethiopia.
Crop
Under research
On demons.farm
Nat.av
Groundnuts Haricotbeans
Pepper
Onions
Potatoes
40-50
20-30
34
600
280-300
35
20 - 30
26
300-350
150-200
4-5
8-9
-
-
-
z
Horticultural Development Corporation
Onion
Potatoes 
Pepper
200-250qt/ha
250 “
35 "- 37-
8.3    Projected Yield
The yield build-up forecast which is presented in the following table// has two parts, based on the farming systems envisaged. There is a relatively faster rate of growth for the large commercial farm(s) where the anticipated ultimate yield will be achieved after 5 years 
of project implementation. On the small holder farms plots on the other hand, the projected yield level would be attained after 8 years of project implementation. Year 1 is the year of project implementation.
Yield Estimate
!(
Crops
Yearly Yield build-up in qt/ha
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
A. for the small
Holder Farms
Haricotbeans
Soybeans
Groundnuts
Potatoes
Onions
Pepper
8
10
14
60
80
7
10
12
16
80
100
10
12
14
18
100
125
12
14
16
20
125
150
15
16
18
23
150
250
.18
20
22
27
175
250
22
25
30
32
200 300
26
30
35
35
250
250
30 i
11
---------- •
B. for large scale camercial farms
Haricptbeans
Soybeans
Groundnuts
Potatoes
Onions
Pepper
10
15
18
125
150
10
15
20
20
140
200
12
20
25
25
170
250
15
25
30
30
200
300
20
30
35
35
250
350
30
• • / • •It is anticipated that, the raise in theftfields will be realized
as management and cultural practices are improved with experience. The acceleration of better yields would also be brought about through trials and research a carried out within the project area. In the
final analysis, it has been assumed that certain basic conditions
will be assured to attain the projected yields.
. Conditions such as, the required levels of inputs would be made available early enough to ensure their timely utilization, that sufficient technical management will
be maintained, especial 1 within the small holder farmers undertaking. 8.4 Expected Yield under Rainfed Conditions
Although this part of the connent is irrelevant to the already formulated cropping pattern, it is nevertheless presented to satisfy somebody's curiosity as to the yield level to be acquired if potatoes, pepper and onion were to be grown under rainfed conditons.
Enough has been said on the soils of W.Kulite Project that only 
mention will be made here that ’
‘ • 
the
soils workability during the uncontrolable ran season makes readily accessability to the fields by amimals and their implements in particular for cultivation and for other crop husbandary activities ‘ ' difficult
thus, negetively affecting the productive capacity of the crops in question.
Onother factor to consider is the physical damage caused to the
an<1 t0 SOme eXtent t0 the 0ni0n
crops which at times may result
A
in the total loss of these crops.
Incidence of plant diseases especially on pepper and potatoe will constrain the growing of this crop in the wet season with high yield expectation.>7 ~
The following yield data under rainfed conditions are presented for comparison.
"Tablt (2-
Sources
Crops
Potatoe
Pepper
Onion
Data from Project area National yield average
Hand Book of crop production
in Ethiopia
Total average
34 Kg/ha 100-150 "
150-200 "
7Kg/ha
8-12 ”
26 "
21 Kg/ha
60 “
300-350 "
111.3       "
14.3 "
135.3     "
When   these   yields   are   super   imposed   on   the   yield   estimate   proposed for   these   same   crops   under   irrigation   and   during   the   dry   season   cropping the following would be noticed.
"Table f 3
Crops
Estimate inder rain fed conditions
Estimate inder Irrigation conditions
Expected yield loss in %
Potatoes
Pepper
Onion
111.3
14.3
135.3
250
30
350
54.48%
52.34% '
61.35%
Agronomically these crops could be grown under a rainfed condition and expect moderate yield provided that the time and intensity of the rainfall is precisely monitored and determined and if a well coordinated and a highly efficient extention service is introduced in the area.9.  Agricultural Operation
1. For Large Scale Commercial Farm(s)
Material (Qty)
Crop
Machinery
(Qty)
Labour
(M/D)
Seeds
(Kg/ha)
Fertilizer (Kg)
Urea
Dap
Pesticide (Lts)
Potatoe
Groundnut
Soybean
Onion
Haricotbean
Pepper
/S'
<1
IZ-
i5
(O
/Sb'
q ro 
u
loOo
W
6 o-
3- S' 
G c
/ co
3/<
I S<7
10 0
/ o o
t o o
( O o
zeJ
Z0
3
3
5
2. For Small holder Private farms 
aj
Potatoe
Groundnut
Soybean
Onion
Haricotbean
Pepper
Z3
33
t<
2 1
/s'
n'
■?< r
19(
3/ s
KC
?•?
/j. u
/ c o
—
—
—
1
10 0
( o 0
1 c c
1 c V
2 CO
zo
3
2^
3
l3
