'AV*
THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA MINISTRY OF WATER AND ENERGY
ETHIOPIAN NILE IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT (WORLD BANK FINANCED)
FEASIBILITY STUDIES OF ABOUT 80,000 HA NET IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE SCHEMES
UPPER BELES IRRIGATIONAND DRAINAGE SCHEME FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL REPORT
VOLUME 1 MAIN REPORT
ffalcrow
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
GENERATION INTEGRATED RURAL DEVELOPMENT (GIRD) CONSULTANTS
ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA
MAY 20! )Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
Ministry of Water and Energy
World Bank Financed Ethiopian Nile Irrigation and Drainage Project Feasibility Studies of about 80,000 ha net Irrigation and Drainage Schemes Feasibility Study Final Report
UPPER BELES IRRIGATION & DRAINAGE SCHEME
Halcrow Group Limited and
Generation Integrated Rural Development (GIRD) Consultants
PO Box 102175. Comet Bmttng (5th Floor)
Haile Gobreselasve Road, Adda Ababa. Ethiopia
Tel *215-1 (0) 116 63 09 92 Fax *251-1 (0) 116 63 09 91
www Miypw com
This Report has been prepared in accordance with the msbvctions of the Federal
Government o( Ethiopia. Ministry erf Water and Energy tor their sole and speerfe
use Any other persons who use any information contacted herein do so at their own
nsk
€> Halcrow Group Limited and Generation integrated Rural Development (GIRD) Consultants
2011Halcrow Group Limited and
Generation Integrated Rural Development (GIRD) Consultant*
PO Box 102175. Cornel Building (5<h Floor)
Harte Getxeselassie Ro« Addis Ababa Ethopui
Tel *215-1 (0) 116 63 09 92 Fax *251-1 (0) 116 63 09 91
This Re pod has been prepared m accordance with the mstrudKXis of the Federal
Government of Ethiopia Mrwslry of Water and Energy for thee so* and sped*
use Any other persons who use any Informabon contained herem do so at the* own
risk
© Halcrow Group Limited end Generation Integrated Rural Development (GIRD) Coni
2011FtiM Vk-wtic                  ofPjhMfii, Mnutln IT tf/r & I™# Ef^p^n Ni/r Irnp'f* Ihiif
FEASIBILITY REPORT STRUCTURE
Volume 1:
Main Report (Plug Annexes)
Volume 2:
Water Resources
SR-01A Water Resources
Volume 3:
Irrigation Development
SR 01B Irrigation A Drainage Development
Volumes 4
Soils, Land Use & Suitability
3c 5 :         SR-02A: Soils, Land Use & Suitability
Part 1 of 4: Main Report
Part 2 of 4: Annexes A. B & C
Part of 4: Annex D
Part 4 of 4: Annexes E - N
Volume 6:           I .and Resources &. Agricultural Development
SR  02B  Irngatrd  Agriculture  A  Agio-economic  Development SR-02C Livestock Development
SR-02D: Land A Watershed Management and Forestry
Volumes 7
& 8:
Resource Users 3c Socio-Economics
SR-03A Resource Users and Socio-economics
Part 1 of 5: Summary Report (Left A Right Banks)
Part 2 of 5: SDAs I 3c 111 on Right Bank
Part 3 of 5: SDAs III 3- IVon Left Bank
Part 4 of 5. Survey Data Annexes (SDAs 1 A III on Right Bank) Part 5 of 5: Survey Data Annexes (SDAs IV A IV on Left Bank)
SR-03B Resettlement
Volumes 9,
Engineering Surveys, Investigations, Planning & Design
10 & IE
SR-04A: Engineering Irrigation & Drainage W orks
SR 04B Engineering: Storage Dam
SR-04C: Geology. Hydrogeology and Geotechnical Interpretive Report
Pan 1 of 3. Main Rcpon & Annexes A - D
Pan 2 of 3: Annexes E - H
Part 3 of 3: Annexes 1 • P SR-04D: Topographic Survey Works
Bries I 4 Volume I
i
1 July 2011rnirrut Dtw**               ofE/Mpw. Muuty tf ITirfrr d’ Ew#
E/fttyta Nl> Irnptfa J9d Draitfff Pr^nl
Volume 12          Environmental Status, Financial & Economic Analysis, Stakeholder Consultations & Study Terms of Reference
SR-05 Environmental Status
SR-O6: Financial A Economic Analysis
SR-O7- Stakeholder Consultations
SR-08: Study Terms of Reference
Maps and Engineering Drawings, A3
Map Albums, Al
Main Album
Detailed Soils, |.and Use A Suitability* .Album Topographic AlbumFederal   Democratic   Republic   6f
Ethiopia
J'
Ministry of Water and Energy /
World  Bank  Financed  Ethiopian  Nile Irrigation and Drainage Project
Feasibility  Studies  of  about  80,000  ha  net Irrigation and Drainage Schemes
Feasibility Study Final Report UPPER BELES IRRIGATION &
Halcrow
In association with
Generation Integrated Rural Development (GIRD) ConsultantsFederal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
Ministry of Water and Energy
World Bank Financed Ethiopian Nile Irrigation and Drainage Project Feasibility Studies of about 80,000 ha net Irrigation and Drainage Schemes Feasibility Study Final Report
UPPER BELES IRRIGATION & DRAINAGE SCHEME
MAIN REPORT
May 201
»
Harrow Group Limited and
Generation Integrated Rural Development (GIRD) Consultants
PC Box 102175. Corns! Building (5<h Floor)
Haile Gebreseiass* Road. Addis Ababa Ethiopia
Tel *215-1 (0) 116 53 09 92 Fax *251-1 (0) 116 63 09 91
hakrow oom
This Report has been prepared in accordance w<h the nsttvclxra of me Federal
Government of Etfsopa, Ministry of Water and Energy for their sole and specific
use Any other persons who use any ■nformabon contained herein do so al thee own
rek
©Halcrow Group Limited and Generation Integrated Rural Development (GIRD) Consultants
2011Halcrow Group Limited and
Generation Integrated Rural Development (GIRD) Consultants
PO Box 102175. Comet Building (5th Floor)
Haile Gebreselassie Road. Adds Ababa, Elteopta
Tai *215-1 (0)110 63 09 92 Fax <251-1 (0)116 63 09 91
www haicrow com
This Report hM been prepared m accordance with the Instructions of the Federal
Government of Ethiopia. Ministry of Water and Energy lor thee sole and specific
use Any other persons who use any mlormauxi contacted herein do so at the* own
nsk
©Ha I crow Group Limited and Generation Integrated Rural Development (GIRD) Cona
2011qffMiqpM, Al/wifry <4 IFkfl* <*■ E<rrp Ethiopia* NiJt Imtfh** out Dm# Pw^i
FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL REPORT UPPER BELES IRRIGATION & DRAINAGE SCHEME
MAIN REPORT
CONTENTS
] INTRODUCTION
LI      Rtfwt Content
L2      Prvfttl Background
L J JjW, Ofytdiyej and Sivpr g/ 'AsrignJNtnt
2 STRATEGIC CONTEXT
2,             / 5fd*cr Backgnwnti
22        NalionaJ Poliff P f' wne^ork
2              21 Strategic Plans
2-2-2 Waler Resources Development
23
2.3.1    Water Resources Development
23.2     Rcsenkmcnt and Land Consolidation
233 Environmental Management
2.4      Irrigation DcpcJopmtnr Aw/Zrf/  Prowr, Jjvwj1 and inrp&atioiu
r
24.1     Irrigation Development Pracncrs on Commercial Irrigation Schemes 2-4-2 Large-scale Smallholder Irrigation Development and land Consolidation
Practices
24.3     Irrigation Development Process and Sustainable CMkM
3 PROJECT AREA
3.             I JntrvdurfMn
3.1.1    Location and Access
3.1.2    Study and Propccl Areas
3.1 3 Dau Collections and Survevs
3.2           Cfarate
3.2.1    General Climatic Conditions
332 Climatic Dara
3              2.3 Reference Evapotranspiration (ETri)
33.4         Effective Rainfall
J3 IHtfrr RfjMnrj
33.1     Hydrology of the Study Area
3 3 2 River Flow Data
3.3           3 I .ake Level Data
33.4         Flow Estimation al Dam Site and at Diversion Weir 3.3           5 Drainage Modulus
3.3.6 Water Balance Modelling
1
I
1
2
5
/
6
6
7
J
8
a
10
ft
11
17
25
27
27
27
30
31
31
31
33
34
35
37
37
39
41
41
52
52
I h I *■4 Mam Report (1)
D-May-HSA lmr*»' 0*"$ fy*
3.4           l^nd Rmum
3.4.1     landform. Topography and Slopes
3A2   Soils
%
59
3.4.3 
Land Suitability 
63
3.4.4 
Sod and Land Management
68
3.4.5 
l,and Cover and Land Use
70
34 6 
Soil and Water Conservation and W atershed Management
74
3.5      Fanning Sjittmi
3.6      Smai/holArCnpPnduction
3.6.1   Cropping Patterns and Crop Yields 3 6.2     Crop I lusbandry 
3.6.3    Labour Draught and Equipment
3.6.4   Agricultural Research and Extension 3.6.5    Farm Input Supply 
3.6.6    Credit
3.6.7   Crop Marketing and Processing 
3.6 8 Main Constraints to Smallholder Crop Production 3.6.9        Opportunities for Crop Development
3.7      ( omnHirialCrvf) Production
3.8      Livutock. Production
3.8.1   Ijvestock Population
3.8.2   livestock Husbandry 
3.8.3   Ijvestock Feed and Water Resources
3.8.4   Animal Health
3.8.5   Animal Health Infrastructure and Services 3.8.6   Livestock Productivity 
3 8.7 Livestock Products
3.8.8   Livestock Marketing 
3.8.9   Major Constraints to Livestock Production 3.8.10 Opportunities for Ijvestock Development
3.9      Vonfy
74
75
75
80
82
83
84
85
86
86
8”
88
92
92
93
94
99
99
3.10 
and ^ado-EcoHonicj
3.10.1 Population and Demography
3.10.2 Land Use Rights and Holding     Size 3.10.3 Ilivelihoods
3.10.4 Household Incomes and Expenditures 3.10.5 Poverty and Wealth
3.10.6 Social Indicators 3.10.7 Gender Issues
3 11 InstiMtonal Framework 
3.11.1  Institutions at Kebclc lx-vcl
3.11.2 Institutions at Wereda Level
3 11.3 Institutions at Regional/ Zone lxvel
3.12 Projtd Arm Geohgf and Grotechniad Parameters 3.12.1      Regional Geology 
100
1°° 1^1 *01
104
106
10/
109
*99
110
HO
112
113
113
114
116
118
j 1 g
1*4 Mam Repon (I)
17-May.nFttitrd DfHKrjtic PjMc tfEdufm, Minify V JTafrr <**
Ef/»if>fif Niif Im/ptm ani Dntt’Utf Prnra
3.12.2      Command Area Geology
3 123 Dam Site and Reservoir Geology 
f frdroftoty
1.14         Enrimnmrnla/ Sfatar
3.14         I Ecology. Hora and Fauna
3 .14.2 Environmental Pollution
3.14         3 Other Environmental Hazards
4          PROPOSED PROJECT
4.1      Infrodndron
4.1 I Project Rationale
4 1.2 Features of Protect Design
4.1.3    Proper Impact and Outcome
4.2      Planning Process, Erasatmork and W'llb-Projta Land Um
4.2.1    Planning Process for Irrigation Development
122
f?s
^0
130 1 34
137
1
MO
1
4 2.2    Land Utilisation Types for Irrigation
1**1
4.23    Planning Framework
H2
4.24    Irrigation layout / Development Practicalities
146
4 2.5    Delineation of Project Area and Main Irrigation System Layout
151
4 26      Irrigable Area by Stage Development Area 
156
4.27     Agriculture Development Options
163
4 28     Optimisation Modelling and Demarcation of Sugar Estate Area 
163
4.
J Imgafon Demand and I&D Engmtrnn^ Infnutrudure
170
4.3.1   Cropping and Net Crop Water Requirements
170
4.3.2   Irrigation Efficiencies and Water Demands
172
433      I AD Engineering Works
183
43.4    Main Irrigation System
183
43.5    Pressure Irrigation Options
186
43.6    On-farm I AD Works and Land Development of Consolidated Holdings
190
43.7    Main Drainage System including Flood Protection
190
43.8    All-Weather Roads
191
4.3.9    Alternative Engineering Infrastructure Options
193
43.10    Cost Estimate
194
4.4 
Storage Dam Dtvehfimfnt and Enffntmng htf mstnidum
196
4.4.1   Background
196
4.4.2   Dam and Reservoir Size Options
197
4.43     Dam Design
200
4.4.4   Dam Construction Period
200
4.4.5   Dam Cost Estimate
200
4.5 
Rfjtlt/fnrtnt and land Consolidation
204
4.5.1    Re settlement Requirements
204
4.5.2   land Allocation Principles
207
4.53     Rcsctdemcnt Principles
208
4.5.4   Land Consolidation
209
4.5.5    Implementation Procedures fur Re setdement and I janrl Allocation
L'b H4 Main Report (Ij
212
17-Mav-llVtdrrul Owtwnft.-      * Erfc^rtf. Afiaum #rat"     E*V
littmptax Silt Impfi" ane DrwJff
4.5.6 Re-settlement Costs
4.6      Sugar Estate and Commercial Earm Deifbpment
46.1 Introduction
4.6.2 Large Scale Sugar Production
4 6.3 Small and Medium Scale Commercial Agriculture
4.7       Jnstitutional Development and Sustainable Oci’Af 4.7.1 Introduction
4.7.2 Irrigation System Management A (JAM Institutions
4.7.3 System Operation
4.7 .4 System Maintenance
4.7.5 Farmer Management Information System for O&M
4.7.6 Scheme Management and OAM Costs
4.8      Small bolder Crop Production
4 8.1 P roposed Smallholder Agriculture
4.8.2 Proposed Interventions / Subprojects
4 8.3 Smallholder Crop Production Subproject Costs
4.9      Lsirstock Development
4 9.1 Introduction
4.9.2 livestock Sub-projects Costs
4.10    Land and Watershed Management and Eorrstry
4.10.1  Introduction
4.10.2  ljind A Forestry Management Sub*projects Costs
4.11    Community .Support
4.11.1 Constraints and Issues related to Community Development 4.11.2 Sub-projects to Address Communin’ Development Constraints 4 11.3 Community Development Subprojects Costs
4.12     Environmental Mitigation and Enhancement Measunj
4.12.1  Introduction
4 12.2 Environmental Enhancement Subprojects Costs 4 12 3 E1A / SLA Study and Consultancy Support Costs
4 15 Pnyea Implementation. Institutional Arrangements and MIS
212
2/J
213
213
217
2/|
218
218
220
220
221
221
226
226
228
232
255
233
235
255
235
242
245
243
245
249
249
249
252
252
255
4.13.1  Implementation Process
4.13.2  Institutional Organisation Arrangements
4.13.3  Irrigation System Management
4.13.4  Consultancy Support
4.13.5  Implementation Schedule
4 13.6 WUA Construction Contracts and Farmer Involvement
4 13.7 Small / Medium Commercial Farm Lease Agreements
253
255
258
260
263
264
265
4 13.8 Management Information System
5 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS
265
267
5.1
5.2
1 ntroduilton
Project Ltrel Surras and ( onsultationi
5.2.1    Introduction
5.2.2
Baseline Surveys and Consuitauons
267
267
267
26"
IV
I ’b F4 Main Report (!)
17-May-HMml Dmtu R/pubfc of &Ar^r. Mmrtry of Waftr & Ethrtwt NfA Jrmw* J*< Prarw Prgfrt
5J Conrvltaim I ufa and Ajmm**! of lmgatiM DtvehpMrai Pnxfa tn Ethopia 
5.3.1    Irrigation Practices in Ethiopia 
5.3           2 Large-Scale Smallholder Irrigation Development & Land Consolidate n
5.4       (on/uitafronj at FfdtraJ and Rqptftdj' I zi*/
5.4.1    I*‘cderal Government LcveI
5.4.2    Amhari Regional Government
5.4.3    BeneshanguLGumuz Regional Government
5.5       htitpiicn Workf/xp, Jftnf 2009 
5.6      Mitf-irrm                      ALzmk 20 fO
56 1 Genera)
5.6.2    Discussion of Key Issues raised by Halcrow-GIRD Consultants £7      DtFthpmrKt Worfabap. Dw*htr20f0
5.7 1 General
IPrifcr fW/jk? and ( B Djw O/MtoHt € amitatimi. Dftrnrbtr20f0 
269
260
270
272
^72
~*
“7^
275
278
r
5.9     F/W Mrkfhop, Apri/2011 
£ 10   Cj/rrtftf SiatMj of DtnbpaHnt OptittJ 
6 FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
6.1       Infrodudron
6.2       Prvfetf Cartf
62 1 Irrigation Investment Costs
6.2.2    Irrigation O&M Costs
6 2 3 Water Charges
6.2.4    Upper Belcs Sugar Factory 
6.2.5    Upper Beles Sugar Estate
6.2   6  Summary of Sugar Production Costs
6.2.7    Development Costs of Commercial          Farms 6.2.8    Supporting Sub-proftcis Costs
6.2.9    Total and Discounted Project Costs
tfj Pnjjxtf StOffili
6,31     With-Project Benefits
6.3.2    Vl tih project Value orProdkirrion
r
6 3-3 Present and Future Without-progci         Bene 6 k 6.4       DfriiulHM of Eivno/mc V'd/utj-
6.4.1    Economic Values for Project Costs
6 4.2 Economic Prices for Project Crop Benefits
6.5      1 'inanaat and               Cert tifnffii zl nafysu of Option 2/t 6 5 1 Project Indicators
6.5.2    Sensitivity Analysis
6.6      Sluff j^irjifria 2lnaiyns af Flnviopnierri Qp/itrnj tf, 7    Tht Pmjtit in the (jnttxl of GTP
6 R Pryed Kuhs
i5,9          Fmaarr^ PZaa Qprigia 2/1 6. JO hmmuri Mtd ConJashxj
2S0
'
HI
283
2SF
285
286
286
288
290
291
292
292
295
2?g
298
310
312
315
315
J f 319
321
^24
j
j 77
L'b l 4 Main Report (1J
i-
17-May-ltFffkrvJ Dtxrwn/rf JUpMc tf&biapi*, Mtwm tf IF tfftr     E"rjj
E/A^mm Nrft                  Mtl               Pmpcf
ANNEXES
ANNEX A: IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULES
ANNEX B: PROJECT LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
ANNEX    C:    INSTITUTIONAL    DEVELOPMENT    AND    SUSTAINABLE    O&M    SUB-PROJECTS ANNEX D: SMAIJHOLDER CROP PRODUCTION SUB-PROJECTS
ANNEX E. LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT SUB-PROJECTS
ANNEX   F:   LAND   AND   WATERSHED   MANAGEMENT   -AND   FORESTRY   SUB   PROJECT’S ANNEX G: COMMUNITY SUPPORT SUBPROJECTS
ANNEX H: ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT SUB PROJECTS
ANNEX   I   COST   BENEFIT   ANALYSIS   IN   ETB   2010   FINANCIAL   PRICES   (WIIOLE   PROJECT} ANNEX J: COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS IN ETB 2010 ECONOMIC PRICES (WHOIL PROJECT}
NOTES
'The itseal year (FY) of the Government of Ethiopia ends on 3O June In this report "$*’ refers to US dollars
Exchange rare adopted: LOO US$ = ETB 16.7 (15* December 2010)
N
LIIj F4 Man i             ' 3 J
vu
I 7 Mar 11Frtfd Dfwufi.                  /E/AMJTV4. Mwtn tf Ttttr & /iw® EAiym .V/i             a*! Druwgt
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 Location of EN1DP Feasibility Study Schemes.
Table 2-1: Existing Large Irrigation Schemes tn Ethiopia..
Table 2-2 Irrigation Application A Depths .........................-•■
Table 3-1: Study ind Project Areas ......................—...............
...... 2
.... 11
.... 16
.... 30
J
Table 3-2: Climatic data and ETO for Upper Beles command area —............. ............... -.........................—
Table 3-3. Evapotranspiration and rainfall for command area..........—...................................................
Tabic 3-4: I zing lean average, dependable (80%) and effective rainfall for command are*......................
Table 3 5 Catchment Areas Contributing to Dam Site and Diversion Wars............ ................................... -
Table 3-6:I»ng term average flow (m /s)........ ..........—•.............. -..... -.............•••“•"'......... ....... ...................
Table 3-7 Design rainfalls depth for Upper Beks catchment using a GU fPWM) distribution.................
Table 3-8 Design rainfall depths (24 hr) for Upper Beks catchment................... -.......................... -..............
Table 3-9: Time of concentration (T<) for the Upper Bdcs catchment.......... —.............................. —..........
Tabk 3 10: Final design rainfall depths for Upper Beks catchment............... .............-.....................-............
Table 3-11: Areal 24 hour PMP (mm).......................-........ -.......... -................ —........... -—................-...........
Table 3 12: Design peak flows (natural conditions).......... —......... ...................... —........... --....... —...............
Tabk 3-13: I lydraubc results at cross section of the diversion weir (natural conditions)............ ................ .
Tabk 3-14 Design peak flows (future condition with hydropower releases of 160 m'/s).................... -..........
Tabk 3-15: Design peak flows (future condition with hydropower releases of 77 m’/s)............................ —
Tabk 3-16 Drainage Modulus Values —..................................... ——.........—........................ -.......................... Tabk 3-17 Storage requirement for different areas of irrigation for low. medium and high irrigation
.... 33
.... 35
.... 36
...44
_.44
_46
.... 47
_47
,.♦.48
_4S
-..49
....51
....51
....52
....52
dunes (Hakrow • GIRD operation rule 1.784.75 masl)................... -....... ................. ♦—............................. 54
Tabk 3-18: Extent of land suitability disses and subclasses.........................—............................ ..................... .....66
Tabk 3-19: Results of the land suitability assessment .——............... ..... ....... -..................—......... ................... — 66
Tabk 3-20: Land (.'over A I .and Use of Upper Beks Command Area—.................................... —..................... 71
Tabk 3-21: Crop Production and Yields in the Project weredas............ ..............—.......... —...................... 76
Tabk 3-22 Present Cropped Area, Production and Yidds for Smallholder Farms in the Project Area ....78
Tabk 3-23; Irrigated landholding Size— —— ....................................... ............................... „ „................. ........... 79
Tabk 3-24. Area A Number of Traditional and Modem Irrigation Schemes-.......................................................79
Tabk 3-25: Distnbution ofFTCs and Development Agents........................... ................................_____............... 84
Tabk 3-26: Estimate of Present Production for Regionil and Local Markets ................. - .................................. 86
Tabk 3-27: Cultivated Area of Commercial Enterprises in the Project Area................. —..................................90
Table 3-28: Cropping calendar for Commercial Farms...M..................................................................................... 91
Tabk 3-29: Livestock Population, numbers------- —..... ........................ ........... .................... ............. ........~...........92
Table 3-30 livestock Density by Area (TLU/hi) and Holding (TLL’/HH)........... ..... ..................... ....................... 93
Tabk 3-31: Livestock Feed Sources.............. ............................................................................................................. 94
Tabk 3-32: Dry Matter Production (tonnes)....................................... ........... ........................................................... 96
Tabk 3-33: Livestock Feed Requirement (tonnes) ............................................................... ........... „........................ 97
Table 3-34: Livestock Feed Balance (tonnes)........................................................................................................... 97
Tabk 3-35: livestock Diseases of Economic Importance............................................................. ................. ........._99
Tabk 3-36; Livestock Productivity Performance Indicators.................................................................................. |(M]
I abk 3-37: Estimanons of Standing Stock and Annual Yield ...   ........................................................................ 104
Tabk 3 38 Fuel wood Supply after Irrigation Development................ ....................................... .................... ......105
Tabk 3-39; Additional Land Available for Forestry Development....................................................................... 105
Tabk 3 40: Estimate of Rural Households A Population in the Project Area by Kebck.......................... ...... .. 106
lb 1*4 Main Report (1)
11
H-Miy-Hf-nirn! Dtxntnti' fyM. tfElbuf’V.
Eth^wa A’dr a** Dnaa-gr Pnftd
»fVa,lr
Table 3-41: Total Population and Rural Households in Project Area. 2010..............................~.................................... ..
Table 3-42: Distribution of 1 .and Use Rights....................................................................................... ............................ -107
Table 3 43: Average cash income for surveyed households............................................................................................. 109
Table 3-44: Structure, staffing and logistics for ARD wereda offices.......................................................................... -115
'fable 3-45: Number of DAs and FTCs..................................... ~..............................................................................-......... 115
Table 3-46: Geological Units at the Dam Site and Reservoir .Area.................................. -.............................................. 124
Table 4-1: Population Projection for the Project Area..................................... -............................................................... 143
Table 4-2: Household Land Allocations, ha-..........................................................................................................—........ 145
Table 4-3: Projected Number of Land Holdings by Size................—....... -....... ............. .............................................. 146
fable 4-4: Category* of Irrigation Canals....................... ............ ................. ........... . ........ ......... ......... ....... ... ...............147
Table 4-5: Category of Irrigation Pipelines................... --..........................-.................................................................... 148
Tabic 4-6: With-project Irrigable Areas by SDA.................................................................. -......................................... 156
Table 4-7: Irngable, Riverine and Non-Imgable Areas by SDA......................................... -  ...................... .................. 158
Table 4-8: Gross Irrigable Area and Soil / Slope Categories by SDA................... .........................................................160
Table 4-9: Agricultural Development Options.................................... ............................ _................ .-........................ ... 163
Table 4-10- With-projccx Land Use Option 2 (Sugar Estate Core Area) ha ............................................................... 166
Table 4-11: Summary of Smallholder Farm Sizes and Ixications (numbers) ...................................... ..................... 169
Table 412: Involuntary (2010) and Voluntary Re settlement (2010-2020) (Option 2)................................................. 170
Table 4-13: Monthly Crop Water Requirements by Farm Category'........................ .. ............... .. ............................. 171
Table 4-14: Sugarcane Net Crop Water Requirements............................................................. _.................................. 171
Table 4-15: Conveyance Efficiencies......................................................... ............... -...................................................... 172
Table 4-16: Application Efficiencies................................................................................................ M............... .............. 173
Table 4-17: Peak crop water requirements and typical design flows ................................._....................................... I”4
Table 4-18: Gross Irrigation Duties at Diversion Point (l/s/ha)..................... ................... .................. ...... .................. 177
Table 4-19: Monthly duties and water demands for the Option 2 mix of farms ...................................................... 178
Table 4-20: Monthly duties and water demands for a 100% sugar (Maximum demand I ....................................  180
’fable 4-21 Preliminary Cost Estimate for Right Bank Command Area..................................................................... 194
Table 4 22: Preliminary Cost Estimate for Ixft Bank Command Area (.All Surface Irrigation)........................ .... 194
Table 4-23: Preliminary Cost Estimate for Left Bank Command .Area (TVB-W Pressure       Irrigation)........... 195
Table 4-24: Summary of Reservoir Storage Option Characteristics........................ ............... ~.... ........................ .... 19"
Table 4-25: Comparison of Dam Option Costs...............................................................„........ _...................._............ 200
Table 4-26; Estimated Number of Affected and Displaced I households (Option 2)...................
Table 4-27 Proposed SDAs for Resettlement of Displaced 1 louscholds.....................
Tabic 4-28 Compensation and Resettlement Costs.......................... „...... _................................................... Table 4-29: Expected Cane Production from Upper Belrs Core Sugar Estate Area (36,225 ha)
Table 4 30: O&M Capital Costs............... —......................... .............................. ................
Tabic 4-31: Recurrent O&.M Costs................... ................................................................................... ... ....._
Table 4-32: Cost Estimate for proposed Sub-projects.................... .............. .. ..... „..................
Table 4-33: Cost for Livestock Subprojects (ETB).................. ......................... . .................................... ..
Table 4-34: Summary' of Subproject Costs................................. ........................................... . ...............
Tabic 4-35: Estimated Community Development Sub-project Costs................ ....... . ...................
Table 4 36: Summary of Environment Subproject Costs........................................ ..... .......................
Table 4-37: Main System Operator Costs................ —................ .............................. .................................
Table 4-38: Project Implementation Consultancy* Costs.......................... ...........................................
Table 5-1 Start up workshop - group feedback on UB discussion topics...............................................
I’b t‘4 Mam Report (1)
17-May 11Frrirrj/ PrwmnfAz       tfMitfu, Mwfn tfWjtrr r*
Eth^tun Stit Imfatw aid Dr*»4& Pf^frt
Table 6-1 Coat Estimate for Irrigation. Drainage Ac Road Development............ -................ ........................... 285
Table 6-2 Annual Operation and Maintenance Recurrent Costs.......................................... -............. -............. 286
’fable 6-3: Cost Estimate for Sugir Factory (13.000 TCP)...................—-........... —....—.... —........................... 288
Table 6 4: Financial Investment Costs for Sugar Estate (55.500 ha)........................... -.................-........... .......290
Table 6-5: Estimate of Sub Protect Total Costs: Option 2A (Financial 2010 E1*B).......... -.............................. 293
Table 6-6 Total Project f inancial Costs for Option 2A, ETB million  .......................................... —............. -.295
Table 6 7 Discounted Project Costs for Option 2A, 2011-2045, ETB million................................. -...................295
Table 6-8. Financial Development Costs of Major Items for all Development (Iptions (discounted at
10-4).............. ............. -.................................. ...... ~..................... -....... ..........................................297
Table 6-9: Summan’ of With-project Land L’se for Option 2A. ha........................ -........................ ♦*—..... -...299
Table 6 10: With project Numbers and Areas of Farm Type* by I-and Suitability Classes: Option 2A...300
Table 6-11: With project Cropping Patterns: Option 2A —.........-....................................... —...... -.............. -.302
Table 6-12 Crop Returns for Model Farms: Option 2A................ -......... -................................ —..................... 303
Table 6-13: Crop Returns for Model Farms Weighted bv Area tn Scheme Option 2A -.................... ..............304
Table 6-14: Water Charges as Per Cent of Net Farm Income: Option 2A............ — ........................................306
Table 6-15: Water Charges as Per Cent of net Farm Income. Out-grower Option —................................. -.. V)6
Table 6-16 Returns to Family Labour Weighted by Model Farm Type, ETB/day............................................ 308
Table 6 17: Net Value of Production With-project, left and Right Banks Option 2A, E FB thousand 311
Table 6 18: Present Net Value of Scheme Production, Financial E'l’B thousand.............. -............................. 312
Table 6-19: Present and Assumed Future Without project Farm Numbers and Areas--------- ---------------- 313
Table 6-20: Net Value of Production, Future Withour-projcct, ETB million .—.............. -.............—............. 314
Table 6-21 Estimate of Financial Price of Domestic Sugar. 2010................. .................. ...........—..................... 317
Table 6-22; Estimate of Financial Price of Domestic Sugar. 2020........................ .. ............................ ——........ 318
Table 6-23: Present and Projected Pnce of Sugar Produced at Upper Beks.................................. .................... 319
Table 6-24: Project indicators: Option 2A-..................... ................................ -....... ............. .............. ................. 319
Table 6-25: Project Indicators. Option 2A Present Economic Price of Sugar................... .......... ..................... 321
Table 6-26: Sensitivity of EIRR to Changes in Investment Costs...................... .................................................. 322
Table 6-27: Sensitivity of EIRR to Changes tn With-project Benefits.............................~............... ,,,............... 323
Table 6-28: Switching Values (EIRR=10%) for Option 2A ......... .................... ......... ....................................... ,.323
Table 6-29: Mulri-cntena Analysis of Development Options............... -................... ...........................................327
Table 6-30: Impact of Development Options on GTP Indicators.................................. ....................... ............ 532
Table 6-31 Possible Financing Plan for Option 2A. Financial ETB million........... ....................... ....... .............. 335
Lb F4 Mam Report fl)
xi
I7-Mar 11FhM R/pM.-efFuffy*, Miturfr)
E/fapa* Ndt                g*i Drw^t Prvffl
LIST OF FIGURES
E*ig>
Figure 1-1; Locution of Feasibility Study Schemes........-......... -......................................................... .................
Figure 2-1: Major Irrigation Schemes in Abbas* Basin..... —...... -....... ............................-........... ....................
Figure 2-2: Sugarcane in Area 1 (left) Ar sprinkler irrigation in .Area 3 (right)............ -....... -...... -............
Figure 2-3: Photos of lav-flat cubing......... ............... -....... -............ —.....—................... ........................ ,3
Figure 2-4: Photo of gated orifice offtake..................... ....................-........................ —........................
Figure 2-5: Photos of Finchaa Sugar Estate.................................... ................. ~..........
F igure 2-6: Photos of Koga Irrigation Scheme (Januar 2011).....~.... -...................-................ —.......
Figure 2-7: Photos of Fentale Irrigation Scheme Infrastructure........ —......................... -....... —............... — ..21
Figure 2-8 Photos of unprotected geo membrane lined secondary canals............................. .......-............. -..... 22
Figure 3-1 Location of the Upper Belcs Irrigation Project Area..........—........................ -......... —................. -28
Figure 3-2: Administration and Kcbcle Boundaries................................. —......................... . ..............................
Figure 3-3: Annual rainfall isohyets from co kriging for the Upper BeJcs Project Area........... ...... ............... 32
Figure 3-4: lx»ng term average climatic data and ETo for Upper Belcs command area............-................-...34
Figure 3 5 Seasonal variations in reference cvapotrinspiration (ET„)........................... —...............-........... —34
Figure 3-6 Mean. 80% dependable, and effective rainfall -—...................... . ......... ............................ ............. 36
Figure 3 7: Topography At Elevation of the Project .Area................ —............................................ —*............38
Figure 3-8: Enat & Gilgel Bcles Gauge Locations....... .......... ..............--......................... <.... .................-...........39
Figure 3-9: Mean, maximum, and minimum flow at Main Belcs gauge........ ........... ............ ..................... .......40
Figure 3-10: Lake Tana monthly lake levels from 1960 to 2006  ......................................................— -............ 41
Figure 3-11: Upper Belcs Stage Development Areas............. —........................—......... —..................... —— -43
Figure 3 12: Long term average flows under natural conditions...................................................... -................. 45
Figure 3-13: Comparison of estimated Bow at diversion weir (ngbt)........... ................ —........................ ..........46
Figure 3 14; Design storm hvetograph for Upper Beks catchment (1:100 yr).................................................... 48
Figure 3 15: Hydraulic long profile forT=l:2, 1:10, 1:50 and 1:100 years (natural conditions)................ —...50
Figure 3 16: Maximum levels at Diversion War cross section for T=l:2, 1:10, 1:50 and 1:100 years
(natural conditions).................. ........................... .. ......... ...—..................—................................. ................. 50
Figure 3-17:1 laicrow - GIRD operation rule using minimum lake levels of +1784.75 inasl............................. 53
Figure 3-18: Location of Lower Beks (Dangur) Dam................. ................... ..................................... w...............56
Figure 3-19: Land Slopes (by SDA) ................................ . ......................... ........................................................... 58
Figure 3-20 Soils Map (reduced)..................... ....... ................................ ....................... .................... ..................... 60
Figure 3-21 Red day soils (Work Mcda plain) & Vertisols (Derebay plain)........................................................61
Figure 3-22: Land suitability map (reduced)......... .............................................................. „.................... ............67
Figure 3-23: l-and Cover/Land Use by SDA........................................................................................................... 73
Figure 3-24: Smallholder farming (left) & A bah Agro Techrocal Estate (nght).............. ..............................  75
Figure 3-25: Existing and Recently I-eased Commercial Farm .Areas........... .............................................      R0
Figure 3-26: Regional Geological Map (extract from Geological Map of Ethiopia, 1996)............................. 119
Figure 3-27: Geology Map of Command Area ............................................................................................. ....... 121
F^ure 3-28: Geology Map of Dam Site and Resers oir Area.........................................................................      123
Figure 3-29: Geologicil Long Section of Dam Axis................ ......................................................................        126
Figure 3-30: Vegetation Types and Land Cover Features in the Project Area..............................................  131
Figure 3-31 Soil Erosion and Land Degradation in Project Command__ _________________________    134
Figure 4-1: Selection of Land Utilisation Type..................................................................................................   141
Figure 4-2: Ground Levels along Beks Right Bank Main Canal....................................................................... 152
Figure 4-3: Ground Leveh along ticks Left Bank Main Canal ......................................................................... 153
Ub F4 Main Report (1;
xiuMiwV *  * *
r
7
fabMpun Nib !iri&ti"     Dnnnap Prw.r
Figure 4-4 Irrigation Infrastructure Layout............ -..... •.................................. ....................................................... 155
Figure 4-5: Propped Wtth-project ImgaOon & Rreenne Areas.............. •.....•...................................................... -162
Figure 4-6: Proposed With-proiect Commercial and Smallholder Irrigation Development, Option 2147
Figure 4- : Required Diversion Rows for Left A Right Bank Main Canals, m3/s..................................................
Figure 4-8: Gross Irrigation Dunes at Diversion Point.............................................................-...............................
Figure 4-9. Typical Main Canal Trapezoidal Cross Section-................................................................................ |y Figure 4-10: Plan of Main Canal Cross Regulator
Figure 4-11 ; Layout of Typical Night Storage Reservoir.
Figure 4-12 : Side Spillway Escape Structure.
Figure 4-13: Typical On-farm Sprinkler Layout-.......................................................... -lgg
Figure 4-14: Infrastructure layout Pressure Irrigation in SDA IB~...................................................................... 107
Figure     4-15:     Infrastructure     layout:     Pressure     Irrigation     in     SDA     TVB     (sheet     1)......188
Figure 4-16: Infrastructure layout. Pressure Irrigation in SDA IVB (sheet 2)189
.185
Figure 4-17; Existing River in Right Bank Area. -............................................
Figure 4-18; Proposed All-Weather Roads -.............
Figure 4-19; Dam Development Options
Figure 4-20: Plan of Reservoir Area for Storage Options C and D ...
Figure 4-21: Plan of Dam Option D.........................................................
Figure 4-22: Section through Dam Embankment - Op bon D
Figure 4-23; Draw-off Details Option D.................................... ~
Figure 4 24: Institutional Organisation.
Figure 5-1: Koga A Fentalc irrigation schemes_ 
Figure 5-2: B-G Regional Consultations. November 2010 
Figure 5-3 IJike Tana operating rules (Hakrow-GIRD)
Figure 6-1: Estimate of Costs of Production. 2010 ETB per tonne of Sugar.................... Figure 6-2: Agricultural labour Requirement Wuh-project, Labour Days per annum
Figure 6-3: Net Value of Production (Option 2A).....................................
191
.J 92
...198
...199
.201
202
203
_257
..270
..272
.280
292
..307
.310
I
f
Ub F4 Main Report (1)
XSV
17-Miv 11Prflwrj-ff/ Rj^srMb-                       Mieiftry of II f £7/*^# AV* irr^i/fiorj ■rtfl' Pnafiwgr
(b ,w
-
ABBREVIATIONS
XCSI
AND ACRONYMS
. 
—---------
Anihiri Credit and Savings Institute---------------------------------------------------------- -------------
ACE
Amh«n Czint;tntrnon Enterprise
----------- --
ADLI
Aiv-Hr^iltitf^l Develrinmcnt F-ed Indus trtalisitinii
—
adswe
ANRS
Amhiri D^tini A' Supervision Works Enterprise
Amhara ?S>rinrial RetfrJOnd State
-------- —
ARARJ
ARBA
Amkari Rctnonal Aericuhtiral Research Institute
Abbav River Basm Authority 
— -------- -
ARD
Agriculture and Rural Development
----- |
AWWCE
Amhara Water Works Construction Enterprise
_
BGNRS
Brneshangut Gumuz National Regional State
Board
Bureau of Agriculture arid Rural Development
—-------- :
BoFI’D
Bureau of Finance and Economic Development
BoH
Bureau of IF i ralth
BoVCW
Bureau of Water Resources Development
BoR
Bureau of Revenue
CPA
Cooperative Promotion Agency 
. ___
CSE
DA
Conservation Stratcp  of Ethiopia
J
Development Agent
DEM
Digital Ekvauoo Model
EEPCO
Ethiopian Electric & Power Corporation
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
ENJDP
Ethiopian Nile Irrigation and Drainage Project
EPA
Environmental Protection Age no* (Federal Level)
FPLAUA
Environmental  Protection,  I-and  Administration  &  L’sc  Agency  (  or  LEPB) (Regional Level)
ESC
Ethiopian Sugar Corporation
ESDA
Ethiopian Sugar Dev elopment Agency
ETB
Ethiopian Birr
GoE
Government of Ethiopia
GTS
Growth A Trans forma non Strategy
hi
1 Iterate
ini
Household
I PA
Investment Promotion Agency* (Federal / Regional Level)
JS_
Kilogramme
km
Kilometre
LEPB
Land and Environment Protection Bureau (Regional levrl)
f IXH
Larger Landholding Household
Alt .... . .
Land Utilisation Type
m
Metre
MCA
Multi-Cntena Analysis
MEC
Meial   Engineering  Corporation  (mechanical   A  deetncal   works)  under  Ministry  of Defence
MIS
------- - ---------- ,———.i
Management Information System
Uh F4 Miiln Rrpx»ct f j';
17-Mrtv-l 1Ethiopia, Mimifn •»/ N* <> E<ZT Ethopwt Xr> Imptna and Drain apt Profit
MLH
Medium Landholding Household
^MoARD                     Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
MoEED                     Ministry* of Finance and Economic Development
MOM                                     Management, Operation and Maintenance
MoWE Ministry of Water and Energy' (formally Ministry of Water Resources)
MoTI
MSO
NGO
Ministry of Trade & Industry_______  ________ __________________
Main System Operator
Non-Governmental Organisation
NRS
National Regional State
O&M
Operation and Maintenance
PIO Project Implementation Office
pros                                        Potable Water Supply
2«
Quintal (100 kg)
REC
SC
SDA
SLH
SWC_____________
TCD
ToR
WMC
Rjvenne Environmental Corridor
Service Cooperative
Stage Development Area (areal planning unit for Upper Belcs development)
Small Landholding Household
Soil and Water Conservation
Tonnes of Cane per Dav
Tomi of Reference
WUA
\X tier Management Committee for PWS scheme^
Water Users’ Assoaauon
WUG
VCWC1.
WRD _
WWDSE
Water Users’ Ciroup
Water Works Construction Enterprise
Water Resource Development
Water Works Design Sc Supervision Enterprise
Ub F4 Mam Report (I)
XV!
37 May IIfyM fyiMc tfEAhfin, MimtSTf tf^rr^ Enrg
Elhupt* Nzi                   ttd Dw^f
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Project
Description
The Upper Bdes irrigation & drainage project is located about 30 km south west of Lake Tana m the Amhara and Benishangul-Guniuz Regions of Ethiopia. It lies completely within the catchment of the Bdes River which flows south-westwards towards the Blue Nile through the middle of the scheme area. Irrigation development was enabled by commissioning in May 2010 of the Tana Bdes tunnel and hydroelectric scheme whereby basin transfers of water from I-ake Tana into Upper Bdes average about 77 m'/s.
The proposed Upper Belcs irrigation project will develop 70.451 ha (gToss) and 63,8 1 ha (net) of irrigated agriculture within a protect area of 138,15*’ ha.
Six options for net irrigation area proportions of sugar estate, small/ medium commercial farms and smallholder farms were assessed along with their resettlement implications The proportion of sugar estate vaned from 0% (Option 0) to 100% (Option 5). Options 1, 2, and 3 had sugar estate areas of 21,860 ha (34.2%), 36,225 ha (56.7%) and 40,999 ha (64 2 0) respectively. Option 4 was for a smaller, fast track irrigated sugar estate development of 39.175 ha. Under Opuon 2 three variations were considered: (1) Option 2A for surface irrigation, (ii) Option 2B with out-growers, and (iii) Option 2C for pressure (sprinkler) irrigation sugarcane on the left bank
Multi-cntcna assessment of the options was earned out. For Option 0 no resettlement of rural households b required The number of affected households is about 3,015 for a small sugar estate (Option 1). increasing to about 4,200 for Options 2, 3 and 4. If the whole irrigation area was allocated to sugarestate the number of affected households would be about 15,000, about 82% of the 18,380 existing farming households in the project area
Concerning equity, rhr proportion of net benefits accruing to each farm type depends largely on its irrigable area. For Option 0 the bulk of the benefits accrue to smallholder farmers
: (62° o), with the remainder (38%) to small/medium commercial estates. With Option 5, 98% of the benefit accrues to the sugar estate. For Options 1, 2 8c 3 the benefits largely accrue to the sugar estate and smallholders
Adoption of a development option that: (i) enables a large central sugar estate within Upper Belcs of at least 36,225 ha, fri) accommodates all existing households; and (xii) maximises the irrigation area is proposed Option 2A (EIRR 11.1%) fits these criteria and is recommended Option 2C (EIRR 10 9%) with pressure spunkier on the left bank, and Option 3 (EIRR 10.4%) arc alternative recommended options.
Option 2A, when mapped to follow irrigation units, proposes the following net irrigation area mix: (i) 36.225 ha (56.7%) for a sugar estate centered in the Dcrebay plain largely on vertisols and which is relatively free from existing smallholder farms, (ii) 22,872 ha (35 8%) for smallholder farms largely on the red luvuob where rainfcd cropping is currently concentrated, near Fendika, on the Werk Meda plain and in the Pawc settlement kebelcs, and
: A 4 773 h* 7 j°/0) fof ^mall/medium commercial farms If desired (his 4,773 ha mav be
b F4 Maui Report (1)
1-
D^rtsri: fynMc 0/ Efbi^ia. Ministry tf IF*t? CT Enfr$
Elhupian Nik lrrqatM" *** Dnanjf* P^rt
(partiaUy) used to expand the sugar estate and / or for additional smallholders farms
Smallholder farmers would be resettled from the proposed sugar estate and small / commercial estate areas as well as from the storage dam reservoir area A few smallhold^ will also be displaced and/or require compensation due to land take for irrigation, drairup and road infrastructure. Land take for this infrastructure, as well as for terrace risers,
up about 6.580 hi
There arc about 18,580 rural households tn the project area, and 6.2" 4 households (34%)^ be affected by the proposed project. Of these, about 4,341 houscolds (24%) will require (homestead) resettlement into those parts of the project area designated for smallholder irrigation development to be reasonably close to their allocated irrigated plots. Consuucuoc of 4-6 new settlements is envisaged for resettled households The 4," 0 urban households living in settlements, particularly in Fendika, Werka Meda and Pawc wiD not require resettlement.
To facilitate planning the project area of 138,15" ha was divided up into stage and sub-sup development areas largely according to physical characteristics. The stage development ara (SDA) boundaries followed hydraulic boundancs (ic streams and rivers). Stage / sub stage development areas where die irrigation intensities are less than 30% were designated tor
7
runfed cropping. Overall the irrigation intensity for the nghc bank is quite high at 68 4%, tra is only 35 1% for the left bank where the land is more broken. This is reflected in the irrigation development costs US$ 5,564/ha for rhe right bank compared to L’S$ 8,9"9 / hi' fot the left bank.
litigation development on slopes upto 8° 0 (black cracking vertisols) and 12% (red brown lunsols) is proposed, with bench terracing for slopes >3%. Terracing will be required over* least 12,000 ha. 17% of the gross imgation area, and possibly as much as 19.000 ha, 27%.
irrigated agriculture development will lie enabled by construction of two long main canals running broadly along the contour on the right and left banks to command the valley shaped system. Secondary canals are aligned along ndges and broadly towards the Main (Enat) Bdes over which bisects the project area. Due to the length of the mam canals, 100 3 km for the right bank and 130.0 km for the left bank, balancing reservoirs arc proposed to facilitate operation and raise operation efficiencies. Night storage reservoirs at /near lhe heads of secondary’ canals are proposed enabling day time only irrigation This u expected to enhance irrigation efficiencies, reduce risk of terrace failure and provide operational flexibility. The main canals and steeper portions of the secondary canal are to be lined, mostly with
I trapeaoidal concrete placed over a membrane and geotextile Gated cross regulators with (duckbill) spill weir sections are proposed to facilitate and inform water distribution and head regulators will compose gated orifices. The two main canals supply 257 secondary and 1,222 tertiary units, with average secondary and tertiary unit net irrigation areas of 249 ha and 52 ha respectively In the smallholder farm areas there are aboui 04 
j 451      *
1 Including for the left bank diversion weir/storagc dam costing USS 1.143 over the left hank
32,362 ha
lrn
g ’tion area of
3
fb IM Main Report 11)
u
17-May-liFvien// Dfltmffc                sfiMapia, Mutbfrfi ?/ U JJ>r
A>* Iftyritt*       DnaffJgf Prwrrf
tertiary units.
As an alternative to surface irrigation pressure (sprinkler) irrigation systems have been designed and costed for parts of the sugar estate area where pressures can be developed by gravity pipeline, over *J)R3 ha (SDA IB) on the right bank, and 8.J82 ha (8DA IVBAX) on the left bank Development Option 2C adopts pressure sprinklers on the left bank where Steeper slopes and fragmentation of land holding gives sprinklers a comparative advantage of surface trngation
. Other I&D mfrastnicturc includes surface drainage to remove excess water to the existing streams and gullies that traverse the command arci, flood protection embankments where required along streams and rivers, and 692 km of ail-wrafhrr (grave!) roads to facilitate marketing and canal operations. For the right bank development a diversion war is required, and .is already under cnnstruciion, For the left bank, diversion to the left main canal will be directly from the storage reservoir   Four options for the size oi the storage reservoir and
r
dam were evaluated, with the larger three options providing some seasonal storage. However unless rhe net irngauon area exceeds about 705,000 ha seasonal storage is net required if
the i ialcrow GIRD operating rule for Lake Tana and release of water to the lipper Bries river is adopted.
There will be wide-reaching landusc change with the project, whereby much of the existing grass and wood land, as well as much of the existing minted cropped area will be convened to irrigated cropping over a gross area of “’0,451 ha (51% of rhe project area). The riverine forests which currently exiend over 7,(T I ha will be expanded to cover 27,290 ha (19.8%) though some forestry and grazing is proposed within this expanded riverine area. Other Land nut suited to irrigation extends ewer 40,412 ha (29,3%) and will be set aside for rain fed Cropping (5.0 4 ha in those sub-SDAs where irrigation is not viable), communal grazing, forestry, set dements and homesteads.
