NACRMLP

Reports & Publications

NACRMP

External Publications   Discussion Papers   Technical Notes   Workshop Papers   Training Manuals   Extension Notes

NACFP 4

External Notes   Discussion Papers   Technical Notes   Workshop Papers   Training Films   Unpublished    Consultancy Reports   Other   Reference Materials

NAFP ( 1 - 3 )

External Publications   Information     Pamphlets   Discussion Papers   Technical Notes   Workshop Papers   Occasional Papers   Training Films   Reports

Summary:

The Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management and NACRMP conducted a two-day workshop on November 13 and 14, 1997, at Budol Training Center, Kabhre Palanchok to share the sub-watershed selection criteria used by key projects involved in watershed management activities. A total of 25 participants, representing 10 organisations attended the workshop.

The objectives of the workshop were:

•	To review and update criteria for sub-watershed prioritisation developed by the DSCWM.
•	To discuss and compare additional criteria used by other projects and agencies in Nepal.

The outcomes and recommendations of the workshop were:

•	The DSCWM prioritisation guidelines were seen as a valuable step in a sub-watershed selection procedure but not the only criteria to make a final selection. The estimation of erosion potential, based on biophysical characteristics and population density, was crude but allowed the rapid objective estimation of erosion potential across all the sub-watersheds of a district without costly field work. This prioritisation methodology could only be improved through considerable cost and effort. Minor modifications in an attempt to improve the estimates of erosion potential could be attempted, however, significant improvements in accuracy would require a greater level of information on land use, land and resource management, soils, slope and climate. Such additional information could not be feasibility collected across a whole district without a large input of time and resources. A major reworking of the method was not therefore recommended, and the DSCWM guidelines would continue to be used to rank sub-watersheds within a district.
•	It was suggested that the shortfalls in the DSCWM prioritisation process could be overcome by means of a second step assessment and appraisal process.
•	The workshop participants indicated that the procedures for this second step should remain flexible and not be specified by the department. They would be based on the application of additional criteria, based on the individual project or agency’s own strategies, and included socio-economic, institutional, biophysical, political, and/or locational and geographical criteria. It was also considered that in most cases field verification and appraisal were required.
•	The workshop suggested the need for the formation of a watershed management working group to share experience and discuss issues related to soil conservation activities.