Presentation by Tilahun Amede, Katrein Descheemaeker, E. Mapedza et al (IWMI) to the CGIAR Systemwide Livestock Programme Livestock Policy Group Meeting, 1 December 2009

1. Enhancing Water Productivity in Crop-Livestock Systems of SSA: Minimizing trade-offs and maximizing benefits Tilahun Amede, Katrein Descheemaeker, E. Mapedza et al. Presentation: CGIAR Systemwide Livestock Programme Livestock Policy Group, 1 December 2009

2. Livestock a livelihood strategy; increasing demand USA 140

3. Fetching water for household use hugely competes for labour and limited resources Water scarcity is a real threat Photo: Getachew Bayafers Traveling long distance to access drinking water

5. Nile basin

7. Case studies from Eth and Zim Lenche Dima, Dry, crop-livestock 650mm Nkayi Dry, agropastoral 550 mm Kuhar wet, crop-livestock 1300 mm

8. Land use evolution

9. System changes and its drivers in Kuhar

11. open grazing exclosure Drivers of Land use changes @: Lenche Dima : NGO led exclosures Implications: More access to biomass, less competition, more productivity

12. Contribution of crop residue for livestock feed and their water budget Kuhar Michael 60% 2% 28% 6% 2% 2% crop residues green forage grazing hay weeds tree fodder Lenche Dima 67% 1% 17% 7% 3% 5% crop residues green forage grazing hay weeds tree fodder

13. Land and water productivity of major feed classes

15. Lenche Dima Daily Energy Requirement (ME/TLU) = 40.61 Current Energy supply (ME/TLU) = 21.70 Deficit = 46.6% Additional land required 250 ha System = Semi-arid, one cropping seasons, sorghum-livestock

16. Livestock feed and energy Energy spent for walking ± 2-3 times energy for milk production and growth

17. Water productivity variables for Lenche Dima Watershed (1546 ha) with water flows

18. Quantifying the LWP variables Average contributions of the different livestock outputs to overall LWP at household level.

19. Water budgets of the farming systems in two contrasting sites water budget analysis High unproductive water losses = indicator of productivity gap

21. 1. Fertilizer effects on Maize in Zimbabwe FP = Farmer practice, MD = Micro-dose, RC = recommended

22. Simulated maize stover over a period of 30 years under 3 SFM FP = farmer practice, MD = micro-dose, RC = recommended rates

23. Effects of soil fertility gradients on Enset biomass 355.1 267.9 146.0 Transpiration (Ta) 203.5 285.4 446.1 Evaporation (Ea) Non limiting Near optimal Poor Soil fertility conditions Water balance components

26. 4. Intensifying cropping systems: Contribution of maize stover and mucuna to dry season feed at 20, 40 and 60% of daily CP requirements. (CP=0.228 kg/day) for 300 kg live weight.

27. 5. Rehabilitating degraded lands

29. 7. If we changing breeds

30. Estimating water requirements for various breeds 4063 lt /lt milk No No Water requirements 70% of total milk No need to keep No need to keep Scenario I: If feed availability was reduced by 50% 4101 4232 No Water demand (lt/lt) Increase stock by 60% Reduce stock by 10% No need to keep If feed availability is reduced by 10%, no reduction in milk Scenario I: 3175 4663 12174 Water requirement (per lt of milk) 38964 27095 17194 ME demand MJ year 365 270 210 Lactation period 12.50 8.0 2.5 Milk yield (lt day -1) 450 400 250 Live weight (kg) Cross breed 50% Cross breed 25% Local Zebu Breed

34. http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/202/issue/5185.htm

36. Thank you !