Land consolidation (exchange) rs required to (i) enable the new landuse under the protect, (ii) provide at least 0.25 ha (ranfed) and 0.11 ha (irrigable) Land to those households currently landless; ifiiij reduce the current fragmented landholdings; and (nr) to enable cffiacnt mechanised irrigated farming Allocations arc also proposed for communal grazing, fuel wood and homesteads
VC Yule nut included in the feasibility study area, development of SDA-II Hyma (Upper Dindir) along with development of the right bank is suggested. Preliminary indications are a net irrigation area in Hyma ot about 20,000 ha within a study area of about 60,000 ha. The Hyma command starts at the bottom the escarpment, about 120m below Fendika.
Establishment of a 12,000 TCD sugarcane mill near the Upper (boat) over in die
Dercbay plain would be sufficient for the proposed Upper Belts sugar estate irrigation irea of 36.225 ha. If I iyma proved viable a second smaller mill would he proposed in rhe Hyma command to avoid hauling cane up the Fendika escarpment.
T
I’b J*4 Main EU-purt (1j
17 May 11FnM Dnsrvfh
of Efhtopta. Mtfiufry cf Water e* H/trig)
E Utopian Nik lrri^jtjon and D rm nap Pn^r
Since about 2005 about 6,200 ha of land has been leased to 18 small / medium camp*^ farms in the project area. However only about 1. 00 ha (2   o) ot this is being cultivated^
Rationale
c
in general performance has not met expectations It is anticipated that all existing leases be ro oked (alreadlv in progress) and, if appropriate, renegotiated to include for: (j) new|^ and water charges; (ii) required land husbandry practices and environmental protection measures; and (iii) O&M of the irrigation and drainage system (within the commercial boundaries). The proposed project (Option 2A) allows for 4.7^3 ha of small / medium commercial development
Smallholder farmer* in the command area currently have no experience of large scale irrigation but are expected to take over secondary and ternary level management, operatic?, and maintenance (MOM) of the scheme following its completion. A range of O&M interventions will enable this including support and capacity building of necessary farmer institutions. The sugar estate and the small / medium commercial farms woukl be
responsible for MOM within their estate / commercial farm boundaries The diversion ut* storage dam and main canal* up to the night storage reservoirs would be the responsibility ci a professional Main System Operator for at Icasi 9 years, and possibly for the life of the
project.
To facilitate achievement of potential crop and livestock production a range of complementary interventions (subprojects) aimed at smallholder farmers are identified to address input, processing and marketing constraints.
Investments in watershed management, comprising soil and water conservation, land management and forestry, arc proposed to ensure that investments in irrigation and drainage arc successful and sustainable. These include terrace and gullv stabilisation, community’ forestry in the expanded riverine areas, watershed management and linear (strip) forestry along mipr canals, all-weather roads and around the storage reservoir as part of a buffer zone development
Ihe poor and vulnerable arc characterized by farmers with small or no landholdings, women headed households and the orginal Gumuz inhabitants of the area whose traditional livelihood is based on hunting and food gathering A range of community support and development interventions, including health, water supply, access to energy sources and off- farm income generating activities, will focus on these groups
The project area is moderately densely populated in the south around Pawc and on the
\X erka Meda plain, and also in the north around 1-endikx However much of the central portion of the project area, in particular (he Derebay plain, is dominated by Vertisols and is predominantly grassland with scattered trees and shrubs
Overall about 42.460 ha (31% of the project area) is currently utilised for smallholder rainfed cropping of sorghum, millet, sesame, groundnuts, mger seed and maize Small / medi
commercial farms cultivate a range of crops over about 1,700 ha About AV r t
area currently comprises grassland |37%J, woodland i21 
and nverin  f
«J o oi rhe project
c   OrcU f5% Sofn<. pfj
Ub 1*4 Mam Report 1)
17 May-ltWrd Drwjij,
lifhopA Miavtn •< II Mfr £-1inrr^
F.thopM* Xtlf Imptioi jnd Drw»j$r P^f.f
these areas are used by smallholders to provide wood for fuel and communal giving for livestock, but there remains substantial opportunity to develop a large sugarcane estate in the
area
There are about 101/00 persons or 23,500 HH currently in the project area About 18.380 HH /9%) are rural and live in small clustered or isolated homestead, and rhe rest arc urban and live in settlements, including the Fendika, VXcrlc Meda and the Pa we settlements
Concerning land use rights about 31% of the project area belongs to individuals, 33 o is communally used, with the state having rights to 34%. Smallholder land use rights average 19 ha and 25 ha on the Right Bank tn SDA I Ac III respectively, and 25 ha on (he Left Bank. However land use rights vary greatly, and arc skewed with 38% having less (han 1 ha, and 8% being landless and farming land under sharecropping / tenancy agreements. l and holdings are also fragmented with smallholders typically farming from 1.1 to 3.4 plots of
land.
Farmers are highly vulnerable to extreme drought or flood events; 10 80% are categorised as poor with a farm holding of less than 1 ha and owning 0-2 head of cattle. Conversely 7-35% of households are categonsed as wealthy with a farm holding larger than 3 ha and owning more than 10 head of cattle
Under gradually increasing land pressures farming has begun to encroach onto the Vertisol areas, onto the flat poorly drained Derebav plain and onto the surrounding slopes. Poor farming practices with inadequate soil and water conservation measures have resulted in some areas being eroded
Due to fragmented and sloping land, extensive areas of shallow and / or eroded soils, only about 54% of the land is suited to surface irrigation. and 55% to pressure (spunkier j irrigation However the proportion of land suitable for irrigation varies throughout the area and SDAs with very low (<3<>%) percentages would not be developed to irrigated agriculture.
rhe proposed project xK’ill enable substantial increases in farm incomes for smallholder farmers, a large sugar estate as well as small / medium commercial farms Providing irrigation to smallholders will enable a relatively large sugar estate (as web as some small / medium commercial farms) to oc developed m the project area while accommodating the existing smallholders who live there
With the project farm increased incomes would result from the establishment of a large irngared sugar estate, some small/medium commercial farms as well as smallholder farms with double cropping over the whole irrigated area. Natural vegetation and increased crop I residues would support an increase in (he smallholder managed livestock population from about 51,000 TLU to about 140,000 TLU.
__________  | In addition to construction of appropriate dam storage, irrigation, drainage, Ooodprotecuon
Ub l»4 Mam Rcptirt
v
17-Xter 11EtJtnd 
ot Ethiopia. Mnurtry ofWattr
Ethiopia* Nik 1 motion a*d Dnnnagt Pmt
and all-weather roads infrastructure a range of complementary agricultural, livestock, bud management, community development, environmental and system OdcM subprojects ve necessary to maximise sustainable gains in agricultural productivity. Sugarcane cropping^ dominate in the central part of the project area and will require construction of a 12,000 TCD sugar null and associated plant, faeditics and equipment.
Irrigated agriculture lienefits tend to be captured by farmers with the larger landholdings The landless, farmers with small land holdings, women headed households and the origin^ Gumuz inhabitants need additional support- Therefore in addition to a range of subprojc^
Project Impact,
Outcome and
Outputs
to   support   off-farm   livelihoods   targeted   at   rhe   poor   and   vulnerable,   land   consolidation   with allocation of a minimal holding to the landless is proposed Land consolidation / exchange
will   also   address   the   currently   fragmented   land   holding   whereby   most   farmers   cultivate   1-3 separate plots. It will also enable construction of fields and furrow of regular and appropru
sizes and slopes for efficient, mechanised irrigation.
Along with land consolidation the project will support resettlement and land acquisition to clear smallholders from the areas designated for a sugar estate and small/mcdium commercial farms, as well as tn enable construction of necessary engineering infrastructure, the storage reservoir and land development (terracing)
To address environmental decline the project will support land and watershed
and forestry subprojects, including environmental monitoring.
Recognising the quantum shift in atrimdes and farming practices entailed by the project, appropriate implementation and O&M arrangements wiD include a Main System Operator, and support for farmer institutions with development of appropnate legislation, (McM strategy. guidelines and rules.
’Hie Impact (goal) of the proposed Upper Beles irrigation project is "Enfantvd EiViwvc
Grovth and Rtdwtd Poinrrf' in the project area. Discounted over 35 years the expected EIRR is 10.2% with a NPV of ETB 150 million and a BCR of 1.02 : 1.0 for the proposed project (Option 2A).
The project Outcome is for "Eatbarntd Productivity & Sustainability of Irrigated A^ncudurr' por the impact target to be achieved the necessary outcome targets must first be achieved The*
arc for the following to be achieved within two years of scheme completion
•      Development of a large sugar estate over 36,225 ha with a 12,000 TCD sugar
factory producing about 220,000 tonnes of sugar per year plus ethanol and
electricity.
•       Establishment of 22,8‘’2 ha of smallholder irrigated agriculture with an adduM.naJ I 10,983 ha for grazing, woodlots and house-plots
•       Establishment of about 4,773 ha of small /medium irrigated commercial f
•      Support to about 5,0"’4 ha of smallholder runfed agriculture
The projec I outcome will be achieved if the following rune mutudL
---- ------------- project
Ub J-4 Mim Report (I
17-Mavl 1F/yAW Ltowunriir ityrifr tfErfapu, Ab'wfry V &”■***
ErhupM* NiJr Irr&tica Daringr Pnpd
Output* (components) are achieved: (l) Output 1- Enginccnng Infrastructure including the Stonge dim. imgation and drainage system, land development of consolidated holdings and all-weather roads; (u) Output 2: Resettlement and Lind Consolidation; (in) Output 3 Sugarcane and Small/Medium Commercial Estates Dev elopment including a 12.000 TCD sugar factory; (iv) Output 4: Institutional Development & Sustainable O&M; (v) Output 5. Smallholder Crop Production; (vi) Output 6: Livestock Production; (vii) Output 7 Land and Watrrahed Management and Forestry; (viii) Output 8: Community Development / Support; and (nt) Output 9, Environmental Enhancement-
Cost Estimate                Total project costs over rhe 35 year project life for the recommended development Option 2A (ic including implementation) are shown below. The invesimenL costs of the Project arc expected to total about ETB 12.440 million (US$ 745 million) ind the total (non-discounicd)
costs during its lifetime are estimated at E EB 32J >6 million (L S$ 1,920 million)
T
Component
Left
Right
Total
%
Irrigation investment costa
4.85 L7
2,926.7
7,778.4
243%
Irrigation < McM including Consuharicv Support)^
2,147.6
2,233.8
<381-4
13.7%
Sugar factory investment costs
1.826-7
2.092.9
3,919.6
12.2%
Sugar estate development and replacement coils 1
584.4
4-10 4
824.8
2.6%
Sugar factory opcrauwnal cotn
5.301.9
6,733.9
12.0357
37.5%
Sugar estate haulage and management touts
1.009.8
1,263.3
2.273.1
7.1%
Commercial Farm development costs
23.9
88.2
H23
0.3%
Sub project* *
543-6
197.9
741 5
2-3%
Total ETB milbon
t<0*9.6
13,977.2
32,0668
100.0%
_
Ni.»lrc 1 Drvrlopmcfi t rust for 36,225 ha male plu i .jimiuiad rcpLicemml r« hsch Tn 2045.
2/ System t MkM fcsjutvilait to waicr charges) plus detailed drdgn, O&M Support and Cona trucnon Supervisor! plus lustitudemal Ltevdhfwnent and Su’tftWbk t W.M
3Z Supporting «ul>prnrc«!t ecwr cs eluding O&M Hupfwivf
The costs given above can be discounted (al 10%) over the project life of 35 years to give the costs tabulated below The total discounted project cost is 11,063 million (LISS 662
million}-
Total L’SS million
963-4
956.7 ]
1,920.2
Component
Left
Right
Total
%
Irrigation investment costs
2.621.2
2,064.2
4,685.4
42%
Irrigation O&M (including Consultancy Support)
3354
407.2
742.6
7%
Sugar facinrv investment costs
1 191.0
1,364.5
2,555.5
23%
Sugar estate development and replacement costs
121.3
147.8
269.1
2*4
Sugar factors operational costs
885.3
1,204 0
2,089,2
19%
Sugar esuic haulage and management costs
171.3
2267
398-0
3.6%
Commercial Harm development costs
98
48 1
579
0.5%
Sub-pn iieci s
169 7
95,6
2653
2% ,
Total ETB million
5304.9
5,558.1
11,062.9
100%
Total USS million
3296
332 8
662.5
Ub 1*4 Main Report (1)
vii
17-Mny-11Mfri
HffMc                 Mim/ty  f' lF**tr & E*trg>
Elfapiix \'tk              J*d Dna*& PryM
Implementation  1   It  is  considered  likely  that  the  newly  formed  Ethiopian  Sugar  Corporation  will  be  the  " Institutional              Executing Agency, but with support from the Ministry of W ater & Energy, and pameu^ Arrangements          the Abbay River Basin Authority Project level institutions would include the. (i) (Jpper
Sugar Estate; (ii) Project Implementation Office, PIO, and (iii) the Metal Engineering I Corporation, MEC (particularly for mechanical & electrical aspects of development,
induding the sugar factory and associated equipment).
Ihr Upper Bdes Sugar Estate (UBSE) would primarily be concerned with scheme development for the sugar estate area as well as office, factor)’ and staff accommodation
I buildings and facilities. The IJBSE would be a permanent institution concerned not only
I with scheme development but also with scheme operations following the completion of the1
project.
Given the importance of all project components, induding those associated with smallhoife irrigation devdopment. the establishment of a Project Implementation Office (PIO) is
proposed for the duration of the project. The PIO would manage all propter components induding required consultancy services, and liaise between the UB Sugar Estate, any small
medium commercial estates and smallholder farmer Water User Associations.
Fidd levd institutions would indude: Ji) Civil works contractors; (ii) Contractors to construct (operate & transfer to the I ’BSE) lhe cane processing sugar factor)’, ethanol plant, water treatment works, etc; (iii) Main System Operator concerned with operation of the
Implementation
Schedule
Implemented in three phases is proposed comprising
• Phase I (Preparation) over three years;
•      Phase JI (Implementation) over nine years for both banks; and
•      Phase 111 (Support Phase) over four years.
Preparatory phase activities indude: (i) Establishment of key insntuaons Project Implementation Office & I IB Sugar Estate; (ii) Procurement of Consultancy Services for RAP, EIA & Engineering works; (iii) Awareness, Public Consultation Sc Formation of Compensation & I jnd Consolidation Committees, (iv) Deiailed Design and Preparation of Tender Documents (by the ADSWE as per the recently, early 2011. concluded agreement with the ESQ; (v) Preparation & Approval of Resettlement Action Plan finduidug cadastral Sc property surveys); and (vi) Signing of any revised /new lease agreement(s) with commercial farm(s).
IT) F4 Mun Rqx»rt fl)
H May. 11tfEfbitf". Miwm ofW'ofr & E**#
Fjtywf Sib Imptrn Dr^iugr Pf**1
Development St Sustainable O&M; (v) .Smallholder Crop Production
Livestock  Production;  (vi)  Land  &  Watershed  Management  and  Forestry;  (vu)  Community Development, and (vii) Environmental Enhancement
Not including the advance construction works currently underway composing construction of right bank diversion weir and (upper pan) of the right main canal system by the Amhara Construction Enterprise and supervised by the Amhara Design A: Supervision \X orks Enterprise, the following five construction packets are suggested: (i) Package 1: Right Main Irrigation A: Drainage System (incl I-and Development); (ii) Package 2: Storage Dam including M&E Equipment; (sii) Package 3: Ixft Main Irrigation & Drainage System find
| Land Development); (iv) Package 4 Village & Access Roads, and (v) Package 5 Tertiary Irrigation A: Drainage Systems (WUA contracts).
The development of the sugar estate factory, buddings and facilities would be managed by
the ESC under separate construction / operate / transfer arrangements.
Other support infrastructure works,  such as establishment of 5-7  new villages for resettled households,  would require preparation of separate design and tender documents following completion of the RAP.
Support phase activities over four years would include continued: (i) crop and livestock production, fores try/watershed management and communitv’ development interventions initiated in Phase II; (h) support to develop sustainable OAcM and cost recovery from farmer beneficiaries, and (ui) support for environmental enhancement measures. At the end of Phase III responsibility for secondary and tertiary canal system operation will be be transferred to the sugar estate, small/medium commercial farms and to the smallholder farmer groups. VU ’As and WUGs.
Design Features          The proposed project’s design includes for a mix of smallholder, small / medium commercial farms and for a large sugar estate. The balance between each is informed by the desire to maximise commercial cropping and revenues, particularly of sugarcane, while ensuring continued and sustainable livelihoods for the smallholder farmers that live in the project area and minimising resettlement costs The project’s design also recognises that for sustainable agricultural development irrigation, drainage and sugar estate development engineering works have to be complemented by a range of subprojects to address (largely smallholder) crop and livestock production problems, social and management capacity constraints and land management and environmental concerns.
Key problems recognized from analyses of the agriculture sector, and related them^ of inclusive social development and sustainable economic growth, include. fi) the disadvantaged position of poor (ic landless) and women in decision making and thru vulnerability to extreme weather conditions, particularly drought, as well as the original Gumuz inhabitants whose traditional livelihood is based on hunting and food githenng; (ii) unbalance in access to resources, particularly to land; (iii) weak agricultural extension service delivery; (iv) lack of access to improved agricultural technology and quality inputs and farm produce and
Lb H Main Report (I)
17-Mir-lllfM
:
(
Mfaufn q ITWr «**
Effapwt Nik Im^ftM J*d DrVMg Prvfrt
r livestock marketing constraints; (v) poor rural infrastructure, particularly farm to ma^ I weather roads; and (vi) the system management, operation and maintenance challenge
posed by inexperience farmers, lack of farmers institutions, variety of crops and soils mix of smallholder and commercial farms.
Farmer
Involvement
and
Contribution
i
i
All farmers (land holders) in the scheme area would be involved in the project br fi) Agreeing to co-operate with the government and other concerned institutions for the development and O&M of the project; (ii) Engaging in a positive and timely manner m necessary resettlement, land acquisition and land consolidation with the land administntxx and land use agency (and other government bodies), as well as establishing local evaluation compensation and payment committees; fiii) Becoming members of the new water user groups and associations established at tertiary and secondary system level for irrigation inc drainage system operation and maintenance; (iv) Contributing to scheme development co<u by constructing earthen irrigation canals and drains ar tertiary level. and also supporting lid development including formation of stable terraces; (v) Meeting the full O&M costs forlA! infrastructure within the smallholder area and managing the collection, accounting and use of O&M funds, and (vi) Taking legal ownership (though the main system Wl’A) of all project infrastructure within the project area, except the storage dam. diversion weir and
main canal
It is expected that the WVAs will be paid, albeit at lower than commercial rates, for undertaking on-farm works. The difference between the VCUA rates and commercial ratesi
I
the farmer contribution to the scheme To make up a 10% contribution to the capital cost]
2
the scheme, if required , the balance could be added to the O&M water use charges as a
capital levy
1
Experience in  other countries’ is  that \Xl*As  which  cany out (simple) construction works
learn the necessary organisation ind technical skills to later take over scheme O&M.
Consulting Services
Three consultancy support packages are proposed: (i) Package I: Project Implementation
Consultancy for Detailed Design, O&M Support & Construction Supervision; (u) Package
11: Consultancy for Resettlement Activities; and (iu) Package [II: Environmental Impact
Assessment Studies.
I
; The consultants would be grouped within the Project Implementation Office and report to the (government appointed) Project Coordinator.
Ihe Project Implementation Consultancy' will be the largest consultancy contract and will provide support for: (i) detailed design and preparation of tender documents (ti) construction supervision; (uj: an institutional assessment including firming up requirements for the MSO; (iv) preparation of system OltM manuals; (v) capaary btuldtng particularly of newly formed WUGs and WUAs; (vi; any newr / revised lease agreements fot small /
- The Feasibility Study ToR suggest a 10% beneficiary conrnbution to the capital cost ot the scheme
' For example, (i) the Balochistan Community Irrigated Agriculture Development Project Small Scale Wafer Resources Project, Bangladesh
Pakistan; lnd (ii) the
Ub F4 Main Report (1
x
17 May-11Afrwr/jj- IFaftr c- iiwy
jErMgftw JST/jir              ^vf
f'W
Project
Management
Information
System (MIS)
Stakeholder
Consultations
medium cnmmwoil states; (vii) foi rhe project MIS «id reporting; and (viii) to set up the baseline M4cE.
Project Implementation Consultancy support will be required for ill project development
phases. pirtKiilirty for Phases I ind Phase II Io ensure appropriate detailed design and
construction of quality infrastructure Consultancy support would be intermittent in Phasr
1114 supporting WUAs and the Main System Operator.
The MIS would be designed by the PMO supported by rhe project consultant and wuuld be
a computer based (data base) programme, with separate modules related ro the Outputs. Suggested MIS modules arc as follows: ® Module 1 Engineering Development (deiaiJrd
design, icndcnng & award, construction quality and progress, etc); (ii) Module 2;
Resettlement, Land Acquisition and Consolidation; (hi) Module 3: Sugarcane and Small /
Medium CommerciaJ Estate Devcfopmrnr lease agreement, sugar mill construction, on farm works, etc; (iyi Module 4: Smallholder Support and Environment ie crop, livestock, land and
watershed management and forestry, communin’ development and environmental
enhancement mtervenuoiis; andfy) Module 5: Sustainable OflcM and Cost Recovery.
Financial  management  s  vs  terns  would  he  separate  from  rhe  MIS.  and  in  line  with  normal financial   accounting   procedures   of   rhe   Executing   Agency,   or   as   modified   and   agreed   with
inv Donor.
Stakeholder consultations included project level focus group discussions and household surveys, informal discussions at various levels of government as well as with fhr private sector. Formal consultations have also been conducted through a srnes of workshops including: (i) an Inception Workshop in June 2009; (ii) a Mid term Consultation in March 2010; fiii) a Development Workshop in December 2010; arid |'rv) a I mil Workshop in April
2011
Stakeholders mending the Development Workshop showed a good understanding of the proposed project and generally supported the recommendations of the feasibility study,
| including the projects key comptments, proposed irrigation development and range of supporting subprojects Ihe stakeholder*' comments helped guide the finaliiatioTi of the project's design leading up to submission of ihc final feasibility report.
Despite the consuharioru forming pan of 6c feasibility study. development options for
Upper Bries remain the subject of high-level discussions between the Ministry of Water A Energy , the Federal and the Amhira Regional Governments and the Ethiopian Sugar Corporation
Detailed design rod construction of the right bank diversion weir and main canal started in late 2009 funded by the Amhara tcgional government with designs and supervision by the Amham Design & Supervision Works Enterprise. Progress was rather slow In 2010 the diversion weir was substantially progressed and the mam canal constructed (without lining or structures) fot only about 7 km from the weir.
l-b |<4 Mam Rcpnri (1)
17-Map 11VhM Dtffwwfn- R/fttba. of lifhtofxd, Mi/a/fn of W’atrr Enry
lithtopun Nilt               Mti Drwtqtt Profit
Late in 2010 it was agreed tn principle between the Amhara NRS and central govern^
allocate land within Upper Bcles and Hyma for development of a 50.000 ha commcrcu] '
sugar estate to be funded by central government / ESC.
Contract(s) were negotiated and concluded early in 2011 between the ESC and the Arr?^ Design & Supervision Works Enterprise to earn* out (i) a feasibility study to confirm the irrigation development potential (for sugar) of J lyma as part of the Upper BeJes right b^ development; and (ii) for detailed design and construction supervision for irrigation development.
Within Upper Belts detailed design will be facilitated by the topographic and land suitabfe
i mapping, as well as outline designs, prepared under this Feasibility Study.
Project Benefits Project benefits will include: (i) Benefits from irrigated crops including  sugarcane,  food
and
crops, maize seed, cotton and fodder, (u) Livestock bcnefits;(iii) Power (bagasse) and cthiq
Beneficiaries               production, and (iv) Incremental crop At livestock benefits from rainfed areas.
Economic analysis indicates an EIRR for the proposed project (Option 2A) of 10.2% withi NPV of EfB 150 million and a BCR ratio of 1.02 1 for a 10% discount rate.
Risks and
Assumptions
Assumptions and risks concerning project sustainability and benefits include the following
•      Policy and Legislation: (i) government wafer resources development policy and legislation is supportive, and (ii) WUA legislation including rules and regulations an prepared and applied giving WVAs legal status.
•      Economic / political no severe economic or political crisis; and (ii) crop and livestock prices arc sustained at reasonable levels.
•      Weather / climate, no extreme weather / droughts
•      Upper Beks Sugar Estate established, and ESC, MoVUE and f ederal and Regional Governments agree on project development intent and implementation approach
•      EEPCO ojierate Tana-Bdes power station according to agreed operating rules.
•      Implementation: (i) project institutions including farmers, WUAs. cooperatives, PK staff and project consultants all perform satisfactorily; (ii) resettlement and land consolidation is agreed to by farmers and properly implemented adopting a process approach; and (id) any farmer / \XUA conflicts are resolved.
•      Project components. Infrastructure (i) quality lender documents and transparent tendering and award process, (h) quality contractors bid for works; (m qualify supervision and construction of works.
•      Project components, crop, livestock, land and watershed management and forestry, and community development: (i) are given proper attention by the PMO; and (u) links with private sector are established
•      Commercial farm development- new/ revised lease agreement made with commercial farm raking into account land & water charges, Lmd husbandry practice’ and OifcAl of I&D system within estate boundary
•      System management, OAcSL (l) suitable candidates are selected Ac train- d r r
Ub H Man Report (1)
XI1
17-May-l!jWj’WU#) pf HTxTiV d" Fwrgr
1
Ef&ty**aw jViJf fiT^ptfrftr jwa XJm'f4p Png^f
masters at tertiary, secondary & main system level; fii} a MSO is appointed and
performs satisfactorily; and (iti) necessary' farmer contributions are collected and
properly spent-___________________________________________________________________! rdfro/ DratciTvfn RtptfOdr of Ethot>ta. Mimrfri o ITjrir aid Eiffg,
;
(
Efbcopiax Nile len^ofioo J*d Orojna^e PnyrrfE /AwyM Af wrfn < IW Emr?
£;ZMfvuJt Xf> frngwflw jhJ Drarxatr P«wiV
1         INTRODUCTION
/. 1            Report Contmt
This final feasibility report present* the proposed dev elopment of irrigated agriculture tor thr Upper Bcles project. Details arc given in the supplementary reports. maps and drawings which form a part of thr feasibility report, Followiiig this Introductory chapter, the strategic context for rhe project including sector background, national policy, legal framework and current irrigation development practices within Erluopia are presented in Chapter 2, with a Focus on land consolidation, the irrigation development process and sustain able OA:M.
Chapter 3 describes the existing situation in thr Study Area with respect to. (I) climate, water and land resources; (ii) farming systems, smallholder and commcrcia! crop. and livestock production practices, constraints and development opportunities: .111) forestry; (iv) socio* economic characteristic* of farmers (including population, bind tenure, livelihoods and household incomes/food security); (v) institutional framework. (y) geology and hydrogeology; and (vi) environmental status.
In Chapter 4. the rationale, planning process and Iramcwork and optimisation modelling tor the project is presented along with the proposed with-project la nt!-use and demarcation of boundaries for a large sugar estate. This is followed by: (i) a description of the required irrigation. drainage and storage dam engineering infrastructure and costs; (li) resettlement and land consolidation requirements; (lii) sugar estate and small / medium commercial farm development; fiv) institutional development and sustainable O&M arrangements; smallholder crop production; (vi) livestock development, (vu) land and watershed managrinent and forestry; (viii) community development and support; and (Lx) environmental enhancement measures. The Chapter concludes with an outline of proposed implementation and institutional arrangements
"Die design of the proposed irrigation project was prepared in consultation with concerned stakeholders, including tanner representatives. Slake holder consultations and feedback are summarised in Chapter 5
Finally, the tinanrial and economic analyses of the proposed project arc presented in Chapter 6 including an assessment of the project’s financial and economic viability, project nsk* and possible financing plan. A multi-criteria analysis of six agnailrural development options is also presented in this Chapter
Projecr Bitckground
The Ndr Basin Initiative (NBI) launched in 1999 provided a framework to promoie sustainable sodoeconomic development of water resources within the Nile Basin, and led to the formulation of the Eastern Nile Subsidiary Action Programme (ENS AP) whereby multi sector sub-basin projects in Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia arc identified and implemented.
One of these projects is dir Work! Bank supported Ethiopian Nile Irrigation and Drainage Project (ENIDP) for 20.1KJ0 ha of irrigation development and 80,000 ha of feasibility studies. Hie broad urns of the ENIDP arc to
I ill F4 Main Report fl)
I
17-May-t 1Ffdfnj DnfHHfit fapMr Mtwty o' lEaftr & Eawf,
ElhitpiM /"**** Mti &*•<&  W*
P
•      Promote ihc development of sustainable, smallholder based irrigated agriculture;
•      Reduce poverty in the protect areas and to contribute tn rural economic activities uwl livelihoods by providing the opportunities to grow high value crops;
•      Promote food security through increased production of staple crops;
•      Promote the involvement of the private sector in large scale commercial irrigation development; and
•      Contribute to rural employment and hence wealth and well being.
The 20,000 ha of irrigation development comprises the following schemes in the Tana sub basin fl) Megech fSeraba; pumped irrigation for about 5,000 ha; and (ii) Ribb dam gravity irnganon for about 19,000 ha
The feasibility «tudies to identify 80,000 ha of net irrigable area covered three schemes, namely (i) Megech [Robit) pumped irrigation scheme for 6.024 ha and. (u) Upper Belts irrigation scheme for about 64,000 ha; and (in) the Negcso Dam irrigation scheme for 11.040 ha
AU these schemes arc located tn the Abbay Basin, with Megech and Upper Bclcs situated in the 'J ana and Bclcs sub-basins, and Negcso in die XX'ama-Didesa sub-basin. Administratively, the Upper Belrs scheme is located in both Amhara and Berns hangul-Gumuz Regional Stares, while Megech (Robit) is in Amhara Regional State and the Negcso Dam irrigation scheme is in Oronuya Regional State, Table 1-1.
Table 1-L Location of ENIDP Feasibility Studv Schemes
Irrigation
Scheme
Woreda
Zone
Regional State
Megech (Rolxt)
Pump
Dembia
Gt wider Zuria
North Gonder
Amhara
North Athefrr, Dcbub Achefa; lawi
West Gnjam
Upper Bries
/Mr fi
North Gonder
-Vmhara
Dangur; Pawe Special
Metekcl
Benishancu! Gumuz
Negcso Dam
II
Sibu Sere;
Wayu Tuka. 
Bonava Boshe, 
(Lika Dulacha Ac Juma Ago)*
East Wcllega
Oronuya
• tn the Ncgcw Dtftn rcRcrvou area
ZJ Study Ob/ccavcs and Scope of Assignment
The Study objectives were to prepare full feasibility assessments for the following three irrigation and drainage projects: (i) Megech Pump (Robit); (ii) Upper Bcles. a J
D
Dim.
The scope of the assignment composed fi) initial work planning and scheduling ( )
u
feasibility studies for key developments. (ii£ detailed data coUcctJon surv» . i
'
* 
5
‘ 'T  and investigations
(tv) feasibility level studies and analyses, (v) preliminary designs and costs for devcl works and associated programmes; (vi) stakeholder consultations and information
t 'B 1-4 Maun Report (I)
2
17-May-llAti-w?               <** fiw^p
E/Arajwww j\ j' Jt Thtj^iOm WDn*f-*f VnyM
dissemination   leading   to   consensus   and   agreements:   and   (vu)   preparation   of   full   feasibility   study
reports
The feasibility studies embraced the foilowing aspects:
•      Water Resources and Irrigation Development; agro-climatologv and hydro- meteorology. hydrology and water quality, hydro-geology, water resources availability and use, flood studies, drainage studies, and irrigation development studies;
•      Land Resources and Agricultural Development soils, land use and land suitability, irrigated agriculture and agro-economic development planning, and livestock studies;
•      Resource Users and Socio-economics: stakeholder characteristics, interests. attitudes and concerns,
•         Engineering   Surveys,   Investigations.   Planning   and   Design.   Topographic   and georechnical   surveys   and   investigations,   irrigation   and   drainage   planning   and preliminary designs, ind dam/reservoir planning and design;
•      Environmental Sums and Impacts.
•      Economic and Financial Appraisal; and
•      Stakeholder Consultations and Information Dis semi natiofL
The preparation of Resettlement Action Plans fRAPs) and Social & Environment Impact Assessments (SELA 4) were no! required under the Terms of Reference for the Study. Drtailcd Imtiruuonal, Organisational and Managerial aspects of project implementation, and detailed watrr management studies, arc also not part of these feasibility studies.
These aspects will be the subject of separate studies as needed and justified For example, recognising that resettlement will be required in some of the ENIDP schemes, particularly sn Upper Bdcs, both: (i) a resettlement policy framework , and (ii) an environmental and social
5
management framework have been prepared .
Feasibility level designs, drawings, quantities and specifications were prepared for viable (engineering) development options and detailed design and construction supervision is expected to follow-on from these studies
4
• Reserdemenc Policy Frumewurk, Ethiopian Irrigation 5c Drainage Project, Environmental Resource* Mjnagemeni
Ltd, 2007.
EnvirarunenuJ and Socud Managcmrr.i: Framework, Ethiopian Irrigalmn dr Chainage Project, Environmental Resources Management Ltd. 2007.
UH F4 Mam Report (1)
3
I 7 Mas 11Ffdrt*! Dhwii. KrpttbA-      liihfw. Miattfr) Yilbtopijn Kt'.t              and P'ttnijp PrwM
<*“ fe*ny
Figure 1-1: Location of Feasibility' Study Schemes
I
I
o
o
©
L
OGADEN
z
v**-
Awash Bas>n
CD Rih Valley I ahri Basin
Q EMTRO Catchment manaqemrnt
Amibara, Dire Djwj. Abadlr. Merti Jeju. Nura Era
II- H
1 1
■   — I
•I     »I IhwW
MtnUn *f Fjtrr d" Nfk Imgtft** JnH D'Mfr^f nrv^.f
2         STRATEGIC CONTEXT
2/            Sector Background
Ethiopia has a per capita GDP which is (ar USS 240) about one fifth of the Sub Saharan
.Uncan average, and poverty is widespread. Agriculture accounts for about 40-45% of GDP. for most exports, and for about 85% of employment primarily in the form of smallholder
mixed farming systems These subsistence based agricultural systems are vulnerable to shocks, particularly arising from climate variation. floods and droughts. .Although Ethiopia has substantial water resources, these arc yet to be well developed and the area under irrigation within Ethiopia is a small portion of the cultivated area, i.e about 0.25 million hectares our <»i a tola! cultivated area of around 10 million hectares
The maui categories of irrigation scheme comprise: fl) traditional farmer-constructed irrigation systems, fii) modern small scale irrigation with permanent structures replacing/improving upon farmer built systems. with irrigable arras up to 2(K) ha and developed by regional water bureaus; (ui) modern private commercial estate irrigation that emerged with the adoption of a market* based economy in lhe early 1990s, often based on old stale farms located primarily in the Awash river basin; and (jv) medium and large scale smallholder irrigation such as (he Koga and Fen talc irrigation schemes
The Abhay basin is the largest of 12 river basins in Ethiopia covering 200.000 km . In recent years, a number of large and medium scale irrigation projects in the Abbav Basin have been selected for development and this poses new challenges for the management, operation and maintenance of the schemes, particularly for smallholder managed schemes Planned and on going large and medium scale irrigation projects in (he Abhay basin are shown on Figure 2-1.
Figure 2-1: Major Irrigation Schemes in Ab bay Basin
3
' 'M 1*4 Main Krpvr (1)
5
17 .Mas IIFeM P'vrxrjrn Rff*bh; w fz/hiipa. Miwfr) ofVattr & kne#
Llhofitatt Nik Jrri&fl** Prmftage Pryr.t
2,2           National Policy Framework
2.2.1        Strategic Plans
The Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Programme (SDPRP). 2002/3 co 2004/$ was based on four supporting pillars:
•      Agricultural development led industrialisation (ADI.I);
•     Justice system and civil service reform;
•      Decentralisation and empowerment; and
•      Capacity building in public and private sectors.
The ADIJ strategy to increase agncultural productivity places emphasis on provision of infrastructure including roads and lmgaOon, the diffusion of appropriate agncultural production teclinologics and support (eg improved seeds, fertilisers and cultivation practices), and a sin ft from state owned farms to private sector production
The Plin for Accelerated and Sustained Development to End Poverty (PASDEP), 2004/5 to 200*9/10, builds on and broadens the SDPRP and the ADLI strategy, to include basic education, access to water and sanitation, access to roads and electricity and for safety nets for poorest parts of the country. PASDEP also places greater emphasis on accelerated economic
economy. The eight supporting pillars of PASDEP are:
•      Building implementation capacity;
•      Accelerated economic growth primarily by commercialisation of agriculture and promotion of private sector involvement / development;
•     Addressing the population challenges along with female empowerment;
•      Unleashing the potential of Ethiopia’s women with gender education parity, women’s health and potable water supply;
•      Infrastructure including roads, water supply construction of five major dam< for HEP and telecommunications;
•      Human resource development;
•      Managing risk for example reducing vulnerability to shock which is mitigated by irrigation; and
•      Creating employment opportunities
In August 2010. the Ethiopian Government unveiled rhe Growth and Transformation Plan to be implemented between 2010/11 and 2014/15. It is envisaged that the five year national plan would enable Ethiopia to generate an average economic growth rate of 14.9% per annum with the Indus trial sector taking the lead role in economic development. Industrial development is now believed to be the basis for creating employment opportunities and generating foreign currency
8,000 and 10,000 MW of electricity /from water resources) over the next five years
LIB F4Mam Rrpon{i;
6
17 May-11j-M
Abw/frr rf’M 'aFrr r*-
Ftfapta* N/Jr i^rgrif^ Dnuwtt Pn^ff
During this period, agricultural production is abo expected to double and tins would ensure
food security at both household and national level
Ibe plan also aims to rapidly expand publ.c services to ensure that quality health and education facilities focused on meeting the MDGs targets. Capacity building and good governance within the civil service will also play a significant role, particularly with respect to enhancing rmplovmcn! opportunities tor young people in ci womrn.
2.2.2 IF atrr                         Dfwfopwnf
The National VC ater Resources Management Policy (NU1MP|. 2000, provides for creation of individual or combined river basin organisations (RBOs) for all J 2 river basins in Ethiopia. It included for I Lgh Basin Councils as decision making bodies with River Basin Authorities (RBAs) as their technical arm A key task of rhe RBOs is to formulate and monitor implementation of sub basin plans for integraied water resources management Guiding principles included: (i) recognition of water as a scarce and vital socio economic resource Io be managed and planned strategic all r, (u) recognition of water as an economic good, and (iii) for stakeholders to be fully involved in water resources rnanagcmenL
Irrigation policy, as net out in the NWRMP, calls for development of Ethiopia’s irrigated agriculture potential m a sustainable way for the production of food ciops and raw materials needed tor agro-indusirics.Thr nrigauon policy emphasises
•      bull integration of irrigation with the overall framework of socio economic
development plans, and more particularly with the agricultural development led lfidujtnahjatton (ADLT) strategy;
•      Irrigation as an integral pan of the water sector and overall waler resources development;
•      Decentralization. and user-based managemem of irrigation systems, considering the special needs of rural women;
•      Developing priority schemes based on food requirements and the nn&ona] economy,
•      Supporting and enhancing tradinonaJ irrigation schemes;
•      Ensuring the prevention and mitigation of the degradation of irrigation water;
•      Establishing water allocation and priority setting criteria;
•      Integration of appropriate drainage facilities and environmental sustain ability measures,
and
•      Enhancing greater partjepation of all stakeholders.
The National Water Resource Sector Strategy, developed in line with NXVRMP. formulated implementation plans and programmes for the period 2002 16. The Water Sector Development Programme (WSDP) outlines the expansion of irrigation, hydro power and the potable water supply The Irrigation Development Programme (LDP) calls for an additional 274,000 ha of irrigation development within lhe 15 year programme penod. an increase of I 15% over current kvels-
L'H b'4 Mam llrpurt (i)
!7 Mly |tPakruJ DemWV RrfmUii * 
Elbitpu* Nih lmnanvx J«d DnBKap Pry.1
ZJ           Lcpd Frtun ework
2.3. ?  W'ater Resources Development
1 V'Mr &
2.3.2
Proclamations relevant to the ENIDP include:
•      Proclamation Nr 534/2007 concerned die formanon of basin management
organisations to improve holistic water resources planning and management, and
paving the way for the Abbay basin organisation and SBOs tn sub-basins including
W'ama-Didesa sub-basin;
•        Proclamation  No  197/2000,  stating  that  all  of  the  country’s  wafer  resources  are  the common  property  of  the  Ethiopian  people  and  the  slate,  and  giving  the  MoWR  the necessary'  powers  to  allocate  and  apportion  water  to  all  regional  slates  regardless  of  i source and location of the resource;
•        Prodamanon  No  4/1995,  stating  that  the  MoWR  has  the  power  and  duty  to  deterrr the   conditions  and  methods  required  for  the  optimum  allocation  and  utilization  of  t water  that  flows  across  or  between  more  chan  one  regional  government  among  varic
users.
•      Proclamation No 41 /1993. granting the regions the mandate for certain aspects of
water resource management, including small-scale hydropower activities.
•        Proclamation   No   197/1992,   dealing   with   the   water   resources   management   regulation describing   development   areas   that   require   a   license,   procedures   for   obtaining   license: the  allocation  of  water  for  various  uses  and  the  need  to  protect  wafer  resources  from pollution.  It  considers  that  water  is  an  economic  good  and  that  it  has  to  be  valued  an deserves protection.
Rtsdtfoment and Land Consolidation
The expropriation of land, resettlement of affected people and the consolidation of holdings.
will be necessary for the effective development of irrigated agriculture, including rhe
establishment of commercial farms Relevant legal documents and guidelines include:
•      Prodamanon No. 455/2005 to Provide for the Expropnanon of landholdings for Public Purposes and Payment of Compensation (1 5,h July 2005),
•      Proclamation No. 456/2005 Rural land Administration and land Use (15th July 2005^
•      Council of Ministers Regulation No. 135/2007 - Payment of Compensation for Property Situated on Landholding Expropriated for Public Purposes (18* May 2007);
and
•      W orld Bank Guidelines OP 4 12 and BP 4.12 (December 2001). for Bank assisted projects.
According to the two Proclamations of the EDR of Ethiopia, the modalities for the allocation
are as rouows:
the irrigation development being established;
UH F4 Main Report fl)
R
t’-Ma) IISfi»frhy «* 11 tffr fEwp
E/hupf^ NtJf frwpftM jflrf' Dnarnap Prw^
« Where irrigation canal* arc constructed, the holder is obliged to allow construction of irrigation and other infrastructure il they cross his land holding:
•      Without prejudice to (he former holding or farm plot size of a household, I lie firm plot to he given in the future shall nor be less than the minimum size holding (the size of rural landholding shall ensure fhc food security of the farming household);
■ To make small farm plots convenient for development, farmers ire encouraged to voluntary exchange firm lands; and
•      Information of the size and fertility of the farm plots which farmers intend to exchange shall be distributed through the kcbclc administration
With regard to compensation payments, the modalities specified in the two Prndama lions arc as follows:
•      A rural landholder, whose landholding has been expropriated, shall be entitled to payment of compensadori fur his property situated cm die land (based on its replacement cost), and for improvements made to such land (equal Io the value of the: capital and labour expended), as well as rhe cost of removal, transportation and erection of any property dial could be reallocated and continue its services as before;
•      Tn addition to the payment of compensation for property’, a rural landholder^ whose landholding has been permanently expropriated, shall also be paid a displacement compensation equivalent to 10 nines the average annual income that he secured during the last 5 vean preceding the expropriation of die land (in case that no replacement Lind k provided);
•      If substitute (replacement) land is available for the rural landholder, whose land his bern expropriated, the displacement compensation shall only be equivalent to (1 time) the average annual income secured during the 5 years preceding the expropriation of ihe land; and
•      Any person claiming compensation for the expropriation of his land shall produce proof of legitimate possession of rhr expropriated landholding and ownership of the property (through the issued holding certificate).
In line with the national proclamation, the Amhara National Regional State (AXRS) issued the regional Rural land Administration and Use Proclamation (Nr 133/2006) in May 2006. Thr proclamation cstabb-ibed various article* with respect to rural land administration and use in the region, Among the most important articles arc the user nght to land holdings, land re- djstnhutjon, ihr proccduirs for obtaining land bolding, minimum land holdings, and conditions leading to the removal of holding rights. A number of the article* require ipeafic regulations to implement the legislation
Recognising that rrsetikmenT will be requurd in some of the ENIDP schemes, particularly in Upper Bclcs, a rrscnleincnt policy framework was prepared in 21107 for die project6.
*' IL. Miilrmirti I'rfcj,-FnflifwnrL
!  B 1*4 Hqnn-f fj ■
fc lintn^jr I4r^x CntiMHniii Lo-wro UMipwEi; Iji1,3j17
9
17-M.iv-l]Mnil DfWuK
Mint? 
€>
Ethiopia* Xik 1 Ration ad Dnua^gf Pf^M
Emm nrnrnlal A ! anagemtfil
I’he National and Regional Conservation Strategy  of Ethiopia  (CSE), FORE 199" and AN 1999, provides a  strategic framework for effective management of the environment The n important areas relevant to ENIDP include*
•       Improved soils, crop and animal husbandry for sustainable agricultural production
•      Forest woodland and resource management;
•      Water resource development for irrigation, hydro-electricity and water supplies;
•      Rangeland management and pastoral development;
•      People’s participation in sustainable development of natural and man-made culture resources and the environment;
•       Land resource use policy and strategic, physical land use planning;
•      Integration of social, cultural and gender issues in sustainable resource and environmental management, and
•      Environmental education and awareness and human resource development.
Tile implementation of the CSE necessitated the formulation of region-specific regional conservation strategics (RCS) in line with the federal environmental polin’ approved in 199' Consequently, the Amhara regional government formulated its regional conservation strate>! July 1999 The conservation strategy document is divided into three volumes, namely the resource base, policy issues including institutional framework and action plan and mvestruer programs
The National Environmental Policy was formulated in April 199“ and broadly describe’' the country's resource base and how it should be conserved, policy’ goals, objectives and guiding principles, and sector-bv-sector environmental issues. 'I’he policy supports the Conservation Strategy of Ethiopia (CSE. 1997). The policy indicates that all water conservation, developing and management projects arc to be subjected to the Environmental Impact Assessment process. It also recommends an integrated approach involving all stakeholders. Hie ANRS EPLAUA has drafted a regional environmental policy but this has not yet been approved.
Recognising the environmental impact of irrigation development, an Environmental and Sadi Management Framework (ESMF) has been prepared for the ENIDP outlining mechanisms fc screening subprojects for environmental and social impacts, and to manage and mitigate
impacts7
Environmental and Social Management Framework, ENIDP. February 200? Emir
Management Lrd
Resoun.es
l'K 1*4 Mun Report (1)
H-Mav fl2a,
J’fdffrf/
fopM' •*
.VfkijfH' fijf n Sfrf
ErAvtitaiHr Ntfr            tfirr/ Pruritjyr Fnjtftf
24 Motion Development Pnwtfcet, Process* Issues snd fmplrcatfons
2,4 / Trrwtioft Dmty**UM PrthW *Jtf <-iwwrn?■?/ fmjptifm .ftZrrtwr
(a)            Introduction
Irrigation practices in die following existing six large commercial irrigation schemes within Ethiopia arc described in this Chapter to inform best (technical) practices to be adopted tor the Negev j Dam Irrigation scheme*. Practices on large wnallhokler schemes, including land consolidation, arc described in Section 2-4.2.
Table 2-1: Exisrinr bare** Jrrization Scheme* in Ethiopia
Name of
icbcmt
River
basin
Major
cmp(i)
Year
Eti.
Altitude ()
m
Slope*
Sods
Region
Remark*
Wonji
Shoa
>u^xr
Estate
A was h
Sugarcane
■
19M
L500
Mostly
<1%
HeaW
cbv soil
(>«*•); tight sotli
(konua
Ou r -growers
A
commercial
Skle
Rift
valley*
Cotton, Maize Ac Banana
Early
1960s
1.120
Sill loams
A cliy
loams
SNNPR
Commercial
estate
Metahan
Sugar
Estate
Awash
Sugarcane
1965
950
Mostly
<1%
Sands to
clay
loams
l irnmia
Commercial estate; < >ut- growers
Meki
Ziwav
Rih Valley
Mixed
1967
1.64U
Sandy
loom
< >romu
Commercial
ciLate
Ami bam
Middle
Awash
Cotton
19M
750
Mostly
<1%
Sandy
loam,
loam Ac clay ioam |
Afar
Mostly
commercial
estates
Fsnckua
Sugar
EslAlr
Fine baa, | Blue
Nile
Sugarcane
199B
M50 -
1.600
l-«T-
n
LuVtSOh
*
Vernsult
< )rt >mia 1
Commercial
estate
NnU“ Idcvanmii nf of ihr Nygew command vinn* irotn 4-1,420 m I IpOO m
(b)            Wtmji-Shoa Sugar Estate
The current irrigation area of the sugar estate is about 7,722 ha and is expected to increase to 9,922 ha in the near future. The core farm area (Area I) is managed by the eMate with furrow irrigated sugarcane cultivated over 5,822 ha There is also an nutgroucr area (Area 2), and small sprinkler imgatcd areas (Areas 3 A 4). Water for irrigation is pumped from the Awash river and distributed through an extensive earthen canal system Pumps run continuously tn store water in rescrvoirx located within thr estate farm area- Sugarcane is i tn gat rd partly from waler supplied directly by the pumps and the rest from the reservoirs There arc seven mam. and twelve lertian- night storage reservoirs on the estate.
H H Mitn Report (1]
1!
17-May-llMw.' Deiowrir KjfM.- of b/bopa. Mmbrn of IT am <f &mff
F.lloopuin Kilt Imgatian anti Dnniti^t Pro<e.r
The water deliven- infrastructure is by  open unlined canals. \X atcr control and discharg, measurement facilities include fixed proportional division and manual gates located mo, primary  and secondary  canal level. Calibrated gates are employed for discharge measure purposes.