10.    The Meed For Establishing a Pilot Scheme
The agricultural potential for the W.Kulite Project area is generally considered good. To bring it to yet higher crop producing area in the region all available means have to be employed to veryfy some specific variables in some of the potentially productive crops. Some questions, especially in the agronomic field, have to be studied.The need of setting up a pilot and/or a research station within the project area becomes therefore urgent. The most important results 
of these applied research could be made available to the farmer even before the irrigation implementation stage is reached.
In order to ensure the widest possible choice of types of farming, it is suggested to include in the trial process rainfed as well as irrigated crops and if needs be, even pasture trials. In the programme steps could be taken to try out mannual, oxen and mechanical methods or the suitable combinations of these.
Within a total of about 15 - 20 ha. area a pilot scheme could be included in the study programme.
Following is a summary of the agronomic aspects proposed to be included in the study programme.
The main objective of the trial is to determine:-
-    the suitability of the different crops,
-    date of planting,
-    by introduction new varieties their adoptability,
-    plant specing,
-    inter-planting,
-    soil fertility build up through the application,manure, fertilizer and compost,
-    the affar - effect of legumes,
-    weed control method,
-    pest "
",
-    harvesting and storages,
-    fertilizer triats.
In addition. Livestock and if required, fish production aspect would the most important feature in the course of the trial.Last, but notleast, the forestry aspect of this neglected resource would be looked into by way of determining the existing varieties and appraise on its rate of survival, growing vigor, the susceptibility to human and animal destruction, fire, insert, disease, etc.
To reiterate, it is strongly recommended to establish this pilot/ research station without waiting for the actual project-implementation period. The worthiness of this time factor is that some useful data
and information on the crops tried would emerge that would further assist in the formulation of the agricultural development pattern in crop production, thus saving very valuable time.
Tentative listing of crops that should be given immediate attention.
Rainfed Crops
Cowpeas, beans, soybeans, sweet potatoes, sunflower, safflower, rapeseed, nigerseed, lentils, chickpeas, tomatoes, garlic, carrot, onion radish, maize, sorghum, teff, sisal,
Irrigated Crops
Soybeans, groundnuts, haricotbeans, potatoes, pepper, onions, citrus, tomatoe, garlic, carrot, cabbages, radish, tobacco, olive trees,
grape, sesame, mango, papaya, banana, peav, etc.
11.    Climatic Tables:-
Rainfall data processing has been made possible by making use
of the 9 year record (1975 - 83) tabulated in the previous Irrigation
Project document ETH/82/008,.
To arrive at near - accurate rainfall regime, all the data of the
4   stations   have   been   avaraged   for   the   total   9   years   and   extrapoled   for the project use.12.     ANNEXES:-
1.   References
. Land Evaluation for Irrigation Development in
W.Kulite Project Area.
. Land Evaluation for Irrigation Development in
W.Darge Project Area.
.    ETH/82/008 W.Kulite & W.Darge Feasibility Study.
. ETH/82/008 W.Kulite A W.Darge Soil Study.
. Yield REsponse to water FAO Irrigation And Drainage Paper No. 24.
. Tropical Agriculture.
. Hand Book of Agriculture
Indian Council of Agricultural REsearch.
. Crop Production.
Delorit & Ahlgren
. Agriculture in the Tropics C.C. Webster
P.N. Wilson
2.   Climatic Tables.
3.   Cropping Calendar.• ■
If
Ratn-Gdl
(tt^-jns) •
r? A Iy fit Qt'1'f-Q (' Q
*
kj
May
Jun
Jul
A uf
H    Oct
4r?J
I0<f
_____ i/r w"t----------------------
./• ’ • >  -2 ■!
/775
7f7
7<f7 7
7?7&
I ?7 y l \lO
( i?i^ I?8J .
7/6-3
/</>4
V3
a-i 3
lt?-l
a?-?
9<f£
f?-f
767- 7
I233Z
32 v’
2H-ti
9??      0.0
\W
b^Z
>7-6 fl8-l
K7-0
2b?.f
I        ^.9 7$?!
2ol-S  131-0 ilH
1l£-t
nm
2k-l
lii-O
tb-1
Zl-b
Lt-r
i?.f
(,1-r 32-?
lit-i
2l8-f
l/J-f
lot-3
>09-1
/St-S
ltf-53
330-0
ltt-i
fio-o
3<K-i
Jotf./
W
Iff.?
S&tfe>* i
—**-------------
Hl? M-b fli-f
20h b ItO-S
?t‘O
3.^ &-0_
2?Jr
7i-O.
?2-f
f.O
yr?
i/-?
0 4Z-. 3b-.L
3.L
IJ0L
tio
v*0
0*0
JZ-V
73. b
!\3 o-n
kk-5
9-0
$>.?_ l^’.f
3?<
8fJ- 7
3t‘7
1 C
f.7.
733- r
27}.?  m-o
o.-b
M.
73-/
210-7 230-8
yy/o'y,/.
II? 7
2W-f1
2h0-l
2Vf? -
itt-2
7f/-7
