Background Project Goals and Objectives Project Environment Progress To Date Methodology

1. ACP SUGAR RESEARCH PROGRAMMEProject 2.3Mid Term Report - October 2012Increasing Sugarcane Yields For Smallholder Farmers Through Improvements In Irrigation Scheduling

2. PRESENTATION OUTLINE • Background • Project Goals and Objectives • Project Environment • Progress To Date • Methodology • Preliminary Results • Opportunities • Challenges • Coming Year Forecast

3. BACKGROUND • Study by SSATS has shown that most smallholder farmers do not follow any form of irrigation scheduling. • This has led to potential losses in sugarcane productivity from: • Losses in irrigation water • Increase in electricity cost for pumping • Leaching of nitrogen fertilizers resulting in high fertilizer costs • Aggravated soil losses and therefore pollution of the environment • Increase in weeds and weed control costs

4. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES • Goals • To increase smallholder growers’ understanding of irrigation scheduling • To effectively use smallholder grower extension collaborators as a major factor in helping farmers to learn irrigation scheduling • To improve smallholder grower cane yields and quality

5. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (cont’d) • Objectives • To provide irrigation scheduling training for selected smallholder growers to be used as extension service collaborators • To provide selected growers with information on irrigation scheduling techniques (using Canepro/Canesched, Peg Board, Irrigation Profit/Loss Records and Soil Auger systems). • To ensure growers learn about timely and proper amount of water application during irrigation • To assist selected growers in learning how to effectively use the irrigation scheduling techniques to improve the cane yield and quality

6. PROJECT ENVIRONMENT • Political Climate • Remains stable for the foreseeable future (project life time) • Weather Conditions • Remain favourable for sugarcane production and the minimum of 400mm of rainfall between October and March was exceeded, and forecasted to be normal this year. Water storage dams near full capacity • Markets and Prices • The African and European markets remained stable for Swazi sugar and prices are looking better for 2012/13

7. PROGRESS TO DATE • Project Information • Information collected from participating growers and captured into Canesched (computer irrigation scheduling system) include: • Irrigation Systems; types, discharge rates, stand time and application rates. • Field records; crop ratoons and harvest dates • Selection of participants • A total of 63 smallholder growers were selected throughout the industry • Cooperating Extension Officers were identified • Project Evaluation • 12 of the 63 growers have harvested their fields, and have been evaluated.

8. METHODOLOGY • 63 growers across the industry were selected for the project • Participants were trained on irrigation scheduling methods (profit and loss book, Pin-peg board and Canesched), handling of the SMS programme and soil and crop water use monitoring. • Growers run an onsite profit and loss record sheet and/or Canesched, and Pin-peg board simultaneous • Daily actual ET values sent by SMS

9. PRELIMINARY RESULTS Use of the Pin-Peg board method

10. PRELIMINARY RESULTS Use of the Profit and Loss method

11. PRELIMINARY RESULTS SMS Delivery Reports

12. PRELIMINARY RESULTS Irrigation Adequacy • Growers applied on average 68% (between 26% and 123%) of the required irrigation water • Some of the growers had very low supply/demand index because they misplaced some of the irrigation records and as a result, those records were not included in the analysis

13. Pin-Peg Board

14. Growers Training Session

15. Growers Rain gauge

16. OPPORTUNITIES • Record keeping systems including year planners • Records of other farming operations, which will be useful in analysing yields outcome at the end of the season • fertilizer application • chemical and hand weeding • smut rouging • ripening. • Interest in evaluation of irrigation systems

17. CHALLENGES • Labour turn-over/absenteeism as some growers need to be re-trained because they missed the scheduled trainings. • Growers are not always keeping their cell phones on to receive the sent messages • Newly recruited extension officers have not been trained. Some existing ones need refresher training

18. CHALLENGES (Cont’d) • Two of the evaluated growers did not have offices where to display their pin-peg boards. • Some growers delayed in applying other agronomic practices because of financial constraints and this impact on the resultant yield.

19. 2012 FORECASTED SITUATION • Conduct at one extension officer and one grower training sessions (October and November 2012) • Send out and receive daily irrigation messages • Continue project monitoring and evaluation • Compile annual report for 2012

20. ENDThank You!