Blocked end furrow irnganon is used to irrigate sugarcane in the estate area as well
as in rhe outgrowet farms Water applied to each furrow is cut off as it reaches the end < furrow, which is blocked, and ponds up within the furrow. The furrow length depends r slope and three lengths 32 m, 4« m and 64 m are being used. Die gross irrigation depth from 165 to 215 mm whereas the irrigation interval vanes from 10 days for light sod to 1 for heavy soil
Figure 2-2: Sugarcane in Area 1 (left) & sprinkler irrigation in Area 3 (right)
(c) Sik State Farm
ilie  total  area  of  the  state  farm  designed  to  be  irrigated  with  water  from  die  Sdc  and  Sego wa*  about  1.500  hectares  with  an  additional  400  hecrares  to  be  irrigated  using  spring  water. Currently, the farm is taxed on 1,300 hectares
Irrigation water is diverted from die Sik River using a simple intake from rhe bank of die n The main canal, secondary and tertian canals are all earthen with trapezoidal cross sections Other structures such as division boxes and road crossings are made of stone nusonn*. Manually operated steel gates arc in use m the farm though most arc not functional. Furrow irrigation is widely used to irrigate cotton, maize and banana
(d) MetaJiara Sugar Estate
More than 81% of the estate is irrigated by gravity The Enterprise currently has a total concession area of 14,733 ha, out of which about 10,300 ha is covered with sugarcane Irrigation water is abstracted from the Awash River via two gravity diversion wars and intaki hcaduorks at Metahara and Abadir
There are 23 reservoirs for irrigation waler storage, and a 1.200 km canal network su irrigation water to sugarcane fields. 7he water delivery infrastructure consists mostly f I canals but with some lined canals. Manual gates arc used to control irrigation wate t) Water control structures arc found at primary, secondary and ternary L-vr-l. r ■.
and gates arc employed ro measure water discharge.
j,
ij
I.
-*hbrarcd section
UK I-4 Mun Report (1
17-May IFrvA-fji'' Pwitf'-' ItyaAfc
E/Mp** X'*  >'n*
W'Jftr t’*' Hwr^
Pf^ff
Funow irrigation is practiced using plastic siphons, typically 70 mm interna! diameter to supply water to the head of each furrow Recently. 425 mm lay-fbr tubing (hydroflume / flcxi-flmne aqua flume / etc) have been introduced as an alirrname to feeder ditches A three tnan imgator team is responsible for managing rhe 200 !/» lead stream and (typically) 40 s.phon tubes
Low coat layfljt (plastic) tubin< anachcd Io
end of lertw canal
Layflat tubing (hydro-flume) supplying waler
to furrows
The irrigation interval depend on soil type and stage of growth and van1 irom ' I I days for light sods at carlv growth stages t<> 22-26 days for clay bams al later stages. The application amount also vane*; from less than 55 mm (550 mVhi) TO more than 150 mm (1,500 m-’/ba).
Cane yields currently vary from about 1,500 qt/ha to 1,900 qt/ha per cutting.
A proper dnunoge npiem has never been constructed and runoff sometimes accumulates at the
ends of furrows. There are alkalinity and salinity problems in some parts of the estate dur to
excessive irogaitun applications and inadequate drainage. The rising water level of rhe nearby
Lake Bc^cka has forced small areas of irrigated land to be abandoned.
Construction of new drainage canals and reha bill ration of existing drains has been completed
over about 2,160 ha, 21* □ of rhe irrigation area.
Jhc  Metahara  Sugar  Estate  t%  a  government  nunaged  scheme  and  is  organised  into  four  broad divisions:  (i)  agricultural  operations;  (u)  factory  and  logistics;  (iii)  finance  and  human  resources, and  (iv)  support  and  advisory  services.  ’Hie  estate  pays  for  water  diverted  from  the  river  to  the Awash Basin Authority.
The relationship between the estate and local farmers has been poor since implementation of the project, but improved in recent years with more consultation and as a result of construction of schools and cattle watering facilities, and though provision of free medical cart to estate employees and labourers Hie experience ar Metahara led to adoption of bener practices at both Female and Won pi Shoa
UH 1-4 Main. Ilcpurr (t)
13
17 Mru ] IFtdrrui Dr^hrutK fafnbhi 9/Ef^iop/a. Abmrfn oflT'artr&EiMig)
Etfwptan Kilt Imfdfmn iirtd Drjirjpf Projt.-f
(c)            Mcki Ziwav
Lake Ziway is the water source of the Ziwav Irrigation Scheme Water is pumped and diverted to rhe scheme using centrifugal pumps Hie water deliver; infrastructure includes open channels, pipelines, lined canals, and unlincd canals Water control equipment comprises fixed proportional division and a manually operated gate Discharge measurement is by calibrated canal sections The predominant on-farm irrigation practice ts surface (furrow) irrigation but abandoned sprinkler and dnp irrigation systems also exist.
(0 Amibara
Irrigation water for the project is diverted from the Awash River by a diversion weir. Poor functioning of the weir due to river bed aggradation results in large volumes of sediment entering the canal system annually The primary canal has a design discharge of about 13 m*/s and supplies a command area of 14,600 ha. of which 60-7(1°© is irrigated
The mam canal runs 26 km from the diversion weir and supplies mostly commercial farms. The distribution and drainage system is by unlincd canals with major control structure* being reinforced concrete and minor structures masonry. Offtakes from the primary canal comprise double gated orifice structures and allow flow measurement, see figure below There is no mgbi storage.
Double gated orifice offtake from primary
(main) canal
Cotton
Imgataon waler in the scheme is applied using furrow, border and basin irrigation methods, though furrow irrigation using siphons dominates for cotton, the major crop. Furrow lengths range from 200 to 250 m with a furrow sprang of 0.9 m. In recent years furrow lengths have been reduced due to problems associated with poor (non-precisc) land levelling
(g)            binchaa
Sugarcane is rhe onh crop cultivated by the Sugar Estate at Finchaa The estate’s command area comprises three distinct areas.
• Original west bank development area supplied bv the 45 km long West (left) bank main canal of 65 rn'/s capacity. The original design was for 1.08 1/s/ha for a 6.200 ha net irngabic area, however, after two or three years it was realized that this resulted tn over ungation and dramage and water logging Consequently the dun was reduced and the
UB 14 Mun Report (1)
14
17-Afay HDrmitrfti
Mtfw Nfit brfrfM* 
Ef^^Cv'rf. Mtwfrf tl IPcrftr F.nrr^
Pm/trf
coniinind area increased to about R,000 ha equaling to a duty at the weir of O.Rd
l/s/ha-
•      East bank expansion area of about ’000 ha area ro supplied with a new Itasl (night)
bank main canal conveying waler from the existing weir on the Einchaa rner where a
new offtake is under construction
•      The far West Nashr area of 4,000 ha which is under development
Due ro  undulating  and relatively  steep tupngraphv  the Fine baa  irrigation project was designed
from its inception as a 
larcrals by 36 m long flexible hoses.
system utilising sprinkler stand pipes supplied from
The literals comprise either aluminimum or HDP pipes (typically 2'T in diameter) with quick
couplings which air moved prior to harvest and to irrigate different ureas These laterals connect to risers from a bunrd (largely GRP) pipe system 300 - 1,000 mm m diameter Ihc buried pipe
system is supplied from Lined near-contour canals leading irom the diversion weir.
Irrigation applications arc variable depending on sail type and crop growing stages as follows:
•       24  hours  application  (133  mmjevery’  20  divs  ar  peak  crop  water  requirement  pcaodv on rhe black (cracking) vertcsols;
•       10 hours application (56 mm' every 10 days at peak crop water requirement periods On luvisols; and
■     6 hours application (33 mm) even- ~ days for young cane, all soils h is understood that sprinkler uiuforrnity is about #4-85%.
Sprinkler & tripod
Hose off-iaking from HDPE btrr^l
L’H J 4 R<
eport 1
15
17 MiiyJiMDfWM
Mmrtri oflVat'' cu Ewf»
FMmfw JV»               jnd Dra^^f Pf9fM
(h)       Lessons Learnf
Most of the irrigation schemes use water from perennial rivers through diversions using ,
or by direct pumping The common discharge controlling structures are manually operated st* gates with graduated staff gauges to measure water level which is convened later into discharp, using standard tables. Discharges measurements are therefore not accurate. Provision of mo* accurate flume measuring structures is recommended for open canals in the Negcso Imgation Project.
With the exception of Ftnchai where die main canals arc concrete lined trapezoidal sections, the canals arc largely unlincd There is no pipeline conveyance except at i inchaa where it is required to enable sprinkler water application l or the other schemes trapezoidal earthen canali convev water to the irrigation fields
Surface irrigation techniques, particularly furrow irrigation, is the most commonly used irrigation method with the exception of the I inchaa Sugar Estate where large-scale sugarcane cultivation has been developed using spnnklrr imgation. The adoption of sprinklers at Finclm was largely due to the steeper (2-5%) slopes over this scheme, with application efficiencies (uniformity of sprinkler distribution) of about 84-85%.
Where furrow irrigation is practiced water use efficiency and yields are promoted by:
•      Use of 425 mm diameter lav flat tubing (hydroflumr / flexi flume / aqua flume / etc) rephang ternary / field channels and supplying water water to furrows via ’’0 mm
hoses,
•      burrow runoff being lead into field drains and not ponding ar die end of fields, and
•      Periodic precision land levelling
Several schemes suffer to some cxirnt from water logging / salinity, which could be alleviated by provision of drainage. Further, in addition to good infrastructure, competent management and institutional arrangements are features of rhe berrer schemes.
Irrigation application intervals and depths depend on crop stage of growth and soil type and for sugarcane arc tabulated below, Table 2-2
Table 2-2: Irrigation Application & Depths
Wonji-Shoa
Metabara
Irrigation
Interval
(days)
Irrigation
Appbcatioo
(aim)
Irrigation
Interval
(days)
Irrigation
Application
(“®)
Irrigation          Irrigation Interval            Application
(days)
Vertisols:  peak crop requirements
-----
28
215
22
ISO
20
153
Ijghfcr  seals:  peak crop requirements
10                       165
7
p____ __ _
55
10
Young cane: all
soils
— —■
—
-
•
-
6
33
-J
UR 14 Man Report (1)
16
I7-May 11N -l,rfr k'-'* I'-MfR
farfapiav frrq&twi tmd DmitMff Pf**-?
The Dimbo plain in rhe Negeso command lies at an elevation of about >1,420 to >1,500 m, similar to VConji and Finchaa, and irrigation intervals tor mature sugarcane on this plain where vertisols dominate arc likely to be long, vis 21-30 days with 130-200 mm depth applied with each irrigation For young cane more frequent irrigations arc required, at 7-10 day intervals applying about 40-80 mm. For a range of small holder crops grown on the luvisols, irrigation intervals of 10-14 days are likely to be appropriate,
2.4,2 Lajr-juafc SfwttMdrr                            Df/f^nenf jwi !.Mrf Coma/tdatiMt PkaIim
The Negeso Dam Irrigaunn protect is predominantly for smallholder farmers with a core sugarcane estate area, and land development (terracing), land consolidation and resettlement will be in integral part of its development enabling: (i) optimum irrigation and drainage layouts, (if'i suitable basin and furrow sixes for high water use efficiency; (in) appropriate mechanisation; and (iv) earner system operation and management. Land consolidation will also allow land fragmentation and landless issues to be addressed. If land consobdahon is neglected the
potential agricultural and livelihood benefits associated with a shift from runted to irrigated agriculture arc unlikelv to be realised, and inequities in household income are likely to increase
The development of large scale trngatiun for smallholder far men is relatively new to Etliiopia with most developments in the past being for commercial (sugar; estates, with two notable exceptions, the Koga and Fen tale smallholder irrigation schemes, currently under development
Thrsr two schemes represent two iltrrnauvcs for irrigation development; (i) expensive infrasrnjciure designed to enablr high water use efficiencies. and operational performance and having low maintenance requirements - Koga; and (ii) cheaper infrastructure quicker to construct but making good operational performance less easy to achrve and requiring periodic maintenance - Female.
In flits section the infrastructure choices at Koga and Frntak are described, along with assessment of practices concerning land conMjbdancm and resettlement
(a)          Koga Dam ImgatKin & Watershed Management Project
rhe Koga dam project, currently under construction with support from the African Development Bank, w located in Media Woreda. Amhiri region about 35 km southwest of Bahu Dai The nearest town is Mcrawi The project affects seven kcbclcs. Key features of this
small holder imgaiinn development project are:
•
Project area.
10.DD0 ha
•
Irrigation area:
7 ,2tMJ ha
•
Watershed management area:
22,000 ha
•
Main dam height and length
25 m high and 2,1100 m long
•
Dam reservoir area
1,000 ha
* 
Length of main amaL
I B km
•
Length of dutnbuuon canals
1.980 km
• Nr of affected households; 5.000
1-4 Mam Rcjxict <|)
r
17-May-llFttitrui Dem^rufii RfpMc ofEfhupia. Mim/fn oflPaffr Ettf#
Er/tcp™ Xrt Imipfm anti Oriona# Profit
Project infrastructure also  includes for drainage, night storage reservoirs9, on-farm worfa including  irrigation and drainage systems and land levelling, project roads and farm acces tracks, project biuldings, see Figure 2-6. The dam and main irrigation and drainage systet being  built by  a  contractor, with farmers constructing  the smaller (tertiary  and held; irng canals feeding  individual parcels of land It was recognised that farmers need io  know an allocated their parcels of irrigable land before construction of the tertian and on-farm in system.
Wlule   the   construction   of   the   dam   and   main   irrigation   &   drainage   system   proceeded   rcas well, the construction of the tertian' and on-farm works by farmers did not.
The reservoir flooded about 1.000  ha  of mostly  communal grazing  land. No  compensate made for the loss of this grazing  land. Hie reserv  oir displaced 217  households In additio about 40  households along  the main canal and some within the command area  needed to relocated
Ki>ej dam draw-ofT lower
main canal downstream of dan
Gated cro»« & bead regulators and sptU-offtakc
to night sloragr reservoir
Uned aecondary canal 4nd ftumc
m«.unnK Mature dwoMftaoi >f ou|kt ft
.tor.   reservoir
<c
Night borage apparently planned for rhe whole rcheme but n under review
currently with mghr storage
’    b’ abour I .(KO
On
UH l»4 Main Kvporr J)
1H
17-MnyFfidW r?/wwuT,a.'.-. JlpyriW-;* 
ITtfrr <** Fwj|-
1
1
Nf f' c /mjfrf//u<T J/J/J  Itoewjv Fn™ '
Within the command arca each farmer had on average about 3.6 irregular parcel* of land scattered around thr Iccbdrs. After consolidation it i.< expected that tach fanner will have only one. exceptionally two, parcel* of imgablr land To manage ill compensation and consolidation issues detailed cadastral survey was carried out. Hie process was as follows:
•      Registration tn estimalc and record household land parcel arras was cam rd nut in the acvm kcbclcs bv the EPLAUD and [he land adminisrranon committees (LAQ, However the areas of each parcel were not measured but simply estimated by [he farmer* and approved by the Wbreda $»ff and the LAC
•      Cadastral survey by GPS was then carried our to accuratch determine the areas of cadi farmers land parcels for (i) compensation payments (if taken up by project infrastructure); and [iij fur consolidation into the new field layout pattern". I he Cd’S survey found that, on averagr, farmers had under r soma ted their land arras. Note: an any future project use of rectified satellite imagery' could be a cost effective .tlrernalive tor plm area measurement
•      Simultaneous with the land survey a property registration survey was carried out, recording present land use and recording of all assets that might have to be compensated
for
Evaluation, compensation and payment committees were formed com posing mostly of members elected from the local community. ‘I’hece committees determined the compensation payments due to households due in lost usees such as houses and trees and loss of earnings (over 3 years) using current market prices. rIhe estirnaicd compensation amount due was submitted ro the regional land administration office for approval following which funds were iransfrr to rhe project management for payment ro affected households.
Compensation costs were estimated ar about US? 1.59 million and covered payment for houses
/ tukul homesteads and felled tires/ crops,
No compcnsaitun was made lor land consolidation and (the small) reduction tn land holding
sizes required to provide land for du placed households and for infrastructure land lake- To allow for this the existing land user nghl5 of beneficiaries, tn rhe command area was reduced by 2(1° o and land exchanges earned out
Rcrtcfieiaric’f were initially suspicious of rhe project and feared that the land would be laken and handed over to private investors. However with iniuauon of construction works and payment
of compensation more positive engagement is being imiiated
Observations concerning the resettlement and land consolidation process ate listed below
• Accurate cadastral and property surveys are essenual to define thr net irrigable command area in be I armed by each household, and to inform both compensation payments and Land consolidation (land exchange) These surveys must lx* cAmcd out before construction of infrastructure and take several months.
h is underwood that the GPS survey hmk tibouf 3 munihs for eight oirvry teams and covered ibour 20 000 land
parcels.
I H | ‘| Al jin grpttn i•]
1*>
17-May-1Ft'irnl DiMwtu RtfM- t’ lMapij. Atimfry ofK’alrr d- i-.wy
I-fiaofwt Nik 1 friction anti DnoHi^t Pnjtrt
•     To the extent possible fragmentation of holdings is being addressed by voluntary exchange of land between households The aim is to for each household to have ej^
one, or at most two holdings / parcels of irrigable land
•      The maximum land parcel per household was not fixed, but the minimum adopted
0.06 ha/IIH. Those farmers with the minimum irrigated holding arc expected to together to farm their land
•      Households in the project krbelrs whose landholdings do nor fall m the net command area may be allocated irrigable plots as approved by the beneficiary committee.
•      Households that do not irrigate their holdings for two consecutive years should lose their user rights to that land
•      I hc land distribution, exchange and consolidation process proceeded without conflict due to close consultation and involvement of the local community in (he planning ind implementation process. Awareness creation of the process and die project was an important feature of the process
According to a study of ELA-recommendrd mitigation measures for die protect. 20 major pha identified in die Environmental Management Plan (EMP) progressed satisfactorily, whereas the progress of dirce planned activities was unsatisfactorily, including resetdement and compensation payments11.
(b)            Female Irriganon Project
(i)             Introduction
The Female irrigation project is located in Orotnta Regional State, East Shoa Administrative Zone, Bosat and Female districts. It is being developed by the Oromia Water Resources Bureau and aims to develop 18,130 ha of land mostly north-west of Mount Female.
Water is diverted from the Awash River between the Merh-Jeju and Abadir offtakes and supplies the command area by a 49 km long mam canal with a design discharge at rhe headworks of 18 m'/s.
The project expects to transform the livelihoods of local communities and pastoralists from predominantly one of livestock rearing io irrigated agnculnifc of a range of crops, including fodder, supplemented by livestock ’Hie canal system mil include watering facilities for livestock.
Originally substantial sugarcane cultivation was planned with out-growers selling cane to the Meuhan sugar factory. Currently maize is the dominant crop with somc vegetables and there » bttlc interest in sugarcane cropping
The command area is highly fragmented due to land suitability constraint
. /.
c
left lor livestock grazing.
.
*  ^15. and large areas arc
°
"W.B A be be {2007); p. 2
MB M Main Report (I)
2U
17 May-11F/4W 
y                  MwwXrj Pl* M“offr EMg?
Arjfc ImpMa* wri Drj/fMp Pnrr.r
Project features include:
•      Irrigation mfmtnrcture including a diversion weir on Awash rtver, pumping station.
main., primary, secondary and ternary canal* and associated .structures.
•      Tertiary canals commanding 20-23 ha units & smaller field channels commanding 3-6 ha.
•      The main and scccinrfarv canal systems arc managed by rhe Qromiya waterworks
construction enterprise which employs 15 gate / system operators.
•      Tertiary  and  field  channels  arc  managed  by  the  beneficiary  communities,  who  elect  water committees  for  reruarv  level  water  distribution  and  management  llictr  Of  abuse  of  water is punished by a fine of ETB 8<MJ.
•      Beneficianrs arc expected to pay for water used
fix) Project Infrastructure
TIic diversion weir is designed for a  !:5U year flood and ha* four under sluice gates each 2 m wide To reduce silt draw* the under sluice gates crest levels are set 14m lower than the intake pare crest level. The weir length is 128 m
The 49 km long Main canal (42 km ro [hr main asphalt road from Addis Ababa to Harar) has a design capacity of 18 in /*. Much of its length is aligned through tracTured / solid nut-cropped lava with substantial lengths in cut Most the mam canal is unfitted. though there is lboiit 8 km of lining comprising a gcomcrnbranc protected In cobbles held in place with a geogrid where the canal passes though gravelly soils. Fur the major drops pipes are used.
1
Figure 2-7: Photos of Fen talc Irrigation Scheme Infrantrucmre
Main canal cut section
Main canal with geomcmbcane protected with
gcogrid
Pipe dropFfdenl Df**rMi R/ptMi o* Efiuppta, Minuty ofW'afer <7* Hwrp Elhipptat Xiit Irntdten und Dnduatf Pryttf
0     1  1          TV" tS'*' l”"^^
.    k™, drop s«O“« •» I" ™ " ' "™
,\1op8 ■!>' m“" “nJ^„WWl.d RenrrdrJ works include lining of the gibmp d,^
< .„„„nKnon for Sm,"“ c”“b ”«<
Fwc of the secondary canals arc lined with geo-membrane However without protect*^ membrane is vulnerable to rips from livestock I famex* entering the canal prism, see
2-8. It is too earlv to predict the working life of the unprotected membrane but. given the is some damage after one year, total replacement after 5 years may be required A further unknown is the extent to which ultra-violet radiation mav cause degradation The working of gco-grul cobble-protected membrane as used for die main canal may be much longer provided that extensive weed and sediment removal is not required.
Figure 2-8: Photos of unprotected gco-membrane lined secondary canals
I
I
1
flic oilier secondary canals comprise buned PVC pipes. Depending on the design discharge
one or two 400-600 mm diameter PVC. pipes are used
The tertian canals comprise a single 400 mm diameter PVC pipe with manholes at intervals t ’ provide water to Uy flat tubing and field (furrow) irngatron I iowever to date fay-flat tubing hit not been provided and farmers
not been posted and farmers arc dmnbutmg water usmg earthen field canals
Land acquisition. consolidation and resettlement
To address compensation, Und exchange and consolidation a Committee composing of community members and elders, the Und administration office and the kcbelc council melody the DAs was formed. Hie uuual task of this Committee was ro evaluate current legal Und holdings of households in the command area, idenufi the number of landless households, in<* also the number of male family members aged IK and above in each household
The Oromii regional government * proclamauon is for 0 5 b r
per household. I iowever after discussions with the lex al r * ° Ungat>lc ,<nd to locate
allocate land as followed
•      Basic entitlement 0.75 ha/! |J 1;
•       Additional entitlement for each adult male over 18
/ adult male, and
onunuiury. the Committee decided to
” ° aRV ln r^c household: 0.5 h*
I B 1-4 \f.nn Kcpurt (1)
22
17-Mav 11F ,^ I
c / Ettfpfo A
P^Hif
.V/it
. Additional cntitlcmenl for each adult female r>vcr 18 years of in the household:
0.25 hi / adult female.
Landless community members were allocated 0.5 ha-0. 75 ha / HH.
For much of the command the absence of individual land user nghrs within the pastorale community made allocations relatively caw. with no need for detailed cadastral and land parcel surveys.
As pirt of the land suitability surveys potential settlements areas were identified-
(jv) Land dev elopment
I jand development including bush clearing and minor land levelling, was earned out in part by the conincw. the Oromut Water Works Construction linrerpme, and also by the Ormnia
Water Resource Bureau and the Melehara .Sugar Enterprise who provided tractors for land preparation
(v) Scheme Management and Cost Recovery
The institutions established for scheme management comprises itie Department of Scheme Management. Cost Recovery  and Community  Mobilisation managed bv  rhe Ororrua  \Xiter Works Construcnon Enterprise. The Department has two divtsioiw
•      Scheme management division
•      Cost recovery and community mobilisation division
The Scheme management division is responsible for the main irrigation system indudmg the Main, Primary. Secondary and Ternary canals and the pumping stations. The division hires operational staff including gate and pump sLaUon operators.
On farm irrigation is managed bv the Water User Associations.
The Cost Recovery and Community mobdisanon division is responsible for collrrtitm of water tees from farmer benrfcianes. The fee is based on irrigation farm size and is currently ETB
S.L H * I per 0T5 ha p!ut per snwo.
(c)            Lesions Izuni
Government prodanutions and guidelines allow considerable leeway and appropriate land conwluhdoo. exchange and crnnpensaoon modalities will vary for each new irrigation development.
Effiacn[ irrigation require', land comolrdalion to address fragmented land holdings, the landless, irregular field layouts and non-optimum field sizes Where intensive Tainted cultivation is practiced, as on the slopes surrounding the Dtmbo plain in ihc Negeso Dim Irrigation
1 H N Man Report■'!)
21
17-Miv ifF ,*rw
W"* *
.. bb ■
11           & hl,nS
... «***“ '■‘“nb"s “°"”'
fOTK" “”°*
and is not advised12
Land consobdauon ob^uvcs tndudc: (i) reduced fragmentation of h, apmst an mcreasc tn inequable fanner income by  more equitable (tn
Z  land  holdings  of  the  1JJ1  households  would  be  reduced  and  the  la a  small  (mimmal;  ungated  holding);  (iii)  enabling  rectangular  layouts  ar enable high water use efficiency with simple system operation anil to ft
It is envisaged that land holdings of (larger) households would be reduc
(up to about 20%) to achiev e these land consolidation objectives.
Hie resettlement and land consolidation process requires
•      Awareness budding within the communin’ to build consensus.
•        Formation  of  compensation  and  land  consolidation  committees  11 beneficiary representation.
•      Accurate cadastral and property survey and mapping raking severs
•       Dissemination  of  new  field  layouts  and  new  household  land  alloca construction starts ot the minor irrigation and drainage systems.
It is not realistic to  expect farmers to  earn out tertian' and on-farm devrlc themselves — to do so is likely to result in delays tn project completion anc Assistance in setting out of tertiary’ and field irrigation and drainage charm* bulk earthmoving  for land development (terracing  and land smoothing) sh the contractor. Further farmer consiructxin groups / embryo  Wl’As may  I rates for ternary  and on-farm works they  complete This should ensure con reasonable period as well as transferring  necessary  organisation and trehruc farmers for subsequent operation and maintenance.
Cannon is required before selecting low cost w ater control structures and ot tmgauon  and  dramage  infrastructure  including  un-protccted  gtomembrane  , not enable reliable and good operational performance, water charging and hr effiaency;  (it)  suffers  from  a  short  design  life;  (ut)  cannot  be  (easily)  *  lw additional  funds  become  available;  and  (h)  results  m  high  maintenance  costs important  for  large  scale  smallholde,  managed  irrigation  where  the  challen farmers from rainfed to irrigated cropping are already huge without has
cons (nun Is.
in K P‘
Only household* displaced from the reservoir, the commercul %ugar estate und ntcetMrv should hr serried inside the command area
t'B F4 Mam Kq*»<r (!)
24F^/I****^
Aftwfri jfrkfrr c* Em#
1
Eitefwr Nr/e I"Tpf«nr     Dnwm^ ?-•**
r                    Imfatiorr f WMw»r P^w &td SititamMr O&M
2J  J 
Ethiopia is currently embarking on large icilc smallholder managed irrigation development and their is considerable nsk of completed 5chemc5 tailing m realise their poienna! if planners do not absorb lessons from previous developments, both within Ethiopia and abroad. Three important ispeers of irngauon development arc des cubed in this Sectinn:
•      Mastering the irrigation development process
•      Operational challenges and choice of irrigation infrastructure;
•      \X1 A formauon and strengthening,
•      Land consolidation and development; and
•      Agricultural support including extension and marketing.
(a) Mastering the Irrigation Development Process
There is often a lack of awareness, interest and capacity to master rhe complete irrigation process from inception to sustainable OfleM, Failure to do so will result tn partial / complete failure of the scheror Key steps in the process include:
•      Identification of a feasible scheme which has the broad acceptance of all stakeholders, particularly the smallholder farmers expected in due time to take over scheme O&M;
•      Adoption of appropriate scheme layout and infra* tructurr thai enables efficient irrigation and achievement of potential crop yields and yet dues nor impose complex or expensive operation or mainirnance that may be beyond the ability of the smallholders;
•      Attention to non-iechnicaJ aspects including institutional capacity and mierest of smallholders, resettlement and Land con solid a don. and system operation and maintenance arrangements,
•      Quality construction, and
•      Support services including agricultural extension, water management and for OAeM
(b) Operational Challenges and Choice of Irrigation Infrastructure
Appropriate scheme layout and choice of irrigation infrastructure are informed by physical cliaxactensucs of the scheme area, particularly topography. Land slopes and soil*, by the characteristics of the end users and expected operational challenges For example pressure (spankier) irrtganon has clear advantages over surface mcihods for broken, sloping land with shallow, light soils However smallholders may be unable la manage its maintenance including raising foreign exchange for spare parts
Whether surface or pressure (sprinkler) irrigation is adopted, the provided flow control aud measurement infrastructure should faoiiiaie high water use efficiency and equitable distribution, and be easy to minagc and maintain.
Ope rational challenges depend on variety of crops to be grown, reliability of supplementary ram tall, size of scheme and trave l times, and variety of stakeholders and land holdings For disparate crop water requirements and irrigation intervals tend to make rigid supply-driven rotations Lnappruprure, and inf restructure needs co be capable of demand or semi-demand (crop responsive' supply of irrigation waler This is enabled by downstream control canal systems (idral but expensive and vulnerable (o water theft), or ugstream control with some
<• . d' fc
'Z* *
r/-> /
‘X <V‘>
y'. 5
pt\«
’A
TBF4. 
fjj
25
II ■• i
• I
I7-Mjy-11I'rdrrul
afEfbi^ia. Ahm/rn of STdfrr c> Ewg
E           .\7Jf I mutton and Drxwp Pm^f
flexibility build in, foi example by strageocaUy placed (balancing and / or nip! reservoirs 
f \ WUA Formation and Strengthening
c
&
La ™.. *. 
ww-* “* "”"cn“’'",hc J7d°i»« 
,rody “*• ”"”soc““°n*            “
OiM »l l»«d on M.-dlk »*> ’l'""ld >» fomcd °" “ ""
m d»lK
lb •hoold bn ctaRri and «“«< •» “”J"”kr
•» ™™*<
™ / ...tarn *»kTm»» dodng c»«n».»> >' P»n °f “P“"> l”” «'K
u
p “>”™ <«
mdmrd „.«) (.» «VA tomioK.ed «wk. prov.de, an mcenove ro l.m.e.s... onplemem «.
farm construction works.
’fhe legal basis of WUAs needs to be established with appropriate legislation.
Even with WL’A capacity budding and support, for large irrigation schemes main system O&M is likely to need a professional institution for operation and maintenance. Options include (i)i Buikl-Operate-Transfer aningcmcni; (ii) appointment of a .Main System ( Jpcrator totally separate from the construction contractor, and (in) O&M by a public institution such as the
c onccmcd RBO.
(d) J .and Comolidauon and Development
1 jnd registiauon and consobdanon of holdings u vital io achiev e efficient O&M Irrigated holdings Should not be too Urge (0.5-1.5 ha on average), nor fragmented so that each fanner a a member of one. or at most two. \XVAs Comobd.rion of hoklmgs necds to Ise completed
before tertian- and field level .rngatron and dramage swans arc built Particular!' -if soil fertility m the command area is vanable .hrs can take many months requmng detailed sods and cadastral surveys and farmer consultations.
1 develop.,.™ « hod w„dd„  „d
e
kf)
Jo  „
extensive earthworks and precision land levelling rrouirre
where this is left to farmers often take a long time to
.,1. .u ; i a, r
c i . 
* 
on-farm wairr use efficiency
r
, 
f -
appropriate equipment. Schemes
“ 1Be crnP benefits and suffer from p<K,r
(e) Agricultural Support
Where  changes  in  crop  types  and  cropping  patterns  vntfe extension and marketing support is essentia)
Wgarion are envisaged agricultural
Cooperatives  centred  on  village  administrate  units  arc  likely  to    |,c for agricultural extension and other support services. 
C a PPrc)pft^te institution
26
UH |.'4 Main Report (fj
n.\Uv fla/EA^wr. Afourp #rM/r £• Ewp
&*Irn^^ DfwfuW ty*
3          PROJECT area
j /           JntrtMhrc&on
jfj               Lm/im aid dor#
The Upper Beles Irrigation Project is located about 30 km south-west of Lake Tana and falls within the Amhata and Bcnishangul-Gunmz Regions of Ethiopia. It lies completely within the catchment of the Belts River which flows south- westwards towards the Blue Nile through the middle of rhe scheme area. The northern edge of rhe scheme area is ar Northing 1295000 where die nver emerge* from enclosing mountains and enters a widening plain. Ihe soulhem boundary is close to rhe town of Gilgd Belcs at Northing 1235000. At its widest point the scheme area extends about 40 km between Eastings 0210000 and 0250000.
Ihc main urban centres in / near the project area arc Fmdika, Werk Meda, Pawe, Xfambuk, Dek and Gulgcl Belts Public transport exists between these centres
1
pass m ihe rams. Their are no other road route? into the project area.
The project area is 138,157 ha ' and extends over parts of rwo weredas in the Benishangul-
and Pawe), and parts uf four weredas in the Amhara region (North
Achefa,  Jawi,  Alefa  and  Dabub  Achefa).  Three  of  these  weredas  have  a  large  proportion  of  lheir area witlun the Project am These arc; (i) Jawj; (ii) Debub Achefa; and (tii) Pawi> sec Figure 3-2_
»nd RlRht Bank t4llak.
^n. Repriri ft)
1 T-May-llFederul Dt*9.TMf RpMr •/ Eihupu. Minty tf VFjtrv d* Enrgf
FJhnpiun Ndp Imp tn* tad D runup Pryt.i
Figure 3-1: Location of the Upper Belet Irrigation Project Area
'MOOT         ”0000              •OTOM          'OTOOD       JOOM
1  -----------------1---------------- 1---------------- 1-----------------LJ
PJ-'dta* DwmA                rf Efhiy.v- Afaufp fl/'ITjfrr c** /; <rrp
l>*rtn X'i> iFHjyfiJtwt D?artjp P*WtT
JrtrjS j*/PtyM
For dintv. the >^Plfd lOTB foT ”swd>’"’ ‘pro>ect and tra®’"on 'area arc nbubttd , 
The Upper Ikies Study Aiea totals 136.3R8 ha. while the Project Area totals 13BJ57
Table M: Study and Project Arras
Nr
Description
1 
! Study
2
Project Arts
t
prepared Artas obviously not suited io irrigation development (eg excluded from the Study Area Breakdown of the Study Area by, eg t types,land slope categories, land suitability (SI. S2, S3, Nl. etc.J Ve
_ 'he ‘'5nds“ fcpott. _          _        _________________ ________
The Project Area may he more or less than lhe Study Area, and is dehorn, by the irrigation engineer following fixing of alignments far MirnCarjS Drains, etc. The Pruiccr area is divided into two main categories in the Development Planning Process:
•      Irngable Command Area; and
Clarifying Remarks
J rhe Study Area is the area for which: ® soils, land use and land studies and map; and (u) topographic survey / contour / DEM rrup - '
3
Imp hie Command
Area (also Net
Lmgablr Command
| Area)
Non Irrigable
4         Arras
•      _Non Tremble Area, ________________________________________________
The lmgablc Command Area 11 determined bv the irrigation engineer for each lEitun and secondary canal command based on topographic, land 
' suitability and uraiEr availability considerations.
I Ta determine the Net Irrigable Ccrnmand .krra ihc land fake for trng3ri4jn infrastructure ii deducted, typically 4 9%.
The (Net) Irrigable Command .Area is further broken down into J-uid Utihutton Types, LUTs 1,2,3 (■ur&cc) and LUT* 4.5*6 (pressure). b',5C<i on tocinl .■• cpmrngrctal efe „ considerstionj (see below_____ _  ___ ——
The non tmgubk areu campnsei all land not allocated fur lrngatcd agncuJrura] development, for example;
Scnlrmenti / homesteads
*
Infrastrucniic cnhcr rhm irrigation tnfautrucrurr indudcd Enwunment preservation / enhancement
Forwuy phnutiaiu (for fod WOod / COMtn3C(lon)
Cnfnmuinal grazing
Riinfrd cropping
■
Non productive Land (<lr. f^ky             j
Dut Crop5
Some Und may be rt>uln «. 
u      For
thir buret the L’ppec B  „ 
(1
ls
o(hnd
suitability   and   Extent   seasonal   fbaadinif   mrr   w   r
'
x. w mde for environmenfri,
t-crnmuMul gr*J-Lng 0& »«-xne nticnrj fuel WT_ □ „
d  jibniath*ns tn mark the boundary 
prcxluvt>on with
KB I 4 Mun Rrp»«n (1
17-May JI
X'/****** 
X^
-/F-frf         Ew^
J)firWJ^
Date CM*™' uri Jxnyy/
I’rimxn data collection and surveys informing understanding of the project area included.
•       Hvdro-meteorological dam collection and jurep;
•      Soils, land cover and land use surveys,
•      Topographic surveys;
•      Geotechnical dam collcctiofl and surveys,
•      Environmental data collection and surveys; and
•       Baseline agro and snoo economic surveys
iTicic pnman data collection and surveys were supplemented by collection ol secondary data, discussions with stakeholders*  (including formal consultative workshops) and rhe use of high resolution <0- v m pixel size) panchromatic imagery l*he baseline agro- and ujcio-ccorximic data were collected by: (i) households surveys; and (ii) thematic focus group discussions (FGDs)
with local stakeholders,
C/jmate
4
J. 2. f        tSrern// CC owA/flittr
In the Belts river sub-basin, the highest rainfall occurs in the central parr of the basin where the average annual rainfall ranges between 1,400 mm to more than 1.900 mm l"he L’ppcr Heirs irrigation project lies m the upper part of rhe Beks river sub-basin and this northern part experiences moderate rainfall with an annual rainfill of about 1,4^1 mm, sec Figure 3-3.
Rainfall in the Upper Beks area has a pronounced seasonal pattern, typified by a short wet season from July to September, and a Jong dry season The rainfall pancm has a mono-modal dis i rib u turn dominated by the Kircmt rains. The closest climate station is at Pawc in the southern part of the potential prefect al an altitude of J J 19 masl where average monthly rainfall is 250 mm in June; 380 mm in July; 357 mm in August and 231 mm Ln Scpicmbcr On average 81% of the annual rainfall falls during these four wet months; the annual average* ninlall at Pawe is 1.542 mm The *drv‘ season is from November through to Match The Pawc climate station is situated in the mid-section of the Bdcs river where rainfall is generally highrr.
Fhis seasonal pancm in rainfall influences the annual variation of all climatic parameters. The climate in the project area is warm and sub-tropical The mean annual icmpcniurc at Pawe is aboui 24-5°C ranging from a low of 22-7°C in August (when cloud persists) to 28°C in April prior to ihe rains starting The average monthly relative humidity is 74% and remains high throughout the wet months. Relative humidity peaks at 89 6% at the hcighi of the wet season in Augmi, falling to a low of 59% al rhe end of the dry season in April The average monthly wind speed is about 0.65 m/s nsing cu a maximum monthly value of 0.95m/s tn May. The annual evaporation has been estimated at about 1,491 mm.
ih Ref
8k , Srakchuldcr Consiidtatjrjnji
' " ’
,
4Kl “'RL-p.Jn(i)
31
17-Xhr-llRiptriV E/tapd. M/mrtiy •( (Fjfrr **• llw»p
Figure V-3: Annual rainfall iaohyeu from ccnkriging for the 1 PPcr&w‘-
J ~i Pn^1
o
9 22 Monthly and long '«"" «venRe
t
*
of  'fmP«annc ucrc cdcul.ncd using the measured
°
i   | for Pawe climate station Climatic data such as hunudirv. wmd speed, and
obla nct
<U, ^.hine hours were also provided by NMSA for Pawe or obtained directly from the climatic ’“"J,,^located at the Agricultural Research Station. Ixxig term average monthly values for this chmate data are given in Table 3-2. Seasonal variations in climate data are presented in l igure
3-4-
(crTn avcrage minimum and maximum temperatures for the I pper Hcles command area hrehest from March through to April, with lows in July when clouds persists through the
" season A max.mum monthly temperature of 37.4 ’C occurs toward the end of the dn
„ in March - April with a low of 27 ""C in July and August at the height of the wet season. Monthly average minimum temperatures vary from 12.3’C in December to 193’C tn May.
Hie humidity is highest in August when hunud.tv reaches 9(P. ... .he wet season and a muumurn of 59% occurs tn March in the dry season under clear sky condmons \X md speed vanes from 30-82 km/day and averages 56 km/day. Sunshine hour, vary from 4 6 hours in Jul) to 9.8 hours in December
Table 3-2: <
2hmadc data and ETp f
Temperature (°C)
nr Upper Beks command area
1
Month
Min.
Max.
Average
Humidity
(%)
Wind
(km/day)
Sunshine
(hra/day)
ET.
(mm/day)
Januarv
12.4
34 5
23.4
65.3
41 1
9.6
395
4.51
February
143
362
253
63.6
55.1
93
March
—
17.6
—
37.4
273
59.1
756
87
5.09
April
190
373
282
62.9
74 5
u
532
8.0
4.97
Mav
193
343
269
65.4
82.1
June
18 1
29.8
23.9
81.0
81.0
63
3.97
Julv
17.8
27.7
22.8
860
605
4.6
331
August
17.6
27.7
22*
896
57.2
48
333
6 1
3 6 7
September
173
29.0
232
85.8
49.7
October
16.9
304
23.7
85.0
33.5
73
3.79
November
uZ
nr
23.3
772
30-2
9.4
3.93
December
12.3
33.6
23.0
69.0
35.4
9.8
3.81
L-------------- Mean
7.7
4.14
16.4
32.5
243
74.2
563
Noir: An altitude <»f >1J 19 mad u uncd ai>J a latitude of 11.31 
kmgitudi < I 6
W.|\j
17 May-Il
Report (|)
33*'U J,nr
S/'h#»j* *«*               **
Figure 3-4: Long term average climatic daw and ETn for UpperBelea command ar »
e
’w dmafe unlkpfl
3, ’ J 
Re/rnisrt ErMf*ffWi.fpirttftort (ET )
r
The long icnn average climate data is used to estimate the reference evaporation ET„ for the
command area for estimating crop water requirements- The ET»is calculated using the
Pcruiuji-Montcnh formula, u recommended by FAO (1998) uiing the CropWat (version H)
software. The ET , ranges from 3.29 mm/day m July to 5.30 mm/day in April with an average
(
annual value of 4.1 mm/day. The seasonal variation of ET<. is shown in Figure 3-5. The total
annual EX is 1,492 mm for the Upper Beks project area (Table 3-3).
UH r-4 Main Rqwrfr !
34
7-Mjv IIMfWtr, tff+rr
FftotpJ* N* ?*&**• ^Drui^ Prwif
Average monthly ramfalj exceeds reference evapotra September « shown below fr.bte 33), lndicatl^
.he project WM wtU need (surfice) dr^ t0 1Wld
'j’"'
'°
'^'
««’ -
monthly reference ewpotn.nspirxbon exceeds nunfrfj Junnj? (hc dn
.he summer rams in June. Impmon is required m the dn season to n^JT annual crop
.J”5*
°f
for i second
Ta bl*          Evt^ottsmspirationand rainfall for command area
Mondi
Long term
average rainfall
ET*
ET.
LTA Rain fa 11 —
E<o
Remark*
(mm)
(mm/day)
(mm/motrth)
(mm/month)
| jtmJ yJjvV
1.5
3.95
1225
120.9
Fcbruarv
1-6
4.51
126 J
•1247
Dry season; imganon
March
11 6
5.09
157.8
-1462
required tor creeping
April
27.5
5.32
159.6
*1324
Mar
II 1.8
4.97
154.1
■42J
if.        ™ — — |uh
June
240.7
3.97
119.1
121 6
3667
3.31
1026
264.1
\X el season:
August
3337
333
103.2
2303
tupplrrncnijiry inagaih-wi /
ScptemlKt
216.5
3.67
110.1
1064
drainage u required
•October
119.9
3.79
117.5
2.4
November
11.4
373
111.9
100.5
season; irrigation
[ Jcccmbcr
4.2
3,81
118.1
113.9
required
Annual
1.447
4.14
1,492
J-2.4 Effirfn* fLunf 'a//
Table 3-4 gives the long term average rainfall (LTA) estimated using co-knging for the irrigation command area, as well as the 80% dependable rainfall used to estimate the effective rainfall
required for the crop water requirement calculations. The monthly value for the 80% probability rainfall is estimated from the standard normal cumulative distribution (Chow, 1988} using the mean and standard deviation (SD) from the 27 years of monthly rainfall The effective rainfall used to determine irrigation rainfall requirements is then determined by the USDA soil conservation service method (using CropVC’ac version 8) using the dependable rainfall data. P, where P «is given by rhe following
r
P fH = [P (125-0.6P)]/125 for P < 83 mm P rrt = 41.7 + 0.1 P for P > 83 mm
1 ft  I 4 MMll |tl
ffWKt (1)
35
17-Maj-llf
Xii )■’***« ** Or*'*
CU£W”
Tible 3-4: Lon; Month
» ICnri jivci-km Long term average
rainfaD
(mm)
Standard
Deviation
(min)
80% Dependable
rainfall
(mm)
1 ”-M
lanuarr
1.5
4.2
0
i—
o
l-cbaun
1.6
2.8
0
March
116
19.4
0
J___ 0 o
April
275
40.7
0
o
Mav
ins
84."
40.5
37.9 '
lune
240.7
82.2
171.5
1244
July
366.7
96.7
2853
ns?
August
333.7
87.9
259.7
151
SepirmiKf
216.5
70.7
157.0
inP
October
119.9
45.9
81.3
70.7
November
11.4
14.0
0
0
December
42
6.2
0
0
Annud
1447
556
995
655
IRWMw Rcprr(l)
16
17-Mai HA-*"** 
X‘* rm^ Dni*^ P^>,r
j j iFteer Iterotw*
j j f I [ytfratyy of the SMfy Stna
Frtvp
I  hc  Uppef  Beks  irrigation  project  is  within  die  upper  catchments  of  the  Main  Bclcs  and  Gilgcl (A bat) Belts rivers and their tributaries- The topography of the study area is shown on bignre
3-7. The elevation of the study area is berwem 1,000 mad and 1 JOO mid 'rhe main Belts river or the Enat Belrs originates at about 2,250 mul on rhe face of in escarpment separating the Enat Beks basin from 1 ake Tana. The Enal Belts begin* where the tributaries of (he Kaasan and Jehana rivers jcifLjust above this confluence the Jrhana receives flow from the out kt runnel of Tan a-Beks hydropower schcmr draining I Jike Tana.
The left bank tributaries of the Belts river ongmare ar elevation* of over 2,500 mas I on the steep slope* of (he western escarpment ninnmg from Shshura in the north-east* to the Kar mountain range near Chagm m the south-west The nghr hank tributaries of the Belts river rise in less steep terrain, nsing m 1,600 masl in the west, which is rhe catchment divide between the Deles river and the head water tributaries of the Ayima river.
The Enat Belt* river lies in the central and north western part of the Abbay basin and Hows in a south westerly direction- Overall, the Belts river has a catchment area of about 11,573 km' and a total length of 319 km before it meets the Abbay (Blue Nile) over, The F.nar Boles nver is gauged at a bndge crossing on the road some 4 km north west of rhe town of Gilgcl Beks, downstream of the town of I*awc. The catchment area to this gauge is 3,431 km- At ihis point thr nver has a mean annual flow of 56 m3/s
The Gilgcl Bdcs over (not to be confused with the Gilgd / Abac Bdcs) * is a large primary tributary of the Enat Beks and is gauged at the town of Gilgcl Beks, not far from Mandara.
3
This tributary has a catchment area of 675 km  with a mean annual flow of 17 m'/s. The total gauged area of the entire Beks river basin is about 4,106 km-, approximately 30% of the total
3
Boles catchment before it reaches the Abbay of about 13*573 km .
1
LH
<1**1 (J)
37
17 -May IJp
tq
ct***™"* 
” &***• ','",t^ ^r<",r
r:tl  lM
^   X* W‘
Dra"^ Pnf‘1
The runoff as expected follows the seasonal runf»U pattern typified by a short \wt* season and long 'dry' season The seasonal pattern of runoff is pronounced with only fom months of high flows during the ‘wef season from July through to October, l ypically, for the Enat Belcs at the road-bridge gauging station, flows reach 135 m’/s in July, peaking m August at 236 m’/s and declining to 165 m’/s in September Dry season flows from December through to /\pnl
average about 3 m’/s but can drop to about 1.4mVs m April
The Tana Bek' hydropower scheme is complete and wis commissioned on 14* May 2010 Releases from the runnel arc passed downstream along the Jrhana river, a tributary of the Enat Boles, which is significantly changing its hydrological and morphological regime ILe operation of the hydropower scheme will dictate outflows to the Enat Beks nver which will be superimposed on the natural flow regime of this nver The natural flow regime of the Enat Boles will be changed as some 70% of the natural outflow from Lake Tana will be diverted rn the Beks basin This will result in:
•        A 30 fold increase in natural flows in the upper part of the Upper Boles area fin the Jehana tributary');
•        Doubling of the average discharge near Gtlgel Beks town at the lower end of the scheme area; and
•        A 40 told increase in base flow’ during rhe low flow period (in April),
J.3,2 R/ier Data
The Main (Enat) Beks nver is gauged at a road bndge on the main road from Gilgcl Bries roughly 4 kni from the town of Gilgcl Beks. The location of the gauge station for the Gilgrl Belcs nver, a tributary of the Main (Enat) Beks nver intersecting just south of the project area, is also located nearby, sec Figure 3-R
♦
I I «
r
I
39
17 May-IlSih I'n^rxx Drmy ?Wt
The Mun Tjvm) Bdes has an upstream catchment area of 3.431 km: and a mean flow mVs for the penod 1962 to 2005; between 1982 to 2005 die mean flow of the Gdgc] 55 m’/s. The smaller catchment of the Gilgcl Bries gauged near Mandura has a contnb area of 675 knf and a mean flow of 16 m /$ Overall, the data qualm for the Main />• 
s
and Gilgcl Belts stations is considered medium and gcxid, respectively
v’nat)B?k 
Analysis of the flow records for the Main Bdcs and Gilgcl Bries nvers was made to check r’_ suitability of flow data The long term average (LT A) monthly flows for the Main Belo? nVff gauge for die penod 1982 to 2005 arc plotted on figure 3-0 showing the seasonal variation, with higher values during the July to October penod and low er ones from December to Mw. Overall, the mean annual flow for die Main Ikies nver at the gauge station is 56 m'/$ fie data gaps filled). The mean annual specific discharge for (he Main Bries catchment at tiic gauge station is 16 4 l/s/km: which is consistent for a catchmmt of this size tn the Tana ikies but
Figure 3-9: Mean, maximum, and minimum flow at Main Belcs gauge
Momiy flon Mot Belm brtfge
LHHMwn Rrp<»rf U
17 M-\ H„ .
shKfffT' $ V'afer Em*
\tJe >”W,!'‘,!