He.tl
lo 6 j
?0‘t.
94s i
fy-y 
fr57-7 |kl
<>
Jj-2
fb32
Zf-3
<7-77 23^‘Sy^
tn-7\i
ff 7
(o 7
^9
7A*y*-/
If?- Z 210-7 2ok    b Itf.-C .
W*. Ur? 3 _
76L-7
■2 r©-«7
\oi-Q 11&9Z
J Mean 2_________________ __________________________
a/
—
\2*O-T,/l3 3 2'I-Z\397/ 27b-?.
k_________________________________________________________________
r? 75~ 7? 7  b
111    7
7?  7  ? 7?  7  7 7<??TC7 7? S- 1
l^t
7? S3
4t-i" p/J-3 jjfl 2 20?-1 2ol-b
121-3
/?/■? KT -1 2.39(2 7b-<+
H7.1 llb-djIT-l \zL3-3
j.,. -
.
______
i
fl-o K7 8.m-rZ70 ?'3^0^
Ul2-3\^-o 77^zl?6?./j l}l-z , f7-7;W¥ 7bbi (33-u\
3i-0 7t-i-.377-?'.3(>3‘'i\3o3.3\
<7      €> C> ZM-ri'tf ? -.
lo9b-«
tTs o<7
till -9
13<*r\-
T9K-D 9W--1 nei-0
*V3 5
/23?-Z
ao
17-1
CU.<
o
oo
_
0.0
tb.c
0.0
iV-0
t-ir
C.D
0.0
/<•.’
i-.it
0. 0    2/. 1 liJ.J    l-V <?*$    3/-G
si- cos /•D Gl-i 0. 0 0.0
fa .</    o-o
L^-3
Hb.3    K-9
LOO
6b?      '^.1 rr-v
'07 0 2C7
7'-',     ??■!
2 S3-.3 \9?S
^.0
2to-6.ti?9
I&2-7
1 63 19 3'2-7^
I 2-J-38.
112-7?
3 v6•r 0 mo .10
L 7 2- • g’ -
Hea^^>l ( 'ns-2.b.no.\'O3.srK5.SlL13<Z \o72.5’ \11-l.9. K-73
91^. Ia
2/-3977-£
?3-i?
I
I
ilali(>n ~
0
fart I* ty at KA/e. I KiVe
— ■* —■ — — 
z
»
'■“’ ( 9*1 • in * J
;------------------t
^9/.   "I
2
I
!
T
??    l    r 7? 7 C
79  7  7
7f     7%
7f7    <?
77^0
79  2  !
7?»Z
792 5
^“9 ^rr. Z 793-fc
l
f/'V
-1                1
i y7Ll.o fS^o
10S 3 m-3 731 -9 ^8-7.122-3
9 1301 \2^0.<l 2bo-o -/0?3
17.9 Jtr-7 ■ 2ob-<o Illa H7-S
\-’.-y-^
i^E ’<i fo*°
\»57o,
i u.J-,12.7 1/7-6       u3-b  \C?  5-1;
35-*;
1
9
Yl-OL.
/V7- 7
? •  / /^/7-9
/3?*<Z
I
I
i
I
i
w.4,.
.M»O^ H.A'
r t6S' -2. 
S-ll. S* n • </. 6*?-3 
% bl- i
?9/-2
o.o \ '.2-Z - H.3 ’7.0- O-O'-Uf..! _
A -<J 
j °- 0 j21 9 ,2 -3 1 
5<-7   liBT'ji tt-b iz*-7
9
2PJ.Z. /y/ 2.
I
, i-e \ o-2 ; 0.3 |
! U:0 Sb-b>. qq.- S9-S-
! j- ’ '7-9 >/•/
.0. J
!«■•!
j 1C7» O\ b f ' “. V-2. 
7^o/> f
H   9-3
292- f
J
69.9      131.0.lb/.  I  171-2  21-h
,?<?•« b1o37<i.S 19oh.7?9-
ilb o 1U-7 u uo.b
fbb-3 Ul i ,/p-s- 3667 394 t>
7*  « 2577^^ ,vnr vtb.G
;V1 . Ox 1rt.. J • ^.o
.
tz
. !/^.o’.75 ?
75-7
7rv'./7-i
7•!?. 2b.V2l.27 (oA-S bG.^
I1I•
1
:
Pe^jec 7 ETTHj<32l  0%
o
Ochl-'-s f'  -, •urt,-. a. '
K.rII
/*7^y
Jun
Sy-I
Tb.iAlJp/2 s/
Sea/os
^t^ZZjfpz
J175
13 7C 19 77
I975L
8 7. S’ 2^Z
*12-1 28f-C Z«f7
£|<2 AAc.
2^
.7/'¥
lid
M-t'
\s. |tfL3
\p\ZUr
JSf.
2ZP
SX13
l<& |±/y.
j&kz._____
Zi. 7; w________
%-.C Z/V-2
llP-t 2SQ-0
72/7
1® 4 ±£3^5.__________
<&«
2^-7
199-0
1.919.    O-SL  M j«t,- zjtl
27*
w k'
J2xJ  &&
A-jb i Axjl
rf*.*_
<3-1
4i-*' 
4y
jiit-
Z40:i-_______
i9io
/W
IW
£l£3
I2V-.I
//t8
J#S
jl/
,d.’2l
Ulf
lit I
if
pSJ
i4*
ZW-j7.
»-9
1  Hl
R-4z-
23 ?/J7
pL& siLq/- £
ZK       fl* 
2Mr
9 ■*+/pfe
23<
i4<
w. r/T*
Ztf
thy q
son IGO-*
hi
Z*4a0'2
*-*•
n9f
22f0
l£3-0
\hZ\.7ttS
t-2. u7j_
£:7 
>SS/ (77-3
29> 3209-7
J0.7
UtL
//£*
/AStJ______
/n.P^^5-2 24?-/
l!23
£/*JL /2*?2f T
w93 7^3 /W
3Zi ; S^3
/
T
-         " 'J
T
■t
T■
>
-
* —• ■
;__
. ir
/2J * HfQ                            /4#-47
ftl>
7Pill
ti-33.
fi-S'
2ae€ -NiOU
7l£f
»7
2?r-y.
.W»ll/So
-ZTzi I7P-!
I p.7
 A-
S'
i<t-13
25-B
Wl
7Vi*
l«h Z
j/MM?           /oi.L    I •'S'? 237 7 2ii e    MS-S
,74.
6
7<-&J
17.-J
7-/S'
24-M  Wl
1^3
Lk~S3
2&7
\Aidlygc 4 |
ae
6-/'ToLq I «a r* )
1(3 3
iSCl
2kl-1
177?
»3<i   774
*5fZf
Tz/TTr-
b»-ll
M //
/7-?&
z7.bj‘
8 1/
F7T
/(>•</%•W/fc ?7U     TO.'U
2J-Z2
21-Jh  77
-      ....      ,. 2/3"-3
z?r.?c/
I
— t----------------
Mel
P/y
uer^f c
T'„p, <c
fPi
23'{r
=2^-
2<T‘ 2-
/ & • /r
tI
//•/rFig. |
CROPPING CALENDAR
PROJECT: KUUT
Months.
Moy.
Aug.
Sept.
Annual
Rainfall Iwn)
Av. Yearly
Temp <*c)
Mean Monthly
Rainfall (mm)
105.6
263.5
•194.72
IT. 95
Mean Monthly
15.9
Tof.
Temp. CO
••r Grewing
PbriedimcU
-Fcriftdfrd .
Soybeans
B
959.7
(575)
•5.9-19.2
(20-25)
Potatoes
17 9 - 19 6
(15-20)
Ground nuts
o
15.9- 17.7
(22-28)
Pepper
~l
[^3
209-4
<7501
(7.9-196
(19-23)
Horicof beons
95B7
(400)
Onions
Green monure crop
205.4
(4 50)
29.9
(orpr. 230)
15 9- 17.7
(15    20)
17.9- »S 6
(15-20)
17 S • Il <
( IC-2S)
Jun.
Jul.
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov
Dec.
- Lond preparation & Panting. -=1 - Crop Husbandry (Crop Core). _I - Harvesting 8 Trosh ditposol.
* Figures in bracket art optimum wafer and temperature requirements3            Climate file c====
3
Station : Woli;s o/ja 1 ga/ Annaya/ Welki.Ce
C
cpppr 3
PDDDDDDDDDDDDL
January
3             February 3            March
3            April
3            May
3            June
3            July
3            August
3            September 3            October
3            November 3            December