Ij&Uh/Dm
Record* of levels of Lake I ana arc important for the operation of the Tana-Belcs Hydropower scheme as these arc the basis for the operational rules. Water released from the tad race of hydropower plant will be used for irrigation in the Upper Belcs project area, as well as for Lower Beles and I Ivma areas I-akc levels fluctuate throughout the year and from year to year as shown on Figure 3-10
Figure 3-10: Lake Tana monthly lake levels from I960 to 2006 Laks level at BeNrter
s
4   1,784.71 masl on the 8,K  June 2010 is below the recommended minimum operational level for Lake Tana
Fmm' Intimation at Du/n Site and at Dtvenmn ISetr
(a) Diversion weir and dam site locations
Die project concept is to divert water to die right bank command from a right bank diversion weir on the Main Belcs river where the river bed level is about +1,230 m, and to the left bank command from either a diversion weir/ or directly from a storage dam further upstream where the river bed lev el is about 100m higher at about +1,330 m The diverted water largely emprises releases from the Tana Belcs hydropower station in order to meet irrigation demands o^’er the command area
project area is ven’ large, about 138,145 ha, and up to 74.784 ha (54%) is suitable for surface irrigation. To facilitate staged implementation it has been divided into stage development areas which arc shown on Figure 3-7 and also Figure 3-11.
Since late 1992 satellite altimetry data is available which records the water level of Hke Tana every 10 day* The readings closely follow the levels measured by lake recorders The satellite recorded die second lowest lake level since records began of + 1,784.9 mad on 27 June 2009. This year, 2009, experienced a lower than average rainfall in the I Jike Tana region The lake level on 21 April 2010 was recorded as 4-1."85 01 masl prior to commissioning of the Tana Belcs hydropower scheme on 14'  Max 2010 The most recent available ubservanon of
(|)
41
17 Mar-11I'’**”' "*nn*'*
Stiges LA, IB-E, IBAV. ind IB S through to Stigc III form the nght bank command lr water will be diverted by the right bank diversion weir (Figure 3-11). Stage I] rehtea to (or Upper lender) which k outside the protect area but would be supplied by diver,  10n dii5 urn.
Stage IVA. IVB, 1VC. and Stage V nuke up the left bank irrigation development and « intended these areas will receive water from the left bank diversion weir immediately
down5tram of a proposed dam. or directly from the storage dam via a draw-off tower < diversion weir at the same location
Release from ihe Tana-Bclrs hydropower station is expected ro supply enough water to i irrigation development over die nght bank (Stages IA through to IB S. & III) without th for addition Stonge on the F.nat Belcs However, with the expansion of irrigation dodo in Hyma during Stage II and onto die left bank then some storage may be needed on the Bek' river Ilie regime for releases from the 1 ana-Belrs hydropower scheme (i c. operati niles) adopted will ultimately determine the area of development that can be irrigated wid storage and then the area for which storage is required The issues arc considered further Section 33.6
L’H 1*4 Main Rc.pt mi (f)
42
17 Xhi-1/ ■*>***/
M/ati/ry */ fF j' trr r'* Af***p
»\‘nir IrrvQjfWf Dna^p /*rwr» r
.
UH F4 Main Rqwc (I
43
T
17-May 11
1--------------- rs*.'*•
?W                P
... How estimation for diversion wrir and dam she
Ttee are no measured flo- of the Upper Bcles nver near rhe proposed dam or drv* me$ w in dm ««dy nxmrhly flows have been estima.ed ar each sne based on flow fc, Main Belts gauge (St 6003) These estimation* «e supported by a regional analysis whx accounts for rainfall variability and catchment area The catchment areas arc 'ummanie Table 3-5 fmm upstream to downstream, for the © proposed location of the dam and bank dnerwn; ® right bank dtversxm wear, and (iii) nver gauge on Main Belea.
Tabk 3-5: Caichment Areas Contributing to Dam She and Diversion Weirs
Location
2
Catchment area (km )
Dam ute & diversion weir / offtake (left)
5!
Diversion war right
ft
Mam Beks at bridge
3.43
The mean area! precipitations for the constituent sub catchments were interpolated from measurements using coknging techniques This rainfall data is then used to estimate flow the sites of interest using a regional approach relating gauged flows to catchment area and rainfall Rainfall data is also used tn the WatBal water balance model software in an artemp model monthly flows at these locations.
Table 3-” and Figure 3-12 pvc estimates of the long term average monthly flow’s at the left bank diversion weir / dam site and it the right bank diversion weir. These monthly fl‘>u estimates represent the flows under natural catchment conditions and do no! include the monthly releases fmm the Tana Beks hydropower station
Tabic 3-6: Long termayrragc flow (m'/s)
~ --------------
n
Month
Dhrenioc weir (right)
| January
Diversion weir
(kftJltD™
0.9
13
February
05
07
March
0.4
Apnl
.
03
Main Bcki (£ Bridge____
4-4     _ _ 2.8
2.0
0.2
May
f
ur»e
03
14
06
43
0.9
6!
—-
J.L
July
Augusr
September
26X1
453
28.9
October November December
-■>•1 ___ — 134 5______
231 9____ - 164.7
1-
128
33
1 1
L—__J«3_
-_________4_G 1r
74.9______ -
18 2______ J
Annual
10.4
-—--------- Ly . M4
6.9            j
L’H l‘4 Mam Report 'I)
44
17-Mav-H
‘I ~
' * 3I *1V//> to’®®1**' ,w/f ^'“'"'4* Pn**,'/
(c) Flow estimation using WATBAL
(i)            Introduction
The WATBAL model simulates change* in soil moisture and runoff. It ls essen dally in accounting scheme bused on a conceptualized, one-dimensional bucket that lumps both the root and upper sod layer together (Yates and Strzepek, 1994; Yates, 1996). Hydrological processes are sunularrd on the basis of a conceptual approximation. Parameters are adjusted or optimised until the model output is an acceptable estimate of the observed runoff. Calibrated parameters values are optimised against observed runoff data. The observed runoff record is spin into two data acts - one used for calibration and the other for validation. When the
"goodness” of tit vahiei derived from lhe cahbranon and validation procedure are similar, then the fitted mode] parameters are considered acceptable.
(it) Estimation of flow at right diversion weir
Monthly flows at the right bank diversion weir estimated using a WATBAL model provide an alternative estimate of the flows at diversion weir and dam site using a regional approach based on catchment area and areal rainfall Flows are modelled using rhe optimised parameter values calibrated using observed flows at the Main Belos gauge, the catchment rainfall estimated to the right bank diversion weir, and a catchment area of 865 km- The monthly flows were simulated for the penod 1982 in 2005 at the nght bank diversion weir
The mean annual flow generated with WATBAL is 12.7 m'/s compared to 14.6 m'/s based on the regional approach. A comparison of the long term average monthly flows estimated by both methods is given on Figure 5-13. WATBAL undcr-predacts flows in the wet season compared to Lhe simplified regional approach and vice versa during the dry season Flows presented arc for natural catchment conditions and any releases from (he Tama-Deles hydropower stations Would need to be superimposed.
Jlr » Report (I;
45
n-Mai-itWvt IWmftr JtyMw * E^tfaa, MtKifr, of Vater r  Ewp
u
Ellnttan Vi l.’HNtws ad Draw Pfimi
Figure 3-13: Comparison of estimated flow ar diversion weir (right)
Lonj ave'ag* eWfrated 4o» e* divertor <w i rlgfv)
ro
&
10
0 Lcfc_.
(d) Design blood Estimation “™«”   ” ' of .™„, pen, J, op ,„ , ,.lm jra rat ire
&d
“ ,». ,,, ,|„ r„(l| W )|
,    .k.™ ih. I pp« Bek, „, jj„ 4iign of
m dtrtnnme J* J,
toM fmfra
ij
""
K “* »-*«. -d „  ™ .
pup> b loJ
t
''«• '*• I »• -
™'"'J k /
“' ””'" f"*~T
'» *< R>«. n.npd. .«! fi-v
2zsimr>il±ar ”””’    fn How° "e)vr■ -r, for return
m
ncnrwk ______ . r< .
,b “
.he ddta™       ,„ tj,
fcmhl
.
7 1 '
«T”“
«**•
—d... » .» pfa,. n, mon fa
in Table 3-7. 
'*7 ■ «~d S. .h,™ l. .he 4»h —
g
^pth from t]le frequency analysis is g**
Table 3-7; Design rainfalls depth for Upper Beier .... u
distribution
Carchmeut Distribution
GL (PWAfl
* CWchn>«‘<•«*««. GU (PWM)
Ild.K ramhdj
T= L2y,
60
|
t rI ,,h
T- L IO yf
RS
T=L50^
107
T-l:100 yr
116
The esnmared design rainfall depths are based on daily maxima data *dodr'adjustment of 1.13 ts applied to the daily rainfall depths to
hr design rainfall depth (Table 3-8) Confidence in the design nunfal) de
'
v ^u<a 10 a
Upper Bdes catchment is given when compared to design depth specified ' nfUTUtcd ^or
t
Road .Authority Drainage Manual (ERA. 2002) The proposed valuer ar  ^■ ^°P
P
M0
than the
CR H Main K<p*» (I)
46
17 M  -11
arY^ IrW'"” PrmMef Pnr^
.dinted in rhe Drainage Manual for (he Region A2, but lower than values indicated fur Bahir D r - Lake Tana region
fl
Table 3-B: uesign
24 hr rainfall depth (mm)
Sutiofl
T= 1:2 yr
T= MO yr
T—1:50 yr
T=L100 yr
Upper BcJcb
67
96
12!
131
era 24 hr (2002)
52
79
107
11B
ERA 24 hr (2002) Lake Tana
74
131
187
211
_ I
The total duration of (he sronn hyetograph used for the I’pper Beles catchment is based the
rsnmatc-d time of concentration T of the catchment The T  was estimated using the Kirpich
c
e
method and Braiuby and William'* method to give a bnw ol‘ travel for the catchments. The Te values obtained are tabulated below in ‘fable 3-9.
?^
lanicj- ; inncui wu
Caicbinent
Area
1
(tan )
Lxugth
(taa)
H
(i)
Tc
Kirpich
(hr)
Tcinvel
time
< h,»
Tc Brann by
Williams
Mean Te
(hr)
|>xm A: diversinn weir
593
35.8
940
42
7.0
9.5
6.9
Divernon weir
.C^h9
880
573
1050
7.0
109
15.8
113
The rainfall depths are adjusted for dura bon by estimating a rainfall correction factor. l-inaLly. an areal reduction factor (ARF) was applied to the design rainfall depths because areal rainfall decreases as catchment area increases. When the ARF is calculated for this catchment using the Fiddcs (1974) formulae and checked with the method outlined in the Transport and Road Research Laboratory fTRRJ.j Report for (he Bast A fidcan flood model (Fiddc\ 1976) ihen ARFs of 0.72 and 0.50 are estimated respectively Howwcr, these methods are general formulae for a given region and art nor specific to the Upper Bcles catchment. The arral distribution of storms and the pattern of their movement over the l ipper BeJrs catchment remain unknown as die nun gauge network is too spine to quantify this However, by comparing die ratio between <hc mean nuntail and maximum rainfall for all storms {>25 mm of average rainfall) between neighbouring gauges then some characterisation of the behaviour of storms in or near to the catchment can be made These results indicate that storms of vimilax characteristics are
ex pcnenccd at these tain gauges After considering all approaches an ARF of 0.75 is adopted
**sunung a 12 hr storm event for i catchment area of 865 km  to rhe right bank diversion weir,
:
he final design 12 hr rainfall depth? (for a catchment ares of 865 krrfl) after the ARF is applied Wc presented in Table 310.
''8 |"4 i i .
* 3111 Report (1)
47
l7A(av-|1Ftdrrd 
# EjhtptJ. Mitufri fit 4ttr &
EfSepuw Xilt          aid Dnmgt Prvr.1
Tabic 3-10: Final design rainfall depth* for Upper Bcles catchment 12 hr rainfall depth (mm)
Station
T= 1:2 yr
T= 1:10 yr
T= 1:50 yr
lipper Bcles
45
65
82
The temporal distributed 12 hr rainfall using the alternative block method (Chow shown in Figure 3-14
Figure 3-14: Design norm hyetograph for Upper Beles catchment (1:100 yr)
««!•1988) B
u
area of 590 km  Table 3-11 shows 24 hr PMP adjusted for a 0.9 ARF Table 3-11: Areal 24 hour PMPjmrn)
A dam is designed to discharge safely the maximum possible flood without nsk of failure. Ao estimate of the pn.babk maximum flood (PMF) is therefore required to estimate the spillway width of a dam to safely discharge a flood without ovenopping and endangering the dam The PMF flixxl is estimated based on probable maximum preetpttauon (PMP) which is the theoretical maximum precipitation that a given watershed can experience.
In this study, the WMO stattsocal method is used to estimate the 24 hour PMP based on the maximum annual dally ratnfall from the Pawe, and the nun gauges at Dangtla and Gorgora The estimated PMP depths based on daily maxima data for die Pawe, Ganglia and Gorgora nun were estimated and then dock' adiu.stment of I B was appltcd to transform daily values to a 24 hr PMP. Maximum areal rainfall decreases as the area increases therefore an areal reduction factor (ARF) is applied to the 24 hr PMP values. An ART of 0.9   used for a catchment with an
2
PMP daih^mm^
Pawe
(1987-2008)
Dangila
(1966-2005)
Gorgora
(1972-2006)
Average
506
W
233
359
CflH Mam Report 1)
48
17-Mav Ite *f**l',’’*~
The mean value for the three rain gauges giving a value of 359 mm is taken as the areal 24 hr pMP for the Upper Boles river catchment Dus 24 hr PMP depth is in close agreement with the
hr PMP depth rcPorT for rc8ion h? Mo^’ f2000) m rhc ordcr of 330 to 360 mm. This
provides confidence in the 24hr PMP depth estimated for this study.
Because there is no readily available information of the rainfall hourly distribution when extreme storm events occur, the 24 hr PMP values tabulated above were half-hourly distributed Then the accumulated rainfall value for each hour at the time of the PMP occurrence was determined Taking the differences berween adjacent hours it was possible to obtain the hall' houdv rainfall distribution during the two PMP events. The final step was in arrange the hourly senes for each PMP by using the Alternating Block Method (Chow et J. 1988) to give a
sub- hourly distribution of the 24 hr PMP applied to the Upper Boles river catchment.
Rainfall runoff modelling is used to transform the design rainfall ro design flood hydrographs for a range of return peood floods The hydrographs are generated using rainfall runoff model* in HEC-HMS version 3.2 Hydrologic Modelling Systems software. HEC-HMS software is designed to simulate die surface runoff resulting from rainfall. representing the catchment as a system of interconnected components. Catchment characteristics determined from the DEM included.
•     Catchment boundaries;
2
•     Catchment area (km ).
•      I-ength of the longest watercourse (km); and
•     Catchment average slope (m/m).
Each catchment was schematised into sub-catchments based on their drainage network Muskingum and Gunge hydrological routing was used to phase the tributaries* hydrographs together and then propagate the flood wave downstream to generate the hydrographs for a range of design storms with given return peood for locations upstream of the proposed diversion weir and proposed storage reservoir. The design flood peaks for the 1:2,1:10. 1:50 ind 1:100 year events upstream of the proposed storage dam site and right hank diversion weir site are tabulated below in Table 3-12 assuming natural conditions.
fable 3-12: Design peak flows (natural conditions)
Site
Catchment
Area
1
(km )
Design flow
(m7«)
T=E2 yr*
Design flow
(nP/a)
T=l:10vrs
Design flow
(n>7»)
T=l:50 yrs
Design flow
(“’/»)
T=tl00 yrs
Uiin site
590
141
325
527
620
Aversion
(nght)
865
196
456
742
870
j
( c) River Hood Levels
yoaulic analysis was undertaken using a HEC RAS mode) representing a section of channel T  rivci diversion weir site. Figure 3-15 shows the maximum water levels w long-section
for different return period design flows under natural conditions.X3
Fttfr'x 
a?          Mrwjrn tfWjffr
Lilwtva Ndt J*4 Dump Prv»f
section The hydraulic results arc tabulated in Table 3-13, 
Figure 3-15: Hydraulic long profile for T=l:2,1:10, 1:50 and 1:100 years (natural conditions)
Figure 5-16 presents the maximum water levels and velodhrs within the diver* Mon Weir
Qr Hri
Figure 3-16 Maximum levels at Diversion Weir -------------- 112° (natural condition.)
cro»s section for T=l:2,1:10,1:50 and
M
'W»^d p J.»n.,
n   t             TOn- OOCH^/m ,,,.............................. ,        ........._
H                                     Cl.l
I H J’-l Mjjn Report '!)
SO
t?-M.y HTable Vjj^Hydraulic results atJ*otg
Mio.
Return
period
Design
flow
(!»’/•)
channel
elevation
(masl)
<he diversion weir (natural conditions)
Velocity of
1,230
1J30
1.230
1.230
Water
surface
elevation
(masl)
1,253.73
1,23536
1,236.70
1.237,26  |
channel
1
(tn r )
3.50
486
5.86
6.25
Top width
(m)
2530
31 89
3595
0.70
0.76
0.80
0.81
3
(0 River Flood Flows including for Basin Transfer
Finally, it w necessary to superimpose likely maximum discharges for the basin dncrsion from Lake Tana to the Taoa-Beles hydropower staoon and into the Upper Beks river. The diversion to the Tana-Bdes power plant is based on a design discharge of 160 m'/s and a plant factor of 0.48. equivalent to an average discharge of 77 m /s. There arc 4 turbines, under normal operation there will be 1. 2 or 3 turbines in operation The fourth turbine is only used as a spare, during maintenance, or is used as an addinonal turbine when lake levels are high when the Chara-Chara weir is at risk of spilling.
The operating rules are simpk A minimum operational level of 1/84.0 masl is adopted and an average turbine discharge of 77 m'/s was assumed for a wide range of lake levels (lc. >1784 3 but <1787.0 masl). The discharge from the turbines is increased to 160 m'/s at high lake level (i.e. >!?8T0 masl) but operations arc stopped at low lake levels The regulated outflow to the Abbay river is fixed at 1* m’/i.
During the wet season, floods in the Upper Bclrs river could coincide with high lake levels above 1.78* 0 mask During such times discharge from the turbines of 160 m'/s could be released downstream into the Jehana river and be co mod ent with a flood peak generated from the natural catchment upstream of the storage dam and (right bank) diversion weir In this wont case scenario, the maximum design flood peaks to be expected at the storage site and the drversion weir were calculated based on flows in Table 3-12 These arc tabulated in Tabk 3-14. For a less extreme case Tabk 3-15 presents the maximum design peaks io be expected at the storage site and the diversion weir if the average discharges from the turbines of   m’/s are coincident with a large flood generated in the upper catchment.
T^ble 3-14: Designjscak flows (future condition with hydropower releases of 160 tn
7
Site
Catchment
Area
2
(km )
Design flow
(m’/s)
T=li2vrs
Design flow
(nP/a)
T= 1:10 yrs
Design flow
(®7»)
T= 1:50 yrs
Design flow
(uP/s)
T=l:100yrs
Stoq^ ute
590
301
485
687
700
Divernon Weir (right)
865
356
616
902
1030
Bp <M
"H ^pott (I)
17-May-W
51Fnimu RxM iftebufia. Mimsfi) *11 j/rr
Irnptot nd Owy Frtftd
fi.nirc condition with hydropower relearn of 77 n,
TabteS^DeM
,cak flows
Design flow
(tn1/1)
>/•)
Design flow
(mVs)
T=L2 yra
21R
273
Design flow | Design flow
Catchment
Area
T=l:50vrs
(*»’/•)
T=t:100yr>
Stonge wit
Divrrwon
Weir (right)
1
(km )
590
402
604
697
533
819
94’’
J.W
Dnntjy MMw
The drainage network should be designed to accommodate surface run-off for a 1:5 year an© penod storm. The values of the drainage modulus calculated by rhe sloping land method in tabulated below tn Tabic 3-16, for drainage areas of 50 ha. 500 ha, 1,000 ha and 3,000 ha Tb method with ns relevant slope category is proposed for use to estimate runoff and to size drainage works, determine flood bund / reservation limits for rivers, as well as to consider appropriation soil and water conservation measures along gullies and streams.
Remark*
Table
Nr
3-16: Drainage Moauiua v
Drainage Area (ha)
1
-
2
50
Al U C B    ________________ Sloping l«nd rational
method (<2%) (l/t/haL.
18.9
500
8.7
3
1.000
5.3                      —-
Main drainage ar«
4
3.000
_____________ M------------------------
336
incorporating rhe
Tana was developed using WEAP software
adjacent Belo catchnJn^ P^ncd future water resource developments in the Tana and for the Tana Bdes h dr °^^CCm’c modelling was to examine the operation rules without mipicnno j l                   101 ^^cmng water for irrigation in die Bclcs catchment dcctnary production            ***** ^eVe^ or cnvifonmenta] release to the Abbay river. or
In this study we re-examined rhe lake operational rule cun cs
SMEC'W>*’‘’a
.  a ,*^»Y
intent of
<t
present  a  modified  Haler  ou  -  GIRD  operation  rule  (see  Figure   during  the  critical  m^nl^
Hal crow - GIRD opairion rule 11 io divert more water for ltnP of the dry seasons, from January to April, by storing more seasons and tuning rcleasrs to coincide with this peak imga°°n same time preserving minimum water levels in Lake I xna
production
The VCEAP modelling results confirm the recommendarion minimum lake operation level of +1.784.75 masl to safe reduce impacts on Lake Tana and its environs. Results annual lake levels. and consequently lake area, with full 5*’alcr
r ana in the wet
penod, whilst it the
electricity
bv SMEC(2008)<o> °P ^
be the dechnc in *
development in thc
d      ,,1   bel
I ’M H Main Report (j)
|7.M«y-H
52Mmtrf tfW^rr .■'Twp
X>k W” "’■’'
and Beks catchments. Also that the magnitude of this decline in lake lock is dependant on
| IOW the Tana Beks Scheme is operated, which then dictates the penod of tunc when monthly lake levels exceed + IJU5 masl required bv shipping for safe navigation of Lake Tana
Figure J-17: Hallow -             GIRD operation rule uning minimum Like levels of + 1784.75 mxsl Halcrow & GIRD operational rule for Lake Tana (mln 1784 75 mail)
Mow
rdevtri
(ffl’l'l
£
*
178SC®
I 787 75
1787  50
1/87    25
l za 7 oo
1786 75
1786 50
1786.25
■ 160
■ 120
■ 80
40
-M  1786 00
J
1785 75
B0
1785   50
1/85 25
1786  00
1784 75
Jun Jul Aur Sep Oct frtov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
1
When the Tam-Beks scheme is operated using: {hc SMI T operation rule (min. — 1784. <5 mas!)
lhe mein like level declines bv 0 45 m to + 1/85 6 masL Lake levels remains above +1,785 mas I
lor 85"  o of the time Results, are similar when thr 1 lalcrow - GIRD npcranon rule is used to
npetite thr diversion of water from Lake Tana to the hydropower station in the Udes
catchment; (hr mean lake level tails by 0 38 m to a water level of + 1,785.7 masl. I-ake water
levels remain high exceeding +1,785 masl for 80" u of the time period
Lake levels arc marginally improved and more water in Lake Tana is available tor transfer to the
Bdcs catchment if the environmental flow requirements reported by McCartney et al (2009.1
using the DRM approach are adopted rather than those recommended in the ELA fBellicr,
1997) for the Abbay river
If flow releases from the hvdmpciuer station arc uncontrolled,  based.  of
turbmes), annua! iake levels dedtne drama-‘^aX
the time Navigation would remain an annual probl
level m any vear from January to June.
When the Halcrow - GIRD operation rule is adopted consistently higher compared to those achieved using t c . 
would hardly exceed tins
• ■
“             Gino 
months in particular from January tn May compare to t
advantages;
■"
using
critical drv season
“n~ >... -
Lli3,,1Main Rt
In
53
17-Muy-ll•*           Shtufn           d~E^p
lixfMpM *\7i /rrpvce* rfwAvag* An*/
i Ftrsdy. despite an innuri reduction in eJectnaty production of 3»
ndc  (min  +1.78-1  mas/)  dectnaty  production  increase,  hr  10%  '  COrnpVtd  to br 7% from January to June Ibis is considered hkdy to be a period
sourer, of hydro-power are hkely to be constrained by water ,h dectnaty u most saluable. 
Otht«
u. Secondly, it allows a greater area of irrigation to be developed before storage on
ortages and
Enat Belts is required, and less storage need be provided when it is needed
bdow. 
**'
Wafer balance modelling to determine the size of reservoir storage was earned out for fa demand options, AD, representing different cropping panems (farm type mix) within th project area Option .A has a low demand with little sugarcane cropped, while options B. I represent higher crop water demands associated with increasing areas of sugar cane. Irng; demand Option C broadly represents a core sugar estate over about half the irrigation are while Option D represents 100% sugarcane cropping Irrigation crop water requirements water demands are presented in Section 4.3.
Water balance modelling results indicate that for irrigation demand Options A, B, and C n itonge is required for a net irrigation area of about 75,000 ha if the Halcrow - GIRD ope: rule is adopted, after which storage is required. A development of about 90.0(H) ha would require storage of 70 190 Mm’ depending on crops grown and irrigation and conveyance efficiencies, see Table 3-18 below' For irrigation demand Option D (100% sugarcane,, stot is required after development of about 60,000 ha
Table 3-17. Storage requirement for different areas of irrigation for low, medium and
—-—fogatioa   duties   (Halcrow   -   GIRD   operation   rule   1,784.75   masQ
Irrigibofl Option A I Irrigation Option B I Irrigation Option C
Irrigation Optio
(Medi
um)
(Maximu
m)
Groat
storage
Dam
height
Gross
Gross
D»
storage
Dam
bright
Gross
storage
Dam
height
storage
bei|
I 15,000
0o
(™)
0
0
3
(Mm )
0
r to.
1—r 0_
1
I (Mm )
0 
0
AB o
25.000
0
0
0
00
■MOO
0
0
90.000
_____ 0
_____ 0_
_____ 0_
___ 39
0_____
0_____
30
50____
90____
0
2_
o
42
53
0 _
40
75
HO
150
190
39
49
64
70
J_____ «
"■ »» »■«»>., fwiHnpMi<)pixjnj
f
,', t 'T
l
C nJ° <*l7“'75"“■« •»
P
*"> «T«" ,h'   Beto
'^Icm rome ^cement
u
o f Tanl Bdes hydfppo*«
prudent to consider construction of n storage reservoir which would ensure ir h
A/am Report (1)
|7-Al>yJr
6
30” E (see Figure 3-18 below), has much better stage storage characiensncs’ . A 120 m high dam at Dangur would store about 4,640 Mm' This compares co fust 378 Mm’ for rhe largest (possible) dam tn Upper Beks. The natural catchment of the Dangur dam is also large. 8.980 km- compared to just 590 km- for the Upper Bdes dam site. The Dingur reservoir would flood about 12.000 ha compared to 1,100 ha for the Enat Bdes dam.
rhercforc based on the data available the Dangur dam cost per volume stored is likely to be much cheaper than for the Enat Beks dam. This indicates that the Upper Beks dam should only be sized to ensure irrigation within Upper Bdes A Hyma, and spcabcillv for the left bank command As the total Upper Bdes and Hyma irrigation area is unlikely to be more than about
•' 3-85,000 ha then a small dam / diversion weir, high enough to command the Upper Beks Lett Bank Main Canal, may well be appropriate’"
suppli« for about a rnonth ir pcak dcnuniK por example, for the envisaged Upper Beks
(ecduding I lyma) net irrigation area of 63,870 ha then fare storage of 203 Mm’ (k dam option \ with FSL of 1.405) is equivalent to a delta of 0.32 m and would meet drv season crop water
requirements for about 5-6 weeks This would provide securin’ to farmers in event chat upstream hydropower releases are not as expected for what n et reason. However this would be xn expensive and probably unnecessary expense
I nng term irrigation development envisages about 10-20.000 ha being developed in the adjacent Hyma river catchment tn addition to 63.8" 1 ha tn Upper Beles. Aho it is understood that about 85.000 ha could be developed in the Lowrr Beles valley.
| lowever no storage is needed for initial irrigation development of 50 -75.000 hi and it is therefore suggested that the Upper Beles nght bank and Hyma could first be developed (Lc. SDAs I, II & in for about 42 52,000 ha comprising the nght bank command area of 31,509 ha and Hvma for 10 20,000 ha) The Enat Bdes storage dam unuld then be built simultaneous with development of the Upper Beles left bank command. The size of the dam would depend
on:
•      Actual net irrigation irea in Hyma;
•     Actual operating experience of the Tana-Beks power station, and
•      Actual crop water requirements for the nght bank (A 1 lyma) command.
It is not considered cost effective to build a large dam at Upper Beles with any provision for irrigation in flower Beles. ’Hie Lower Beks dam site at Dangur, located at IV' 06’ 3” N, 35 ’ 50’
' R'ferBCE()\fp
' "The dei. 
Phase 2 Dam Project Studied (also referred to in the SMEC rn> n ’ ppl) level for the Upper Belts Left Bank Main Canal is + 1,335 mad
u
Uh H\i
:<r P«T (|)
55
r May iiM
tf&h+L
& liwrg
Lt.’nfiu' Xilf Irr^M MJ Dm* Pr**t
Fip..tf 3-18c Location of Lower Bolea (Dangur) Dam
I
3.4
34 1
Lu></ Beaoarm
’Hie Study .Area comprises a sloping (concave) alluvial and colluvial basin p am
the Enat
Bclcs River. ’rhe plain is narrow tn the north where the over spills out of th flortb to south quickly broadens southwards. At its widest point the plain is about 40 km-
the plain falls from about +1,450 m to +1.000 m At its eastern margin the plain + 1.450 masl to +1,250 mas) and al its western margin from 4-1,350 mas tu elevation (north to south).
The plain is cut across Tertiary sheet basalts in the north and ^a>rfn sediments in the south Since its formation the plain has been cos illuvial and colluvial sediments deposited as coalescent fans IxDth by tributary streams, particularly iho$e from the cast
In the north where the Enat Bclcs leaves the mountains the st di me surfaced upper fan deposits. Southwards, these deposits pass into <-
0
t low grade metam ^^
(pre*) P^5toCe0C
an d by •<*
• . Abat “cles
deposm - the so-called Dercbay Plain. The main cast-bank tributary is ' c
p!»in» inter*** ‘ alluvial fan »represented bv the so-called Werka Mcda Pl*m 1110                   1
rtitely latitude 11 26 confluence of the Enat and Abat Bclcs Rivers, at approximately
at the
Since fomuum, the owe extensive plain* have been (and '‘””T
U nuetotx)red
ucedbyV<0
, fftTialn »«**•
active headward erosion Now, only few large surfaces o              slxOngly wcathe^ fCtl C Original plain surfaces remain as gentlv sloping land
17-NW
.11
t’R H Man Rcpiwr (|)
56on higher part* and w>th Veztuol, on slightly lower slope, 
JuHice, „e
*«'   Of   the   Enar   Bde.   River   md.   east   of   the   river,   on   the   internes   between   the   Abac   Bde, ind Keteb Rivers.
In summary three broad types of landscape exist in the Study Area-
. Rough, meued aHuvtal fan, m the nonheasr and. on a smaller scale, the (u east, .e the
land north-cast of the F.nat and Abat Beles over,
.   Broad   plains   in   the   north-west   (the   Derdny   plain)   and   central   (Werk   Meda   plain)   pans
. Narrow ndge and complex broken topography in the southern parts Current (Recent) alluvial depos,non in the Study Area „ very restricted beaiue valley, ire
not
ire shown on Figure 3-19. Project area topography and elevation were shown previously on Figure 3-7.
57
n-M«T-njShfcuu P ur“•VfEuiJ urt^hfiZ]
iXrnifj
& &/«W rn^fr//y > -
JWU’Wfl /nupJJtfEliuf*                •fVMr&Eiu p'
Wf
(
a)
Soil Types
In  broad  term
s  the  ge
neral  sod  pancm  is  straightforward.  On  the  gendy  sloptng  stable
surfaces
deep, 
weather
ed reddish day soils have developed on the upper slopes. Exchangeable
bases have been leached from these soils, leaving an acidic matrix in which residual iron unpins
the red colouration Downslope, under the warm and alternating wet-dry climate the bases have synthesised with silica to form montmonUomtic day These deep cracking days (Vertisols) occupy stable lower (relative to the red soils) topographic positions The parent matenaJ for
these soils ts primarily the alluvial / colluvial veneer overlying the sobd geology although the
reddish days and Verrisok can develop in-situ from basalt and basic metamorphic rocks
Where either headward or surface erosion is gradually destroying the old surfaces the red days
and verrisok have degraded. 'Fhc resultant soik on the erosion surfaces are: (i) shallow phases
of the red days and Verrisok described above; (li) deep and moderaidy deep brown and dark brown divs, frequently with vrrtic properties; and (iii) very shallow and/or stony sods where
erosion has exposed bedrock and/or where there are outcropping hills or ridges
The mapr sod groups are therefore:
•      Deep, upland red day sods (NdiwA Lmvo/j}.
•      Deep L frtAroZr,
z
•      Deep and moderately deep brown and dark brown clay sods (Camhut and
•      Shallow and very shallow sods (< 10 m deep), L/p/oroZr. and mduding shallow
Verrisok.
Additionally, alluvial soils (FAtp/joZi) are of very minor ex lent. There are no extensive tracts of deep, fertile, flood*tree alluvium Valley sides arc steeply sloping and usually have shallow soils. Vaflcy floors are narrow, flood regularly, and contain a complex of alluvial sods.
The 1:100,000 scale Al Soil/ Map. reproduced as Figure 3-20, shows the distribution of sod
types. The sod mapping units arc the polygons shown on the Sod Map. Sod map units arc not
to be confused with sod types map units usually contain more than one sod type.
Vertisols cover half of the Study Area, about 68.061 ha Sods VP1, VP 2 and VH1 are by far the most extensive, together accounting for two-thirds of lhe Verrisok
The red dap fN id sola, Luvisok) together cover about 19.847 ha, or 14% of the Study .Vea Cambisok cover only 5% of the area, about 6,495 ha
U P«®»ols, Valley Complexe*. HiU» and Village. - ill of them unsuitable for irrigated agnculturc - cover 31% of the area, about 43,223 haFtiitrjl Dft** Tufu public q Eibuptu, Afimtrn l^tfrr & Entt^
t
ElhupM Nik Imfph" Jtd DrorMp Ptyrtrr&*'
4Mwfry &,
X'* 
'** Hmm?
(b)
Soil Physical Properties
lhe overall average infiltration rate for the red days (N. Rl and R2) is a moderately rapid 10 6 cm/hr. For the Cambisols (CV, P and B) the average infiltration rate is a rapid 12.9 cm/hr
These average infiltration rates reflect good soil structure and friability, despite the high day content of the soil* Infiltration rates up to about 15 cm/hr are regarded as suitable (albat marginally) for surface irrigation of most crops except ncc. Rates above this are generally considered to be t<x> high for successful surface irrigation. All rhe infiltration rates are suitable for pressure irrigation
Somewhat surprisingly given the high infiltration rales the average subsoil permeability for
the red days fN, Rl and R2) is only a moderate 0.6 m/day. Minimum values art slow However, despite low to moderate permeability the sods are all well drained and show no signs of any significant waterlogging The Cambisols (CV, P and B) all lack the good subsoil structure and friability ol the red dap. Consequently, their hydraulic conductivity is very slow (minimum) to slow (maximum and average values) The lower is (he subsoil permeability the more chance
there is for topsoil waterlogging and poor subsoil aeration. For all sods oo flat land (or if under surface irrigation where land slopes are reduced by terracing), given the high infiltration rites, some care will be required to ensure dial irrigation is commensurate with drainage capability If not, there are risks of waterlogging, excess run off and erosion. Periodic deep cultivation would benefit the aeration and drainage of these soils.
Soil Available Water Capacity is the volu Ium ™ of   e     «ter held between IxJd opaty wd uniting* Q 6                    „
point for a specified soil depth, usuJly the num
(e g u5fflR Qop««)
recommended   (hat   to   avoid   over-watering.   P   <   aWC   values   from   12.6%   (126   mm)
adopt 0.6 m soil depth rather than the conventional I J to 28 1% (281 mm) are typical and this range represents am e Converting the AWC (%) <o actual amounts of wTiter wilting point to field capacity shows a range of 66 to 1
Field experiments to determine the amounts of vvllcr lo and the time liken for cracks to re open were conduct an indication of the frequency and amount of water app between 0.2 m and 0.6 m Few roots, even of crops sue ** bey ond this lhe chosen irrigation regime will obvious y
of
*
for all soils,
top 0.6 tn of 5011 £,om
saturate a Vertisol to depths to 0.6 m,
A(WCX 1). The results give
f or a fanp of rooting depths
canc anJ marie, extend
looting depth of the
8 1 * X,a«n Rrpon fjj
61
17 May-IlDrwamtir
VatMfxao N4                 Df**P p^
crops under consideration The field experiment results indicate that irrigations of (up ,f
160 mm at 21 day intervals are likely to be suitable for reasonably deep rooted crop, mature sugarcane), while irrigations of (up to) about 90 mm at about 10 day intervals lfer^ suitable for medium-5 hallow rooted crops.
Only the Luvisols and Fluvisols have satisfactory bulk densities throughout (harproQk, c other soils are compact in some or other horizon The bulk density measurements geneulh confirm the field descriptions of consistence, which is mainly hard or very hard dry faring soils. Vertisols and Vcrtic Cambisols are all poorly aerated at field capacity, throughout theu depth. However, even when major cracks are filled and the Vertisols have swelled, roots (th^ below about 20 cm) can extract sufficient oxygen from minor cracks that remain unsaturated AU other sods have a reasonable air capacity in the topsoil but may suffer from reduced rubvn aeration.
Soil depth is usually deeper than 1 5 m to 2 0 m and ven frequently at least 4.0 m deep but most soil types have a gravelly phase, where the subsod becomes stony and/or very gravelly it some depth between 0 6 and 10 m The gravelly sod phase is not considered to be unsuitable for lmgarion because gravels are not a barrier to roots or water However. on slopes above 3% gravelly soils are unsuitable for irrigation if terracing is required Sods having < 0.6 m depth have been mapped as unsuitable for irrigated agriculture IJic Ixplosok and Regosols (types 1! to L4) all overlie rock within 0.25 m or arc very stony down to rock, usually within 1.0 m. They are all unsuitable for irrigated farming
Soil Btruciurea of the red clay soils arc usually moderately or strongly developed blocky breaking to fine blocky These structures assist good drainage The Vertisols have coarse prismatic and blocky structures, The structures are strongly developed but in terms of their effect on drainage and rooting they' are completely overridden by rhe shrink swell characterise of the day.
Soil texture is predominantly dav, both topsoil and subsod When dry. topsod consistence is hard (most soils) or very hard (Vertwola). When moist, consistence is fnable The Vertisols are characterised by a thin (< 0.1 m) (op horizon which regularly wets and does during the rainy season to a fnable granular mulch Sub-soils arc very’ hard and compact when dry The Verm*1 sod peds are very hard and separated by wide and deep cracks. VChen moist, the sub-sods of r*3 day sods become fnable. Consequently, despite the high percentage of day the sods remain weD drained and permeable The sub sods of the Vertisols remain firm or very firm even when
moist.
Most soils have a moderate potential to erode 1,15Cd on measured percentage of very fine sand plus silt, total sand, organic matter content, and the field estimation of soil permeability and soil structure). Actual erosion depends on topography, rainfall and land use In the wet season. Io maintain ground cover and to reduce slope lengths is . miun n-^ement of land husbandry / conservation, given the moderate propensity of the soils to erode. This is increasingly the case as slopes increase
62
Mun Report (1)
17-May H(c)             Soil Chemical Properties
The following generalisations can be made from the analytical dam available:
« AU «oiJ  ha
s
ve a hlKh nutrient retention capaary and air highly base-taturated, especially
W
with calcium and magnesium
•       Vertisols and Huvisols are slightly acid (average pH range 5,5 - 6.8). The Nimols. Luvisoh and Cambisols arc more acidic (average pH range 4.7 — 5,6)
•       There arc no extreme pH values that might warn of potential sodidry or lodirv. but some crops may respond to liming
•       The Vertisols and Ver tic Cambisob generally have low levels of available phosphate throughout rhe top 0.6 m Values in the other soils are higher Ail soils have low available phnspahatc.
•       Adequate levels of exchangeable potassium are usual within the top 0.6 m, levels tnav be low below this depth
•       I^evels of nitrogen are everywhere low.
•      The Vertisols all have low levels of organic carbon in the topsoil Levels tn all the other topsoils arc slightly higher. Only some Fluvisob have any significant amounts of organic carbon below’ the topsoil.
•       Calcium; Magnesium ratios arc all below 5, so magnesium availability even m the presence of high levels of potassium is likely to be satisfactory.
•      All the soils are non-calcareous, non-saline and oon-sodic.
Only Fluvisols can be considered to be in any way fertile. The other soils are all deficient in nitrogen and all have a low to moderately low organic carbon content Levels of potash are usually sufficient, such that any significant response to potassium fertiliser is iinhkeh’. Levels of phosphate are shown to be most variable but have probably been overestimated'. For sustained agriculture the levels of organic maner must be increased and regular applications of N and P fertiliser will be essential. Given the acidic nature of all the sods any N, P fertiliser should be of a non-acidifying type There are micro-nutrient issues specific to some sod types. None of die sod profile or auger analyses, even of deep honrons, indicate any sod salinity or sodidiy.
(a) Objectives and Procedures
and   terminology   of   the   classification   follow   the   Fwnvrkjitr   Lm/   EveiwifM*   (FAO   Soils Pulleun 32. 1976). I*he land suitability assessment considers ma LUTs These arc:
63
17 May-IlFtdtrul
VjfMc
>f V<»" & E*T
i’t/Mpta* Ndf lrnpfio* Jftd Dnanq* Pry*t
The following notes in this section describe the fundamental assumptions made m  „,
a
land to suitability classes and the issues arising. A full explanation of the land suitabiLt^ * assessment and of the assumptions and criteria being applied are given SR-02A. Annex M
Vertisols may be more suitable for large enterprises because these would be expected to hr the machinery capable of working the soils more easily and quickly. Similarly, large enterp^ would be expected to have greater ability' to fertilise poor soils, to provide other inputs and • benefit from economics of scale Conversely, the nerd for soil conservation on sloping^
that results in small terraced fields would be problematic for large enterprises with big machinery, but of less concern to smallholders. The possibility to provide pressure imgarzrjj. smallholders (LITT 4) remains but is an unlikely option The technical skills and mawtourxr requirements of pressure irrigation arc currently well bey ond the resources of most smallholders.
The cropping patterns and options for the LUTs have been evaluated by project agronomists based on matching the crop requirements with characteristics of the sod types as set out in SR 02A. Annex N. The matching provides the agronomic rules for optimisation of cropping patterns in the project area used tn the Farm Revenue Optimisation Model (see SR-02B Chapter 5) and Section 4.2 of this Main Report.
The classification assumes that the required drainage, particularly of Vertisols, will be provided If there is no intention or budget to do this then the lands arc unsuitable for irrigated agriculture
Some soil types have a low hydraulic conductivity but when fully and continually’ moist (as wtri irrigation) sub-soils arc friable and sufficiently permeable. The classification assumes that irrigated cultivation will ensure sufficient aeration and internal drainage of these soils, aided by periodic deep cultivation if necessary.
The classification also assumes that any required soil conservation measures will be put in pl>ce- Without the guarantee of such measures the environmental and agricultural sustainability of the project is jeopardised and much potentially suitable land would have to be otherwise classified as unsuitable for irrigated agriculture Land has been classified on the basis that slopes above
3% arc cuncndl not suitable for
imganoQ Only if terracing and appropriate soil
conservation measures are provided is such land considered suitable for irrigation.
Vertisols even on low slopes arc known to be very credible so for surface irrigation conservation measures will be required, including lerraang and leading runoff along contour* penmeter (natural) drainage ditches. The measures required arc desenbed in SR-02D Section 3 Assuming that such conservation is feasible (examples from international practice are bmitrd)* vertisols on slopes above 3% (up to 8%) are classified as currently unsuitable (i.e potentially suitable) for surface irrigation
Terracing of the deep, redduh and brown uphnd aoil. i, frjllble for slopes of 12% because these soils are more Mabie and Cln luppon
M
up [£1
UH F4 Main Report (I)
17-Mar-H&&! !******•
Mntutr,           er E^
fjh^ l'rT*,tfla* aa^Ontfa^t Pr^nr
,|<>pes increase so too must the conservation effort, and the
<ak Agm
fold »e< .nd <te. r.dd, udid,- „ be
r
6% ^XT7”“»
remmoi|
P^liUXCjHlganon :s feasible on land sloping to 12*i <o nn
sloping  land Hower.  sod conservation ts sod required,  prwdodh^ " rr<’Ulr")'° """ *endv
oo 
x"
P ^±ZT^ “            "< ™h
f„
Surprisingly, most of the non-verasols show consistently high infiltration rates, such that they
are marginally suitable for surface irrigation find even highly sunable for sprinklers). These high rates may be due to well-structured and fnablc day top sods AU the soils with high infiltration rates have a high percentage of day in the topsoil and it is assumed that a certain amounr of puddling can be undertaken if necessary to slow infiltration Irrigation itself will tend to reduce infiltration rates by naruraJ sdtaOon along furrows and in basins It is isturned that any irrigation development can manage currently high infiltration rates.
All soils have low organic matter and low fertility and are marginally suitable for sustained firming. I lowevcr, this factor does not enter the classification because it is assumed that the irrigation project will include components to improve sod fertility. It is expected that commercial enterprises will conserve and improve their land and, likewise, that small farmers with increased productivity from irrigation will divert some profit to improving the fertility of their holdings. The point is made that the full benefits of irrigation will only be realised if sod fertility is also significantly improved.
(b) Land Suitability Map
The resultant land classification is set out in SR-02A Table 9-3, the 1:100.000 scale Al Land Suitability Map, and on figure 3-22 below.
Table 3-18 shows the area for each suitability map unit for the Study area of 137.626 ha. Table 3-19 summarises the data and shows that there are up to 75.833 ha of land suitable (S2 or S3) or coodidonalh- suitable (N1) for surface irrigation, depending on the LUT selected. For pressure spnnlder unganon there are up io ^.OOS ha of land suitable or conditionally suitable, again depending on the LLT selected.
These figures represent about 55% of the Study Area of 138,145 ha.
0)
65
17 May 11Ftdmd               RptH. 9f E/hapj. Miwfry a/ ITdr & Earg ElNafaaa Stir Irv^jhaa and Prur«<f PnrM
Tabic 348: Extent of land •uitabilin classes and subclasses
auic
Land
Unit
Suitability class, subclass
Slope,
%
Soil type
LUTl
LUT3
LUT2
LUT 4
LUT 6
LUTS
H.
Surface
irrigation
Sponldei
irrigation
lv
0-2
S3wv
S2wv
S3wv
S2^T
1 —*-<^1 Uis
2v
>2-3
S3tv
S3rv
3v
>3-6
Vertisol j VP1 VP2 VP3
Nit
(S3rv)
S3rv
S2tv
Nit
(S3tv)
’J®
4v
>6-8
S3tv
5v
>R- 12
VH1 VH2
VE (on slopes < 3%
only)
N2t
N2t
Mt
(S3tv)
Mt
(S3tv)
ml
Nle(v)
0-8
Nle
Nle
Me
Nle
ill
Sub-total:
■      ■'L
56,7«"
lr
0-2
S2s
S2s
S2s
—
S2s
2r
>2-3
S3t
S3t
S3t
3.771
3r
>3-6
Nimols. Luvisols,
Cambisoh
Nit
(S3c)
S3t
S2st
43M
4r
>6-8
N
R1 R2 CV P B
Nit
(S3t)
2W
Sr
>8-12
N2t
Mt
(S3t)
Nir
(S3t)
301
N!e(r)
0-8
Nle
Nle
Nle
Nle
1.550
S
ub-total:
1935
N2
> 12
1.1 —14; others
N2
T
N2
N2
N2
57.471]
Hills:
——--------------------------------------------------- -----------  Villages :
UZL
—
Total;
U7^L
Table 3-19: Results of the land
Suitability class
Surface irrigation
Sprinkler irrigation
Vertisols
Non-V ertisols
Vertisols
Suitable (S2 or S3)
45.760
12,560
55,912
Non-Veg”
17,412
CondiDonallv suitable (M)
sod conservation required
10.810
6.703
833
1,851
Total:
56,570
19,263
56.745
19,263
75,833 (55*
of Study Area)
76,008 (55% of Study Ak»)
H J-4 Maun Report (I)
66
17-Mn-l\_ A J______ k       ALA___ 1                  U\ '
(-1-1 i
» * •
tUp.**. 4 lu****.
C* Haip
A>* b^ft^
P***r
UR IM Main Hcprvn (1)
67
17-MiyllFt^trsl
S Elfapta. ,\f
tnt
j^     Water & Li"ty
b.thtstin ,\de           and Dnxn^f PnrfiT
: 4.4        Sod m Land .1 {.inaptmtn!
(«) Drainage and Sod Conservation
kpeodj. for Vertisols, a proper dramage ditch network mil need careful d hour, for dry foot crop, and wtthm 3 days for anvZce'cTnp The p
’"M
w«« following 
fronj
P  P^nty u to rono^
^^^foaX'^d         f         S,OPCS             bCrW'CCn             3%             amJ             8%             "         MU,ab'e             tOeiU<K:
xrnganou ) or fl,, 
planted with tree-lines ft,
fodder
fhc non-Vertisols at Bclcs
*"* te™« (<y^
■   ‘" unRaUon) 10(1 smooth risers that uiDtr ? fnl cu'tI',n“n) and gras, / shrub strips to provide cx-ao.'i-
ensure that excess rainfall     C^cncra^.' well or moderately well drained The mur. orer.i
surface dnwavr m --
lrn gabon can be led off rhe land safrlr hr careful cuntomp
' '
ri           r
gcr,)cx,$ung streams. 
'■° "«‘J yp«, because raostoffh . u .
*hgncd to contours »n n. , 
° w sloping rhe drainage network must be cuct>
•nd not across the slope with I tnchaa sugar estiie, for f
a 'SOcu,c^ U1di furrows so any furrowing must be v* C,ed runu^ bang carefully led to contoured drain’ 3
^rrow, , l
m Venuo|j
P C’ 'Cn',U5 w°‘<on occurred at the downstream end of^'
^^gradrennaretoosteep
,n fldd ,'tmtio  of ua
n              (ct c .
null ba’inj, terracing, and vegeuttJ'^^ bj con,our furrowing and planting. crel“’n o) «««» wj, hcJp ,nfiJtra J°“'our ’tnP’ Deep cufovation of sods pnor to th*
S °llWCv^ J^l,On
h
fs;o 'aDofth
j.
eivu iWru a(c
^herenr v
an< )l lh. , 5Ornn*'here betu^cn k »r
i|
uld adopt 0.6 m soil depth rathe
s Irrigation frequency
tHC '’vaXV5 PkntI ,mgaU°n frtt,UCflCy
Vcrnsols FlcW
 ob en-,^X°  * «^«m
1
n
g
component has been
o ‘‘°^ AWC
to schrduJr imgatR>n ahOn °f 80,11
<nd sod 3nd ConccP'« of bale
^UJon is cventuaHr   A, mnre rch>bk
° ^ tion is eventually a far more fcl
n
a
t ’B F’4 Mam Rrpoa fjj
68M* 1^"-            Dn’**' '‘'^
M image men i of \ erusoils
and conservation hive been outlined above For lmgatinn, water will onlv penetrate Vertisols via the cracks, and once these dose any additional irrigation will pond or runoff. The keys are: p) to establish an irrigation regimen related to the drying cycle; and (ifl to provide adequate surface drainage both to control and remove surplus water (rainfall or irrigation,!
Jr is difficult to routinely schedule irrigation on VertMoLs bcause 0 water doc* not enter nr permeate the soil evenly - water enters the soil only through the cracks; and (ii) conventional ihcon or Held capacity and AWC does not apply well to Vertisols The objective is hi irrigate when the cracks arc opened to the full rooting depth mormilly between 0.2 m and 0 6 m depending on the crop) and to then replenish the soil quickly until the cracks dose If irrigation is tort gentlr or slow (especially likely in the case of pressure tmganon) then the cracks will close ar rhe surface with insufficient waler penetrating in depth. It lmgaimn is too rapid or excessive (r specially on sloping land or along over-sleep furrows) then runoff will cause the sods in Practical experience on the Gezira *chcmr (for cotton) in Sudan indicated an optimum
under Semi-Arid Conditions. IBSRAM Proceeding? No. 6. 1987]
Tltc Gczira findings indicate that when the crack? are filled (by rainfall or imgaiion) thr top 0 2
7
or die plants may drown. [Firhmther. H, G. IF aUr At
NRI, Chatham, UK- I996]r
hr the Sudan Gt^nir A
69
t? Afar 11Ftdri Phwta- R/?«xr.           Atiwty flf'Fafir e> Eftrrg
/uaupwn A*dr /wnfiix utt Prurt^ P/w.r
(d General fertility improvement
Soil fertility has been discussed in Section 3 4.2(c). Lex els of soil organic carbon ire ncBnh|
low or moderately low Only the Fluvisols have adequate amounts but these sods arc of extremely limited extent A good organic content takes time to build-up and is crucial io promote good structure, permeability, waterholding and nutncnt-rctention. ()rganic nunc conservation is the single most important factor to improve soil fertility
Soil analyses indicate that, currently it least, levels of K are adequate but it is likely that most crops will respond to P fertiliser. Levels of N arc low and regular (o<>n-acidifying) mtropmu fertiliser will be essentia) for afl crops
Most soil homons in all soils have pH (waler) levels above 5.0 and many have pH levels per than 5.5 Currently there is no genera] requirement for Lining Sustained irrigation may potentially cause leaching of bases, lowering the pH (a pl I lower than 5 0 may cause yicid reductions in some crops) but any such trend would be countered by additions of fertihei ini by maintaining or increasing levels of organic matter. The minimum pl 1 of the noo-5 ertwob
excluding soil F2) is 4.7 so some crops might benefit from small additions oi lime in son*
places.
Sod analyses have indicated deficiency of manganese in soils R1. Ri B and 1 ~ in  all the
crops is sensitive to manganese deficiency. Also, levels of zinc arc k>w or e Vertisols, in the veroc ( ambisols (CV, and in soil type P. Ihr crops most sen deficiency are maize, conon. legumes and atrus. Potential micronutrient c checked by sod tests and foliar analyses during crop growth, and rectified as pP
Hie full benefits of irrigation will only be realised if soil fertility » also signific Smallholders with secuntv of tenure will probablv care for and improve their
have irrigation. Commercial enterprises operating on leases will, we hope, do sUffidcflt arc risks. There is plentiful evidence of long-term extensive monocroppuxg
inputs that has left soils utterly depleted, compacted and eroded
zinc
b
The Study Area is mainly undulating, so given the potential runoff care application of fertiliser and precautions may be needed to prevent cuti p ditches and men.
1.4.5      Lrtl Ccvtrand 1 mJ Ujr
Table 3-20 below and Figure 3 23 show the distribution of land cox er an
be needed *
o
f Jraina?
protect (command area. The land cover/land use is largely split bCl5
h   cf rftinfed
^^
degrees of tree cover which covers Sl.SOOha (37%) of the area and s ° , 28.8°°*” th which coven almost 43,(K)0ha or 31% of the area Woodland coven a 
and nvenne forest an imponini 5%.  Other land uses such as village' *c*  ^
with^
vAf rt *
**
vcr
bet*0*0
farmland, irrigated and mechanised cainfed farming and eucal)?,uS plan’*000 100 and tJOOha corresponding to around 1% each of the total area
1 H F4 Mam Rqxvr (1)
1? May11FjH^
lm M!a  D
t    '  ™’J?'Pn^1
Woodland has been mapped throughout the project area with the highest cover on the left bank ui B'BF-(S). VW and IVC Rtvenne forest Jtmtlarh occurs throughout the area but plantation forestry u confined to the south of the area in Stage Development Areas (SDA) III, IVC and V Cultivated land is also scattered throughout the area but is concentrated in the south and east ui stages HI. [VC and V with another area around Jawi in the northwest Comparing the nght and left banks shows rather more grassland on the nght bank (45% compared to 33%), but rather more woodland tn the left bank (22% compared to 18%). Cui m ated land, mostly smallholder managed rainfed cropping, extends over 30% on the right bank, concentrated in the north ansi south (SDAs IA & III), and 32% on the left bank, mostly in the south (SDAs IV-C and V).
Natural vegetation is highest on the nght hank in SDA IB and on the left bank in IVA, IVBVl IVCS and VW and the highest degree of human influence in SDAs VN, VS, IVCS, III 1A and IVCE.
Land Cover/Land Use Catcgon
Dominant Composition
Symbol
1                      Description
Trect
/ba
Shrubs
% /ba
Grass %
/ha
Area
(ha)
%
Land Cover
G1
| Open Grassland
0
<5
>50
3.790
3
G2
Grassland. scattered trees
<10
<5
>50
1R.475
13
G3
Grassland, scattered trees, shrubs
<10
<25
>50
5.132
4
Gs
Shrub Grassland
<10
>25
>50
664
<1
GW
Wooded Grassland
10 35
n/a
>50
23,487
17
------- _____ 
Subtotal
51,447
37
Woodland
>35
<25
n/a
16.036
12
Wo
< >pm Woodland
1035
>25
n/’a
2,399
2
wL
Shrub Woodland
10-35*
>25
n/a
10.363
7
~-------- Subtotal
23.749
21
RF
Rxvcnne Forest
Dense shrubs, trees, grassland
6.928
5
Subtotal
6.928
5
L ,<
p
.Smallholder nunfed farming ''includes scattered buildings)
42459
31
1
J^l^allholdcr Irrigated farming
108
<1
M
^Mechanised rainfed farming
535
<1
H
.Jl^mlcr (loose duster of settlements dr rainfed farming
1.344
1
V
(nucleated settlements i
1,318
I
J^
_JiS^yprus & Acacia i Plantation
575
<1
1 it t
Subtotal j
46339
34
JJU
-Unclassified
4,694
3
Project Area
138,157
100
T*ble 3-20 shows that 33% of the Ptoie« Arc* u «ovc
 _ 
'nullholders.  The rainfed farmland contains $canCK
r rdbsmnfedtarming,nic«tlvbv
dways ««s
mc    penn
anent   houses   and   others   arc
'Cttlexcd throughout the farmland- Some of (he h
(|)
71f-drrw
af             Stet/ty pf U' ottr d* Earrp
&Npa Xuf ImtrfJtw nd />*«**
seasonal constructions either for harvesting or for shifting cultivators. On dm basi% >. b
of survey some 86% of the rainfed agricultural area was cropped and 14% was fallow **
Of the cropped land, the most commonly gr<»u n crops are sorghum (1"*% of records) (16%), sesame ’14%), groundnuts (11%). mger seed (10%) and maize (9°o). Together^
fallow land (14%) these crops occupy 91% of the rainfed farming area Soyabean and riccc^e
a further 5%. A wide nngr of other crops were growing at the time of the soil survey but ilh
them to a very limited extent I’bese crops include teff, chickpea, finger miller, peppers, cotta
and vegetables The extent of banana and mango is extremely limited. Frequently, bccauk
smallholder fields tend to be small, several crops arc grown in dose proximity or are
intercropped
Although the extent of rainfed farming is similar on the Vertisols and the non-V erusols these arc the well'drained red and brown upland clay soils), it is clear that farmer preference is forth latter, regardless of sod depth. Ihc deep (> 0.6 m) reddish upland sods are 82° •> cultivated r- almost 40° o of very shallow soils are cultivated. ()n the other hand, only 25% ot Vcrusnk iff framed by smallholders
Ven little igriculnire is recorded m rarer valleys because these valleys. apart from a tew struD allimal tracts, arc jnanractivc for fanning. They remain overwhelmingly under natural vegeuttrm Th^ we , Iu2mbei of vey 5mjdl lrngarcd fanm maljlly asM)CUted with «!I
drained sods on met terraces These farms are shown on the Land Use and l-aod Cover MP" point data, they arc too small Io polygons. The farms nuinlv grow maize, green pepf*'  ** vegetables
5
Eucalyptus and mixed eucalyptus / acacia plantations cover 5 5 ha, almos settlements Settlements are of two types, nucleated villages (13^® ha) an uoU$cS / A hamlet is a small, loose duster of buildings, some of which arc permancn homesteads. They occur within the rainfed farmland A hamlet with
always t0
b>
js
,IS ru^X«; thcyhtTC typically between 2 and 10 ha Near Fendika there are a Large number o ia
been mapped as a single unit
L'BF4Man Kepwr(l)
72fj?/-apAj-r AX#1 /rrffj^jhl/ Jtf fjtrw'a^r /^nfAT1
Figure J-23; Luid Cover/L^nd Ute by SDA
LJP F4 Main Report (I)
73
17-May-llfrbtfwi Nile
aid r>rurw^f Profit
3.4.6          Sm/ and IFia/tr Can/fnMf/on and IFatenM A farMgMMnt
(*) Regional Status
The    escarpment    hills    and    the    reservoir    catchment    hills    of    rhe    Upper    BeJcs    catchment    tcr highlighted   as   a   sheet   and   rill   sod   erosion   hotspot   by   ENTRO   (2006)’*   with   soil   ]t>5i   Q.^   .• 100    loMc/ha/yr    although    the    majority    of    the    Upper    Beies    valley    was    mapped    as    a    vtrr^ erosion    hazard    with    soil    loss    rates    of    <3    tonne/ha/yr.    Jliis    correlated    well    with    sedm^-r reported   in   the   Abbay   Master   Plan   (reported   in   ENITtO   2006)17     that   showed   a   stdimer.ihM of   1,563.3   ronne   at   Metckcl   (Gilgel   Bcles)   from   a   3,431   km-   catchment   indicating   a   sedmen yield   of   4.56   tonne/ba/yr.   VC   creda   data   also   showed   that   most   weredas   in   the   Upper   Bdciui reported   only   0-1   1%   of   their   wereda   had   'moderate   to   severe’   erosion   hazard.   Current   hobpu within   the   Upper   Beks   area   include   the   reservoir   catchment   area   due   to   extensive   cukmton: *t©ep   slope*   without   any   SWC   or   afforestation   and   parts   of   SO   A   s   IV   and   V   which   arcafterr by gullying and require SVC’C due to rapid deforestation and expansion of arable farnungcr^
Afwiagmenr I ranstxiunrtary Analysis. rmj Gonntry Report, E hj
T    Opui_ Scmember VW from 19834992
[ ’B M Mm Ktpf’Tr f0
74F.ffapa. XL»fjrn »f U
A'/x          JAd DrMAjf t l’ryr.1
hectares. 73ie mam crops are sorghum and sesame, with small areas of maize, maize seed. noug. pepper, and fruit trees
ill
iv.
Irrigation famung s) stem uses over diversions. occasionally pumping and traditional application methods. Only about 140 ha were identified by satellite imagery (some of rhe schemes are ven small) but the area is larger According to the Baseline Survey, and in (he study area as a whole, at least 99 small traditional gravity irrigation systems and 49 lift irrigation schemes cover 724 ha of land with 3,106 imgator* The project area may contan about half or three quarters of this reported irrigation activity. Commercial production of fruit and vegetables including onion, tomato, cabbage, potato, pepper; maize, sugarcane, banana, mango, avocado and papaya is earned out
Recession farming system using the seasonal residual moisture accumulated after the overflow <»t rhe overs for the cultivation of early marunng green pepper, cabbage, kale, maize, and banana Only a few hundred hectares can be found in the project area
Figure 3-24: Smallholder farming (left) 8c Abalo .Agro Technical Estate (right)
$          SmulUioMe-r Crop Production
6 1              Crvppim Ptilltnu and Cnp Yrridr
(a)             Present Cropping
Smallholders use diversified cropping patterns to mitigate risk of pests and diseases, partially fulfil household food requirements and allow opportunities for sale. Their cropping partem also
pends on the availability of inputs, soils, labour, capital, holding size, rainfall and length of Mowing period and market opportunity The Tana-Belcs Integrated Development Project fctroduccd new crops in the area and nee. mango, banana and soybean have successfully been ncorP°rated in smallholder cropping patterns, but these crops account for very small areas and
CCrcaJs oilseeds still dominate
project irea and surrounding areas arc considered to be one of the major sesame producing UeaS °f co<mtry and both commercial farms and smallholders are producing significant
nna ges of exportable sesame seeds. Other important crops grown in the project area include rea ^ 'maize, sorghum, millet), oil seeds (groundnut), pulses; vegetables; and perennial crops
21 shows the total area, production and yield statistics obtained from ARD for Pa we, *** and Dangur weredas
75
17 May IIFwiW DwiiraW al
MikjIq of ITMr &Eiffrgt
Ef&fwa Nib 2rn$tf oe v*d /JnMi^r Prjwf
Table 3-Z1: Crap
Production and Yields in the Project ueredas
Crop
Arei, ha
%
Production,
quintal
yield,
qu/ha
—
Wheat
23®
3%
21.114
8 16 1
Muzc
13.778
15%
486.616
35.32
Sorghum.
24.09?
27%
677,241
28.10
I Mdici
1X088
13%
280.613
23.21
Rjcc
1.339
1%
30371
2X83 |
1 Teff
479
1%
4.348
9.08
| Bariev
150
0%
1,745 |
11.63
Subtotal
54t52O
60%
27.55
Puhcv
Chickpea
230
0%
1.578
6.86 I
! Soya bean
1,499
2%
28,585
19.07
Hancot bean
433
0%
4 49?
1039 |
Field pea
157
{r/u
1,649
1030
Sub-louJ
yia
3%
36309
Oilseed
SriiriK
23,01.4
25%
205.847
194 |
 Groundtkui
r
7,743
9%
103,136
13.32
Xou£
XI33
2%
16,805
7.8H
Siftkrtwtc
9
0%
110
12.22
Lrnjrcd
39
0%
213
------------------—1 5.46
L___  Sub-Total
32338
36%
32A.U1
9.5»
CiitlQfi
37
(F/«
Vegetable
301
8.14 .
.PtJ’pe.
563
1%
I’otam
6350
11 K
0
0%
Ohjoii
n
1<J
0%
Pumpkin
Co Crl
62
0%
Sweet pn^Ta
H r.in
76
0%
Sob* total
5 CfcnmaJ crops
Butina
1H* d 2DM' 4
747
1%
_ ___ f j
.34.Mt
H6 st i J b.o
■n n z.n ZJy.CnJ
JC
P3 Pya
Mango Sugarcane
53.5
1194
Sub-total
Grand total 90,733
Source Wneda ARD Samtict
138.87
143.62 150.00
♦73
. _ZL24
UBHMan Report (J;-
76Mif P™“*f
]Tic sudsucs include both smallholder and commercial enterprises and both irrigated and rainfed fanning. The cropping patterns show that rhe project area has potential for producing a wide range of crops and contributing to the supply of regional and even export demand.
Table 3-22 shows the area, cropping pattern, production and yield for smallholder production on the Left, Right and Both Banks of rhe project area as derived from the Baseline Survey. Similar to Table 3-21, cereals account for 60% of the cultivated area and oilseeds 40%. The area of minor crop® is under-estimated by rhe survey but rhe ARD data shown in Tabic 3-21 confirm that die areas arc relatively small
The average cereal yield obtained from the Baseline Survey is about 10 quintals per ha and the average oilseed yield is about 7.7 quintals per ha, which arc lower chan those obtained from the ARD statistics. Yields estimated from both sources are well below potentwL
Soil type is an important factor for rhe selection of crops, especially for smallholders. Vertisols arc more difficult to work and may present problems of timeliness when they art too dry or too wee These problems arc accentuated if only draught power as available. As a result, the area of nee has reduced significantly since the Tana Belts Project dosed dur to difficulties of land preparation by hand or oxen. Smallholders prefer, but are not exclusively confined to luvisols.
^Krpon (j)
77
17-May 11I'eJtnt/
fttoffar Afx /ffjpfar mJ Dw.v Pn^r
Mniitvy ff II atff C" £w*|>
Table 3-22: Present Cropped Area, Production and Yields jor Smallholder Farm CROPPING PATTERN_____________
_Major cropi
Sorghum
Finger millet
Mabe
Rice
Groundnut*
SesaVmI4eC
leftbank
ii. I %
4,1*9 ____ 16* •
BOTH BANKS
_ha 1 %T
1 CROP PRODUCTION leftbank rightbank
RIGHT BANK
ha J_____ %
7,2*2
6.73S
4.4 H_
1.2*0
3,474
265. 17%
5%
13%
22%
J.D83
1,510
L000
116
4J52_
1.495
S.6O4
-------r
r% -
13%
9%
15.
365.
20%
8.245          22%
Mil
1J96
,<.26
quintals
(•,641
11 *47
10,307
vie kJ
£6
1.7
23
42
15%
45.
21%
19%
J.f>2’'           15
both  ban ks quintal* | y>dd
15.077 14.545
2.094
2.736
3,260
0.8
06
quintal* | yie^
4,951)
l'30
4.239
|74
3,282
2.070
Minor crop, i Sunflower
■»
001%
2
0 025 . ■
4
0.01%
5
24
5
2-4
10
24
| Safflower
2
0.01%
2
0 02%
4
0,01%
5
2.4
5
14
10
2.4
Ham ot Ix“in
2
0015.
2
0 025. |
5
0.01%
5
2.2
5
12
10
2.2
Vegetables
4
0 025.
1
------------ |
0.015.
5
0015.
102
23.9
20 1
23.9
122
239
Som bean
4
0.025.
0
0 005,
4
0,015.
10
24
0
10
2.4
Chjck pea
6
0.025,
0
0005.
6
0 025 .
10
17
0
10
1.7
Tree crops
8
0.03%
5
0.055.
13
0 045.
60
7.6
40
7.6
100
76
Pc pp«
0
O(XP/.
17
0.155.
17
0.05%
0
33
19
33
Citrus
.
10
0
0.005'.
1
0.01%
1----------- - 1 | 0.00%
\.H»£
Cotton
0
10
1-----i— 15 8
10
u
6
0 04% 1 0.02%
------ LL 11IJS Oft
0 04%
0.055'.
1 “
n
0.04%
n nA".
7
0.6
--------------- r
06
10
L Total
Sourer Household Survey 2010
.
0.6 J
15,738 \
I U 397
1 .
57 .US \
5 M>,820
1.1.8
r ~ ; is ie« ------------------ --
O.K
10
O8(b)             Present Irrigated Cropping
r l*hc present irrigation area is concentrated on the banks of rivers and streams where farmers
cin easilv access water by pump and gravity flow. Also, in areas where the water table is shallow
the farmers arc getting waler from shallow uvlls. The command from a shallow well is small
and this type of irrigation is mostly practiced around homesteads According to the household
survey results, the irrigated landholding ranges between 0.125 ha io 0.75 ha, though in Jawi the
farmers around I'cndika town have larger holdings This suggests that market access and road infrastructure play an important role in the involvement of the farmers in irrigated agriculture.
Nevertheless.  Table 5-23  and fable 3-24  show that access io  irrigation is very  limited,  both in terms of size of irrigated holdings and numbers of farmers involved in irrigation In the study area  as a  whole there may  be not much more than 700  ha  of minor irrigation,  involving  about 3,000 fanners.
Table 3-23: Irrigated Landholding Size
SDA
Average bolding
ha/house hold
Remark
I
042 0.25
< >nlv 1 respondent has iha from 20 rrsp-ndcritj
HI
042 - 0.75
IV
025-0.5
Four households out of 120 respondents
V
-
Source I louseh-oW Survey 2010
Tabic 3-24: Area & Number of T raditionaJ and Modern Irrigation Sc hem e h
Tradiuonal lrrigackM Sy* m
Modem Irrigation System
Gravity,
number
Lift
frurn
River
DO.
Wrll
«0.
Irrigated Area
(M
Number
&r
tmgaicn
Number
of
Irrigation
Coops
Grimly,
number
Lift
from
River
DO-
Irrigated Area
(ba)
Number
of
Irrigator*
.13
75
146
372
5
5
17.75
46
4
U
28
3002
1,068
5
4
1.815
35
IS
117.5
1/236
65
1
55
52
68
98
501.4$
2,722
75
5
4
195
1.895
SomuK I luu.cli,*| Survey- Muj
crcnniil overs are the major potential source of irrigation water The farmers cultivate maize Vegetable crops using the residual moisture after the overflow of nvers and streams. 'Hus
^P^ncncc leads on to proper irrigation farming by lifting water from overs, traditional river ^^ersiOns an<j earth dams (GPS location points; 0240259; 1256610 and 0233650, 1258277).
c  irrigation water from these sources is distributed in furrows at required taiga non intervals ^g on the availability of water and crop water requirements.
st irrigators arc organized in producers* cooperatives to facilitate access io inputs and Ot CXXfnP*  Sesbadi Vegetable Growers’ Cooperative (GPS location
c
1  1252512) has 60 members working collectively at their tlirec farm sites. They produce
17 May IIktJfru- Dewruttr RfMc tt&bMfu, Mtanty fif ITgfer & Eterg
EujtapwtKjk bvnutw j*/ Dniro<f Pnfed
sugucinc, incize and vegetables (onion, pepper and tomatoes) on 2, 3 and *> hr respectively Onion and pepper are planted mid of January and will b  harvest 4
c
May 
Around Gfbw"* h/ena 2 Mender 24, individual farmers are involved an irngaicd agriculture by lifting water from the .All River and cultivating chat, tomato, onion, pepper, sugarcane, lemon, orange, and avocado. They have expertencc in growing short cycle
after thr harvest of groundnut in December.
In Village 1? four farmers ire organized in a producer cooperative, between them owning hectares of irrigable land. They have three motorized pumps and they arc using thcBdn r.n during the ary season. During the wet season the area will be flooded and it is impossible:::a the land rwicr a year- Tn 2010 cropping season they mc growing tomato, green pepper. inc onion. October to November is a transplanting period and January to March is the barvcslin? period The members of the association explained char tomato and green pepper haved* potential co harvest more than five times in one harvesting period- The farmers are expect-r get 100 qt/ ha co 200 qt/ha from this particular area. The irrigation users confirmed tbit
Me getting the yields of lOOqt/ha. ISOqt/ha 110 qt/ha of oruon, tomato and green pepp^ respectively They art nor using any fertilizer because of good status of sod fertdiry wh*±L annually replenished from rhe transported silt accumulation from the Bdcs RM*
Crop J //iCAi'nd'n'
‘’’"AM*
(*) Land Preparation and Sowing 
Land preparation is earned out mainly by oxen. Ploughing wirh donkeys is * fOmpaCtc^ the presence of tsetse fly in some areas lhe first ploughing helps to break th
plough layer, allowing unproved aeration and water percolation Depending L seed and sod conditions the frequency of tillage ranges from one to four tin*
coni^011 *
^>ps are
«ops. wheras sbon
'usccptil.ic to mcnMurr
'Ugarcanc „ caJned
^Proved
‘wnebes of , ^
n
-AgncuJruraJ 
b > «Twbie
* KHU'd™t wh,cfa
always MW « roWS’ **
“ UndcrtjJt™ May ™d fof
’ “r 400,11 “I’M* and July m wdl as those crop4
ol  P««nwl tree crops like mango. pap^X’’ b*”
c ore the on-set of (he main rains.
^ P'Oled V,
j
° ot lVaiUble
P* 
^RC). 
PcraJuefi
W t?JC Project area. Farmers gw*
,hC
**   '"’P-'cd of
p
pro
^t
«ma]
S ^J. d maml'°‘         bypnvate
}nui aopj
’nd
owide
p[o .ecl
ai  **«*> danuged |H f ‘ ,,lt P^ntationf
Despire the existence of improved seeds of riiftk 
" 13n«u *nd orange were uitrodu^
*** fsdds. though some
j- and
m ra«c 
'
T’H F4 .Mun iUporr (D
fit!VVJ,lr 0
} .,^lM lm^'
apparently not interested in using these varieties. The maior causes for low use of improved
d* which were noted by the farmers are unavailability m local markets or inadequate supplies from the government office and cooperatives; high selling pace; and lack of knowledge or exposure to she technology
Arnmal manure and artificial fertilizers are both used in the project area. Animal dung is appllrd by rotating the nighr cattle enclosure tn maize and sesame fields and applied bv hand in
vcgelabk nurseries
Artificial fertilizers including di-ammonium phosphate (DAP) and urea are little used for nurdent replenishment. The farmers apply to maize, millet and pepper fields to get higher
yields- DAP is applied during sowing and urea will be added after forty-five days when the plant leaches knee hey hr. llic rate of applicauon vanes depending on rhe level of sod fertility of the phis. As reported bv the farmers during focus group discussion, there are plots where they apply 100 kg/ha and 50kg/ha of urea, whereas the DAP quantity’ is usually fixed at 100 kg/ha There arc farmers applying both types of fertilizers in rows as recommended by agricultural staff and some apply DAP bv broadcastmg-
Thc major suppliers of artificial fertilizers are wereda agricultural and rural offices, service cooperatives and private traders. In Dangur wereda, the agricultural office is the only supplier while m Pawe ;uid Jawi wereda^, m addiuon to the weteda agricultural office, the farmers' service cooperatives and private traders have greater involvement in thr supply system. According tu the results of focus group discussion held at different levels, farmers asserted that inadequate supply of fertilizer and poor market network ate the main constraints on fertilizer distribution tn the project area.
Nevertheless most of the respondents believed that their cropland is still ferule and there is no nerd to apply fertilizers. About 90° o of the respondents in SDAI justified that they are not Using fertilizer because their land is still fertile enough to produce reasonable yield. Un the contrary the lirmrrs Irving in the area characterized by frequent cultivation and lugh population density aj  demanding large amounts of fertilizer to maintain soil fertility. They explained tfrai
C
^oa^adaliLhty of fertilizer, high pncc. and lack of knowledge in utilization ait considered as the a |or constraints of low level of Ap-trib^er uriliranon
()
c
Control of Weeds. Diseases and I’csts
etT^uaria arc widespread in the project area and affect almost all crops particularly maize and r ^hurn. fh  farmers try to reduce the damage by digging for and killing the queen termite,
r
ever the problem is beyond their capacity to solve because of the extent of the problem, cctn e control measures and non availability of chemicals.
’fcyworm is a dev astating pest that can be controlled when the agricultural office cakes P^nsibQjty for a control campaign to provide chemicals (free of charge) for protection.
lents are
lm Of
j   attacking crops in the field and in the store. Maize, >orghum,
nut and millet arc the most affected crops, and lhe farmers use traps, chemicals and cats
qxm (|)
fit
17 .Stay II...
„ According IO the respondents, the estimated danugeb,^
to protect seeds &0®                z f wuJ production
md pests is nngtng horn 5 -
and anunal dung spreadtng we someofthr^
.             wd urine treatment ano * Crop rotation, chemical ana
practice, app^ m control pests
^^ducoon in the pt^
1 ar«
«eed udesunon is the major constant to cropp and nee ue the most sttected crops uhi J 
 *
6yC o loM c
Kumar. labour The crop toss due to weed mfes
2
hine Kttt
Attention is gn-en to weedtng aenvi- ™
to control the weeds This berbtade is applied to nW • 
on
 d. toe c
broad leaf weeds Hand weeding is earned ou -
infestation.
(d)
1Tta=bm  ’“*
s
„ _ „f '«
•“
.Ml crops are harvested manually other by sickle or an p and sorghum with then sulks
1
tent thep ^
When the harvested crops are dried and have attained favourable
cJ
LS  moM ‘'• '
ire removed from the ebbs, chaff or straw, rbre^hing with o:
^ed out
"
for small-seed crops like finger millet and sorghum.  Threslung  «  ca cO>ne rnatcn^*
plastered ground tn keep the grain town mixing with soil, sand an             fished by bo0*# Depending on the tonnage of harvested crop sorghum and nee can
stakes to remove the grain.
si fely
The (inner* me different forms of storage structures to keep the crop p
|ong^
minimal  crop  loss  Mine  cobs  and  sorghum  heads  arc  temporarily  kept  in
&  f^pih
structures close to the house. Tbc second structure is open for venu^11011
1
Jepe^ ^
take small portions of the harvest for manual threshing and further proccs
of
then immediate needs Pan of the maize harvest can be kept tn traditional >tor
is
bamboo with mud plastering for home consumption or marketing SonxrttinCS, 0ofc stored in sacks - usualh when the harvest is larger than the capacity of the tra structure.
J.6. ) labour Itnufbt and hapupnttnt
Family labour n the mam source of labour m tire subsistence fanning system. 1 -» °’ anangemenu and lunng arc alternate sources m ge. extra labour for labour intend
bU
aerrsnue, weeding. harvest^ and hud clearing. Labour exchange is unportM-t to SUPI* resource poo,                Tbrougb mutua! hbour exchange arrangemen. the househ^ more than 300 labour^ depending on the sue of .he cutova^dLea
Anahsis of the Household Survey data V., 
.      . .        . L ,. 
•  «Pondent) showed that 60% of resp° °
r
n
. 
r
(b
c
considered their household to be short of Uh.™ ’>
l         -      .           , 
mean number ot exchange days per annum « 
labour
,     . 
°°ui,    2% were involved in lab, . eouxcr h*"^
LX
. j
• -lv
J ind 53% of respondents acuvdv n»
J B F4 Main Rq*«n fl)
R2M"irfr} f>* irOHf & E*f#
t ;r ^M A7k Jrr<u//«        D"**# Pry?.*
J lie household may hire labour for the complete season when the owner is busy on other business or the members of the household are old or infirm. Obviously neb households take the opportunity to maximize the crop return particularly when they use this extra labour for high value crops like sesame and vegetables
According to the household survey results* rhe labour payments ire liking place in three forms: daily basis, seasonal and in kind The first two forms of payment arc in cash with a rate of about ETB 20 /day (range* from ETB 15 40 /day). The seasonal payment ranges between ETB 1,000 to 1TB 4,000. whereas rhe payment in kind ranges from 20% - 25% of the harvest.
Analysis of the Household Survey data returned a mean reported hued labour rate of ETB 23 per day (n—"0. standard deviation = 5.8) This is higher than the average rural daily rate in highland areas which is about ETB 18 per day. Clearly the project area has a relatively low population and die number of commercial farms increases daily labour opportunities.
Oxen and donkey arc the sources of draught power and both arc used for land prrpajidon ind transportation Oxen with local ploughing equipment set are mainly used for land preparation. Sometimes farmers use donkeys because they are more resistant to trypanosomiasis Threshing is done bv oxen for finger millet, sorghum, and teff.
Oxen ownership is widespread About 85% of the households have nt least one ox and maximum of seen oxen per household, and ihe average number of oxen owned by individual household is 2,5 oxen, which implies dial majority of farmers do have a parr of oxen that enables them to plough their land, f armers with a single ox plough their land by borrowing an additional ox from relatives or they access draught power through an exchange arrangement locally named “wrAfffxjw *. Renting oxen and exchanging with human labour (eg. three days working for the oxen owner and one ox day for h im; arc wap of gening draught power for bnd preparation.
1
The 1 jvewock Report suggest that the nui
.            ,h« of oxen available for ploughing is
approximately in balance with the cultivat are4 annum) The main problem is the distribution of t developed coping mechanisms io overcome the oxen from neighbours or relatives, renting » 
nK  of 2 98 ha per pair per
between households. Farmers have
wcr shortage Sharecropping. using
g 
y  nge ore common mechanisms used
cxc  M
labour exchange arrangement
in resolving the draught power problem at house
»     to     to     „     ptoto,     .     p»     «<     Oto     for     00C     to     «h* ownerS land for three days or 1:3 rauo.
borrower must plough the ox
J 6                 ^grra/Zfm/ Research and E&towM
Agricultural research in the area is mainly under
the project area and has an immense opportunity to m through improved technology- PARC is currently cam 8 cereals, pubes, oil seeds, fibre crops, hnraculrura crop .
PARC PARC is centrally located in ^ease the productivity of lowland crops
research acnvmcs:
4  '4**n £
rpon (1}
83
17 May 11FrWAfrcrrfn rfWrr c*
Nri r rr<*j rpfl aiffc/ Zbwff-qiy Pfflyfl.T
r
lnimil husbandry, and agricultural economics. The centre has five permanent tn
Mambuk, Paux, Mandara, Dibate and Bulen weredas
PARC's agricultural research activities arc earned out with the participation of the end
dial allows communities to become involved in on-farm adaptation rrtal activities In 2^^ than 5,300 fanners were actively partiapating in rhe process of technology adaptation disseminauon in five weredas
In order to faahtiic the dissemination process and information transfer between one and tint development agents (DA) are assigned in each kebeie and a Fanner Framing Crnrrc (1TC nm also be available. Technical stiff from the wcreda ARD provides support to devdopmetr agents a$ required. The number of development agents in the protect area is given m Fable
3-25.
Table 3-25: Diatribudon of FTCs and Devehpmcot Agents
i,tCl!a
SDA
I
Number of DAi
25
Number of FTf4___
ill
2S
__*L_—-—1
V
34
IV
39                               I
. ____
J
Sourer AR !J Offices
In each kebclc there is a development team where the farmer; gr° P
u
11 u Trt-W membersJincv
j^ve
agneultural information and experience Flach Team would nave zv-j group leader tint would usually be a model farmer.
Frfm hfat Supply
t
al€  <d
The    three    essential    agricultural    inputs    (fertilizer,    agro-chemicals    flO<l    r rtJizcr
e
lp, P*°
suppled by the wcreda ARD. Cooperative Unions and pnvaie trader’-
seeds  of  maize  arc  suppled  through  fanners'  service  cooperatives  from  t however during focus group discussions the participants noted that rnoAt
arc not well organized and in addiuon poor road accessibility 111 t^ic nGft^r
unK^5’
of
1,1
area  constrains  the  operation  of  the  input  supply  system.  Probably  about  3  ^(^ch15 fertiliser are supplied to wrredas in the project area each year, at lM5T 5 «> °
Admas Union of Service Cooperatives and Mama Union of Cooperatives a ^icc
organizations involved in input supply. Despite weak organizational set up SCf%
afC '
cooperatives in the project arts these unions are providing an input supply s^n K* required members when they have them in stock Improved seeds of mxizc
the dominant seeds used by smallholder and large scale farmers. Vegetable seeds orlvi|C mainly through wcreda ARD because of unreliable seed quality those puraW^eti
traders
Regarding agro-chrnticah. nutnk herbk-i U .
,
f
arorenxnrx^cd
TO W
j   auppfe tte no, 
the
^ Zof
ur-. ^ v>
:
Prur***
during the outbreak of major pests like army worm the government office will supply the feqiurcd chemicals.
Avalo pk a commercial farm is engaged in seed multiplication Improved maize seed is produced and supplied to the client Admas Service cooperatives Union, 73us Union wiU supply to the member service cooperatives which then distribute to the farmers according to their request
16.6 Ottto
There are no branch offices of commercial or development banks m the protect area. The nearest bank is in Chagni, 100 km away.
There is a branch office of the micro-finance institutions Ambani Crrdif mJ Sawny ImttMf (ACSI) in Fcndika town. ACSI has 183 branch offices and about 2350 employees throughout AN RS and it provides financial services to 860,000 clients, of whom 500,000 are benefiting from credit services, 300,000 clients have saving accounts and the remaining 60,000 cheats receive pension service. About 50% of the total clientele consists of women The ACSI branch office in Fendika town is active in all 26 kebcles of Jawi Wcreda. A total of 4,300 savings accounts have been opened with a total deposit of ETB 6.4 million. At the end of December 2009. 4,106 persons had obtained a loan and the total amount of outstanding loan was ETB 10 6 million
A branch office of the Benins hangui-Gumuz Micro-Finance Company is located in Mambuk town and Pawr town and is operational thougbout Pawc wcreda. A total of 118 persons have opened a voluntary saving account, including 51 women, and the total saving amount is ETB 1 85 million There are 3,486 lenders, including 667 women, and the total amount of outstanding loans is ETB 4.99 million at the end of December 2009.
Between 15% io 85% of respondents to the household survey reported obtaining at least one loan during the last 10 years, mainly from the savings A credit association- The surveyed households got short term loans, which were mainlv used for i) purchase of oxen and cows; ii) procurement of agricultural inputs, ui) trade; and/or w) renting land The surveyed households usually had to pay an annual interest rare of 18% to 19% for loans obtained from ACSI, whereas the B G Micro-Finance Company charges 10% to 13% per year as interest
85
17-May 11h&'d                  fapriu. d&h'oftu. Mrwfr) d IVaftr »'? Zirny
E/Amcwm .\7i /mjfuniM j*/ Druttf^ff Ph*.*
16.7        Crty Markffm^ and Pmctshn^
Present crop production sold into regional and local markets is production mu
idfusted for losses minus the requirement for feed and seed Table 3
-- H^COO^
production tn the project area is about 40% of total production.
26  show, dutny^
Table 3-26: Estimate of Present Production for ReinonaJ and Local Mark
I---------------------------- ,---------------- -y—------------------------------------------------------
Ctl
| Estimated
total present Produced for
Present
nuJr!
sorghum
nui/t
M^amc
production,
ton*
15.0
12,061
14345
5,330
6.018
present local
market*, tons
13,258
8.859
9,621
marketed
surplus,
tons
1.619
3.IT4
4,~*l
4,818
5.418
«2!!*r odsetxk
functioning Local efforts it am
S °U,Tr Haschnt Sun ^ 2010
Agro-proccsung is very limited in the project area The rice mill at Pa*c  15  T
---- ...% *,vc niw at rawc ■» nv
1  artisanal oj expelling have proved un-ecooomic
.Mur* Constmu
t0 ^ma
The oujoi constraints
L
Present low prod
producQ<>n delude the following:
fronts >nd thc
P rodu«™- "«d to be *ddreS>
11
high
- ^ increase with-pro|ect will need to be
nc
11L
“op     chcmicij,     I     °7i>Kn<Ul’Ur‘l       inpuu       m        prauhi     unproved     seeds.     fer«d”r
Pc«t infestation: due to l.
*** l0PUI <^,VCI? system unll be oecc*5
JV.
*nd method* 
f*oor
°      * thln “POHMl supply and use of crop protection che
of
0>
V.
bad parncuhfiv over
^bcJes and market centres: access O  **
n
(donkeys are <1*0 Ukcd because          ^*?U” *Of ^nd preparation is in short *°PP '
beruven households. 
° ** ^P^nosotruasL, problem) and poorly d*0'*
1'8l-4.\fwn Repc^,^
86
Ji
17^’W" DfM^
vi Labour shortages. labour is in short supply and expensive during peak seasons, this
may adversely impact on the economic viability of the project
vu, Access to Extension Services the extension services are under resourced and need
technical and logistical support
nu Access to Credit though the situation is improving through micro finance, farmers
may find it difficult to fund the incremental inputs required for irrigation, including the cost of water.
ix Unreliability of rainfall: rainfall is uncertain and erratic and there is litde access to stream and nver (dry season) flow* for assured irrigation
JjS 9 Opportunity for (~n>p DfnrJopnxnt
Opportunities for agricultural development are described below.
i. Agro-Climafc: ITu: agro clrmatic condition of the project area is suitable for most of
the lowland crops and most importantly the rainfall pattern is favourable for rainfed agriculture. It gives the opportunity to practice supplementary irrigation agriculture with low cost due to less water application during the rains The irea also has sufficient dry spell period for harvesting and land preparation activities which is very important for irrigation agncuJrure
il Soils and Land Suitability plain land feature of the project area and different types
of soils with reasonable good fertility rare provide the opportunity co improve crop production The existence of vemc sod which is suitable for certain crops would have comparative advantage for the establishment of sugar estate farm tn the project area
ui Availability of irrigation water resource the project area is endowed with a number
of mostly seasonal streams and riven. However with the inter-basin transfer of water from l^ke Tana by the recently completed Tana -Beks hydropower project, there is now* a large under utilised perennial flow’ in the Main (Enat) Beles nver allowing extensive development of (dry’ season) irrigation in rhe project area.
17  Famen' experience the farmers living tn the lower part of the project area have good experience in cultivation of cash crops and perennial crops such as mango and citrus. The intervention of Tana-BeJes Integrated Development Project introduced new crops in which the farmers have developed then experience in growing of nee, mango, amis, soy bean, and groundnut As (he result, most of the farmers could easily engage in tnigauon agriculture with basK technical support
v  Agricultural Support Services: the availability of an extension system in all project
weredas facilitate the development intervention to be implemented as scheduled
I raining and other capacity budding intervention could be earned out through this governmental structure.
vr  Crop Profitability: the area has a potential to grow high yielding crops under
irrigation. Suitability’ of the area for sesame, soybean and sugarcane is an opportunity to grow these crops over large areas to generate a relatively high financial and economic return for the project
Und availability: the vcroc land has not so far been extensively exploited except for
and a little rice cultivation. The availability of this resource gives an opportunity «o establish large-scale sugarcane farm which is likely to be a profitable economic
^vestment
87
17 May 11Fedfm. PtHwuftr R^wta. o'Ethiopia, Ahw/r) rftTaftr <*• Ewr^
Ethiopian A’/ir Irrigation and Drainage Pryrrf
viii. Marketing Opportunities the area has well organized crop marketing roul
Pawc and Jawi town (and accessible villages) to major market centres hke Addis v
Bahir Dir. Gondar. Mekelc and Humcia While wet season access is difficult t
areas it would not be difficult to address
J. 7          Com merci a I Crop Production
Leasing  of  agncultural  land  has  been  undertaken  bv  three  governmental  administrative  bodn the  wereda  administration,  die  Regional  and  the  Federal  governments.  There  are  land  size
4
limitations to  the leasing  arrangements permitted to  each administrative level; however iD that bodies need to  get approval from the kebcle administration at the initial stage.  Before apphT<- for the land,  the investors have to  go  to  the specific area  of interest to  check die jvailabur.  ct arable land which should be unoccupied and free from forest vegetation.  Then,  depending  oc (he arra  of land applied for.  the investors will applv  to  above mentioned government bodiei i: secure the land.
3 he Federal government acts on behalf of Regional government to lease-out land in the ca<
limited technical capacity to administer very large areas of agricultural land and when there *
lease request for land falling in two regions. When the application refers to an area of more xC
ha die Federal government can lease-out the land on behalf of rhe region If the requested imi
is below 10-15 ha for rainfed and 4 ha for irrigated agriculture. the wereda administration can
lease out in consultation with kebcle officials and after die approval of the wereda ARD
technical staff
If the land size is between 15 and 500 ha, rhe Regional government requests confirmation tn®
the wereda administration The wereda administration also sends a similar request to I he Uhcx administration to check the land is unoccupied and in a lowland area on vertisols. Th» trpe 01
land is mostly under utilised in the project area, lire kebcle administration then establishes a committee of ciders, kebelc officials, development agents and other relevant people to
the status of the requested land for investment purpose Then, after the committee has
expressed its opinion to the wereda adnunistnmon, the wereda office responds to the Reg”’0 administration and if approved it all levels the land could be allocated to the investors.
lire land size being leasing out bv rhe differ™.
The   lease   pavment   rale   also   vanes   from   wereda   r   T“’'ri,a',n     t>”tllC5     van”   bc,ween    reg,°'15
administration requires the pamrent of about ETR 7n land rent increases to between ETR 650 and ETR Pawc    wereda)    The    investor    is    expected
For lnstancc’ wefed*
cctarr- whereas at federal leve
to    pav    th    c    ***    K'    Sl”Cr      Plc      Kh’lon      ’
P 1 <hc first yexr's pavincn| m a(|vlnce
Table 3-27 names the majority of the commercial f
which would have had regional involvement m arrin Paring in the project area, most
leading arrangements are all relatively recent
Figure 3-25 locates the larger leases, though this informal it is understood the (existing) leases have now been (or w I* 
* 'C ^casc can be seen that these
.
bcConunR hi»tonc
about to be) revoked.
88
I’ May-
UR                 Kcr*'rlFigurt 3-25:                                and Recently Leatcd Commercial Farm Areas
I’R F4 Main Kcp«xt (1)
89
17-Mjv 11„ ^Wal"& Ln'V
EttafM N<* 
Pn “'”r
Tabk 3-2?l
S in the Project Area23
Year of
Lncsbonj A«a,h. Cunrndv
cultivated, ba
establishment
Ilf®
AUc commercial
Paux
Abay pk_
Abeba* pk_____
Mob ir/egntcd
farm
Kuuiton pk Suter pic
Atalu Kidanc
Avala ok
Bid wi Teran
Debrewetk
Belav genenrx
Pawc
Piwe
Onion, tomato,
2005 I peprer. twnaiu______
Maize, orange,
2007 204 )7  man_daon, ^rupefruH
Alfa-alfa. ^esbanu.
sweet potato, nee,
Ganic fattening
2007
Piwe
Paur
Pawc
pepper, onion
Planned to gm*
maize ______
J aui
2009
2008
2008
Mohamed Ahmed
Tahir
i Alhcahir_________
I Yihelal Aide
Alrru
JDFC____
Khunem
agricultural
| development pic
Ten u mm
Not operational Not opera nona] Noe npcrational
2008
2008
Dangur
ciwrvTaCTCMu farm ] hn^r
2008
200?
2003
2007
Source ARD/HPUU
There are two recently signed lease agreements for quite large scale
oninirrc1^ ^ffnS*
§pA* ,n<
id >'■p;
specifically 5) With BDFC (wth Hrber PLC) for 17,400 ha of sugarcane
»nd (u) with Q£ industries for 25.000 ha of cotton, mostly IO the «es _ lease areas overlapped each other and also embraced some Land already it is understood that these leases will be / have been revoked. K is P°”* irrigable areas may be te allocated to these estates.
by ether*-
sO nw *n’*
11 lea*** w<<*
t d llM' »U *
*    Note    that    rhe    BDFC    kueh<4d    neve,    devetoped    and    that    Federal    Government    «««’unL' uithdrawn and/or under review in early 2fl) |
itMT1’
UH 1*4 Mam Rcpcn (1)
90M
jj,„ .n- Rer-*M‘
3
•/ ral" '■""XI
X'* W"' *** Drw^ Pn^
Current Government thinking is for a single large irrigated sugar plantation extending over about 50.000 ha in I pper Belcs (including Hyim) composing about 40.000 in Amhara NRS
and al»ou( 10,000 ha in Bcnnhangul-Gumuz NRS. It is understood that the concerned two regional governments have agreed that the Federal Government arranges to lease of this area on their behalf, and also arrange funds for project implementation
In 2010 there were only about 1,700 net cultivated hectares under commercial management in the project area out of a total of 6,200 leased hectares Most commercial farms cultivate sorghum and sesame and use local varieties. However, ven' small areas of maize seed, onion, tomato, banana, orange, mandarin, and grapefruit are produced by two commercial enterprises. All commercial farms arc under rainfed agriculture except for Abay pic which irrigates about ten hectares of land The majority of the operational commercial farmers use traditional farming practices such as oxen/donkry ploughing, broadcast sowing, hand weeding and manual harvesting Many “investors” rent draught power thus avoiding the purchase of expensive machinery Those commercial enterprises that do use tractor power use it only for ploughing and discing; other agricultural operations such as sowing, cultivation, weeding, spraying and harvesting arc earned out by human labour.
fhe general cropping calendar currently used by commercial farmers is labulaled below Table 5-28: Cropping calendar for Commercial Farms
Crop
Land Preparation
Sowing/
transplanting
Harvesting
Maize
Jan Feb
May
Oct/Nov
May
lune
Ian
Soybean
May
lune
Oct/Nov
Find of lune
Nov
Sesame
May-June
July
Oct/Nov
Mav
lune 10-15
Oct
Rice
Mav
Julv 20 23
Nov
Mav
June
Oct
Groundnut
April May
lune
On
April Mav
lune
Nov
C oruultahim with cnojtncTCial fanner*. 2010
hi
8 neral the performance of the commercial farms in the project area has not met
P^ctations. Tbc proportion of leased area actually developed has been too small, land
rancc has often been wasteful and the methods of production are hardy an improvement
11 SnuUholdcr practice As a result both production and productivity have been ven low The re ‘LSOn for the poor performance oi commercial farms is that they arc under capitalised
e  nunimal fixed costs (machinery, storage, management etc.) per hectare l*hr ins esters n °< m tlc* ^vesting to the extent envisaged
OWever, dj  motive
e
opefatJV<. stncc 2005, so it is too soon to sir that
mr neicul farm leases have been a failure Significant improvements in rhe performance ofFt<M  Df-mruth  RffiM:  •/  Ethiopia.  Mnurny  of  Water  &E*f$
l.thiopian Nile lmiafion and Dmqt Pnytrt
commercial firms could be made by terminating the lease of poor performers forthwith supervising better the remaining investors and being more rigorous in the selection of 0Ol ones An obvious means of doing this is by making the lease application conditional or. tj* submission of a business plan which should meet a defined standard. The plan would thmf up-dated annually fas required for any commercial operation) and agreed in advance with the leasing authorities. Gross under-performance could thrn lie measured and lease terminations could be objectively decided. Investors need to be monitored to ensure they arc actual investing rather than making a quick profit on land clearance or acting as landlords to smallholder farmers
3.8 
Livestock Production
3.8.1 
Live stock Population
Livestock production is an important agricultural activity, second to crop production. The
types of livestock in 1!ppcr Belos Irrigation project area are mainly traditional vaneties of attic,
sheep and goats. Donkey and mules may also be ranked high in importance. Poultry is
important at household level and improved varieties do exist, distributed through ARD Tw
main reasons for the prevalence of traditional varieties include remoteness of the area, prcKncr
of tsetse and trypanosomiasis, lack of knowledge, lack of availability, high prices, no intern:
and for some lack of adequate housing
The total livestock population of the project areas is indicated in Table 3-29. Accordingly, the
total number of livestock is about 60,240 cattle. 8,230 sheep, 12,117 goats. 46 horses, 2,809
donkeys. 250 mules. 47,633 poultry and 8,039 bee-colonies The sheep, horse and mule
populations arc relatively low in general terms and even non-existent in some development
areas. l*his is especially true for horses; there is none in SDA 1. Ill and V. This is attributed t<>
the less suitable lowland climatic conditions
Table 3-29: Livestock Population, numbers
SDA
Livestock Population (number)
Cattle
SHecp
Goats
Hones
Donkeys
Mules
, pouloy
LA
1.750
342
809
0
146
5
1.754
co***
j£
tf?