•VlHJVL’L'VViHJLJL'L’lJ
4.6 5.2 5.4
: wo1iso
ETO
(mm/day)
<nnnr>nnnnnnnDnr
Climate
Rainfall (mm/month)
Eff. Rain
(tnm/month )
mnnnnnnnnnD)TDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
C
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD-.
5.0
4.8
3.6
2.8
2.9
3.6
5.0
5.1
4.8
23.2
28.4
77.4
69.7
105.6
156.9
256.0
263.5
176.7
64.1
17.6
6.7
17.4 21.3 58.1 52.3 79.2
117.7 192.0 197.6 132.5
48.1 13.2
5.0
«_
u
c
3 YEAR Total
3 
3 Effective Rainfall: 75 %
1602.0 
1245.7 
934.3 mm
c
\
-
&DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD}
ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDPDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDr: 3                      Reference Evapotranspiration ETo according Modified Penman
3 Project : Welkite D/KIP
3 Latitude : 8 North. Lat. 
Climate Station : Woliso 
Altitude
:      1600 meter
i
?
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDPPDPDDr'DDDPDDDDDDrDDDDDDPDDDDDDDDDPPDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDL-
3 Month
Temp.
3
Wind3peed -xC                  %                     km/day
D
Humidity
Sunshine
Radiation
ETo-Penman
CDDDDDDDD 3 January
DDDDDDD 17.0
DDDDDDDD
47
DDDDDDDPDD
112
DDDDDPDDD 8.6
hours                mm/day                 mm/day
D                         D                            D  DDDDDDDr
DDDDDDDDD
4.1
DDDDDDDDDD
4.63
D
3 February
19.2
43
3 March
121
19.4
45
7.9
4.3
121
5.22
3 April
19.5
52
7.6
4.6
5.38
3 May
19.2
112
57
6.6
121
4.5
4.97
3 June
17.6
71
7.0
4.5
4.84
3 July
16.5
78
84
5.0
3.9
69
2.8
3.59
3.4
2.76
..
3 August
16.2
84
3 September
16.8
69
76
3.3
3 October
17.5
86
3.6
2.90
53
5.0
138
4.1
3.55
7.8
4.5
4.95
..
3 November
17.7
43
<3 D7 ueecceemmbeoerr
l <17.9  . y 
130
qy  49
130   130
9 2  9.2
9.2
4 4.11 
4.2
5.13
4 82  4 R9
'
V.
3 YEAR
17.9 
59 
107 
6.7 
4.2 
1602 
;
MZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD?
3
Crop data :
SOYBEAN
Crop file : soybe
an 
3
3
C
Growth Stage DDDDDDDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDDDD
DD                       DD                    D
Init Deve
DDDDD
l Mid DDDDDDDD
DDDD
Late Total DDDDDDD
DDDDDDD
3 DDDDD
DDDDDDDD4
3
Length Stage
[days ]
20
35
60
25
140
3
3
Crop Coefficient
[coeff.]
0.45
->
1.05
0.45
3
3
3
3
Rooting Depth
[meter ]
0.30
->
1.00
1.00
3
3
Depletion level
[fract.]
0.50
->
0.60
0.90
3
3
Yield-response F.
[coeff.1
0.40
0.80
1.00
0.40
0.85
3
&DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDY
ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD'?
3
Crop Evapotranspiration and Irrigation Requirements
C========================================================================4
3 Climate File : woliso 
3 Crop 
: SOYBEAN
Climate Station: Woliso 
Planting date : 20 May 
3
3
3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
3 Month
Dec
* Stage
Coef f
3
ETcrop
ETcrop
Eff.Rain
IRReq.
IRReq.
3
CDDDDDD 3 May
DDD 3
Kc       mm/day          mm/dec         mm/dec            mm/day              mm/dec          3
D D D D D D D D DDDDDDDD4
DDDDDD
init
DDDDD 0.45
DDDDDD 2'. 02
DDDDDDD 20.2
DDDDDDDD 30.7
3 Jun
1
DDDDDDDD 0.00
DDDDDDD
0.0
init
0.45
DD 3
1.80
3 Jun
18.0
2
34.3
0.00
0.0
deve
0.54
3
3 Jun
1.92
19.2
3
deve
0.71
38.2
0.00
0.0
3
3 Jul
2.34
23.4
1
46.8
deve
0.88
0.00
0.0
2.61
3
3 Jul
2
26.1
de/mi
57.4
1.01
2.68
0.00
0.0
3
3 Jul
3
mid
26.8
67.0
1.05
3 Aug
2.88
0.00
0.0
28.8
3
1
mid
66.6
1.05
3.00
0.00
30.0
0.0
3
3 Aug
2
mid
1.05
67.6
3 Aug
3.05
0.00
0.0
30.5
3
3
mid
1.05
3.27
67.9
32.7
0.00
0.0
3
3 Sep
1
mid
1.05
60.0
3.50
0.00
35.0
0.0
3
3 Sep
2
mi/11
3 Sep
3
0.99
52.1
3.51
35.1
0.00
0.0
3
late
0.81
44.2
0.00
0.0
3
3 Oct 1 late 0.57 2.59 25.9 24.1
D
3.25
32.5
34.8
0.00
0.0
3
n1q
1 Q
^PDnDpnn
3 TOTAL 
DIMnD
DDDDDD
DDDDDD
DDDDDDD
DDDDDDDD
384.3 
DDDDDDDD 691.5 
DDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDD
1.9 
DDD 3
DDDr*!
^^^^^^dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddy
★ Dec - Decade (10 day)ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD? 3 Crop data :                                 GROUNDNUT          . Crop file : grondnut_________________________________ 3
3 Growth Stage
Init Devel Mid 
Late Total
3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
3     Length Stage
3 Crop Coefficient [coeff.J 0.55 -> 1.00 0.55 3
3
[days J                  25                35                45                25              130                          3
3
Rooting Depth
[meter ]
0.30
->
0.80
0.80
3
3
Depletion level
[fract.]
0.45
->
0.45
0.50
3
3
Yield-response F.
[coeff.J