IB
4.384
893
1,852
0
1.115
4
4.1*1
w*
Sub-total
6.134
1,235
2.661
0
1.261
8
5,897
ni
6352
808
1, 54
7
0
P4
14
7.544,
r
Right Bank Total
12386
2,043
_ 4,414
0
1,435
22
U,44l.
IVA
3^30
265
644
32
39*'
38
JVB
9.515
363
2,709
305
J.558 ?
3.962.
ij*
10
17
JVC
24.151
2.937
3302
3
392
66
I9.OO5J
Sub-total
36,896
3,566
6.555
45
1.094
121
24.525 |
V
10.95B
2.621
1,I48
0
279
107
9.667 (
Left Bank Total
47.8541
6.187
7,702
46
1374
228
34,193 _
■
Project Total
60,240
H^JO |       12,117 [
____
*1
3809
250
47.O3_L-3^
Sourer. R«r«nvc Wrrwb
and Ku^l Dcvr»t,mrnI
DevdllpmcT>r CrnOT,. 2010
1J‘4 Man Rq*c fl)
17 May -HThe tool livestock popul.ri.rn exprencd In TLU ls
46,98  TLU or 92% of the livestock population. Thi, u fo|] ., ’ . C’ttJe ComPIU'
7
gosts 1.212 .2 4 0/ and sheep 823 (1.6%). The rest of the livestock i< U a. ’ of the livestock population
5 thln ODC per cent each
llK
livestock density for the project area is calculated to be 59.2 TLU/km% which  ^bcXeen 20.6 TLU/km  (SDA I) and 59.5 TLU/km  (SDA V). There art more livestock
2
2
fcft bank <
45 6 TI 1
2   3S
'  ’/hm )
2
 compared to the nght bank (26.2 TLU/km ).
Tahle 3-30: Livestock Density' by Area (TLU/ha) and Holding (TLU/HH)
SDA
Area
(km2)
Livestock
population (TLU)
Density
(TLU/km*)
Livestock bolding
(TLU/ Person )
(TLU/ HH)
IA
98.4
1574
16.0
0.4
1.6
IB
186.0
4,296
23.1
0.6
2.4
Sub-total
284.4
5.869
20.6
0.5
2.1
m
141.7
5.305
373
0.7
2.5
Right Bank Average
426.1
11,174
26.2
0.6
13
IVA
99.8
2,876
288
0.6
3.4
IVB
1813
7,421
436
1.0
5.7
IVC
459.2
18.858
453
0.7
19
Sub-total
721.2
28,779
42.6
0.8
33
V
1553
9.236
59.5
0.6
2.7
Left Bank Average
876.5
39.940
45.6
0.7
32
Project Average
1302.6
51,114
39.2
0.7
19
Source* Computed from livestock statistics ir.J G1S. 2010
be seen tn Table 5-30, the average livestock holdings for the whole project area are
to be 0 n.L / Person and 2.9 TLL’/Household. ’Hie livestock holding on the left
>nk B
high
er than on the right bank.
T|j^ Cjul-
11
housch lj ^^
^ IVCS
attention  to  all  livestock  according  to  the  capacity*  of  individual
feedin $
the most attention, of which priontv is given to oxen and cows. Herding. carc» housing and breeding are the management points tiken into mosI the time out tn the communal grazing land. Generally, it is the
mnrr, 
t0 takc carc °f animals while in the field. Livestock graze from early in the
"’^'«ai«.»4.,tanooa
c «w NahltlJ
die mein source, of feed (be ell Inedock. Odle oeen old mdbns
^’Cttock,  ^H,OfU^  f°dder,  bur  during  the  slack  period,  oxen  arr hindlcd  like the rest  of the (boj]^                   w dual purpose, used for ploughing and for milk production and special iced
P Orr>dgr (sorghum), sorghum pancake hay, crop residues and local beer
17-May 11
93Federal DfHncrafK Kfta^c of Ethiopia. Mutufey ofVTjffr & Energ
Etfaptai Xtk Irrigation a*d Dnse^r Prytit
waste  (a/ff/j))  is  provided  in  addition  to  the  natural  pastures.  On
of the livestock
cows arc treated hkcth,
rev
Watering: Livestock arc watered at least once a day. normally at midday in the dry saVjrj Sometimes, especially where water is nearby, the watering could be up to three times a dr • attention is given during the wrt season as water is available everywhere
Health care the health of the livestock is a major concern to the farmer. AU animal arc vaccinated regularly and prophylactic treatments arc earned out every three months as the ar^ is tsetse infested and trypanosomiasis is a big threat. When animals get sick, they arc immediately taken to die nearest clinic or animal health post. Because of the trypanosoma •_> influence, treatments arc given by animal health personnel and fanners themselves.
Housing: three systems are used by way of sheltering livestock These are night enclosure, sharing of the house and separate shed The first cvpc is the most common practice Most valued :milking cows and oxen) and young animals share the same house as the bvestock
owner
Breeding: Natural breeding using local bulls is the common practice for all bvestock in the study area. No sire selection takes place and as both male and female animals star together in the field, breeding can lake place indiscriminately any time Since last year the wrrrda ARD Office has established a cross-breeding program, but has served no animals due to lack of nitrogen, semen, transport and lack of awareness.
Ihc entire family is committed to the well being of the livestock in the household
but individual members may have specific duties to perform in the managemenr bvestock related activities.
).S J Livestock Feed ana U'a/fr Rfjorrvrf
(a) I ced
As shown in Table 3-31. natural pastures account for about 80% of livestock feed. crop residues and aftermath grazing. The feed sources for poultry in the project area are grains, crop rejects and household left-overs.
nt of the diflertf-
j jjy
m> irik
Table 3-31: Livestock Feed Sources
SDA
NaruraJ
jmturci
Crop
residues
Aftermath
_ grazing
Improved
Industrial
by-products
Source R«prcmc Wcrrds Agricultural and Rur* Development
Dodupmmi < «tr«.
( B H Main Rrp«T (I)
04f ihc«*» 
V'***? Pn^r
Nearlv all grazing land is held commonly. Even the afterm
ath
r
“ „ ta ... >11 .,„« .k mp . h^Kd A,
„ „, J.^TZ
pven  by  the  community  and  it  suffers
encroachment
for
cultivation  A  (LT
%   . m^y r<op »».<> „ 
ta
„,, wlemnl fcr ,fe d
fr
™
feed requirement’ at times of feed shortage.
r th
The annual total dry matter productton tn the project area ts calculated to be 296.779 tonnes As can be seen in Table 3-32 wooded grassland produces 81.540 tonnes (27.5%), followed bv $ moderately cultivated land 76.084 tonnes (25.6%), grassland with scattered trees 53 p- tonnes (17.9».) and woodland 29.684 tonnes (10.0%). Ihe rest ts obtained from the remaining land cover00 Ml               LO’f ~- ~T
rru^V---------- rrrnz—-r—— —-
o°te
£
3
•v
1
.T
.«
3^..w.w*-’-*'*'
The livestock in Upper Belts Irrigation ProKct area need about 115.454 tonnes of dry nutter for their annual maintenance (Table 3-33). By livestock type, attic need 107,131 tonnes pct annum, which is about 92 8 % of the total. This is followed by the requirements for donkeys, goats and sheep. The rest of the livestock need less than one per cent each of the total rcquitcmcn       L
T Babil/e 3-33: Livestock Feed Requirement (tonnes)
j n —— - —
SDA
Dry Matter Requirement (tonne*)
Cattle
Sheep
Goats
Horace
Donkey*
Mules
Total Dry
manet
Requirement
%
1A
3.112
78
184
0
166
7
3 54S
r
3
IB
7,797
204
422
0
l,2T|
6
9,699
8
Sub-TOttl
10.909
232
607
0
1,437
13
13,247
11
Ill
11,119
184
400
0
198
22
113*23
10
Right Baah Total
22,027
466
1,006
0
1,636
35
25,171
10
IVA
5.744
60
147
59
453
60
6,523
6
IVB
16,921
83
618
18
347
27
18.015
16
! ivc
42,951
670
730
6
447
106
44,91)9
39
Sub-toiaJ
65,615
8Un
1,494
83
U48
193
69,446
60
V
19.488
598
262
J
319
170
20,837
18
Left Hank Total
85,104
1,411
1.756
84
L566
363
90,284
 1 18
Project Total
107,131
1.876
2,763
B4
3,202
398
115.454
100
Proportion. %
92 8
L6J
24
0.1 ,
2.8
0.3
100-0
Sources Cfifnputril frotn livestock Statistics ind cemvmion tmoo.2010
Hie teed production, requirement and balance in (he project area are presented in Tabic 3-34. rhe* overall feed balance is positive and in excess of the rcquircment
Balance (lunncs)_____________ ___________
Fecd Production
Feed Requirement
Feed Surplus
1
28,046
_____ (tonne*}______ 3,548
(tonnes)
24.498
53.127
26h899
108,072
9,699
11,923
43,427
14975
lb£Banl( Total
23.181
25J71
6.523
82,001
16,658
59,618
18,015
84,408.
21.501
188,707
296,779
44,909
20,837
90,284
115,454
4yoj^
39.499
‘^-^kToui
^SjeciTouj ~
_66£
98,423
181425 j
Source,: Q
•°®pmcd from Table 3-32 and Table 3-33Etiuf^n
Pn *'* f'™1
11k positive feed balance U attributed to abundant dry nutter production fIom Vj^
area and different lind coven However, some of the area is infested with tsetse w<j d,fr fd
inaccessible io grazing livestock. Other areas are far from settled areas. Finally, 
''
early  matunng  nature of the forage docs not give the chance for livestock to  utilize fnddt, the right time Aggravated by  this,  the communin' faces a  decline in the availability  of fenj mainly during the dry season.
(b) Water
The total amount of water needed for livestock is calculated to  be 600,421  m\ Water forciftk is 549.691  m'.  which u about 91  6® © of the overall livestock water requirement Thu is follow
3
3
by goa» (22,113 m ), sberp (15,020 m ) and donkeys (12,302 nP).
Riven are the main sources of water in Upper Belcs Irrigation Project area but in most men the quality becomes poor as the volume of water gels small There arc very few seasonal spnnp that the community use as source of water for livestock Nevertheless only communities dut arc located further away from the rivers face scarcity of water in the dry season. The common mitigation systems followed to overcome the water shortages include
•     Take livestock to farther away watering points;
•     Transport water for sick animals, small ruminants and young animals;
•      In situations where well* are the main sources of water the depth of well is increased,
•      Dig shallow wells along drv nver beds;
•      Make use of water harvesting technique!!, collecting, conserving and rationing water last longer; and
•     Watering livestock every’ other dayAtauty ./Taffr &E^.
N* 
Dr***
JJJ Anima/HtM
M. O™ .,  „™
JL JZ“X~ ™&“"
°"
f          omle
^wred    Table 3-3S-kin „d
Jn
Table Livestock Disease* of Economic Importance
liuy/                 _ Livestock
type
_
Type of disease
Disease  Occurrences
Level of Incidence
Season
Frequent
Sometimes
Sctioui Mild
Low
Wet
Dn
Anthrax
X
X
X
Pasteurolosis
X
X
X
Trvpa.no so mu sis
X
X
X
Blackleg
X
X
X
Cattle
Babisiosis
X
X
X
I-umpy Skin
Disease (LSD)
X
X
X
Internal parasites
X
X
X
HxtenuJ parasites
X
X
X
Pasteurulosts
X
X
X
Trypanosomiasis
X
X
X
Sheep
Pneumonia
X
X
X
Inrcmal parasites
X
X
X
PPR
X
X
X
X
Goan
Internal parasites
X
X
X
X
Poultry
New Castle
Discase(NCD)
X
X
X
--
Cocdious
X
X
X
Sourer Respective- weredj Agnculrural and Run! Development Offices, Development Centra. 2010
1 rypanosomiasis affects mainly cattle As a result, it has been reported by the community that it U  difficult to maintain animals in the project area for a long tune without animal health assistance.
zlrimu/ HftM Infrnftrjictifrt and 3rrwtw
There are three possibilities to obtain animal
health posts at kebelc level and private sources. As
the respective kcbeles, livestock owners usuallv take reported that each animal health post is normally uah technician and gives service to three kcbeles. In some
veterinary drugs at relatively high pnees In extreme x^ssible, the last resort for the farmer is to treat sick necessary drugs from the open market. Farmers keep
r ormcr are in roost cases far
t0  the last two- It has been
pecessiry and a
private drug shops
w berc all of the above are
by purchasing
fof  purpose n
bke vaccinations ind
Uc
«    where    there    ue    animal    health    po*t».    normaltounDC^    „    ^porunt    m    the
"wtments are rendered. The service provided by tra t>o^ u hcrc the case is acute and the other services could
17-Mm n
99Fdr» Drwuft; Rfwhk• 4 Eitr^u. Mimrtri tfTiirtr f Hwjj E/AmJmi Ndr                  Dra*<* Pr^wl
3.8.  U«*k 
6
Mcrem $pecics
 under different mdreators ts
3.J6 The age
P  L nutunn for all livestock types is long; 48 and 43 months for Qnlew
and
is annbuled ,o
XX*.»'■»  -*
Table 3-36: Lhretiock Productivity Performance Indicators
Jvertock type and sex
Performance
indicator
Unit
Cattle
Sheep
G
om
1
Mak
Female
Male
Female
Mak
Fout
Sexual matunty
months
. <*
43
14
13
13
c
Avenge interval
Months
20
7
1
Twinning
%
53
n
Productive hie
vein
8
9
5
3
4
!
J
| Milk yield
Lores/da*.
1 2
Scrnnc Rcsprrtnr >vrob Agnculrunl and Rural Development (>fbccs, KID And Development( entft*. - *•
* g7 Lmitek Prtdrfj
opened arc calculated in
Jn, '”lL' and Production JS low. The quintlDes
■upplemcntan Report SR -02C and summarised below.
rate of 2 98 ha per year
fhe potential draught tx>wer m ,1.
- °             arca “ w unwed at 13.524 pain of oxen. At
cropland The annual laidiX^
«l*«cd to cultivate about 40.301 ha of
resources   arc   approumat   I   k   i“   tetlma'cd     •’   brtw«“   W«>   ™d   40.000   b»   ,>icn
>t local level iod between households' fabh* t ouott 5,259 t        al amouonnnt of es T mhilek i c °xnet-trd^ v ,
m1
’hough there may be imbibe
cattle tn the project area is estimated to r
.......... -.........  „
but  consumption  would  be  he.  i  l   P10^1   area   of  about  45  litres  per  capita  pct  a,in
•'
households ^h larger numbers rfcM*
Meat u available from
]
cin  c jhc
the study area from the different sour poetry The total potential mear product** 
Jl
estimated to be about 531 tonnes |f *  ^ consumption would be about 6 4 L>
Ns Per capm p  ajanuny.
U   Cu*a<cd 10 be 651 tonnes. Meat from cattle h Cansun*d ^dun the project area
a
Egg* m the project area are frotI) to be 556 thousand (25.0 tonnes) Th
,
’‘Mal unounl
 “f eggs produced is csO” ’
11
'&P bonj ulumprovrd
Jo nm
Hide, are available from slaughtered cattle u>d .Io f
pw*
j
production   is   calculated   to   be   2,530   hides   and   4   026   ^1   ’hMP    8O*B    P",colljd killed in the project area uc used bv the comm,. ' <      ‘ P",duo» thosc »nu’“,"‘ ,
as Itve sales
fo '^en
tpiBpo^ lJlf rcstlJ d^
100
j? M«» ’’
I »H f*4 Main Report (Ifhe tool amount of manure expected in the project area is estimated at 50.044 tonnes The roduction from Urge ruminants is calculated to be 48.603 tonnes (97%) while small ruminants
^tribute 1.441 tonnes (3%) The potential for manuring of fields in the project area must he mall Manure applications are usually heavy (say 10 tonnes per ha), there are vinous uses of nunure (plastering. cooking etc.) and not all the manure can be collected Probabhr no more than two or three thousand hectares of cultivated land, say 5% of the total are manured each year
fjvesrock and livestock products are a major source of cash income for households m the proicct area, though milk and eggs are primarily for home consumption and meat is usually consumed on national holidays, weddings and funerals. However, there is no tradition of raising livestock for market, except for those animals under fattening programmes. As farmers consider livestock as an asset, stock arc not offered for market unless there is a need to cover some expense.
Markets in the project area arc normally held once a week and livestock products and/or live animals arc also sold on daily basis in urban centres Markets are accessible on the hoof throughout most of the year and it is not economic to truck the small numbers of livestock nurketed. I lowever, markets arc few and distances may be far, which results tn weight reductions and a market! loss of quality in the market place Markets themselves art poorly organised and the availability of market information is informal and vanable Few if any large livestock traders visit the area because it is remote
Prices are generally low and favour the buyer, because the seller is often forced to sell by cucumstance and may have rravellcd far Prices also fluctuate seasonally. Numbers of livestock marketed increase a few weeks before and after New Year, Easter and Meskel when meat prices tend to rise, fhe demand for oxen tends to nse before the planting season
( oijtrunu to [Jwl(Kk
constraints to livestock production include (i) seasonal feed shortages, iii) poor breeding (iui poor veterinary' services; (iv) poor market facilities and price information, (v) lack of
I. and (\t) poor hvestock extension These constraints are discussed below.
W Shortages of Livestock Feed
of livestock feed are natural pastures and crop residues, which constitute ‘ ’ 0 *nd 13% respectively of the total feed sources Seasonal feed shortage (both in
and quality) k a major constraint to livestock production and development.
Ltv^t . 
1
(b'  inadequate Supply of Improved Breeding Stock
area are nearly all indigenous types They are hardv and more resistant to
h        « productivity. Trypanosomiasis occurs and the survival of improved animals
bui
11 WMhou< prophylactic measures so farmen are deterred from introducing cross bred
17-Mit.11
101Fmwu.'
* Er-*rrfu. »U.*«rtfrj ITjfr <** Ftrp
1 .Xrir jlj Dnrt^r ftjnr
. , ,.
. —. ,h<h .re rt.pen.rte Mid m short supply Hieh m..n.e„„ee <™0, M cf
,Ly feed, eeratauj .up!»" «*
■W 0'””d'‘
, 
w  Pool Veterinary Services and Animal Health Problems
diseases «e common m the study area, resulting m high mortality and mnrbi^
- nmic losses Veterinary sen-ices and availability of medicaments are
“l^Xtheh.ghlA-cstockpopuhtion (191 TLU/HH -nd 39.24^1/^^
pros™.- »e no. evned our on ™e „<1 perfnmr.nee record, on rre.uneeu c(
common livestock ailments are poor.
(d) Lick of Market Facilities and Market Price Information
Larger livestock markets are local cd in the major towns and may be far, resulting in losi of condition of traded animals Numbers traded arc small and price? fluctuate widely. Markets have poor infrastructure, making trading difficult Market knowledge is informal and bcnctki buyers rather than sellers.
W Poor Access to Credit for livestock Purchase
The bankmg services offered are inappropriate for livestock credits. Farmers ger credit chro<h informal channels and money lenders ar high interest rates The Amliara Credit & Saving Imnruie (ACSI) and Beninshaiigul-Gumuz Micro-Finance Company have branch olEcnin FcndJu and Pawe towns respectively 1 .touted livestock credit service is available ar present bn unth time this is expected to improve,
(.0 Pool Livestock Extension System
The project area is remote and contact between weredas and the regions is loose, extern sen-Ke is poody staffed with few restiurce,
i.H.IO OpfortuitittrjJarUvtit^kI')fttltf>mrai
The lhJ«|Ot*
crra-rJ
W  ithproget  livestock  development  opportunities  are  discussed  below  and  include  ,., availability  of  drv  matter  for  teed;  (ii)  livestock  waler  supply,  (till  improved  cicdtr,  m) marketing, (v) breeding stock; and (vi) improved extension services
(a)             Availability of Dry Matter
The availability of dry matter for feed is expected to improve wash protect At pic**' «”* annual producoon is about 300.000 tonnes and sufficed to support about 131,600
due to constraints on paJalabdrty, seasonal^ and accesubiliiy (in addttwn to other
on the livestock population including duease and water supply) the present livestock pcp‘ in the protect area is csomated to be only 51,115TLU. Wllhprojcct, about 44,000 ha o'
p
grassland and wooded grassland on trngabk vertisols
convcrTe
a    United land-
lo
Suiularhr, rhe woodland and wooded grassland rrrmmmg on irrigable luvisols will irrigated Despite a marked decline m narmal" Rnang 1E1OUIC„ ,hfre unJi be a coropens’ increase in managed dry matter production whtch will fodude on-farm fodder and agro forestry. A notional grazing area of 0.15 hi per smallholder farm has been allocated (»*
Supplementary Report 5R-02B) which will pvc , (o(il
of 3 255 |ia m the pr"’^'^,
37
area Dry matter production per unit area is expected to increase tn managed fuel lot* t ’° where cut and carry can be practiced. Agio-forestry will he carried out in household pk> ’
r
( '
-|1
UH M*±n Rfpf*T (I)
1U2f^l’
y Df**& Pn^r
hJ ) *nd »«« designated to settlement and infrastructure (6.571 ha). There wdl be increases m biological productivity per unit area as a result of irrigation. As a result dry matter production ts cjpected to more than double to about 661,000 tonnes pa. After allowing for access limitations the total available dry matter production with project is expected to be about 320,000 tonnes per annum. As all of this this is assumed to be available for livestock feed, it could in theory cupport about 140.000 TLU. This represents a potential increase over the present of 175%. but to achieve this increase other livestock population constraints such as disease and water supply would have to be relaxed.
(b)           Adequate Sources of Water for Livestock
[t is envisaged thar the establishment of the proposed project would ensure conveniently located and reliable supplies of water for livestock as part of the irrigation design.
(c)           Access to Credit
Better access by farmers to credit would support efforts to purchase and own improved breeding stock in the study area. Provision of seed capital could be considered by farmer savings and credit associanons set up in the study area, which would lend money to farmers wishing to invest in improved livestock.
(d)             Access to Markets
Changes in the management (feed, water, health, breeding and facilities) would bong about increases in productivity and production, creating a surplus of production beyond the consumption required by individual households and the community. If the problems associated with marketing are overcome, the farmers involved in the project would benefit from the additional income accrued It is expected that the project will provide all weather access to and within the study area enabling year round marketing of animals and animal products to major rnarkets by truck. This needs to be supported by. (i) improved marketing infrastructure in the study area; (ii) price information; and (iii) linkages with (private sector) buyers.
( ) Improved Breeding Stock and Facilities
c
mproved breeding stock should be introduced to make the most of the expected increase in
'diabk and quality* feed and water supply*. The proportion of more productive breeds should '  along with the predicted increase in livestock numbers. However, trypanosomiasis is a
ac
1 t obstacle to the use of improved dairy animals, at least in the near future.
W Improvement of the Ex tension Services
nstruction of the new bridge across the Abay River would facilitate the contact between n  ^cni5hangul Gumuz) and weredas in the project area. Access to the extension
SCn*ices would u
r
. 
.     , be easier and different interventions could reach the community’ fas!er.
17 Miv-H
103lirA^Cww Nw                          Drmqt JS^r
J. 9 Forr*<n
b'uci wood demand ind supply for both the project (command) area and
atchmctil    his    bcm    esumitcd    baled    on    the    fuel    wood    productivity    of    different    7"^ fuel wt»jd demand based on thr population data Table 3-37 shows estimate, of h '
stock and annual yield of the woody biomass in the project area using paramet
**
oispp. 
"s ,oni
Table 3-37: Eitimadons of Standing Stock and Annual Yield
i-
----------------------------------r-
------------------------ ■- I -
--------- ~ B T—------------
-------------------------- —            ------- —----- - II
""■      ----- •-----
SDA
Standing Stock
3
(m )
Annual
Yield
(“')
20W
Pop.
Annual Wood
demand at
Um /person
1
1
Annual
Surplus
or
Deficit
Yean of
stock   left at current
popn.
Attila
oce dd t meet dnud
Rl^Lt
Bink
463,817
20.940
32.741
42.563
deficit
11 4
2W
Left
Bink
1J79.O15
49,043
68,980
89,674
deficit
13.1
Hil
Total
LW2.M2
68,983
101.721
132,237
deficit
1Z6
MB
StMwer:   Project   land   (.owr/Uie   mapping   Project   Vupulari<Mi   darn   VUwxiy   Biimas*   Inventory   At   Strategy Project 2004.
2010 popuhnon of the project MM . tunJX At an annual wood demand ,, 
demand of I32 23?
, C’QnMlcd " 101 <24 (20,952 urban, 80,772
r
w        m 1. From Table 3 P^  person tlus tnasbtes intn a total anmul
m annual shortfall of 63,254m’^Th J 1)10
nu phsei at present, so it u
raJcub,cd 31
drgndiDon No SDAs have an an 1^ years nf stock left The tfM
6A25hi his been edcubted u lle
Currcnt denund withom dcerid „ 
Ucrcda authorities in J awe and Pawc both report wood stock is being used resulting in wrKtdlw1
wood surplus and deficits range from 6.0 to 514 dr<,r” ant^ his 12.6 years of stock left- A tore! of
pbnTccl W|th fuel wood planations to meet
fW 20,0
^^"^^naturaJwoodland
?,Che *randing *'«* removed will be wjuiwW
1 *"
“ *»»»
te
»«
»«i< b«i .X? ““ (XT
5
P<Xa2 ?',O 7 0M ha
grCU ‘ ’nd ,n mi^^on The fund "
* ra ph",“l X,
3 '™ M «d Ae «pemtd
U ^ly th>» deficit will rise **th
511 r‘ “ rIlat *b(' lend lilocanon of fud wood
Refer Supplementary Report SR-02B Imp ted Agneuiture A Arto economic Development Planning
.’I
[JH | 4 Man Krp-*r {IJ
1<MI 1***™ J9 i Dna**r Pr^
(about 02 ha per household, see section xx) will be
p<„SIble xddiuonxl planung should be earned out. ' ‘"’“"k*'" ,o mf« Jenund.
Annual Fuel
wood Yield
of
remaining
land (m )
Annual Wood demand at
1.3m /person (2010 with
project)
43.722
3
SDA
Annual
Yield
Reduction with Project
60
Plantation ha required
to meet
2010
demand
3330
Am (ha) io be plancrd
Option 2
813
-—--- -----------
Forestry
Area (ha)
defidi
1
Righr                     8.419 R«nk
Left 33332
3.029
89.677
31
5.635                  2327                3.776
Tool
4L75lJ
133399                       40
9.165                 3,040                 6305
It is not within the remit of the proposed irrigation project to ensure that the Upper Beks irea is supplied with fuel wood. However the data shown in the tables above show that fuel wood will become increasingly scarce during the life of the project While it is quite possible that some of (his demand may be met by electricity. at least in the urban areas, it is likely that the demand for fuel wood will remain high for some years to come
Table 3-39 therefore shows areas of land within the project area that could be converted to forestry and fuel wood production, (sec SR-02B, Tabic 5-9). Ihcsc areas include unallocated land in some SDAs, unused land in SDAs planned for commercial irrigation, hilly ind unclassified land in some left bank SDAs and currently cultivated land within the nvenne environmental comdor (hat could be converted to production forests
JjBle 3-39: Additional Land Available for Forestry' Development
SDA
Unallocated
Land
Land in Core
Estate Am
Hills and
Unclassified
Cultivated Land in REC
Total
JShBink
1.482                   2,041
970
4.493
Bink
Total
7.960 2,781 7392
9,442 4,822 7392
6.504                24,637
7,473 29,128 1
This indicates that there is enough land available within fuel wood to 2030 and beyond However the
to supply the populaoon with
ucas require
^dopmeni of any unalloaccd
land management policy decisions to be made For in omnuin2] grazing land. Hie land may also have pressures on it from homesteads < coopertrion of sugV °UIC
development of land within the core estate will require c rTUnagcmcnt and much of the hills and unclassified lan
^elopment The conversion of former culm.ied 1^ contcnDOOS ind re^ lhe forestry rather than purely conservation forestry may
acccP^nce of all stakeholders
sulllbk fof forcsny
"leRFCtoAUnd^ofP^000
17-Mi? U
105Frdrs Dtnaraa*                E/AnfaJ. .Wwfo d ITC* Earp
btafui Ari
nd Dnet<r Pn^r
J. W      Resource Users smd Socio-Economic?
$.10.1     PtftLifoii m! Dfnoffupb)
Tk project irra coven 118,145 ha and 34 (rural) kcbclcs he within or partially project irca, with total area, rural population, number of rural households and "V '** sue as shown in Table 3-40 Administrative boundaries of weredas and kcbclcs ’ previously on Figure 3-1 The G1S uas used to calculate the proportion of each
u-ithin the project area SDAs The population was then calculated by SDA to <me population of about 80,770 persons
* rJa
Tabk J-40: Estimate of Rural Household* de Population in the Project Area by Ke belt
Kurd Po|n»htaon
Ana ha
Kuril FopuUuoB
1    S’pl
Imi     Gbhnd
Auvh Mdrkci
|r*' Kr i \S>
Sunidi Itx
Mm
l>w Mirwn
Bami In
Arabrta < Juh Anuj> ■
Pr»c
It > atrip 2 VAy t4
2 VJlayr I-
Pss-.W*
tkwi 2 \ Ay M
DuwSVJhg 3U?>
I huy »ZV-4S
Dwtnct2 IM
Teial
Note Total number of M kehelct in propel area because (j) District 2 Village 1 tn SDA I and 19% in SDA IV; and (a) Dninc 2 Village I it litoc lo l ateledd 25% i        25% inn SDA JR ar,rf
The rural populate was then sub-divide , .
the Baseline Survey, and the urban ponul
Adless households using ^J[a
a
Population       Census       The       information       B           »hwcr«ty       from       the       200
population was birther ,ub d)vlded
the project area u about 101,700 persons of Census (according ro the census, 29% of
* "Table 5-41 The project a>« 
Wcfc ldcr,r,f,cd ,otjJ POP1"*"
C Vc classified w urban in the 24^
*
about  18,400  rural  households
in  the  nroiert  P*TuIj,,rjn  of  p
P^<*rCKofHfe
ch ,bout(< Difr[4nd
.
»*e  wereda  is  urban)  'The*'  ***
^
UH IM Mae* Kcperfl)
106f
M/Diwiwfr Pnjrnf
T.bk±^
SDA
ktai rupui*u"
Landed
rural
population
handle™
rural
population
Urban
population
Total
population
Total Rural
Household*
5,455
474
6.835
12J65
1449
LA       _     —■—— DS
3.328
289
69
j  -t              ---- ---- J  rWn ttf
3,686
823
o-    ______ _ —-
3.469
302
229
3.999
858
iu S
996
87
0
1.083
1P y _     __ ___ ___ III
246
7,104
618
3,487
11409
1,757
IVA
4.500
391
0
4.891
1,113
1VBE (Nl
3,033
264
0
3497
750
rvw
4.400
383
575
5458
389
IVBE S)
1.572
137
0
1,709
1,083
IVC-N
15.063
1410
982
17456
3.736
IVC-E
5.349
465
1.058
1423
(I
IVC-S
6.876
598
4.776
_________
12449
1,701 |
V-N
7,207
627
1.606
9,-M0
1.783
V-W
2303
200
505
3.i)O8
570
vs
3.656
318
829
W 1
904
Total
744W
6.462
20.952 L
10L724 |
18482
Source: Kcbrir population estimate** (BaneUnc Sun-cyj anil 2DG7 population
Sateen kebdcs within the protect area were surveyed ui detail, including thematic locus group meetings and individual household respondents. The tollowing information on resource users and sodo-ttonomics was collected SDAs I and Ill cover the Right Bank of (he project area and SDAs IV and V the Left Bank
LmirfCrjeR/i^WfW^J^
The distribution of land use nghts in the tour ma 
in <DAs h shown in Table M2-The
£ forn 4% in one surveyed
proportion   of   households   having   land   use   rights   of   1   SD   A   IV   Ac   V.   The   proportion   of
kbde in SD A I Ac III to 84% in one surveyed kebdc in - households with land use rights of LI to 
SDA I Ac III to 68% in one surveyed kebclc in SI)A ! with land use rights of more than 2.0 ha vines - .
,        „ 
to 73% in one surveyed kebek in SDA I Ac III
X*bte 3-42: Distribution of L^and Use RigbjL
SDa
5UfVcycd kebek- m
pru portion of households
kebek in SDA FV Ac \
/ rnTT1 r>'0 m one suntyw
dumber of
% of female
U*c of pkrti
’urvryed
J^bel«
< to ha
LI-2.0 ha
Land use right
of land.
boldcra___
4% ro 61%
1% to 68%
8% i<> 73%
2* B to 18%
6,3 to 16.1
.l_____________ 9 J 3
3% to 84%
8% to 31%
R6 m 17,9
th,
14% io 43%
2* ■» to 33%
cmatiu focus group
meeting*
C ?°rt 11;
17-Miplll rM Dmrufti Ayato. of Eltvofu. Miwm tflTdtr d* Eaty
:
hwpua Nii !miufy?w asj Pnr«^r P^ftT
Biscd on ail the data collected bv the household survey, the overall  .-„
,
.
a
cra ^ Size  f.i
o
individual land use nght is 1.9 ha. and 2.5 ha on the Right Bank in SD A I a, m
** 1 Gt j 1R
the Left Bank in SDA IV & V. The survey data as a whole enables large medium
land bolding households to be characterised as follows: (i) large holdings (>   M
2
27% of all rural households with an average holding of 3.27 ha; (u) medium sized - 2 h») 27% of all rural households with an average holding of 1.16 ha, and iiii) smd] (<l.l ha) 38* of ill rural households with an average holding of 0.61 ha. It is ntinuta^
(
about 28,831 ha of land under nghts is cultivated bv 14,812 land holdine household, i J*
SDAs.
The registration of land use rights has not started in Pawc and Dangur weredas as there b  » office  for  land  administration  In  Jawi  and  South  Achcfer  weredas  the  registration  ofuidmda land use nghts is ongoing or completed with 51% to "0% of the land certificates issued
The proportion of landless households vanes from 0% in one surveyed kebele to 35% ir.
another. Accordmg to focus group meetings the overall proportion of landless households tx the 16 surveyed kebcles is 15% on the nght bank and 14% on the left bank According to the household survey data the overall average proportion of landless households is 8%. Becomes of the unde variance of the data, 8% was taken as the proportion of landless households as a percentage of all rural households in the project area Landless farmers arc effectively sharecroppers, almost 100% of household survey respondents who claimed to be landless culnvated an average 2 ha of land rented or sharccropped in from land owners.
The proportion of female land use nght holders vines from 2% in two surveyed Rebel* ™  u nght bank (SDA 1 & III) to 31% in one surveyed kebele on the left bank (SDA D A
Reported total holding sizes art almost entirely cultivated - smallholders obtain th and fuel wood requirements from unregistered communal land.
"
“ *' Pro,fC' ““ “ m0d"”'
-e«ge number of plo«
"X47*P ’ WSDA 1 * from !, l0 20 plots m SIM TV * V The
. X2h h‘
P
UndhollhnE
r h°U’ bVC “ °f 1 « - “ P'- of hod mere M no
' 1 to u •Mcdiun’ ’
P “• W'Inl*«lof
ragmraltdLu usc flRhts one
“ c - ,h
cpr °^uti
U- "Zed kebde.
holders „  other
e
lU   loo               t(Jo
,     p^, „      ’
‘^"^pen because the hod use
ng
hsve to pay ETB
 100 to ETB 2,000 net hi.TZ' ” 
n°'
’ dU,‘ oJO”*
his/her land for rwv 
hi., her land for one cropping seasoa The most tnmm, u
°
USc nRk« holder for the right co
mrni is ,h,t
the sharecropper receives 50% to  5% 
?
. 
?n shxrcxroPPjag aaongr
whereby the sharecrop^ h
m
provide the oirn and all inputs.
< rj,rr & Elw®
Ij^hboods
(top producnon w the mjun «onomic activity for 80% to 100% of the households in the 16
suf veyed kebdes. Livestock rearing is a main economic activity for 1% to 100% of the
households in M surveyed kebeles Daily labour is a main economic activity for 1% to "0% of
the households in 10 surveyed kebdes. Reportedly, handicraft is a mam economic activity for
1% to 15% of «he households in 5 surveyed kebdes. whereas 2° 9 to 6% of the households in
tour surveyed kebeles earn an income with small businesses. Transport is a main economic
activity for 1% to 2% of the households in four surveyed kebdes In one surveyed kebde in
SD A V. 5% of the households have government robs
According to the participants of the thematic focus group discussions. 1% to 17% of rhe
households m 15 of the 16 surveyed kebdes are involved in brewing lallalaraka, whereas 1% to
25% of the households in 6 surveyed kebdes are involved m weaving and less than 1% to 21% of the households in ft surveyed kebdes earn an (additional) income with tailoring Ixss than
1% to 32% of lhe households in 7 surveyed kebdes arc involved m pottery, while 3% and 11%
of the households in two surveyed kebdes in SDA IV & V make baskets. Less than 1% to 5%
of the households in ft surveyed kebdes run a small shop, less than 1% to 12% of the
households in 6 surveyed kebdes are involved in transport. and less than 1% to 5% of the
households in 6 surveyed kebdes have a government job.
10.4    HoMjthoti Ihi'owj and Iixprnditorrj
(a)              Sources of Cash Income
Based on the data  collected dunng  the household surveys, lhe average cash income for surveyed households is presented in Table 3-43. I louseholds apparently  have larger incomes on the Right Bank than the Lett, mainlv because land holdings are larger.
Tablej-43; Average cash income for surveyed household a
Source of cash income
SDA I & III
SDA IV 8c V
^Number oi surveyed kebeles
9
^Qgc cropped area (ha
2.1 to 6.0
1.6 to 3.4
S»lto(cr    (ETB)
lips
4445 (0 21.542
1,484 to 9314
Touj(ETB)
5,085 to 24,082
3,070 io 12,596
Source: household survey
'  age cropped area (land use right and/or rented/sharecropped land) vanes from 1.6 ha CO ha for the surveyed households The average innual cash income from the sale of crops
a er
y   households ranges from ETB 1.484 in one surveyed kebde in SDA IV & V to 21 342 in one surveyed kebde in SDA I & 111.
0VCraH avenge annual cash income for the surveyed households vanes from ETB
5UtVc  wi
2 
. T1tln Onc Sl*vcycd kebde in SDA IV & V to ETB 24,082 tn one surveyed kebde m SDA I
17-Miy-U
109R/pfibk of Ethiopia. Mifiutn sfff'atrr &Efiery E/*w^wt Mir Irr^jMn jfiJ Drjtfiqe Prwrrf
(b)      1 louschold Expenditure
The    majority    of    suntyed    households    make    regular    cash    expenditures    for    the    purehwe,,,..    , health care, education of children and clothes A smaller proportion of the suneyed
*••
llso spend money on the procurement of agricultural inputs (i.c. seeds, fertilisers and \ chemicals), the purchase of agricultural equipment, household utensils and/or live
In the 16 surveyed kebdes, 20% to 60% of the surveyed households purchased one or
-
m Xc
oxen dunng the last 5 years and 5% to 48% purchased a radio. In 12 surveyed kebdes, 5%b 30% of the surveyed households procured agricultural equipment (lc plough) and 4  o to 11% of the surveyed households in three surveyed kebdes obtained a vehicle.
In the 16 surveyed kebdes, 63% to 100% of the surveyed households with land use right? pay an average amount of ETB 42 to ETB 220 as land tax to the Government. In addition, IPito 65% of the survey ed households in 8 surveyed kebdes also reported the payment of other taxes/development contributions for education, road, church, sport and/or health.
G
J. / 05          Powrrh and Wealth
(a) Proportion of Poor Households
Generally, a household is considered to be poor if it has access to less than I hectare, no citn and less than two cattle Based on these poverty criteria, the participants of the themarx t« group meetings assessed that 10% to 80% of the households arc poor, of which 5 o n> - considered to be extremely poor.
(bj Proportion of W ealth? I louseholds
Cl
Asset
li t r» xn.l 1 I»-»•,■ f
households have a house with a roof made of corrugated iron sheets, whereas die surveyed households in the 15 kebdes have a separate bedroom
3.10.6        Sfinal Ittdicaforj
(a) Literacy and Educauon
t f"
I'HI 4 Mam Report 1)
110(b)              Health Status
Md.ru is reported to be the most tmporunt health problem w
standing water (i.e waterlogging) and lack of sanitation Another major health . typhoid caused by polluted drinking water.
According to the information provided by the wrreda offices. 3 of the 36 kebeles , th. f SDAs do not have a health post. Reportedly, there j, only one physman m the pr^t who
P^hlems is
works tn rhe hospttal tn Pane town. A total of 41 nurse, are stationed tn 18 kebeles whereas 15 kebeles have one or more health asst,cants, and 10 kebeles have one or more teamed nudwn es According to contacted staff of the I lealth wrreda offices, at least 28 kebeles have at I™., ~ health extension workers (HEVCs).
According to the female participants oi focus group meetings on gender issues, family planning is practiced by 8% to 75% of all households in 12 surveyed kebeles Reportedly. 50% to 100% of all children arc vaccinated against childhood diseases and (local) health l&sislints provide pre- and post natal care to pregnant women.
In the 16 surveyed kebeles. women give birth at home where they are assisted by female relatives and/or neighbours, whereas the TBA also assists in a number of surveyed kebeles in Pawe W’ereda
*°
A  b.,u» 
to
~ or fc. 
» -»
kebeles in Jawi Wcreda and two surveyed kebeles in awe ere a.
hood Security and Household Numnon
According  to  die male parnapants of focus group discuss.ons, households are£
™ if 3,,v 
2 » 4 —.
of the households in the 16 surveyed kebeles are considered
land shortage, waterlogging, poor soil fertility and lack of oxen any
reasons Jfood insZy PemaJe-headed households often are food insecure as
In yean wnh normal ramfall. 5% to 50% of the surveyed households m 8 reported to have food shortages. In yean with less than no ram ’
weyed households in 11 of the 16 sufveyed kebeles report
tale  of  animals,  obtaining  of  loan,  handicraft  and  migration  are  tncn with tood shortages
In three of 16 surveyed kebeles, 45’ • to 89° » of the surveyed hou
have received food relief one to four tunes during the last 20 years Adls   VCoyn  Kebele  (Jawi  Wereda)  stated  to  have  pamapated  in  to< ' he last 10 to 20 years.
R qx>nedly. 20% to 55% of the surveyed households in the 1 ” *ttst once a week, 5% to 50% eat fruit at least once a wee > '
v H?etables „ least once a week. 15% to 85% have an egg at least one
hbour.
strategies to cope
household in
projects dunng
ved kebeles consume meat
95% wIWmftr RryaM. »/E.'Ar<yw. Mram «/ *-»rr & E*rp
Fjhtfun Slit               *4 Dnatqt Piyt.1
100% consume pulses it least once every week. Milk and dairy products consumed at least once a week by 15% to 75% of the suneyed household
3.10.7 Gtntkr hmrJ
(>j Domestic Labour Division
Based on information collected during the thematic focus group meetings On gender
apparent that almost all domestic tasks are carried out by the female household
although male household member* repair clothes, fetch water and fuel wood, take carc
and sick household members, shop and/or repair house and household items.
(b)              Agnculroral Labour Division
Male household members are responsible for all crop production activities, whereas female household members axe mainly  involved in seed selection, seeding, fertilising, weeding  itJ harvesting as well as transport, cleaning, storage and marketing of the harvested crop*
Almost all livestock-related activities arc executed by the male household members, except preparation and marketing of dam products, poultry keeping, and marketing of eggs. Female household members arc mainh responsible for milking, caring for young and sick animils cleaning of shed, collection of manure, poultry keeping as well as marketing of small Inc annuals, eggs and dairy products.
()
c
Deasion Making
all 16 surveyed kcbeles, most decisions are taken jointly by the husband and wile, llthoia- the wife takes the decisions related to the purchase of food items and/or utensils and/or *
ale of animal products In a number of surveyed kcbeles, the husband takes the densJon related to tuning of seethng/phntrng and harvesung. procurement of assets, such as agn^ equipment and/or sale of animals
.
..
' d' Conlro> over Assets and Financial Resources
41 h,‘U,ChOW
- ^edh owned bv the husband and*
c t b° Cnotrr»L* the income from the sale of arunu p
(c)           Membership of Local Insdnmons
Female household members arc usually able to be members ot the Kcbcle
i r»unot^^
^>0,
institution*. women's groups unci management committee, savings Ac ere ]k*ir and/or work group /brigade.
lit aS'VJC1*
(0 Female Headed Household,
In  all  16  surveyed  kebeies.  households
are  female  headed  when  the  We  has  become  a
she is divorced
In rhe 16 surveyed kcbeles, crop production u rhe nutn
of
JCUVI[V for W
the female headed households 3% to 50% are evolved livestock rearing in 6 sun^ k
( B F4 Main Rrp»<i (1)
112^ ,r,trr
fo to 60% wofk as d*^’ labourcrs ln 14 *urveyed kcbclc?. and 1% m 30% in 15 surveyed
kcbdrt involved in handicrafts.
According to the female participants of rhe thematic focus group meetings on gender issues, about 10% to 70% of the female-headed household* in the 16 surveyed kcbcJes arc considered to be food insecure, of which 5% to 30% are seriously food insecure.
It is estimated that about 8% to 50% of the female hraded households are poor, of which 3% ro 30% >rr considered Io be extremely poor
I //         ZoarrWo/ra/ Fnmen-ork
Ul.l        hstiMionj Jt KtM Lfif/
(a} Kcbele Council
The Kcbele Council is the lowest administrative unit established by the Government with formal rules and regulations, duties and responsibilities. The members of the Kcbele Council arc usually elected democratically by the community members According lo the participants of the thematic focus group meetings, the responsibilities of the Kcbele Council are a) administrative and |udicial services; b) planning and execution of kcbele development activities: c) implementing of government policies and strategies, d) collection of taxes and registration of population; e) awareness creation; and/or f) conflict resolution. The Kebde Council tikes all decisions related to local political, social. economic and security issues Allhough the Kebelr Council docs not have implementing capacity or budgrt for executing development actmnes, it forms an important channel co inform and mobilise lhe population. If the village elders are unable to resolve a local dispure. the case is referred (o the Kcbele Council The Kcbdc Council is formally responsible for the management of communal land, including the communal grazing land, and it also has the authority to allocate land for communal use.
According to the participants of the thematic focus group meetings in lhe 16 surveyed kcbcJes. the mam weaknesses of the Kcbele Council are a) delayed decision making, b) absence of members, c) lack of incentives, d] lack of budget and facilities, and/or c) low awareness of responsibility /mandate5 and capacity
(b) I-and Administration Committee
According io collected information, a land administration committee has been formed in l7 of the 37 kcbcJes located fully or partially in the four SDAs The land administration committee is a ^OrTnal institution supported by government rules and regulations It has the mandate i) to c ontrol land use; u) to implement environmental conservation; lii) to resolve lind-related
n ^ ts, iv) to register and certify land use rights, and v) to relocate and redistribute land. Hie
,c
^bers of (he land administration committee arc ‘directly’ elected by the community
Members,
( ) NX atrr Management Committee
1,1 4
c
fding (q information provided by the wcreda offices and collected dunng the thematic IP^up meetings, one or more water management committees fNX’MCs) have been formed
°f the 3  kebclcs The WMC is usually formed with the support of the WRD wereda
?
113
17 Max 11Ftatrui             Rftfa oj'FJbtcfM, Minty o/lVafrr & £enj>
Etbwpm Ndr frngdftM and Dran^f Eryfj
office or the water resources section within the ARD wercda office ;
miintun one or more PVTS schemes. A VCMC normalh has five to seven ^*,,!e *'* members directly elected by the users of the P\X5 schcme(s). To ensure th PWS scheme(s), the WMC has to: i) collect (monthly) user fees among all houT' PVTS scheme(s); ii) arrange and supervise the proper O&M of PWS srher r-Old’ awareness creation; and tv) mobilise community resources for O&M $
(d)              Forest Protection Committee
^^ClCf |q
According to collected information, one or more forest protection committees exist in all y kebdes situated fully or partially in the four SDAs
(e)              Savings^ Credit Association
Reportedly, 8 of the P kebeles in three of the four SDAs have al least one savings A credit issocutxjn, mainly in SDA IV A: V.
'0 Cooperative Societies
1  “ " ’16 of d”57 “*■ ““
s
•X) Village Leaders
Hie village leaders are directly rlertrd
nliape l
M   rr ln r
d
lc community members. Women cannot become i
bemg resident arc d ° SUn cd kebeles. Apart from gender, respect, honesty and
nuinh rcspoflnblc
C,CC,Cd " leadcr A
< conflicts and coordinating development armines.
UTrcda o,fif« >"d during the thenur.c foou
5 uc °Psf’Uona| tn the four SDAs. including ttr
<0 Dangur Weredx
“
poup mecungs, a number
lulun NGO nvp m n
' B " Wotd’ *»d
'
W Dispute Rttolun,,,!
of the themstic focus
reported that there were conibas wuhm border disputes Community hade /-u conflicts as ihcv are accented mJ 
ln fUnc 16 surveyed krbd«
** tn°th" Jtcbdc’ nU,nJ>‘ dlX
*** COft51dercd to be roost effective in resoh’«<,r
consider^ ».« v t
’ c honest by the community members
* 11.2 lutU»tfmu at ITrrrala 1^/
(•) Bureau of Water »r<y
Pawe VC creda and Dangur Wercda In Jaun ‘ office has 16 vactades. There u only onef^**
0
computers. fhe existing staff docs not rcceive^ ^
•      Shortage of vehicles;
•      Lack of .Ufod
sllff
due.h^
•      Insuffiaeni budget
** ’eP*rMe VfRD werrda otfr**
on ^ three 5ecll°n staff incJ
Tw<> non-fiincoon*!
T,amxnK The miin constraints
^centives. and
L’H b‘4 Mam Krp>rf (1)
114TaBic Wereda
(ty Agriculture and Rural Development Wereda Office
•fhe structure, staffing as well as the number of vehicle and computer for the ARD wereda offices        shown ui Table 3-M.
sial             and logistics for ARD wereda office*
Number l_of tectiont
Staffing
Number of vehicles
Number of
computer
to
.I**1
' - F staff
- 61 vacancies
-1 car
- 2 non operational motorbikes
•1 computers
Dangur
8
. 27 sraff
11 vacancies
• no vehicles
3 computer (2 functional}
Pawe
8
- 27 sraff
- 17 vacancies
L
2 cars (1 operational) 8 motorbikes (3
operational)
3 computers (2 functional)
Source: Wereda office
Only in Pawe Wereda do ARD staff receive regular in scmcc training from the Pawe Research Centre The main constraints for the effective functioning of the ARD wereda offices in the three wcredas include:
•
•
Shortage of vehicles;
I Ligh number of vacancies;
•
High staff turnover due to hardship and lack of incrnuvcs/allowances;
•
Insufficient budget,
•
I-united access to improved technologies,
•
Lack of access roads to many kebcles (for J awn Wereda and Dangur Wereda); and
•
I -ack of regular in -service training for staff (in Jawi Wereda and Dangur Wereda'
(c) Development Agents
fhc  DAs  are  the  main  implemenicrs  of  development  activities  related  to  agriculture,  bvcstock and  natUr^l  resources  management  at  kebele  level  As  they  arc  living  in  the  kebele,  the}’  have  a 'tn good understanding of the local conditions, constraints, opportunities and other issues.
I)As usually have developed a good relationship with most farmers through the provision r training and advice in the fields during the cropping season
Jbe numbe; of DAs and FTG in the 37 suneved kebelc situated fully or panullv within the ^SDAsb feed m Table MS.
I»ble3_45.
IDA
Number of
kebelea
Number of DAs
Number of FTC
Number of
veterinary tlaff
16
47
5
10 (V kebelcs)
22
’3 (2D kebcles)
5
19 Jtkchelcs
group meetings
17-Mn 11
115Ff^ralDtaMtk fy&bi Iztbnpu. Mtnufy 9/ITttrr & /:«rqp
fzdwpfcw X/i Irrtptm j*J Dmq Prwrt
According to information provided by the ARD wcreda offices and collected dUrxn u-
thematic focus group meetings. 35 of the 3“ kebeles have 2 or more DAs. The co/ *
suggest that only 10 kebeles have a banners’ framing Centre (FTC). The present
ratio is therefore about 1:105 on the Right Bank and 1:180 on the Ixft Bmk - this. i
good moo
According to collected data, 25 of the 37 kebeles have one or two veterinary staff
(d)           Environmental Protection, Land Administration and Use Authority There is a separate office of the Environmental Protection, I.and Administration and Vic Authority (EPLAUA) in Jawi Wercda llic main responsibilities of F.PJ.AUA arc: (i) environmental protection lie. surveys, resettlement and environmental impact assessments. J land administration fit. land measurement and registration, issue of land use certificates, liod acquisition); and fui) land use (lc. assessment of existing land u*c and potential, preparation in: execution of resettlement plans) lliere is no office for land administration in Bangui Wcredi
and Pawc Wercda
(c) I leal th Wercda Office
One of the core activities of the Health wercda offices is die prevention of malaria through improved sanitation and drainage, promotion of bed nets and spraying. There are two health extension workers (HEWs) in each kebclc and their main tasks are: i) prevent** of disease through awareness campaigns and training; li) immunisation/ vaccinations; ui family plann iv) attending dehvenrs; v) provision of pre- and post-natal care, vi) malaria control; and vu improved hyprnc in house
(f)               Wercda Council
The Wercda Council comprises two or three elected represenratn es tn >n
elect the Wcreda Administrator and Deputy Wcreda Administrator for a p
Tlic Wercda Council has quarterly meetings to review rhe performances o 
on progress reports submitted by the heads of each wcreda office, rhe Vi c approvri approves the alkxauon of budgets to each wcreda office based on a res icw
annual work plan
cac h kcbclc »’ho
offices ^ C(, glsn
J J /. 3       lurtMiciu at RfgoKa// 7.0* Lrtv/
(a) Amhara Regional Agricultural Research ^ * ’tU!C jcfll jnsutun°n
nt
The Amhara Regional Agricultural Research Institute (ARARL 15 an m P^^ Rural responsible for agricultural research operating under the Bureau ot Agn Development In addition io its head office in Bahir Dir, it also has five
research centres, including (he Adet Agricultural Research Centre. ARA
Andes*  a  1  jvcstock  Centre.  Agricultural  Mechanisation  Centre  and  the  Fis or around B>hu Du
agricu^1^
f^tre 1°^’
jf
I JR T-4 Xf^rn RrjMirf (I)
116The main activity of ARARJ « conducting research in a Urge number of Gelds, including
•      SWC. including area closure with planting of fast-growing trees and grasses (cut- ind-carn* system for livestock), terracing, gully treatment and planting of productive
trees.
•      Crop production improvement, including horticulture (fruit and vegetables), cereals, pulses as well as potato with 5 varieties that are resistant to local diseases and having significant higher production;
•      Drought-resistant crops, including drought tolerant crops and fist-maturing crops;
•      Apiculture, including improved beehives;
•      Livestock improvement. including breeding of cows with higher milk production;
•      Water harvesting (roof and runoff) for supplementary irrigation,
•      Composting and green manure,
•      Fodder crops, such as fast growing grasses for midlands and leguminous crops for highlands;
•      Agricultural mechanisation, including thresher and pumps (lc. pedal and washer pumps),
•      Fishery for lake, streams and ponds, and
•      Irrigation and irrigated crops, including crop water requirements, different irrigation practices (i.e. dnp) and mulching.
ARARJ’s research approach is to test and screen new technologies al its research centres before trials and demonstrations arc conducted at farmer level ARARJ has developed both information technology, m particular new or improved practices, and material technology, such as new varieties and equipment, which can be easily integrated into extension programmes. So far, 90 new varieties have been registered in the name of ARARJ According to the ARD urredj office, the Adet Agricultural Research Centre is currently establishing a “farmer research linkage centre*’ in |awi Wcreda.
(b) Pawe Research Centre
I he Pawe Research Centre was established in 1085 on a small land area and in 1986 the area increased to 77 ha. The main objectives for the establishment of the Pawe Research Centre
was to select high yielding varieties of different crops under the agro-dimauc conditions in the lf ra to be used bv settlers and to generate packages of recommendations with improved cultural practices and other modem production technologies.
C ^We Research Centre has established different divisions doing research on agronomy and physiology, crop improvement crop protection and animal feed. The major types of crops on
the centre is doing research are sorghum, maize, finger millet, nee, telf, beans, noog. sna ^c, groundnut, cotton, kenaf and forage legumes. The centre is operating under the
Pulsion of the federal Institute for Agricultural Research (IAR).^ ra,ererE^
l-jtnfu* N* /"**»« "< D™«<< P’T'1
M2 Pn/ectAjr^ Geology »nd Geotechnical Ptnunetert
M2,1        Rrpwa/Gf«io
The lipper Belts dim site, reservoir and command areas arc on the “Western P|a(eau physiographic region of Ethiopia, to the north west of the Rift Valley. The Upper Hi
catchment forms part of and is on the south-western edge of rhe Take Tana Sub-Bua, phyuognphic region and geological structure. The geological map of Ethiopia (1 2.000,
19% (sec F igure 5-26). indicates that die region is underlain at depth by Precambrian bi^ rocks (miurdv granites and highly metamorphosed rocks), which arc partially covered by Penman to Palaeogene sedimentary rocks (mostly sandstone, limestone, shale and marl), are themsehes overlain by a thick sequence of recent (Tertiary and Quaternary) volcanic tt<fe (mainh- basalts) and associated sediments (mainly lithified tuffs).
The basement rock is exposed where the area has not been intensively affected by volcanism and where the sedimentary rocks have been eroded away. Basement rocks only outcrop to ihr southwest in the lower reaches of the Beles Basin at the downstream end of the Command Area There arc no extensive outcrops of Mesozoic sedimentary rock in (he Tana Basin or Bee catchment, but they arc observed in the Abbay valley to the southeast. 1 hr predominant geological units affecting engineering design are therefore extensive sequences oi Tertian ind Quaternary volcanic rocks of maink basalt and cuff
The map shows the Belo dam site to comprise the Eocene age Ashangi Formation (urjt Pj drsenbed is deeply weathered alkaline and transmonal basalt flows with rare intercalation' tuff ohm tilled to the north and west of the dam site (in the reservoir area; and Anther io the southern (juat outside of the project area) are volcanoes formed of the younger Oligocene Xbocroe age Tannaber Gussa formation (unit PNtb), alkaline and transitional basalt with uachttr and phooohtr (fine grained alkali igneous rocks) The escarpment m the cast is as Quatrman age plateau basalt (unn Qbj). described as alkaline basalt and trachyte
lhe northern pan of the command area is also shown to be Ashangi Formation basa^. but , MHitheni lower reaches of the command area are shown as the older Tulu Dim tv Group ( PRsd). ’I’hese rocks are described as late Protcroroic (Precambrian basement rocks) of difF^t metamorphic Ethology meta-basalt, meta-andesite, green schist, phyllite, m<« congk nncratc, quartJiu and marble
The map also shows a lar
command area. At the scale of the n CCAfnbnan granite intrusions southwesr of die
*r> tcnonK graru.r. gr.nod.oruc JLL* '’**'**>« fK>1$,bk ,hat
intrusions of fX’>'
onuiund ires, but ate too im^ , f (diorite) occur m the southern half of the
tn ‘*‘how onth
0           bnMp
UH f 4 Main Report (I)
118fFfhl
^ MW
Fknife
p.irioiiiil Gcologic-il Map (extract from Geological Map of Ethiopia, 1996)
'
Geological Map of Lake Tana Sub Basin
LEGEND
Alba Baialr
Ashingl F emotion
Amb> Aridom F&mjOon
A/naJc Li»tttww
Abay Fsmation
Adigrat Fornrtfort
Gtofo^jcil Mip of EtN«pi>
Second Edtafon. IMS
J L * OwArfffff/ zlnw
glcal mapping of the project area is shown on Figure 3-27. The project area geology is
I rcdtiniinanth’ volcanic pyroclastic (tuff) rock units in the dam site and reservoir area; cilcamc (basaltic) lava flow rock units in the dam site and reservoir area, subordinate
*      to ruff* except on higher ridges;
*      ^°kamc (basaltic) lava flow rock units throughout most of the command area;
*          demerit Rock units in the southern part of the irrigation command area;
0 ‘rile dykes and sills intruded into basalt and tuff tn the command and reservoir
«<=^s; and
c f burden deposits of residual sod, colluvium, alluvium, over terrace deposit and rcccnt river deposit.
c Cs gjv 4fCa cornpri*cs a slightly concave alluvial and colluvial basin plain ol the Upper
B]
Pkun is narrow in the north where- the river spills out of the mountains and
119
irMay-1Frtrrx'
if Effyu.
d" E*rp
M^ut \ilf Irr^tfjK jl/ Dmiqt hwrf
then quxkh- broidcns southwards to about 40 km at its widest point Thc p|
Temin- sheet basalts in the north and Basement low-grade metamorphic sciU south. Since its formation the plain has been covered with (pre-) Pleistocene allu^j
colluvul sediments deposited as coalescent fans both by thc Upper Beles Rfr. tnbutan streams, particularly those from thc east. Thc rivers arc now inased so th
deposits ut bang ictn ck eroded. The relative topographic lows and plain land b ** predominantly covered by soil overburden maicnal (Quaternary deposits) and to cenam
by the basalt and the basement rock outcropping units Thc thickness of the Quitting Q'C"
deposits ts commonly less than 5 m and is formed by a process of weathering, Cfo?10n
deposition. Dissection is greatest in the south east of the Study Area, south of thc Chanfe
River The Bull - Chankur interfluve is also strongly dissected. Compared with the land ttl „
the Beta Riser thc land to in west is relatively little dissected because there are few tnbu&na of any sue or flow large, gently sloping surfaces of the original alluvial plain remain.
Several types of Ternary and Quaternary volcanic (mainly basalt and tuft) bedrock outcrop throughout thc study area, as well as basement rocks at thc southern end of thc Command
Area. Bedrock is considered likely to be present at shallow depth along dir length of the Maa fF-nat) Beta river with outcrops often visible on the channel sides or nearby side slopes
l urthct outcrops occur along tributary river channels and forming thc hills and side slopes of the river valta and edges of the Command .Area.
The rocks in thc upper catchment / vionitv of the HEP scheme are trachyuc tuff and basJt with alluvial superficial deposits In dose vicinity to the Dam Site and reservoir area there art
ndges of built fotnung the relative topographic highs ui the surrounding area, whilst the Sue itself composes thick units of tuff, lnterlayercd with basalt On thc nght abutment an
unexpectedly thick sequence of supetfiaal materials was found
tn thc undulating command aica there arc two main types of geotechnical501 s»
| Fie t
grey/black very plan* days of vertisols (also known as black cotton soils), formed weathenng, leaching and soil development The second is a red/brown clay or °
associated with settlement areas and areas currently under rain fed crops
Thc geologic units tn the project area arc affected by several discontmuitv structures faults / lineaments. pints and intense fracturing Thc major trend of faulting / bne* project area as traced from thc prevailing satellite imageries and on site field obse^’ltt°fl gentryxphic evidences w generally N^X • SE, ME - SW and NNE - SSW. This « U1 with the general regional structure Joints arc frequently dipping at high angle (60 to degrees). The directions of streams and mtn counts tn the area are considered lik^h 10 governed by major discontinuity structures. Unlike the Rift area, such discontinuity arc considered not to be acm e
w aUB IM
121Ftar^' DantTVit: fapftos t>fFjfnfu. Mnufn of ITjfrr
n.’nfpjo Xiir /rrtgrtH jnJ Dnuqt Prop?
3.12.5     Dant bit md RfJtnvir Gfotogy
Geological mapping of rhe proposed dam (and offtake ro command the left •
reservoir geology is shown on Figure 3-28 The reservoir area is orientated X’E SU^ ** assuming a top water level (TWL) of 1.400 masl associated with a large dam*
long and 500 m to 1.500 m wide and mostly up to 40 to 60 m deep in the cent
is characterized by gentle to steeply sloping ridges and plain land form, with a
the over Kewarrmena entering from the north The valla* bonom / flood plain^.^
to 200 m wide; with the over channel i tself incised 2 to 3 m and 20 ro 30 m wide * reservoir area the over occasionally is forced through narrow rock gorges.
The dam axis a orientated NW-SE with a crest length for a large dam of about *1.05fa between the +1,400 masl contours 'rhe bottom of the valley has an elevation of about-|Jl mast and here the river forms a straight section with an approximately 20 m wide chanx’t is inased into die adjacent superficial sediments by about 2 to 3 m There arr patches of exposed bedrock or. the channel sides.
.bu»« „ 
i srnill bluff
in > shallow vXv 
^atioo of Ab saddle is
of about 20 m ffOr ||,e k/ r * 
WrKl apoied „
W ^K there is more bedrock exposure Ibis hiS ion
^“> CTWI tmm 3 sPiUw”’area uh,ch 15 PmPasfd 10
,0 
thc nuVI
8 therefore the spillway will require an exemtrn
southwards, bur will bend             J^b°ns spillway chute is mirtally orientated to fit*
d^’nstream The chute will be
^°U Ucsfward$ m order ro re-join rhe Beks Rnr
F°r the small dam ()r>ri iv               mro a relatively gentle slope on rhe left side of the villr
' e spiflwiv would instead be cut into the left abutmcnl skx*
^ght abutment f0IJm a
W or change m dUKU(*/' $,°P - nj,ng ’Wr following a rx/ge or *c'
e
nOnhnlv P« of th, „ ' Ub " ,b°Ut ,be 1385 masl contour so that the ufT
J 
'located just upitreini
* 
of
'         15 ‘’Soared WMV _ ESE There is a a*-"3'
^the nght abUtnienf
= Four dam 4 reserve sue upoons ve consider. Opr™ A. B * C art fof
srongc. while option D is foe a much smaller dam prodding only dmrrulRefcf Stonge Dam supplement!/) report
^4 Mam Report (JJ
122
pfortd*ng
‘
17         ’’i
17.M»r fl
UH H4 Mam Ri-pon (1)
123JWm' A** otf. 
fa'npwXr/"***'''OruM^e Pn^f
J W j' frr
’ jI
1,1
n
A sumnun of the geological units occurring ar the dam site and reservo
3-46 Tuff is the dominant bed rock unit exposed in die reservoir area Bas^ * parts of the reservoir area along river and stream beds and banks. small
5m wide dolente dyke is found exposed al<»ng the Bdcs river bank a feu , aP!’' *
upstream of the dam site. Superficial deposits in the resenoir area are consid mosth rhin draping shallow bedrock on the valley side slopes, with a tvri’L
between ib< nit I to 3 m
Table 3-46: Geological Units at die Dam Site and Reservoir Area
Jna'cl' ba
'
if
/
/_____
Recent     River
deposits
Alluvium
(cohesive)
__
i Name
I Topsoil
Location and Comments
Vanable depending on underl) mg geok-gr.
typically thin. 0.10 
._  
Along Belet River lied and banka
bound along the relative topographic lout mil
plain lands
Alluvium
(granular) /
River Terrace
Deposit
Colluvium /
Residual Soil
I hglilv
weathered
TUFF
Slight to
moderately
weathered
TUFF
Description
Stiff dark red brown, black or greyish yellow brown sdn CL\Y
I nose unconsolidated variable dark grey slightly clayey sands
GRAVEL with cobbles and boulders With lente* of gravelly
davs and sands.
I Firm tn very stiff dark grry ?o
’ black slightly sandy slightly
gravely silty CLAY to Clayey* SILT soil of high plasticity. ()ftcn
with desiccation _cracks
lxxise to medium dense vanable dark grey sandy GRAVEL with cobbles interbrdded with tine to coarse SAND Possibly claves* or silty in places.______________ ______ Stiff to very stiff dark grey . yellowish grey or reddish brown
ven* gravely silty CLAY to ebyey SILT and clayey GRAVEL with coblJes and liouldcrs, often as
angular rock fragments,
Weak pinkish grey highlv
weathered bed rock recovered as wiry clayey GRAVEL with rock
fragments that are cobble to boulder in size __________________ Moderately strong or strong
greyish pink tn grey slight to moderately weathered massive io very closely jointed lithic possibly
agglomerate (basalt and tuff
fragments; TUFF. (kcasionaUv
blue grev or brown Sub-
hoczontally layered / oriental cd
fragments in places
1 Underlying cohesive alluvium, mixed highly variable with thick sequence (>.Wm) at BHUBllfc
, on right abutment slope Possibly tines washed w
| during drilling.
I
Draping rhe side slopes of rhe dam abutment reservoir area. Formed from the u eatheflngJnd leaching of underlying n kfk combined with ^*5*
processes.
Found at places along rhe slope ofkft aburmefl and reservoir slopes. Dun zones of highlv
* rathe red weak to modemrely weak niff roUfK’ in
borehole cores
Found mainly at rhe dam site left abuttnenf
also in the reservoir area.
bjposures generally tag blocks with ma.*u'T f widely spaced discontinuities, forming ,nc^*j u/ pavements with onh* rhin rot! or cliff (W,n "
tops.
Fresh to
ilighth
weathered
BASALT
Dolcnre dyke
LI______ __ i___ ..____
Modern  rely  strong  or  srrong  dark  Exposed  aJomT
g*jwkc along some stream beds and ,a
Hue grev aphanaUc and a! places
I
___
....
on hill rops in and surrounding the resrt^
vesicular medium ro ven closely
.Uso underlying tuff ar left abutment 4iX>
lotnred BASALT. Likely ro be
ven’ strong in placet
underneath alluvium at right abutment. *'O
^d
rf
basalts possibly tub-intrusive sills. ,n!rf *
Strong to very strong dark blue
with tuff
Exposed on Belts River bunk
grry medium to fine grained
slightly weathered medium to
I closely jointedDOLERF*^
I JR F4 Main Report (I;
124*** pn”^
P/AW*"-'
Reservoir
arc nunv major photo lineaments observed passing through and adjacent to the I* »mostly orientated SSW-NNE, that appear to influence the form of valleys,
*           *
ot straight sections of river channel. Some of these lineaments arc shown on the * °'l(Drawing UB/FS/ GEO/100/02. see figure 3-28)
**“       jo»»       M..fcayri       „       „ ,
u mp,       of
oncnuuoa and possibly responsible for some of the h> be™ ob«„ed bu, ,tae be
*
fa “" N°
**«
The geological units found exposed and encountered by ground invesngatioa m the Dam Site Area during the present investigation are outlined and summarised on UB/FS/ GEO/100/02 BeJes Dam Site Geological Map (see Figure 3 28) and UB/FS/GEO/2/04: Dam Sue Geological Ixing Section (see Figure 3-29 below} where the geophysical survey and borehole data have been combmed wtth surface mapping to produce a schematic geological section along the dam axis. An approximate chamage system is appbed to this long section, from left to right along the dam axis, with ch.Om commencing at the left abutment at +1,424 mail elevation, and ch 1,135m at the end of the nghr abutment at +1,426 masl.
17-Mnr-ll
125IiIIIIIII'II
'III'
IU
F
VIg 
t-\,^,TOt ’> W
,
& E"®'
feasibility level geotechnical investigations lor the dam and reservoir sue are described m
5up p|rmf nran- Report SR-04C. An estimation of the geotechnical parameters and characteristic* of each soil and rock unit has been made to support the feasibility stage designs The key findings arc
. A nick fill dam with an asphalt* core is appropriate, using basalt rock fill taken from hilltop quarry tiles located about 2 to 3km from the dam site,
•     The basalr is a much more suitable rock fill material than the niff;
•     Reliable sources of suitable days, sand and gravel are not available in rhe dam site area and will need to be imported from outside of the area or produced from crushed basalt,
•     Alluvial and colluvia] clays beneath the dam footprint will need to be removed,
• 
For higher dam Options A to C, it is assumed that the thick deposit of granular terrace
sand and gravel beneath rhe right abutment will also need to be removed due to the
potential for liquefaction,
• 
l uff and basalt bedrock beneath the dam, together with any fault zones or dolentc
dykes intersected is likely to require grout injection treatment to reduce the
permeability and leakage potential,
• 
Buried features identified by the boreholes and geophysical survey beneath the dam
axis require investigating ar detailed design stage and may require additional excavation
and replacement.
• 
Where the Main canals cross rock canal lining should be provided to present excessive
leakage;
• 
Hie Main canals cross colluvial soils and vertisols On vertisols, if these arr not
removed see below), the canal design needs to accommodate lower strength soils with
high swelling and shrinkage potential and the presence of shrinkage cracks,
• 
Where possible, vertisols should not be used for main or secondary canal embankment
fill. particularly if concrete Iming is proposed, due to swelling-shrinkage characteristics
and potential difficulties in working and compacting the material. The Vertisol material
should be removed and replaced with suitable (loamy) earthen matenah
•      I hr proposed all weather roads should be designed with a granular earthen sub-base beneath the aggregate / gravel road material raising the road above natural ground level,
•     As the vertisols are highly susceptible to heave and can have low shear strength, high compressibility and be highly dispersive, structure foundations and retaining walls for major structures need to be taken deep enough and to be adequately designed to overcome potential heave, bearing capacity failure, large settlements and sliding For the smaller irrigation and drainage structures it will most likely be cosr effective to remove the vertisols and import suitable earthen material and provide shallower foundations
the above conclusions are appropriate for feasibility stage design, and may be reviewed COnfirmed by more detailed geotechnical ground investigation at detailed design stage
|7-May IIMnI
ff              Mixnrr) tfratr^Enogi
EriMfitn N» I'r’t-M’ D™** •P'w''‘r
3.13 Hydrogeology
The project area, including the dam site, reservoir and irrigation command area, n
by different hydrogeological units These arc river deposits; alluvium; colluvium / resid^'^ reworked deposits, basalt, dolentc dykes and basement rock units. The ma|o  aquifer
r                     uni.
the area are associated with the unconsolidated to loosely consolidated over deposit, Jnj
fractured and weathered basaltic rock units
llicre are few drilled deep rubcwclls in the area,  and the major unproved poublc water 5^. «.ourcc5 arc open welb and shallow bored w ells serving individual homesteads, and protected’ springs.  Streams and unprotected springs remain the major source of potable water for about half the population
Data for existing drilled tubewells are for the most part not available, and were only found fee four wells drilled in the upstream part of the command area The data available for these four tubewclls arc: (1) the tubewell log. (ii) well depth, (ill) SWL; and fiv) estimated yield
Aquifers in the project area have moderate to low productivity. Yields of aquifers arc tn the order of 15 1/s to 4 l/s for 20 in drawdown, but arc very variable.
Tie groundwater quality as determined from analysis of water samples from three wells in the Command Area is generally within the allowable limits set bv the WHO and Ethiopian guidelines for potable water
Rased on existing and projected rural and urban populations the demand for water based on I- I /d per capita for the rural population and 25 1 /d per capita for die urban population is - * Mm3 (2010) and expected to increase to 4 16 Mm3 (2030). This is equivalent to a 24/ flo* -,f
0.09 m3/s and 0.13 m3/s respectively.
Groundwater (low from the project area is likely to approximate at least the base flow ;lc Apr- monthly low flow) of 14 m3/s measured in thr Main (Enat) Belcs river at the badge near the southern boundary of the project area The total groundwater resource may however be significantly more lhan this. The projected potable water supply demand of 0 |3m3/s is
9® « of the baseflow.
In theory the projected potable water supply (and sugar factory) demand could be met by sinking productive tubewclls though out the project area However this faces thr folio*’* # uncertain ties / problems
•      The extent of productive aquifer fix. presence of weathered and fractured basalt* rocks and unconsolidated sediments / river and stream deposits j. which would support yielding boreholes remains uncertain and cun only be determined by add-on survey including lest well drilling in the project command area.
•      Demand by the rural population is scattered in small settlements and isolated homesteads; anti
•      Demand by the urban population is concentrated in the main Woreda sertkrnenR, including Werk Meth, Frndika and Pawi
1
UP F4 Main Report fl)
128U-
* rj"' f
Ji
f> ^
rc mcei fi,Iure P°“bk u alcr ’upply dcmand' lnclud*nK witer requirement? of the sugar factor,
iiWl „( potable water supply solutions is required to replace the current widespread use of
\cams mJ unprotected springs and shallow wells The mix is likely to include:
. Reasonable sized potable water supply systems for the major urban areas as well as for
the sugar factory, whereby water is diverted from streams / men flows, treated and
piped to the point of use with intermediate storage as required As a proportion of the flow required for irrigation any surface water diverted for factory / potable water supply use will be negligible (<!%)- Specifically it is envisaged that the sugar factory will divert and treat water from the Main > Enat) Beles m er upstream of the proposed factory location;
•      Boreholes 20-60 m deep of various sizes with (Hindi pumps serving single homesteads or clusters of homesteads depending on well yield. l*he larger boreholes may even have a simple distribution system, and
•      Protected springs and protected shallow wells up to about 15 m deep mostly serving single homesteads.
The project area is charactcri7ed by shallow ground water generally found at depths of 5-40 m, with the shallower depths largely founded in topographic lows, Le. the plains. During the wet season much of the lower lying areas, largclv vertisols, become waterlogged
With the irrigation project canal seepage and application losses would increase infiltration and recharge to the groundwater aquifer possibly as much as 150 200® o. A greater increase is very unlikely given the semi impervious nature of the soils and underlying marginal aquifers
The groundwater resource, as roughly indicated by the wilh-project baseflow from the project area of (say) 2-3 nP/s, is not significant compared to the average dry season irrigation demand of 60 m /s being diverted from the Main (Enat) Beles nver.
Irrigation during the drv season for double cropping and / or to enable sugarcane cropping, will potentially seriously aggravate the water logging problem as there is limited natural vertical drainage and low hydraulic gradients over most of the command area. Careful water
nu Aagement to avoid over-irrigation, and provision of surface drainage to improve ninoff of surplus water following rainfall, is therefore necessary to avoid water logging
3fMrntJ                     R/iMd. •' IJhNpM. ytmifr) (\f U'ttfrr cu /j«np
/uAnCmv Xri /'Ttfxv» tna 
P^r
3.14
kwironment*1 Stanif
3.14.1      E.»Jtxi. FA>~ ad
(,) Natural Vegetation
_ 
oflhe fa« «««■ »■!« “mMnd ,ra h*" b“” ",,pFrf “ «•*.
j Op™ WoodUnd wd Shmb Woodl.nd) composing 28.799l» or 2|% o(
"jL'cXsstaid cmxn . further a”4h" <,7%>
'*“' 'voodll"d
gnsslan ",n’I'n* 
,k miiontv of 'V<>od resources in the area covering a total of 52,79^ J0 . J5 ttces/h> for much of this area The dominant woodland t^
SXduLAc.a.compns.ng/I^^A <^.zl. ^.z^/ andzl^.
tta drista.
By local names, most important tree and shrub species for fodder production are (i) Tree G«r. Sen*. Arm. Sahania. (.^ fXecb inrbet). llan-a. Sefa. Me,eiUe. Sanden. SM>. DM,. Md Sek^a. and fu) Shrubs: Gw Varbrnl. Kondr, Kirin, YewefKolo. Ktnrttr. Gan,Mo. Bamboo (KsrMJ), Shiwl
Rathik Forests occur in most nvenoc areas and arc particularly dense in the incised vdJcn - f
.l)As r\ and \ Thej are composed of indigenous species such as Fiats rj^ntorw^ Oka ip, thatm/a. Prvnuj ^naina, Spaibadta ampanulata, Slerwfpmtum kunthtaxum, Sy^ja"
f • ’ c, I rnuKLi amygdaftr.3 and Aunrxid asxmjjnu along with some we Midland spears above
dirion there arc some 28,000ha of grassland (excluding wooded grassland) cotnpniny l,JSI 1 VC ° °f dl° tOtlJ 1X0 scatTcrcd throughout but concentrated in SDA IB and the west of
The most extensn c grass xs Pennurtunrpurpunxm and the most important grasses ifl
f
terms o  feed resources are Ytbmt Sar (most important). Gtjtra. N'tch Sar, Ntbro. a'bndabo. S'* 5nM^ Afrtewr, Arhtkt, and T/nro
1 d of
About   63%   of   the   project   area   is   covered   with   natural   vegetation,   mostly   g» Apes, uoodlind and riverine forest, with most of the rest under smallholder r
54 mppi ^
1
Some of the vegetation types are shown in Figure 3-30 The natural vegetation n « bmJdxfig source of fuel uxxxi and building materials for local communities ll though rucaJvf
poles are increasingly being imported
In rrcmr
iaa hjW m adverse unpan • 
111051 <he wild animaL jUVc
d
earned out, encroaching into for&t lcms^iaJ and aquatic ecology. It is reported that
~ nanonJIr or IrglwaIh d„*° WMt' Hfmn, due to ih« clearing There
protected area. >n<J
uO
IB F4 Main Ripnn U)
130
|?*M»
II- Vr>
\f rw//n
P/^f
Land Cover Features in the Project Area
Woodland
Rivenne ford along Betel aver
...............................  Eucuypn» 
Roadude pUntanoa
The nvenne forest is the most important intcre nng K dong the Enat Belcs nver and its larger tnbutanc'
for many bird species and also provide natural fruits c communities, especially during drought periods. Majc
piM—-
-
-pc and is found inwnlv
•             and nesting sites
important by
provide natural irons
1    uco xvef
ya/MfW l^ ^
include Zi^phuj sfw-cbnJt^
^T^find Natural (nuts are collected an
commonly found in the past but now arc moie difficultto < “*d h food by local communities, especially the you
^unniz. h is expected that some of the natural vege
liwlock wd the
be «ode
cpin (|;
131l-tderui            R^irMr of Eltofu. Mwitrf ofWjtrr t” E*f&
Ethnfw Stit lmt*™ jod Dnatqt fapr
out in the coming months / years due to sustained and increased flow f
hydropower project
The rypicaJ vegetation of the project area is deciduous woodland. coverin hn
protect area. The dominant species are zte Aaxia a/hda Md Tfnt* Ut ’
informants reported extensive bamboo cover a few decades apo k **             ' '’’’nou du.p^
Extensive wooded grassland and grassland areas arc established on seasonally fl u ■ particularly on the Right Bank These areas have some ecological importance for
and birds being both difficult of access in the rains and remote
**
Eucalyptus and other ornamental trees were planted as part of the Tana • Belts project to bt
used for various community purposes such as fuel wood and construction of public IwnMmp, belling of some of the eucalyptus plantations was rendered recently by local government offa.
but there has reportedly been brtle interest - the trees are mature and now of little value for building poles
(b)             Fisheries
The Enat Bcles nver has potential for fishery,  which would increase until sustained incrcawc flows and construction of storage reservoirs under the project The known fish specie* in the
Bcie* valley are Nile perch (Barbus) and Cat fish (CTSw
The presence of other
fish  spcacs  such  as  die  Gar  asps  uu  noted  from  site  visits  and  information  provided  from local communities.
conducted
to catch fi h
bU ' I’MU trad‘0o,Ml “
* ®rouP* fhey utilize a traditional chemical known as
s
and advrrsclv aft ♦ u ^orx^  along the rivers. This fish catch method is prohibited by
carfv 1990s;
M  ” 'fc' — '• - “
P roJCC( area under rhe 7 ana -BcJes settlement pmject (1985
Despite the nutritional value of fish, community interest in fishing is curreo i ve project area. As noted above fishing is practiced donunandy by the Gumuz peopk considered by other ethnic groups to be the business of low caste peoples or nunon
i rv low in tbr
Currcndy the wcredi agncuJturc offices are nor concerned with fishery development of community interest as well as budget and skill constraints.
()
c
Fauna
variety of wild animals m
Information from the wereda ARD  ffir
o  ° °
‘nformann indicate diat Humbert *
j
due  ro  widespread  clearing  of  nat^J  **  d«±mng  due  to  adverse  impact  on  their  habit*'
settlement / mignmon of people into the >tlOn’ Jwarthog, bush pig, bohor rerdbuck, bush (verver and coIobus monkev, Anubis baboc
°^Rr>4>l*nds and uncontrolled populations of small
du *krr) and other common mamnub
predators only leopard could be con side i ’ P°rcuPlnc and hyena) Of the
common. The presence of small numbers of
L’H F4 Main Report (I)
132
I7W1’^pcodiks in Enif Beles nver was confirmed dunng the Bite visits. Despite the reduced number rf  vxdd animal* and legislation that prohibits killing of wild animals hunting is still practiced.
Some of the indigenous Gumuz communin’ still practice their traditional hunting and gathering lifestyle
\ bud list has been compiled for the Study Area and its environs. The list suggests that the
r rtrad5 have been well covered by observers: not only are the expected speaes are reported, but there are some interesting migrants and vagrants are included tn the list Of the approximately 858 species on the Ethiopian list, some 451 (53%) have been reported in or near the project area This is a relatively high level of avian bio-diversitv. The list also shows that spedes characteristic of both medium and moderately high altitudes occur, though there ire no localised habitats (e. g broadleaved forest, airo-alpine moors) to attract more specialised species The higher altitude species arc likely to be encountered on the escarpments outside thr mgadoD command Howev er, the large areas of seasonally fl<x>dcd grassland and bushed grassland within the command arc likely to hold inter-Afncan migrants from the northern, doer areas of Sudan. ‘The grassed black cotton soils may be habitat for species common on this type of land in Sudan like thr White-tailed Bushlark, which is very rare in Ethiopia (only reported from hiechisar in RVLB). Despite the apparently good survey coverage of the area many additional speaes are likely to occur and with ame be reported. Regular survey by both amateurs and specialists over several vears is required to establish speaes, numbers and movements in more detail
With project, the impact on birds is expected to be moderately negative on bird populations because of habitat reduction (replacement of vegetation cover by cropping) and mildly negative in terms of bird biodiversity because few very rare speaes are other resident or migrants depending on the area. Many species reported to be associated with the project area are both fairly common and arboreal and would be able to use the planned environmental corridors to move through the project area to access alternative food sources and nesting sites. Increase in water bodies and associated vegetanon may attract Palearctic waders and other migrants if rnanagrd sympathetically Indeed, the with-protect situation may not be as bad as the wiihout- project future, which is likely to see continued uncontrolled de-forestation, widespread burning, over-stocking and land deterioration With-project the biggest negative impact on birds would
B «kecpi g repotted to be in
n
communities in the project area
'ontnbuong lo household incomes as honey sales. However the annual burning and deanng of n >turd vegetauon hu appllcnlly rcsuJted g dedlnf in the honey harvest in the recent years
17-Miy 11
133Rrtwa..Wr«r <fV<Mrcr E>mg>
}j**ta* .\w                 and             P**t
lifirironmtntal PollutM
a Water Quality in l^ike Tana
Water in the Main Enatj Bdes over now originates from l ake Tana and ts released fr Tana-Bdcs hydropower scheme As a result of reduction in seasonality of low and a k discharge the nver morphology is changing rapidly The sustainable development and " of the proposed irrigation protect is dependent on rhe present and future lake water q ♦
quantity Ikies River water samples taken before commissioning of die hydro-power scn J* have low sediment concentrations but relatively high salt concentrations. Sample* taken subsequent to commissioning had higher sediment but lower salt concentrations The saii -
r
hazard, as indicated by EC values for nver sources ranging from about ISO to 280pS/cm i5 low The water quality analysis results confirm the genera) suitability of Lake Tana water for irrigation
Potential pollution of Lake Tana water which could affect the project area now and in the future is related to domestic, agricultural and industrial activities. I hr major likdv source o! pollution of the lake water is due to waste water and hazardous waste from Balur Darfiwutx other major settlements, but also from residual agrochemicals with increased use ol agnculrun. inputs in the lake catchment, particular])' in area* being developed to irrigation (i.e the Megrth scheme*. Rib and Koga).
(l>) Sod Erosion and Land Degradation
Land degradation is already occurring in parts of rhe project area, particularly where land ha* been extensively cleared for rainfed cropping (such as in the Pawc settlement kebcles m SJXA. Ill and V), and around Fendika in SDA LA. Slutting cultivation and farming without an  *
1
measures has resulted in soil erosion and loss tn sod fertility h is reported that some bn<l i  ’ west of the project command area has been abandoned due to erosion & Joss of produces- Some of the impacts of uncontrolled sod erosion in the project area arc shown in Pigmr
1
Abandoned land due to fertility lns«
Tributary ttream bank crofio’1
UH | 4 Mun Rrp'ftT (IJ
134I
ln 9^ " Z P/ar*<'
1
Vczrf jm»n cleaving for settlement
.r.’M
’S
Eroded gully in vertisol
Erosion in Lind cleared for nunfed cropping
While the Enar Bclcs river and some of its main tributaries have already eroded down to bed rock. many smaller tributaries and natural drainage gullies arc also eroding fast with increased runoff as vegetative cover is removed. Without gull* stabilisation measures, and with increased runoff from irrigated fields with the protect, there is a nsk that gullies would extend into the irrigation design areas
A         pan of the project area, about 56,500 h, (41%) b Ueh to be (pernuoentlv) unstable for irrigation due to a variety of constraints, such as: (i) luruted soil depth, (it) comp ex slopes; (ui) steep topography, and (hr) flooding Measures to prevent unganon eaten g these unsuitable areas arc also required.
cry few sod and water conservation measures have been implemented in the project area. The requirements are quantified and costed in Supplementary Report Land
Man
agement and Forestry SR-02D.
<4 L^onn^ul M-> . *■
Pollution within the project area is caused by urn temporary (local) atmos >*■» r*-
m  months leading up t
We:
season  to:  (ij  promote  Crash  grass  growth,  ()  .-mporan;  increase  in  orgat
J nd also as a method of hunting wild animal*. m 10 *nd soil fertility allowing cropping of marginal Ian Prair to development and cultivation
<casons, >nd (Wto ciraI
17 Mk H
135Vidffw Damruftt RtpMf (ft Ethioptii, Mini ft) of IT,jfrr ?** fin^rr,
Efbrafiut Nth I mean . * nd Dnanjp Pryrrf
The present, low level of fertilizer application has a small impact but js
dramatically with negated agriculture development from the use of a
to about 10,000 tonnes per annum at full development Similarly the use r ’ ”
increase to about 214,000 litres per annum. This would have to be monitor rf
integrated pest and fertilizer management promoted to avoid surface and
Wth-proiect in-migration by small holder families is expected to increase (about 2,750^
,n addition to natural population growth from the present population). There will
seasonal migration of labour (about 13.200 people annually) for the sugar estate Urbm^
will also grow in the protect area by 52% between present and 2020 due to natural grow; rd
rural  to  urban  migration  Agro*product  processing  will  be  significant,  particularly  tbeenvu^t sugar factory, the power plant to burn bagasse, the ethanol refiner) and water / wa$rr*Ter treatment works for die proposed commercial sugar estate. Additional public infrastnicrun
also be required including schools and water supplv, etc Wastewater and solid waste from settlement and agro industries poses risks of environmental pollution unless necessan treatment and mitigation measures are incorporated
! 14 } 0,trr P-nmnmrnlal I la^arth
2
( ) Waterlogging
ggvig is a problem particularly in the flat W'erk Mr da and Dcrabay plain areas, and P                  on the vertisols. Extensive pockets of waferlogging are widespread throughout d*
111  '        5 fhese areas are currently largely under communal grazing or foreit and and a significant proportion are proposed for commercial sugar estate developing
rainagr measures will be required
(b) Drought
Crop  losses  result  from  late  and/or  inadequate  rainfall-  I  he  soon  economic  s that 15% tn 80% of die households in 16 surveyed kcbcles are considered to be
p
Landlessness, land shortage, waterlogging. poor soil fertility and lack of oxen
^jsec^
the   mam   reasons   for   food   insecurity.   Female   headed   households   are   also   of(cn    5hortaf The drought m Bum-Jira Kebele in 2008 reportedly caused widespread livestoc
(c)           Pests and Invasive Alien Species
Outbreaks of army worm have been reported Birds (e.g. Qutlta qutha) are hkeh with-project pest
(d)          Public Health Epidemics
Based on findings from the sooo  economic survey  and information from key  info*n,n
fS  J*
following health epidemics have occurred
• Malaria epidemics m Bunj-Jira, Aypapu. and Dimtsatsic Bries Kcbelcs in
■ An outbreak of Cholera in Adis W’oyn Kebele in 2008
f
L'H I’4 Mun Rrp*>n (I
136ppOPOSED PROJECT
4
4/
zU
7rt£Ax/wt"f,flJ7
prtM
Overall about 42,460 ha (31% of rhe project area) is currently utilised for smallholder fainted
cropping of Marginim, millet, sesame, groundnuts. rugrr seed and maize Small / medium
commercial farms- cultivate a range of crops over about 1,700 h*. About 63% of die project area currentlv comprises grassland (37%), woodland (21%) and nvenne forest (5®^)- Some of these
ireas are used by smallholder^ to provide wood for fuel and communal grazing for livestock,
but rherc remains substantial opportunity to develop a large sugarcane estate in the area.
There are about 101,700  persons or 23,300  Hl I currently  in the project area  About 18,380  11H (79%) arc rural wd live in small clustered or isolated homestead,  and the rest are urban and live in settlements, including the Fendika, Vt’erk Me da and the Pawe settlements.
Concerning land use rights about 31% of rhe project area "belongs” to individuals. 33% is communally used, with the state having rights to 34%. Smallholder land use rights average 1.9
ha and 2 5 ha on the Right Bank in SDA I Ac III respectively, and 2.5 ha on the Left Bank. However land use rights vary greatlv. and axe skewed with 38% having less than 1 ha, and 8%
being landless and farming land under sharecropping / tenancy agreements, land holdings are
also fragmented with smallholders typically farming from 1,1 tn 3.4 plots of land
F armers arr highly vulnerable to extreme drought or flood events. 10-80% are categorised as pour with a farm holding of less, than I ha and owning 0 2 head of carde, Conversely 7-35% of households axe categorised as wealthy with a farm holding larger than 3 ha and owning more
than 10 head of cartie
to encroach onto the Verbsol afeas,   onto   the   flat   poorly   drained   Drrebay   plain   and   onto   the   surrounding   slopes.   Poor I  arming  practices  with  inadequate  soil  and  water  conservation  mcasurrs  have  resulted  in Uws being eroded
13”
1? Miy IIhtkr* Dowo/l ifE/hopa. Sbmjrn of ITittr & Eftrrg
Ette**!* Nih imtutio* j*d Dng**f Prytrf
commercial Finns) to be developed in the project area while accommodat smallholders who hvc there. 
With the project farm increased incomes would result from the establish irngated sugar estate, some small/medium commercial farms as well a< iil double cropping over the whole irngated area Natural vegetation and increased would support an increase in the smallholder managed livestock population fr TLl’to about 140,000 TLU. 
cxu^
" °m ’***«
In addition to construction of appropriate dam storage, irrigation, drainage, flood pmcecti-r and all-weather roads infrastructure a range of complementary agricultural, livestock hod management, community development, environmental and system O&M subproject uf necessary tn maximise sustainable gains in agricultural productivity. Sugarcane cropping i-£ dominate in the central pari of the project area and will require construction of a I2,0Cri TCL sugar mill and associated plant, facilities and equipment.
Irngated agnculture benefits tend to be captured by farmers with (he larger landholder lb landless, fanners with small land holdings, women headed households and the original Gios inhabitants need additional support. Therefore in addition io a range of subprojects to supp off-farm livelihoods targeted al the poor and vulnerable, land consolidation with alloca minimal bolding to the landless is proposed. I^nd consolidation exchange will al
the currently fragmented land holding whereby most farmers cultivate 1 -3 separate plo llso enable construction of fields and furrow of regular and appropriate sixes an s opes efficient, mechanised irrigation
Along with land consolidation the project will support resettlement and land acquaint* , smallholders from the areas designated for a sugar estate and small/medium comm
as well as to enable construction of necessary engineering infrastructure, the storage and land development (terracing)
To address environmental drclinc the project will support land and watershed m*n>g forestry subprojects, including environmental monitoring.
Recognising the quantum shift in attitudes and farming practices entailed bv the projecn appropnarc implementation and O&M arrangements will include a Main System support for farmer institutions with development of appropriate legislation,
guidelines and rules
4.12         Ftatttnj of Pn/ta 
The proposed project's design includes for a mix of smallholder, small / medium eornn* farms and for a large sugar estate. The balance between each is informed by the desire t0 maximise commercial cropping and revenues, particularly of sugarcane, whde ensuring continued and sustainable livelihoods for the smallholder fanners that live in the pr<>lfC‘
1    31^
and minimising resettlement co.u The project's design also recognises that for susuu ’* agricultural development imgauon, drainage and sugar estate development engineering *of
nief-',Cl'
.
L’B f-4 Mun Krpcio /
138y               / Wv*
tu be complcfncntcd by a range of subprojects to addies (largely smallholder) crop and
tock production problems social and management capacity constraints and land
^agernent and environmental concerns.
g problems recognized from analyses of the agnculruir sector, and related themes of
elusive social development and sustainable economic growth, include: (i) rhe disadvantaged
on  of poor (ic landless) and women in decision making and tficir vulnerability to extreme
father conditions, particularly drought, as well as die original G umuz inhabitants whose
rraditwmd livelihood is based on hunting and food gathering; (ill unbalance m access to resourceparticularly to land, (ill) weak agricultural extension service dehvexy; (hr) lack of
access to improved agncultural technology' and quality input* znd firm produce and lives lock marketing  constraints,  (v)  poor  rural  infrastructure,  particularly  farm  to  market  ilk  weather roads and (vi) the system management, operation and maintenance challenges posed by
incapenrncr farmers, lack of farmers instirunnns, variety’ of crops and soils and die mix of smallholder and commercial farms.
i 13 Pntffd ififparf
f hr/Vwwr
7
The Impact (goal) of the proposed Upper Bates irrigation project is “E/rbawni Ewimnc Gnurtb
Peirrfy* m rhe project area. Discounted over 35 years the cxpecied project EJRR is
10.2% with a NPV of ETB 155 million and a BCR of 1.02:1.0.
The project Outcome is for "Exha/uid  Ffw/mAm/)- & SxjkMuibr&ri of ImgstfJFor die impact target to  be achieved the necessary  outcome targets must torsi be achieved.  These arc for the following to be achieved within two years of scheme completion:
•      Development of a large sugar estate over 36^225 ha with a 12,000 TCD sugar factory producing about 220,000 tonnes of sugar per year plus ethanol and electricity.
•      Establishment of 22,8 2 ha of smallholder irrigated agriculture with an additionri
10,983 ha for grazing, woodlots and house-plots.
•      Establishment of about 4 J "3 ha of small /medium irrigated commercial farms.