0.40            0.60               0.80             0.40            0.70
&DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDY
ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD^
3
Crop Evapotranspiration and Irrigation Requirements
3
Cz====== = = = = ===: ============ =========== === = = = ====:==============:x======—====4 
3 Climate File : woliso 
3 Crop 
: GROUNDNUT 
Climate Station: Woliso 
Planting date : 1 June
3
3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
3 Month        Dec Stage Coeff
ETcrop 
ETcrop 
Eff.Rain 
IRReq. 
IRReq. 
3
3
Kc
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD              D                    D
mm/day DDDDD
mm/dec
DDDDDDD
mm/dec DDDDDDDD
mm/day 
DDDDDDDDD
D
mm/dec
DDDDDDDD
3
DDDDD
DDDDDI24
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Jun
1
init
0.55          2.20
22.0
34.3
0.00
0.0
Jun
2
init
0.55          1.97
19.7
Jun
38.2
3
0.00
in/de
0.0
0.58          1.93
19.3
Jul
46.8
1
deve
0.00
0.68          2.02
0.0
Jul
20.2
2
deve
57.4
0.81          2.15
0.00
0.0
Jul
3
21.5
67.0
deve
25.6
0.0
Aug
0.94          2.56
0.00
1
mid
66.6
0.00
0.0
Aug
2
1.00          2.85
mid
28.5
1.00          2.90
67.6
0.00
O
3
3
3
3
*-<
Aug
3
29.0
0.0
Sep
i
mid
1.00          3.12
67.9
0.00
Sep
o
mid
1.00          3.33
31.2
60.0
0.0
0.00
mi/lt
33.3
Sep
3
0.96          3.39
52.1
0.0
0.00
0.0
late
33.9
Oct
-L
late
0.82          3.29
44.2
0.00
0.0
o
3
0.64          2.91
32.9
34.8
0.00
0.0
*3
29.1
24.1
0.50
5.0
3  TOTAL 
. 
r
------------ ^DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDVDrDrDDDDDDDD^DDr^
346.3              660.9 
5 0**
5ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD?
3 Crop data :
3 Growth Stage
PULSES
Crop file : pulses Init Devel Mid 
Late Total
3
3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
3     Length Stage
3 Crop Coefficient
3
[days ]                  15               25                30                20                90                        3
3
Rooting Depth
[meter ]
0.30
->
1.00
1.00
3
3
Depletion level
[coeff.]
[coeff.]
[fract.]
0.45 -> 1.15 0.60 3
3
0.40 0.60 0.80 0.60 0.80 3
0.60
->
0.60
0.80
3
3
@DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDY
Yield-response F.
ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD?
3
Crop Evapotranspiration and Irrigation Requirements
O==========================================================================4
3 Climate File : woliso 
3 Crop 
: PULSES
Climate Station: Woliso 
Planting date : 1 June
3
3
3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4 D                            D           D                 D                    D                       D                       D                       D  DDDDDDDDD4
3 Month
Dec
Stage
Coeff
ETcrop
ETcrop
Eff.Rain
IRReq.
IRReq.
3
3 CDDDDD
DDDD
DDDDDD
Kc DDDD
mm/day
DDDDDD
■ihm/dec DDDDDDD
mm/dec
DDDDDDDD
mm/day
DDDDDDDD
mm/dec
DDDDDDDD
3 D
3     Jun
1
init
0.45
1.80
18.0
34.3
0.00
0.0
3
3      Jun
2
in/de
0.52
1.87
18.7
38.2
0.00
0.0
3      Jun
3
3
deve
0.73
2.42
24.2
3      Jul
46.8
0.00
0.0
3
1
deve
1.01
3      Jul
3.00
30.0
57.4
2
0.00
0.0
mid
3
1.15
3.06
3     Jul
30.6
67.0
3
mid
0.00
0.0
3
1.15
3     Aug
3.15
31.5
66.6
1
mid
0.00
1.15
0.0
3.28
3
3     Aug
2
32.8
late
1.01
67.6
0.00
2.94
0.0
29.4
3
3     Aug          3         late           0.74         2.30                23.0              60.0                  0.00
67.9
0.00
0.0
3
0.0
3
CDDDDD
3  TOTAL 
D
DDDD
DDDDDD
DDDDDD
DDDDDDD
r>DDDDDD 238.1 
D
DDDDDDDD 505.8 
DDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDD
0.0 
D     DDDDDDDDD4
DD 3
@DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDr>I'DDDr>DDDDDDDDDr>DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDY3 Crop data :
3 Growth Stage Length Stage
Crop Coefficient
[days J                  25                30                45                30
130
[coeff.]
0.55            ->                  1.10             0.70
3
3
3
Rooting Depth
[meter ]
0.30
->
0.60
0.60
Depletion level
[fract.]
0.25
->
0.30
0.50
Yield-response F.
[coeff.]
0.45
0.00
0.80
0.30
1.10
3
3
3
ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD?
3
Crop Evapotranspiration and Irrigation Requirements
3 Climate File : woliso 3 Crop 
: POTATO
Climate Station: Woliso Planting date : 1 December
3
3
3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
3 Month        Dec       Stage        Coeff      ETcrop            ETcrop          Eff.Rain           IRReq.
IRReq.           3
3
Kc       mm/day          mm/dec          mm/dec           mm/day              mm/dec          3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
3 Dec               1         init           0.55         2.71                 27.1                  2.6                2.45
3 Dec               2         ini t          0.55         2.65                 26.5
1.7                2.48
3 Dec 3 in/de 0.60 2.83 28.3 3.1 2.53
3 Jan 1 deve 0.73 3.44 34.4 4.4 3.00
3 Jan 2 deve 0.92 4.24 42.4 5.8 3.66
3 Jan 3 de/mi 1.05 5.09 50.9 6.2 4.46
3 Feb 1 mid 1.10 5.53 55.3 6.0 4.93
3 Feb 2 mid 1.10 5.74 57.4 6.1 5.13
3 Feb 3 mid 1.10 5.80 58.0 10.5 4.75
3 Mar               1        mid            1.10         5.86                 58.6                15.6                 4.30
3 Mar              2         late           1.03         5.56                 55.6                20.4                 3.52
3 Mar               3         late          0.90         4.72                 47.2                19.4                 2.78
3 Apr               1J- J-a^elau.f ter d.92 0.77         3.92               39.2     39.2               17.7     17.7                2.14      2.14                   21 4     21.4               33 CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD^
24.5                3
24.8                3
25.3                3
30.0               3
36.6               3
44.6               3
49.3               3
51.3 o
47.5               3
43.0               3
35.2               3
27.8               3
3 TOTAL 
500.9              119.4 
461.5                 3
@dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddde>dddddddddddddddyZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD?
J Croo data :
5 Growth Stage
3
3
3
3
3
3
Length Stage
Croo Coefficient
Rooting Depth
Deo 1e 11on level
Y.lew1d-resoonse F.(coeff.J
PEPPERS
[days ] [coe f f . ]
Crop file s peppers 
:= = = = = = = = = = = = = ===========«===================4
Ini t
IDDDDl
35
De ve 1 innnnnfinnr
Mid
in/inn/inr
Late
i'Ln/nLn'UnnLn'Ln'Ur L'L
Total
3
J
fODDL'UL'UUL
•UUUL’UULf
’   JL'DPSDID* LDJ DLD,Dks D SL/UL/ >k/DUDDLs DDISD■4
45
50
20
150
0.75              ->                    1.00             0.85
3
J
[meter         ] [fract.]
QDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDY
3
0.25              ->                        o.ao            0.80                                                3
0.20              ->                    0.30                  0.50                                                3
1 . 40              0.60                1.00                  0.60             1 . 10                         3
ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDnDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD^
3
Crop Evapotranspiration and Irrigation Requirements 
Qc. = H ECE B 3 S = S= = C= =zr= = xxe E = = = = = = = X = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =::= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 4
3 Climate File ; woliso J Crop
: PEPPERS
Climate Station: Woliso Planting date : 1 December
5
3
3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
3    Mon t h       Dec        Stage         Coe f f        ET CroD             ET crop             Eii.Rain               IRRea.
3
K c         mm/day              mm/dec             mm/dec              mm/da/
IRReq ,             3
mm/de c J
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
3
Dec
1
ini t
0.75
3.69
36.9
2.6
3.43
34.3
T
3
Dec
z
in i t
0.75
3.62
36.2
1.7
3.45
34.5
3
Dec
•v
in i t
0.75
3.57
35.7
3
3.1
3.26
J an
32.6
3
1
in /de
0.76
3.59
3
35.9
4.4
3.14
31.4
J
J an
2
deve
0.81
3.73
37.3
5.8
3.15
31.5
T
J an
_•
de- e
C.8t
4 . 16
3
41.6
6.2
"eb
3.53
de ✓e
35.3
0.92
4 . d>0
3
4 6.0
3
6.0
Feb
4.01
deve
0.97
40.1
5.08
50.8
6.1
3
Fee
mid
4.47
44.7
!
1.00
5.27
52.7
10.5
4.22
42.2
-
-
Ma-
mid
1.00
5.33
3
Mar
53.3
mid
15.c
3.77
J .00
37.7
3
5.38
3
Mar
mid
53.8
20.4
3.34
33.4
1 .00
5.24
52.4
3
Ap-
19.4
1
mid
1 . Op
3.31
33.1
3
3
5.11
Ap-
51.1
X
17.7
1 a te
0.96
4.78
47.0
3.33
33.3
3
3
Ad-
3
16.4
late
0.89
3.14
4.37
31.4
3
43.7
19.7
7.40
74 n
C SD^^DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD^^DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD')
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ODDDDDrDDrDDDrDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDYZDPDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDPPDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD?
3“crop data :                            _ ONION£dry)
i °”=°"   =================4
=             ==
0==========
Init Devel MDid evel Mid Init
La Lattee Tot     Totaall
3
S
CDDmDDDDWWDDDDDPDDDDDDDDDDDDI>Dt>t>r>DDDDDDt>DDDDDDDDDDDDDPDDr>DDDDDDDDDDDDDM
3 Length Stag. 
[days 1                  15 
™                 4°                150
J
3 Crop Coefficient [coeff.] 0.70 
>
0.95 
. 
$
3
3 Rooting Depth [meter J
3 Depletion level [fract.]
^3d Ydiedld- ddredspons ddded Fd.[dcoeddffd.]ddddddd
0.20
0.20
0.45
ddddddddd
->
->
0.80 dddddd
0.50
0.30
0.80
ddddddd
0.50 
3
0.60 
3
d                          d                 d                    d                 d                          d           dddddy
0.30 
dddddd
1-10 ddddddddd
3 dddd
ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD^
3
Crop Evapotranspiration and Irrigation Requirements
3 Climate File : woliso 
3 Crop 
: ONION(dry)
Climate Station: Woliso 
Planting date : 1 December
3
3
3
ETcrop 
Eff.Rain 
IRReq. 
IRReq. 
3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
3 Month         Dec * Stage Coeff               ETcrop 
3
Kc      mm/day 
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD              D
3 
D“ ec
1
2
3 
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
init
0.70
0.73
0.80
0.90
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.92
0.88
0.83
0.78
mm/dec DDDDD
mm/dec DDDDDDDD
mm/day DDDDDDDDD
D                       D        DDDDDDD4
mm/dec
DDDDDDDD
3 DDD
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Dec
Dec
Jan
Jan
Jan
Feb
Feb
Feb
Mar
Mar
Mar
Apr
Apr
Apr
in/de
deve
deve
mid 
mid 
mid 
mid 
mid 
mid 
mid 
late
late
late
late
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
3 TOTAL
3.45
3.49
3.81
4.22
4.40
4.59
4.77
4.96 
5.01 
5.06 
5.11
4.85
4.47
4.10
3.82
WDDD r.’D
34.5
2.6
3.19
31.9
34.9
1.7
3.33
33.3
38.1
3.1
3.50
35.0
42.2
4.4
3.78
44.0
37.8
5.8
3.82
45.9
38.2
6.2
47.7
3.96
6.0
39.6
4.17
49.6
41.7
6.1
50.1
4.35
10.5
43.5
3.96
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
50.6
15.6
39.6
3.50
3
51.1
20.4
35.0
48.5
3.08
o
19.4
30.8
*-Q•
44.7
2.91
17.7
29.1
41.0
38.2
2.69
16.4
19.7
26.9
O
Q
'DDnnnriririryr
2.46
1.84
24.6
18.4
&DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDnr,nT}T)r\  9DDDDD
661.0 
■»  r-. »->
155.6
a •! WVDDDDD^Dl DDDDDD 505.4
^^^ddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddy
* Dec - Decade (10 day)ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD?
3 Crop data :
3 Growth Stage
CROTALARIA
i--£-£--£-===-=-==========4
-4
Init            Devel           Mid
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDL
VDDDDDuIJDDDlMMslA
D'JLnIDLD'LD/LD'LD'UEb
3 Length Stage
3 Crop Coefficient [coeff.]
3
3 Rooting Depth [meter ] 3 Depletion level [fract.J
3 Yield-response F.[coeff.]
[days ]
10
1.00
15 ->
15
1.00
0.60
0.45
1.00
Late
)DDDDDD
10
1.00
0.60
0.60
1.00
Total 50
0.20
0.45
1.00
-> -> 1.00
1.00
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDL
ZDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD?
3
Ct================= = ==
Crop Evapotranspiration and Irrigation Requirements
=   =      ==========
=
===========
3
—==============-—==-=======4 
3 Climate File : woliso 3 Crop 
: CROTALARIA
Climate Station: Woliso Planting date : 1 December
3
3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
3 Month       Dec * Stage Coeff                ETcrop           ETcrop        Eff.Rain               IRReq.              IRReq.              3
3
Kc      mm/day          mm/dec mm/dec
mm/day            mm/dec            3
CDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD4
Dec
Dec
Dec
Jan
Jan
init
2
3
1
2
deve
de/mi
mid
late
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
4.92
4.82
4.76
4.69
4.63
49.2
48.2
47.6
46.9
46.3
2.6
1.7
3.1
4.4
4.66
4.65
4.45
4.25
46.6
46.5
44.5
42.5
3
3
3
3
3
* Dec - Decade (10 day)Project : KULIT
WET STATION
Climatic Station
CROPPING PATTERN Woliso
No.
CROP
Area
Plant. Harvest
ETCroo
MM
E f Ra m
S.Eff.
7.
Y 1 d .Red.
7.
da tes
MM
7.
1
SOYBEAN
32
20       5      10 10
384.3
575.6
100
U
2
GROUNDNUT
27
1 6 10 10
346.3
545.1
1OO
0
3
PULSES
41
1     <5       1      9
238.1
407.8
1OO
0
DRY STATION Project : KULIT
CROPPING PATTERN Climatic Station : Woliso
No. CROP
Area Plant. Harvest ETCrop Ef-Rain S.Eff. Yld.Red.
X
1 POTATO 27
2 PEPPERS 22
3 ONI ON(dry ) 29
4 CR0TALAR1A 22
dates 
MM                 MM                  7.                     %
1 12 10 4 580.9
I 12 1 5 675.1
1 12 1 5 661.0
1 12 20 1 238.2
141.1               1OO                       0
155.6               100
0
182.0              1OO                       0
100
0Date Due
AUTHOR          -- -----------------------------
TITLE
CALL NO:
EDITION
VOLUME
CAcc. NO.
J
Wi

Summery

1. Project Overview

The report, titled "Land Evaluation for Irrigation Development in Welkite Kulite Project Area," was prepared by M. Y. Javed Mirza, an FAO Soil Survey Consultant, in October 1989. The study was conducted under the FAO/UNDP-assisted project ETH/88/013, sponsored by the Water Resources Development Authority (WRDA) of Ethiopia.

Key Objectives: Assess soil studies, recommend cropping patterns, and address land preparation and drainage problems for irrigation development in the Welkite Kulite area.

2. Location and Climate

Location: 200 km southwest of Addis Ababa, along the left bank of the Kulite River.
Area: ~3,820 hectares (ha).
Climate:
- Annual rainfall: ~1,200 mm (70% from June–December, 20% from March–May).
- Temperature: "Warm Tropics" regime (mean annual ~18°C).
- Growing period: ~240 days for rainfed crops; year-round under irrigation.

3. Soil Characteristics

Two main soil series were identified:

Soil Series	Characteristics	Suitability
Darge Series	Deep, black clayey, moderately well-drained, slightly calcareous.	Moderately suitable (S2) for most crops; limitations include seedbed preparation (w) and erosion (e).
Kulite Series	Very deep, very black clayey, imperfectly drained, periodically ponded.	Marginal (S3) due to drainage issues (d).

4. Land Suitability for Crops

The report classifies land suitability into:

S1: Highly suitable (productivity >60% of ideal).
S2: Moderately suitable (40–60%).
S3: Marginally suitable (<40%).
N1/N2: Not suitable currently/permanently.

Selected Crop Suitability (Examples)

Crop	Darge Series	Kulite Series
Maize	S2w	S3d
Potato	S3d	S3d
Pepper	S2w	S3d

5. Recommendations

Priority Areas: Focus on moderately suitable lands (Mapping Units 2 and 3).
Drainage: Install open-ditch systems to manage excess water.
Mechanization: Transition from bullock to tractor power for tillage.
Farmer Training: Teach irrigation control, contour ploughing, and erosion prevention.

6. Agricultural Review (1991)

A follow-up review in 1991 proposed:

Key Crops: Soybeans, haricot beans, potatoes, onions, groundnuts, and peppers.
Rotation System: 4-year cycle integrating legumes for soil fertility.
Pilot Scheme: Recommended to test crop adaptability and management practices.

Note: The study emphasized integrating irrigation with rainfed agriculture and addressing socio-economic factors for sustainable development.