•      Support to about 5.074 ha of smallholder rainfed agriculture.
flic project outcome will be achieved if the rune mutually supporting project outputs (components) arc achieved, These arc summarised tn the Project’s Logical Framework included as Annex B. and are:
•      Output I: Engineering Infrastructure including the storage dam, irrigation and drainage system, land development of consolidated holdings and iD-wcailicr roads;
Output 2: Resettlement and l_and Consolidation;
•       Output 3: Sugarcane and Small/Medium Commercial Estates Development including 12,000 TCD sugar factory;
Output 4: Institutional Development & Sustainable O&M Output 5: Smallholder Crop Production
Output 6: Livestock Production
Output : Land and Watershed Management and Forestry; Output 8: Community Development / Support; and
Output 9: Environmental Enhancernent-
139
17-Mjv itltdrnri Drnoirjfi. Riruba. of Efhttpu. Minify ofWjfrr & Izntyp Izthxu* Nri Imfpfrv* and Drsn^gr Prwtf
4.2
4.2,1
Planning Process, Framework and With-Project Land Use Planning Pnutstfor Irrigation Dtvthfmtmf
steps, including:
suitabk land. Water resources do not limit irrigation development in Upper Belt,,
• Division of the project area into a number of Stage Development Areas, SDAi,
n
hydraulic unit boundaries,
•      Determination of lmgablc / rainfed SDAs based large!}' on land suitability and irrigation intensities, existing settlements, and important environmental habitats suchm riverine corridors;
•      Use of Optimisation Models to: (i) determine areas to be allocated to a large vjpr estate, to small/mcdium commercial farms and to smallholder farms (irrigated and rainfed), thus identifying the management / farm type; (ii) to calculate the rcquircmcr and distribution of non-irngated land use, including gracing areas, fuel wood plots, homestead plots, infrastructure (for imganon. rainfed agriculture and public infrastructure) and environmental reserve; (iii; to provide an estimate of re-settle®®’ requirements; and (tv) to calculate present, without-project future and with-project benefits from sugar estate, commercial and smallholder farms on land of different
suitability.
• Statement of irrigated agriculture development options and the Development In for die schcmr.
systems as required,  scheme operation considered and suitable (compatible) irng®f,on infrastructure identified and designed,  and institutional and implement anon arraogem formulated
I’B 1-4 Main Rep<wi (!)
140top*                  Mnulp *T„„. & E^.
X/x 7'H**’*’* Pwqt Pro^a
Fipuc 4-1: Selection of L»ad Vutituion Typr
Soil types A depth.
Cost,  Economic  A
1
Topography, land
slopes, shape and
Environmental
Considerations
Application
beokenness
Water quality
I
*
Method: Surface or
Management
Pressure
smallholder or
commerce] farm
Population den sit}' of
population and use of
existing land
LcgaJ/tradirioaaJ rights
of current users
Existing practices
incidence of irrigation
Government
Policy de Views
Management
(farm) Type:
Smallholder,
Out garwer or
Commercial
Farm
J
422         Lind I ■tihalioe Type/ for I friction
As illustrated above on Figure 4-1, the land utilisation types arc broadly defined according to: fi) method of irrigation, surface or pressure (sprinkler); and (ui management arrangements, smallholder, commercial or out-grower, giving six possible LUTs:
•     LUT 1 Surface irrigation, smallholders
•     LUT 2- Surface irrigation. small, medium and large scale enterprises
•      LUT 3- Surface irrigation, out-growers
•      LI T 4- Pressure irrigation, smallholders
•     LUT 5- Pressure irrigation, small, medium and large scale enterprises
•     LI 1 6- Pressure irrigation, out-growers
in the project area, with a
Large scale commercial farming is expected to donuna g* irn
g b|  ^ca. In addition
ac
luge sugarcane estate likely to extend over about 40.000 
| g organisations already exist
small to medium scale commercial enterprises are via > e
cultivated and some of the
occupying about 6,200 ha, though it is known that not
. ganon by pressure
jn
lent  igreemcnts  may  be  suspended  /  cancelled  These  estates sprinkler) of surface furrow / basins
Smallholder farms are likely to be non-mechanised on t
h(CI
 ^brown hwol sud^ but tn
^pport to prepare seedbeds,
of pan-mechanisation on vertisols where they will eq onuncrcul enterprises would be plough and form irrigation furrows in these heavy da\ so oilnvation.
Mechanised as far as possible, certainly for Und p  P
rc
araNA /m/rfM'-r «</                      W
Out growers growing commercial crops (sugarcane) under agreement with the |^c
estate are a further LLT. with the estate purchasing the crop, taking care of tnarket^ '
providing support for land forming and land preparation. Widespread interest amo^
' mallhokier farmers may not be forthcoming but would depend on the terms and cot^,
offered / imposed.
Irrigation application methods suitable for Upper Bdes could be cither surface or pfcslUl(
irngauon Pressure irrigation is technically viable on both fiat and sloping lands up tOibw
12%, while surface irrigation (without land forming) is only recommended on fiat or gently sloping land up to 3%. but up to 12% (8% Vertisols) with bench terracing. Pressure tm^,
most likely to be attractive to commercial farm* who can mobilise necessary foreign aching
for spare parts, and if the required pressures can be generated by gravity.
Pressure  irrigation  for  smallholder  farmers  (LL’T  6)  would  not  be  viable  unless  introduced  rc the  area  by  commercial  companies;  and  then  potentially  tn  (he  longer  term  (15  years  +)  whec the technology is familiar
3 P/anntn^ Fruwork
(a) Present and Projected Populations
Pho distribution of the present population of the project area by SDA was given previous!* in It. -41. Die 2010 rural population of the project area is estimated to be 80.770 peoples
h >useholds. Ihe urban population of the project area is also an important statistic
c it influences rural to urban migration and regional food demand Following the 200' opulauon Census, an esnmate of the urban population of the project area was made al 2O.9S2
P                 n ther important statistic is the proportion of landless tn the rural population rights of landless people are expected to be distinguished in any re scnlement
programme 'llus proportion was taken as 8% of rural households (see Section 110).
I caring in mind irrigation investment will create different opportunities between SDAs (depending on the various proportions of land suitability classes) then with project a substsc^ re-organisation of population distribution is expected Specifically, the present (relatively population in SDAs IB (Right Bank) and IVB W (Left Bank) will be re-located within the project  area  (by  involuntary  resettlement)  to  make  way  for  a  sugar  estate.  Ihe  present population from the recommended dam site (207 households) would also be resettled
t ts important to realise that mural re settlement to make wav for large scale irrigated agncultum establishes the starring popular of the project area, not the dutnbution at full
rvelopmcnt. rhe final (with project) population distribution has to take tnto account grow* 01 the existing population, any in-migration, rural Io urban migration and the re-dwinbuB-^ °! the changing popular between SDAs. according to the avaiWnlm of both .rogablc land
non-imgable land for grazing. foci wood production and other non arable uses.
The population projection is important for agricultural planning For most agnculuxral development options considered, full development is expected to take 13 years (see Implementation Schedule, Annex A), during which tunc the rural population will increase
LIBF4\fjm Repnn (I)
142r^V****1                     rrfT p 'w** P'y‘'
ur>i   f«,,l,’>'   and    an>    ,n    m,gra°',n    ind    deWMC    due    10    mention   to   the   towns.   These   trends
"* modelled using the CSA population growth projections Table 4-1 summanes the present 1            llaUOn >nd P °icc,cd population to 2020 and 2030, assuming no m migration.
r
d i. Ponuhtiun Projection for (be Project Area
’OK  por'
Present 2010
2020
2030
SDA
Rural
Urban
Rural
Urban
Rural
Urban
5.929
6.835
9,775
1 \ IB 1-
11,140
6.882
16,831
3,617
69
-
IB W
3.770
229
-
IBS
1.083
•
-
-
III
7 727
• •
3,487
13,658
5.446
13p65
8327
IVA
4.891
-
5,902
6.780
fvBE (N)
3,297
•
3.861
449
4360
678
IVBW
4,782
575
-
-
IVBI (S)
l.“09
2,062
2,569
IVCN
16373
982
22,081
1.983
24392
2,997
IVC E
5.814
1,058
6.584
1,653
6,918
X497
IVC s
’.4"3
4,776
9,997
7459
8374
11369
V.N
7,834
1,606
8,79”
2,509
9,126
3,790
VW
2.503
505
3,021
-
3,470
-
vs
3.973
829
4,456
1,295
4,614
1,957
Total
80,772
20,952
90,194
31,934
91,150
48348
Source Consultants’ ctrtraatat based <m CSA growth rates
The project ions arc interesting m that urban population is expected to grow from 21% of the project area population in 2010 to 26% by 2020 and 35% by 20V), while the present rural population grows by 12% to 2020, and only bv 13% from present to 2030. This a opened as die driver of urbanisation is very strong even in wcreda towns, and the increase in the rural population is absorbed by growing opportunities in urban areas.
(b)          Allocation of Land for Culrivanon
The rural population projection is the basis of an estimate of (be amount of cultivable land that be requited wtth p^ fof farm|ng households Ftnt though it is necessary to know the
per household.
p* principles bclund calculating land allocations are stated in Proclamation 133/2006: Revised
J
b ra National Regional State Rural Land Administration and L’se Proclamation 1 he
^dduics of this Proclamation have been used on lhe assumption that the same guidelines will ‘Ppbcd in tha, pan of the project area in BenishangaJ Gumuz. In short these arc:
I he area required for irrigation infrastructure in a scheme will be deducted
P pornonally from the area of each holding « « P
ro
not 10 instruction.
n-Maytl
14.3f rfierd Dffnxratu of&htofu. Sttmjfn of ITartr r** Eotrg,
Etbntuo Nik Imfjjtm and Dnnoqv Prvrtrf
The minimum size of rural Landholding that may be acquired 15 o
0.11 ha (irrigated). 
'
15  *5 ha
The maximum allocanons arc 7 ha on high ground (taken to mean Im-isoj
project area) and 10 ha on low ground (taken to mean vertisols m th
c  Project ire,
T k the guidelines. an «umate of the frequency distribution of holding sue is
r Fxononuc Baselme Survey distinguishes between large holdup (> 2  ,
h
7W of rural households with an average holdmg of 3.27 ha; medium
h 0|^
2™ »' h““ho“’ "h " Tlf' hoUm8h X,’T h ..iax^ (<1.1 h.) wmpnmg M% «<hou-W* 
”,j ta,ia»g ■** *»">—»*" °to“ w-i-
wood requirements from unregistered communal land
holdmi. ottol tab*.
The with project area allocated to irrigation infrastructure in the irrigation command area has been carefully calculated and totals about 6,580 ha. This represents the difference between oct and gross irrigation areas The area that falls on land allocated to irrigated smallholdings mu£ be deducted proportionally from the present smallholder land size classes. A large irrigaicd and holding would be 196 ha. a medium irrigated holding 1.06 ha and a small irrigated land hndxe 0.55 ha It is assumed the future sizes of rainfcd holdings remain as at present.
It is proposed that households that arc presendv landless receive a small cultivable holding so that they are not socially and economically excluded from the proposed protect The mnumuni irngated allocation foreseen by Proclamation 133/2006 is 0.11 ha Optimisation Modelling
’uggrsts that landless wiD migrate to SDAs with irrigation supph Should any landless households remain in SDAs allocated to nunfed agriculture then they may be cnntled to the minimum allocation specified in the Proclamation of 0.25 ha.
bserved above, ar present smallholders obtain most of their grazing and fuel wood requirements &om common land, a pan from the small amounts of wood and dry matter th*
obtained from agro-forestry (very limited at present) and crop residues. However, project the availability of communal land will reduce. In SDAs with relatively large propo^ o imgable land (particularly on the Right Bank which has less dissected terrain andap«,f'
proporucn of vcrtuol<|
“ allocate p„ household of bnd fw Rxl uwJ producoon jnd
u
fo
It#
not the intention to mjte be project selfWfiaent
(
V" bUUl-1
.    ’ ” °f 9 mift" for
land dfocoon, for wood produttjon
project land allocate need, ,  plan
'*k fr°m
m fJ[hcf commodltv Although both
P°-ble There nor
(°
Section 4.9) but additional fwbbc or p*”'
o              fof
pubbe mfrastruenue Pubhc mfnstnjctltfe „ „ 
,hc ,"’Ui,cd for ”nflnn ,ra8aBon “ “
and
and
11
L‘B F4 Main Rq*irf (I)
144f«**
*             ^P**# 
Pn  e
f -'
iUi c hou*«hold s«e « roughly «p»l the project (between four ind » member,) the
1  ^remeni (ot h>nd for living and fuel will be roughly equal between household,. fondles,
l,^iKhnlJ' receiving land for dice necessities should therefore receive roughly the same
,’Zanon M » ljrFc landcd hoU5ehold If * als<> “’“nied d’M Endless household allocauons will chide land fof grazing (aliening animals for sale ts a common livelihood activity of landless
households even at present.
However, in SDAs where it is uneconomic to supplv irrigation landless households arc allocated >nly die tainted minimum ot 0.25 ha, from which they will have to obtain as much of their
crop dry matter and wood requirements as possible It is possible to reduce the size of fuel wood plots on the Right Bank (where non irrigable land is relatively scarce) compared with the Left Bank (where rhe converse is true)1'.
The adopted household allocations for net cultivated areas, foci wood plantation and grazing for planning purposes and used in the Optimisation Model arc summarises! below in Table 4-2
Table 4-2: Household Land Allocations, ha
Vcftisoh
Lwiaolf
Spec. Meat.
Rainfed
Net cultivated arra allocation
Miramum aEocatoon
01!
011
0.11
025
Small barms net culm ated
0.55
0.55
0.55
061
Medium farms net cultivated
1.06
1.06
1.06
116
1-argc farm* net culm ated
196
196
2.96
327
Communal grazing Allocation
Communal jrazuy Right Bank
0.10
0.10
0.10
020
Communal grazing [Left Bank^
0.15
0.15
0.15
020
Communal grazxr>; minimal allocation
010
0.10
0.10
0.00
Fuelwood Allocation
budwood ajjneaaon <Rivhr Bank)
0.10
010
0.10
0.15
Fuelwood aDncanon 1 elt Bank.
0.15
015
0.15
0.15
Fuelwood minima] allocation
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.00
Homened and public infrastructure
Homcitead plot per farm
020
020
020
020
Fuhk infrastructure
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
£2!^Alloc»tion per Household
2l!fyium dloonr,„
056
056
0 56
0.50
j*nall Farms
1.00
1.00
1.00
121
^umfurn,
151
151
1.51
1.76
farms
3.41
3.41|                  3.41
3.87
Th
usuhants estmutes Net cultivated irn aUocarioo hued on Proclamanoo 1JJ/2U06
of tami households m each size category can be estimated from the population |ect1t>° (fo 2020 because rural growth subsequently is not expected to be large, see Table
'^ZZZpoa SR02D (iw js° ^cu°n 4j°)wdude5 eikuUnon5 whKh ,hw ,tu[ ,iK hou*hold
1
J  °'’ “ '"’^'e to achieve self sufficiency in fuel wood and recommend, the establishment of a Cn * h’ on unallocated land.
17-Mav 11
145h&ni Dtnwuh.
Iztiivwt \rjlf Imgif/on Dnan^r Prynt
MntiJtt) tfU aln C1"
4-1) from the post re settlement population distribution using rhe farm s
distribution obtained from the Agro Socio Economic Baseline Survey dat ^
t   Uaic)
4-3. The estimate is reasonably consistent with the negatively skewed f   *' ^)Wtl m’ht,
rr
expected from a sample of rural landholdings ic a large number of small • h u
relative
ly few larger ones. 
° * d
n
_ 
„p„b.»n „wmn»«b.ri b, b.»«b.*l b..d dloabO". «bown »14* „ ,
194 
J»k .nd ».S» l»»'b"Ub “
' pop«ta»» '""w,h"' """W r,,’m d,,n
P '"pk
18.MM |.„ Jx* The <                       Model dewmbne <be bod .<»«.«>
accommodate them
Table 4-3: Projected Number of I^and Holdings In Size
«,
Population Projected to 2020
11 mi sc ho Id* Projected io 2020
SDA
Minimum
allocation
Small
farm Hit
Medium
farm 1IH
Large
farm HH
Minimum
allocation
i
Small farm till
Median]
farm HH
Up
faruHH
IA
782
3,597
l?99
3.597
178
819
409
I”
IB E
-
-
•
IB W
-
IBS
-
-
-
111
1,334
4.603
6.138
4.603
304
1,048
1.39’
:,0<
IVA
472
2.172
1.629
1.629
107
494 j
371
IVHF (N
309
1.421
1.066
1.066
70
323
243
X’ ------- —1
IV HU
-
-
J
1VH! (S)
165
759
569
569
38
173
130
liy
1VC N
1.766
8.126
6,l»l
6.094
44)2
1,849
1,38’
1VC-E
527
2.423
1.817
UP
120
551
1VC-S
WK)
3.679
2?59
2.759
182
837
414
628
44
All
•A
VN
7(M
4.451
2,428
1,214
160
1,013
553
V VI
Vs
356
2.255
1.230
615
81
513
-
280
Total
7,216
33.486
25529
23,964
1,642
7521
Source ( <>n»uit»nr» rramatr bailed <« Tj hie 4-1 And Tabic 4-2
1 motion I ^,,11 DnrtopHtal Pmticabtu
W Introduction
After compleoon of bods and topographic llfflvcp detilJcd
(gn(J drunlgf) ltyoutS
ucrc prepared ,o include rhe greater
proportion of ,unable coil*. Hie layout i> h<**
u.fluenced  by  topography  (fe.  io   foe  prpehne  drMnbuho,,  -  see  below),  with  canals
along ndge* and drarnage makrng maxrmun. „{ la™, were adop.ed „ mud. „ prl5Mblf to
RcClangular
mechMllWt^
.he  command  rs  broken  up  mu,  mam.  branch,  secondan  and  .eruary  hydraulic  uni«  to operation and maintenance
L’H |-4 Main Rrp<r(t)
146Mwty qfll #,r                  J.
A** w Pwr
(b)             Hydraulic Units 3nd Canal
Command hydraulic units arc the building block, for sy«e
defining rmganon (and drainage) boundaries ind run^J" °pef,t,on «d maintenance,
farms concerned with opera non and tnajnrenancc
5nMWloW« and commercial
Suggested sizes for command hydraulic unit5 abng w[h
discharges and areas arc tabulated below, Table 4.4 nlc C1°a C”CROnc5 3ltct indicative
over several secondary units
proposed sugar estate would extend
Tab
| Nr
k 4-4: Catego Command Hydraulic
Unit
py oi Category of Canal
Indicative
Discharge
(S»7‘2.
Indicative
Area
ha
(  JL
Indicative
lengths (in)
OiM
Ifucirutiofi
1
Main
5,0-50
1    5,000 - 30.00(1
As irqiured (with
balancing reservoir
■ System WUB / Commeniai
Mam Unit
*2
Brunch
1.5      5-0
1,000-
3,1X10
swage)
Farm(s)
3
Secondary
l.’mr
Secondary
0.5-30
400
1,200
1,000-4*000
Secondary VCL’A / C.uavnc rciai
Farm
L
Tertian Unit
Tcrriurv
30 60 i/s
30 - 60
400-W
Tertiary \VUA
5
Quaicrrun
Unit
Held
Channel
15-30 l/s
15 30
400-H00
irrigator group
5
Held
J.
Furrows /
Busins
-
(c)             Hvdrai.be I 'nits and Pipeline Sprinkler Layout
—
“P and down-slope and minimising ptpclme ngths. 
on existing gullies, streams and riven form the same rv 
the command itself is typically divided into pressure Z° '
Within each pressure zone, the command is divided up into r<*g ' '
„ fot , ciaal system,
by  , hipb pomt
. .             , hvdraubc units
-   fiom
y up_nM IS
typically  200  ha  in  area  These  hydraulic  units  would  be  supplied  > the bunrd pipeline system.
hot a pressure irrigation options within the large sugar estate in spunkier irrigation is proposed. and the hydrants would be loot » applying water to hand-move laterals and thence drag hoses- aC
lfTl Ratr about 5 ha
I nper Bel*5, (frig-hose
, j sub nuifb
planning pipe system layout the following pnnop
•  Balancing storage should be provided at bulk supp , 
•      Within pressure zones, the long supply p«p^«-
. should be observed
in pressure zones,
etc, dtould be
luw< ind at each hydrant
aligned down-slope. so that pressure dlsna,tt“°n [vplfilk be aligned across slope offtake, are minimised The hand-mo' c l»|crFtdfru!                Rrp*b6. of Efhtnpia, Mtniffr, tflFafer&Iiiirfg,
Elhtoput .\/Jr Imp/wn and Dwqt Prytrt
(ir near horizontal ground; The short, tvpicallv 36 m lorw drao k up and down-slope. 
*
On-farm   layout   and   access   should   be   rectangular   to   extent   practicable operations, and mechanisation
Suggested sizes for command hydraulic units, along with pipeline categories and Hide discharges and areas arc tabulated below, Table 4-5.
Table 4-5: Category of Irrigation Pipelines
Nr
Command
Hydraulic
Unit
Category of
Pipeline
Indicative
Discharge
(»*/•)
Indicative
Area
(ha)
Indicative Pipeline
Length -(  )
m
0AM Inttiiutj^
1
Trunk Mam
5.0 - 50
5.0013
30.000
As  required (with
System WUF / Medium CommcrniJ J'
im
2
Main Unit
Branch  Main / Main
1.5 - 5.0
1.000
3.000
balancing reservoir storage)
3
Secondary
Unit
Sub main
0.125
200
1,000
4.000
Secondin' VCTLA / xnk Commercial Fann
4
Tertian
Unit
Tertian VTUA / parr of commercial taro
5
(Quaternary Unit*
1-atcral (2.5-
3" diameter)
4 l/> per
lateral
25 (5 x 5)
500 - 600
f armer fragat^ part of comtnc^L^—
6
field Units
Drag  hoses
to sprinkler?
0.5 l/s ‘
0.65
36
Farmers / parf commercial tarnt__—
(d)             Land fragmentation & I ruga non Intensity'
W ithin the Upper Belen Study Area of 157.626 ha (here are up to 74,784 ha (54%) of land suitable  (52  or  S3)  or  conditionally  suitable  (Nl)  for  surface  irnganon,  and  up  to  '6,026  ba (55%) for pressure (sprinkler) irnganon. see Section 3.4.3
The Project Area extends over 138,157 ha and has boundanes similar to the Study Art* 71‘r proportion of suitable or conditional suitable irrigable land vanes for each stage develop"**' area lhe land suitability map, shown on f igure 3-22, shows that the higher proportions"f suitable irrigable land is on the nght bank, particularly io the south of l endika on the
plain On the left bank the suitable land lies largely west of W ork Meda on the Wcrk Med4 plain In SDA V in the south of the study (& proiect) area the suitable land is highly fragmented, king dong ndges between die men
SubslannaJ areas of contiguous suitable land are usuaDv nought if irnganon schemes are to * developed cost cftecuveh and economically Irrigation intensities of 70-R0^'« or lughcr preferred with typical lower limits of 30-50°/©.
UH 14 Main RcpKT 0)
146
:7-May11'.^ ,M» W«*’ *“'
Att»f »irh Io* irrigation mtcnwne, reflect hirhl. ■
'""“ p„«i. .t i„d n,..t
conftn^on a»a for .mg.t.on.ndd^^^
„ UWoJic
'”p dut ">
UQII
’ D-‘
fon
sen. on work,. Are,, wnh
0
3D
<or h„d
inappropriate and unacceptable for irnganon dnelopnj/ ’* W COns^d
Applying a lower Irmit of about 30%, mean$ d.«, .be left ta,. *, ao, ,,,„ iuffian>i
Lrngauon dcs’elopmcnr
•     A-BEfN);
•     IVB-F.(S);
•     IVCKand
•     VS.
° «w fBk. ,^r 1 u ngiblc fen(j
1
C dfrom
SDA IVA and SDA V(N) with intemiue, of about 30% and 35’. repernvejy are marginal for irrigation development, but ire both currently included
The SDAs excluded from irnganon development ire however proposed for inclusion within
the project, uith efforts to support rain Ted agricultural and soil and water conservanon programmes Such efforts will stabilise the boundaries of the irrigable area, and reduce the need to resettle farmer in these SDAs onto irrigable land.
(e)             Risk Posed by Irnganon and Rainfed Cropping within a single Hydraulic
Urut
With low irnganon intensities within some SDAs and hydraulic units, there is the temptation to propose irnganon for the suitable soils (usually found along the ndges where canals are lligncd,.. and rainfed cropping on the unsuitable (N2) shallower soils found down-slope off the odges
This poses a high nsk that farmers of rainfed land will take water for dry-season ungadoci, causing water shortage downstream and also leading to sod loss and degradation For this
reason uith-projcct land use planning docs not allow for irrigation and rainfed cropping within
1  single SDA or hydraulic unit Such N2 land should be allocated to pasture or forestry
(1) Existing Rainfed Cropland
Existing small scale rainfed farming extends over about 44,459 ha (31* ® of the Project Area) and  “ concentrated around the settlement arras of Fendika, Wcrk Mcdi and Pawe. see Figure 323
About 37% of this rainfed cultivation is on land considered W'ed fanning. This land is either steeply sloping (>
1  'tallow (< 0.6 m) soil Low-intensity rainfed cropping 
Vertisols) eroded or 'Aith
p^yble md farmers have
tn  the confer.a
moved  onto  these  "at-nsk”  lands  but  without  the  rCS°^^k$prca(j  evidence  of  sod  toss  an
Measures needed to alleviate potential damage l*h
degradation in these areas, particularly in SDA 1^
y
!7-May II
149It&rol
of Ethiopia, Mtnutn °J U 'Jttr & E*r&
Eriiofw* Silt Irripfi" and Dmift^f Pny*1
There is an on going risk that current erosion processes in these areas will contm^
and progressively spread to adjacent areas Two planning principles and land ter
adopted with regard to securing this land in the long-term in order to protect finance investment tn developing land suitable for irrigation, vis:
• Where these “at risk” lands arc within SDAs where irrigation is proposed and
therefore pose a future threat to sustainable irrigation within these SDAs the pr f planning approach is to offer these farmers alternative livelihoods and allocate lanc4 re settle them in the irrigation command area. These "ar-risk” areas would then be * converted to other land uses including woodlots, controlled grazing or forestry and| subject to a full range of soil and water conservation measures including sodandjf0nc bunds, grass strips, cut-off drains, grassed waterways, gully stabilisation, draina«Lrx stabilisation and closure
• Where the "at-risk” lands are outside SDAs where irrigation is proposed such tam-fc farming is unlikely to spread and threaten irrigation investment and options for development arc: (i) either rain fed agriculture would be allowed to continue but undo a range of soil and water conservation interventions; or (ii) these farmers would ibobc re-settled to irrigation areas and these areas converted to other use such as wnodkife. controlled grazing or forestry.
(g) Inclusion of Unsuitable Land in Irrigation Command
In limited areas and due to the inherent fragmentation of land, the inclusion of small parceboc “unsuitable N2 land” within secondary and tertiary irrigation canal networks is unavoidable .■ practical reasons 7*his is done where: (i) small parcels of unsuitable land separate areas of
suitable land alon& the alignment a] an
supply canal; or (ii) tile boundaries of suitable urn
have incursions of small fingers of unsuitable land which, if excluded, would compromise »•« farm irrigation and drainage canal layouts making them more expensive.
On these “included” lands investment would be made in necessary (reclamation) bulk earthworks invoking cut and till ^provided soil depths are sufficient) pnor to any neerssan conservation works involving grading or terracing.
For  planning  purposes  an  upper  limn  of  about for inclusion of these (N2) lands.
8% of the gross irrigable area
has been »<x P  ‘'
c
tc
(h) Commercial Farms Layout Consider a nons
large scale commercial irrigated sugar cane development is proposed for I ’pper Belrs wh*f soil and land is suitable, in both commercial and practical terms large field sizes arc required sugar cane production A minimum size of 5-10 ha has been adopted for Upper Bries- F’^d widths arc also important to accommodate irrigation canals, on-farm roads and allow mechanised farm operations A minimum land widrh of about 200 in has therefore hern adopted Thus where peripheral lands are less than 5-10 ha, or fingers of land arc (predominantly) narrower than 200 m this land has been excluded from command
I B r-4 Mam Rcp«rt (I)
150
11Jt
OJ> Wr  f' EW*                 ***' * hw^
tM**
A j/KW                               ^l”n Irr^afWn
Introduction
«   hm the Study Are. of B".626 ha there are up to 74.784 ha (54%) of land suitable (S2 or S3) ot  conrhoonallv suitable (N1) for surface -rogation. and up to ?6.026 ha (55%) for pressure
. ankle*) irngatwin To command as much of the suitable / conditionally suitable land as pXsibk, the Right and Left Bank Main canals were careful aligned, with sufficient head-losses fpr the many cross drainage structures as well as for required cross regulators and balancing
reservoirs
.         Amtr 5,CCP 0055 sloPC5 10(1 shallow depth ro rock along most of the canals’
24   Duc ,o
j^enrs lined pnsm sections are envisaged
following fixing of the Jxft and Right Bank Mun canal alignments (sec below}, irrigation (surface and pressure) layouts were prepared in accordance with consjderaoons detailed above m Section 4.2.4 These included maximising the possible irrigable area subject to:
a Limiting irrigation of vertisols to 8% (surface irrigation; and 12% (pressure sprinkler irrigation), and
•      Limiting irrigation of non vertisols to 12% (both surface & pressure spunkier irrigation;, and
•      Excluding isolated areas of fragmented land that cannot be ccononucillv / practically commanded and /or land which cannot be commanded.
Iragaoon layout maps (Al) arc included tn the Map Album, and the indicative main system layout is shown on Figure 4-4.
(b)             Right Bank Main Canal
The right main canal has co pass through / close to Fendika (Jawi) where a bifurcation structure is located to supply water tn Hvma (Upper Dindir). ’l*he first of several balancing reservoirs will also be constructed near Fendika. The ground level and required canal full supply level at Fendika is about +1,230 m. The canal distance from the bifurcation structure to the Diversion weir is about 30 km
The concrete diversion weir / micro-dam for Right Mam Canal is currently under construction hy the ADSWE at about 245800E, 1290000iN The Upper Bclcs aver bed level at this location ls  *k°ul +1,233 m and the weir crest will be at about 1,239 m. A gated (3 x 3 m wide) head regulator will control flows to the sand trap ind right mam canal Scour shuce gates are also proposed All gates will have dectnc motor lifting arrangements. with on-site genenoon
c ADS\\. E15 expected to build the right main irrigation canal from rhe diversion war ns far 15  ^1Wl  (Fendika). In part due to funding constraints an unkned canal is being constructed, but CCrta<n kngths, including about 3 km in the head reaches, need lining
' r°m Pcnd^ the main canal drop .bout 90 m between CH 30+000 and 38+500 down the
Ah,rp,tw,,t Ontn *c hcad of d* Dcrcbav PLun at “ cJcvaDon o( ,boul *1,130, Ml-lgurr 4-2
can »J offtakes at CH 30+500 supplying SDA IB and also drops over this escarpment
---------
^<1
5u PpIementary report foe details of the two main canal alignments
151
17-MsydlPnM                   Kfpubb. $ Ethiopia, Mtmilf) of Water Entity
I'.fivo^ae Xiif Imtation and Drttn^t Pryrrf
and this allows the opportunity for non-pumped pressure (sprinkler) development area24. 
After dropping on the plain the Main canal traverses the saddle souihsvest of reaches higher pound To cross the saddle other a high fill (up to 6 m of fill) CJnhtn
H^on10 this
embankment will be required from CH 38+500 to CH 40+500, or an inverted siphon.
Downstream of die saddle the Main canal continues along the contour with cross slopes /fjoni Wfl vamnr from about 3-12% and supplying the down slope secondary canal,
Xed <>n ndges between the interfluves The Main canal ends in SDA III at CH 100+263
Figure 4-2: Ground Levels along Beles Right Bank Main Canal
1
20000
80000
L
40000 60000
Chainage
’’ There is a similar drop from Jawi to the I lymu (Upper Pinder? plain, the stage II development are*
ll
L'H 14 Man Kqwwl (1)
152(c)             Left Bank Main Canal
The FSL *  the head of the Izft Main canal just downstream of ,k
r
41.355 m
n,  left .Main canal wall follow close to the contour f
"’"S'be about
f
or
f
 the first sn v f
+U 37 at 243400E. irilOON Cutting through „ddk J" “ « « ** saddle at about 20 km and is proposed, but will require up to 10 m of * Mim rani1 ’cnPh bv
The left Main canal then continues to command the Werk Meda plain at about -*• 1.315 m and a Urge balancing reservoir will be pros ided at this point. The total length of the left Main canal is about 130 km and it ends at the head of secondary canals feeding SDA V-N A number ol large inverted siphons are required to enable the left Main canal to cross the major side valleys
The left Mam canal is aligned along the contour for almost all of us length with cross slopes from left to right) typically varying from about 8-40% and locally much steeper
Branch and Secondary canals offtaktng fem the Main canal supph «',r'din commanding irngablr areas of 300 - 600 ha.
17-Mm-U
153Vtderai Dt/rtoiTutu          cf Etbitfva. Minufry of Water E*rrjp
Efhropian Nik I mention and Drurif^r Pryrrf
(d)             Pressure Irrigation Options
Pressure (sprinkler} irrigation systems arc proposed as options for the f 11 development areas
•      Area IB pressures zones I&2 (right bank) with a net irrigable area of l commercial (sugarcane) development;
•      Area IVBAX’ pressure zones 1, 2 & 3 (left bank) with a net irrigable area 0 ha of commercial (sugarcane) development
Pressures would be developed by grant)’ requiring down slope pipeline conveyance fa® header reservoirs supplied by open canals leading from the Main canals The Trunk orSupph Mains GRP pipelines would lead to on-farm pressure imganon systems comprising:
•      Branch and SubMain pipelines with control valves and devices comprising buried GRP pines of vinous sizes and forming hydraulic units of about 200 ha,
•      Literals with quick couplings taking water from the hydrants located along the beat GRP Sub-Mains;
•      Drag hoses leading from (3”) aluminium or 11DP hand move laterals to the ipnakct
and
•      Sprinklers spaced in a rectangular grid and mounred on steel tripods.
tM 'n
ut  '^5hic(
lbour
Sprinkler  irrigation  would  be  pracnced  about  23  hours  each  day,  with  downtime  to  movt sprinklers, and night storage reservoirs arc not therefore required
Pressure  (sprinkler)  imganon  can  safely  be  earned  out  on  slopes  up  to  about  12°  a  without terracing, and results in slightly higher water use efficiencies (refer SR-01B).
I ’B F4 Sfwn Rrpcwf (I)
154n&w-a
ssi
(O^-KMsn
I-s
Etntfun Sih inifM*
P^*T
4  2 6 Irrif/iblt Anu b) Stop Dntkpmtat Ana
With-projcct Land Use and Irrigable Areas by SDA
W'ith-pro|ect  imgable  areas  for  each  SIM  are  shown  on  Figure  4-5.  tabulated  w   Tlbfc   v summarised below tn Table 4-6,
With reference to Table 4-6 below. Stage Development Areas 1VB-E (N&S), IVC-EMdV; have too little suitable land to juatify provision of irrigation infrastructure and are exclude from irrigation development Smallholder rainfed cropping is envisaged under the Pr^ these four stage development arras.
The riverine environmental corridor covers a total of 27,291 ha (19.8% of the project«»). Table 4-6: With-projcct irrigable Areas by SDA
SDA
Project
Area
(be)—
Gross
Irrigable
Area (ba)
Net
Irrigable
Area (ha)
LA
13.082
Indicativc Irrigation Develop-
(tin)
Smallholder* sugarettate,LIT:i:
ib-i:
7.879
6.853
I IB W
9.OJ5
".609
6.966
1.4111
Irrigation
tn ten sit)-
60.2%
79.1%
^.1%
54.4%
Urge sugar estate (pressure / wrticr
I.l T 2 or LLT 5
Urge sugar estate (surface): LIT2
IB S
2,593
1.612
III
Sub-toul IVA
12,686
9.494
8,40 i
46,063
9,731
31,509
2.900
rVBE -N
tvre s
9356
4.850
IVBW   l
4.355
2.139
66.2%  |  Smallholder *  c ommeroaL UJTJi?
68.4% |
29.9* . Smallholder * sugreJlgJiSi—-
None
None
49 1%
WB9G 2
3.180
1.746
1VBW-3 IVC-N
6.035
3.023
23.056
2.746
13.904
IVC-E
8,ir
IVCS
10,469
5.926
5,361
50 9%
Urge sugar eftate (pressure
Smallholder *
None
____  ___—--------  . ilT*!
Smallholder <urtace
V-N
7.018
2.726
2.45"
__35^_l Smallholder suHace img>6<w1
V-W
2342
1.140
1.018
commercial, LLJTj-j^ 7
V-S
3.560
Sub-total
Total |
35,674
70.451
45.4%
35.1%
46.2%
l.'B 1-4 Man Report fl)
156on intensity given by ratio of net irrigation area to total area, for those SDAs where
1  he iW 
u  proposed, vary from just 29.9% tn IVA in the upper pin of the left
^ganon c               79jo/e for IB F. in the middle of the nght bank command The lrr^arion bank corn^ ^hr bank   quite high at 68 4%, but is only 35.1% for the left bank The mult
r
mtCn<lt'h ufUt (irrigation) area engineering I&D development costs for the left bank are higher 15  the nght bank, (about USJ 8,539/ha compared to USJ 6,061 / ha, see Section 4.3).
The totali nirert iigat n g . .  ion  .  area is 63,8" 1 ha. 46.2% of the Pro^ct area, with 31,509 ha on the nght
rL
k and 3X362 ha on the left bank
Hk envisaged land utibsaoon types (.e farm management and water appltcatson method, ar *. pm . "I .W. 4-6 A b,p „,.tt
. ..v... d to, SOA. IB ,„,l 1VB,1™ „ Fipur „ 
tF
>
any sprinkler application would be generated bv gravity.
Opnm^arion Modelling and the basts for the allocate of land between the smallholder farms and the sugarcane estate area is presented below m Section 4 27
157
17-Mix 11l
.^„  ^
n    rMr
« AV*. I,r^  ,„ 
Jt
n<       tMIUV
i D        p^f.
I able 4-7: Irrigable, Riverine and N'on-Irrigable Area. by SDA
Gross
Irrigable
Net Irrigable Aren (ha)
Riverine Environment
al Corridors
•/.
%
Total
%
Nel
Com mete
ial Estate
Non-
Irngable
Irrigable
(Sugar)
Potential
Expan
sion
Area
Estate
i
IB I
’,870
£23%
4.113
6 4%
Small holder Farms
3,766
1.418
10 5-.
0.0" .
3.9%
10 «%
5 2%
2.0%
2 3%
15%
_4 8%
15.9*Z
Total
Area
(ha)
13.082
9 5%
h IBW
6.853
10.7%
6.853
107%
8.667           6.3%
6.966
£410
10 9%
9.035
6.5%
! Hi hi
9,494
34,777
6.966
1.410
3.755
r
1.9%
9 2%
"t te
8,400
31409
19443
30.3%
3,755
68.4%
420%
3.340
2,338
15,256
5.926
4.645
8,411
183%
2.999
2,139
I ."46
£746
13.984
2.457
1J
32,362
35.1°>
3 4%
2.139
1/46
2746
109 ’
3.024 68^
78’
’535 1.879
6.952 15.1%
4.386 ".476 2.760
5.88?
5.361
2.457
8.3%
120% 20..5*
7 6* 3.3% L7% 2.7% 6 6" n
13 3%
1.311
4,332
9.4%
2.004
£880
2.090
2,593 12.686
46,063 100% 1 9.731 9.356
33.3% "7 0%
6.8%
35.674 50.6%
38 7%
1.018
70,451
5L0%
100%
22.872
16 6%
226%
35.8%
2.393
4.856
2.791
2.657
33,460
56 5*
40,412
29.3%
91.7%
100%
2.011
5.402
3,331
1.807
1.635
22.958 24 <r 0
18 1%
11 1%
60%
5.5%
14%
3.1%
76.8%
4.850
4.355
3.180
6JJ35
23.056
8.187
10324
£018
2.242
3.560
92,094
100%
3.5%
3  2%
2.3%
<4%
16.7%
5.9%
7.6%
5.1%
1.6%
2 6%
66.7*4
27.291           100% 19 8%
138.157
100.0%(b) Soils /Slope Categories by SDA and Area of Unsuitable (N2) Land within Irrigable Area
far as possible the irrigation layouts were prepared to minimise the area of unsuitable land
Table 4-« below tabulates for each SDA the soil categories fie vertisol/ luvisol & slope), as well u the proportion of special measure and unsuitable (N2) soils included in the gross irngable
l or the right bank the irngable command area covering 34,ha (gross) composes the
following:
•     58.3% Vertosols with <3% slopes;
•      12.4% Vertosols with 3 8® o slopes.
•      16 1% Red I.uvisols with <3% slopes,
•     4.6% Red I.uvisols with 3-12% slopes;
•     0?% special measure soils; and
•     7,9% unsuitable (N2) soils.
Terracing will be lhereforc be required for at least 6,050 ha, 17% of the gross right bank command area fie excluding any terracing required for special measures / unsuitable soils), and possibly over as much as 8.890 ha, 26%.
Lor the left bank the irngable command area covering 35,674 ha (gross) comprises similar proportions
•     57.2® o Vertosols with <3% slopes;
z
•      10.3% Vertosols with 3-8% slopes;
•      14.1% Red Luvisols with <3% slopes;
•     6.1% Red 1 .uvlsoIs with 3-12% slopes,
•     3.4% special measure soils; and
•     8 9% unsuitable (N2) soils.
Icrraang will be therefore be required for at least 5,800 ha, 16% of the gross left bank
c °nmiand area (ie excluding any terracing required for special measures / unsuitable sods), and Po’sibly over is much as 10.190 ha. 29%.
— «j uia< crop yields over tins area wui uc icoa w— ---------------- »--------
interval,
r
rJ
08 ro address rhe constraintsFeJtmi r>e*ocv.ttfi Hjfwtu ttfT'.rhapia Mttiitf) 9f V'tttrr tfr li^rr^
\//f
Jud DrWir.gf
Table 4-8: Groat Irrigable Area and Soil / Slope Categorics by SPA
Black Vertisols
Special I Unauit
SDA
3v            4v            5 v
2v !_
I
*
Grots
Irrigable
Area (ha)
8.638
■t————
, 1UO.O%
7.424
loo.ir.
*.609
100.0%
1.612
100 0"'.
‘>.494
' 1000*.
0-2*/.
lv
2-3®/.
Red Luviaoh
u              S I . J» ' * J-
0-2% 2-37. 3-67. 6-8®/a I
Measure
Soils (ba)
I
able
41 6%
5.566
807
93®
388
52%
858
9.r.
270
i
L
23 i
0 3%
156
7H
1.0%
622
237
'
SRI
*84
10 3%
Total
5.342
61 8*.
83.8*’.
6.9*5
w | »7^ '
26.2%' 41".
0%
0%
14
26.6%
'    14 5% I 35.6*.             0 0% I 0.0%
80%
2.656
785
10.6%
327
437.
144
89%
zzz.%
0.2% i
io I
t
6-8% 8-12%
22
0 1
0.0% ,
0|
o% 0.1%
1
429 , J
.7% i 0.0%
574 1
oo%        91 *%
0 I                 0
0
not □
1.597 I 1.334
16 8%
t
111
I
i Sub-lot ala
Right Bank
1.807    I    62    ’
---------------- 1-------------------- 1-
I 0% 0.0" n
47
01%
34,777         16.713
100.0%
48.1%
3,546
10.2®..
124
120% i 0.4%
10.9%          5.2% ‘        4 3%         02%
3.340 1            908             664            1.124 |         89
n I 4.799 I
— ■ -H r —|
0 0% | 50.6%
22           24,578
0.1’. ' 70.7'..
2 ’      2,786 I
--,M
■ ■— ■ ----------------------- ------------
I------ - --------
iyBW-Phase 1
IVW 1‘hiw 2
I
IVBW IW 3
100.0% I
111 ’              48 I 92                           12
3 3% l
20.7*
312
-■ 1 —. - — - 1 ---------------- r
------------- t
27 27a I     19.9*. i
33 77a ’      2*7a •         0.17. i 8347a 1
1.208
w/. ,
2J58
* 0%
4 
198 5.9% I
’»•
l DOO’.
1.926
100.0% 1
408
66 4% 17.5* •
1.087
232
48
14% +
J
93%
10
0.0%         0.4%
X -- ------------- 1        56,47. |
-------- Z-V-
19.9% ♦
1
93 8%
1,756
0
0
3
32
14.9% 1 1
00% ' 0 0% 1
1.5%
44
1.3%
0
00%
0
0.0%
• ‘              3.023 I
U — — '         1
0.0%          0 1%           1.7%
1,752
408 1
ioo.fr/. \       573% '       15.47. 1      13.5*.
465 T
1
68 I____________________________                                 10 I                                                 8                  0               86                             0 0 0% I 0 3% ’                12%         03" -
I WC N
j 1V5gI
9.043
1.308 i
|
'------------------
100.07a
I T«- —0-2*4
2-3%
M%
MV. 6-12% 1
A 726                      69                                      120 lOO.tT/*              2.5%            7.4%            4,4%
Special Meaaute Soda (ha>
10.5* .
1.140
100.0%
35,674
100.0%
70,451
100.0*4
829                  47   _____ 108
___ °_4—\
0.0% I 525V
J
72.7%
4,2*/.
95%
Sub-locals Left
Bank
Total Area
16,660          3,762          3,480
46.7%
33372
47.4%
10.5%
7309
10.4%
9 8%
7,653
10.9%
86.4%
24,083
67.5%
69.1%
4
0.3%
7,537           3,121
1,920
5.4%
3,422
10.7%
4,4%          4.9%
7,206
20 2%
14,407
20.4V*
1,196 3.4% i
161
UB F4                Report 0J
IR^irM. of tobnf** Mimtny fF*" ?• f-wr»p
Hr*w«^wjw Xrir IrnpftM P»w«*4^r Prtpa
Figure 4-5: Proposed With-project Irrigation de Riverine Areas
.--------------- T_____________ T___________ Jg____________ T-------------------- T                       —aS.
4
I
V* r,m' & t'rp
The prop«^d rPPcr Irn^Uon P10^1 wdl dcvdoP ™.45l ha (gross) and 63,R71 hi (net)
f irng*rrd agriculture within a project area of 138,1 5 ha. Six options for different proportions I ugar estate, small/medium commercial firms and smallholder farms were assessed along
* their resettlement implications. The proportion of sugar estate over the net irrigation area from (Opaon 0) to 100% (Option 5). Options 1.2, and 3 had sugar estate areas of
■>] 8t>0 ha (34-2%). 36,225 ha (567%) and 40.999 ha (64.2%) Opnon 4 was for a smaller, fast- crick irng*af>n development of a sugar estate over 39.175 ha. with surface Lmgation for the
n ght hank and pumped lift irrigation for the left bank. Under Option 2 three viruuons were considered (i) Option 2A for surface irrigation, (ii) Option 2B with outgrowen; and (in) Option 2C included for pressure (sprinkler) irrigation tn that part ot the left bank designated for sugar. The agricultural development options considered arc summarised below
Table 4-9: Agricultural Development Options
Development
Option
Description
Net Irrigation Areas (ha)
Total
Sugar
eitale
Small
holder*
Commercial
Farms
(Jpnon 0
No sugar estate
63,871
0
33784 (511%)
30.587
47
— -I *'")
Opaon 1
Minimum sugar estate
63.8" 1
21,860
(342%
26,644 (41.7%)
15366
(24.1%)
Option 2A
('ore sugar estare
63.871
22,872 (35.8%)
4.773 C.5%)_
Option 2B
Core sugar estate (ie as Option 2A i but with out growers
63.871
36,225 (56.7%)
22,872 (35.8%)
4,773
f".5%)
< )paon 2C
Core sugar estate with pressure (sprinkler) in SDA
IVBW
65,161
37,515 (57.6%)
22,8"? (35.1%)
4.773
C73“'.)
Option 3
Core sugar estate plus expansion area
6J.871
40.999
(642%L
22.872
35.8%)
0
Option 4
-Ml sugar estate with only pumped left bank development & accelerated implementation
39,175
39,r5
(100%)
0
0
r> ptioQ 5
AU sugar estate
63.871
63.871
(100%)
0
0
<2.1
muafion Modt/hag and Dt narration of Safar Ettaft Ana
( ) Introduction
a
1Usc of the complexity of the project area in terms of present ind with-projcct land use and J” to terms of Lmj suatabilin for different land use actmoes, a Land Albcaooo
j n?/5Jf7°n Afof/e/has been developed to assist in evaluation of the six agricultural
d
^ “pment options detailed in Section 4.2.7. This Model allocates lind use to land suitability and  determines (i) areas of the different farm types fa smallholder farms, sugar estate ana
*”(1)
17 Mxv 11
163
----
?■ £FuM                   R/rMc 9t'Ethttyid. Sfiuitry o/'ITafrr?” Etrqp ElhtcCw X:* Irrrg&M Dwt^r Prvtfil
j
«..=)■ 09 “A-"-”** ’"<1 ^do™ o<
(homestead pj il or otsaz,  ine fuel wood, etc); and (m) resettlement requirements
In addition, a Farm Revenue Optimisation Modelmaximises the sum
per annum of all the farm production types (estate, commercial and four ""
farms by land suitability class) which is achieved by producing for an identified’"“Me estimated future food markets witlun the technical farming capacity The detail
are desenbed in SR-O2B: Imgated Agriculture & Agro-cconomic Development'
(b) The Land Allocation Optimisation Model
The principles and structure of the Land Allocation Optimisation Model arc described 10 Sa 02B, Section 5.5. In sumnun’ the model (under constraints of land suitability and popubdcE and with an objective function to maximise the sum of the relative values assigned to the ur each of the cultivable land classes) allocates the net irrigable area to the sugar estate, (small/medium sized) commercial farms and smallholders (preferentially allocating lunsols io smallholders) and non irrigable land to the non-irrigation land use of smallholders (grazing, wood lots, house plots etc.). The optimization model36 calculates the number and locitrcof farms (minimum allocation, small, medium and large smallholder farms, small /medium »ized commercial farms and a large sugar estate) by land suitability class (summarized under vatMb luvisols, soils requiring special measures and suitable for rainfed only) and by stage development area (SDA).
A number of scenarios were examined using the model, including varying the size of fhc sup.' estate, area to be allocated to small and medium commercial farms, the farm size allocation! to smallholders, the population projection and immigration rate of smallholders and thecxtoii which smallholders could be permitted to lake part in voluntary re-settlement. The with pt land use areas are summarised in Table 4-10 for development Option 2.
Development Option 2, with a core sugar estate of 36,225 ha has been selected to sb detailed land use by SDA. The totals only are given for Option 0, (no sugar estate). Op (die minimum estate area) and Option 3 (the core area plus extensions) and Opdon 5 estate).
The Tabic shows that
The net irrigable area (col 1), the areas of suitable col 5) an areas of environmental reserve and hills (col. 9) do not change scenarios; diese arc fixed by the lind suitability data 
. I 5) Und
threc
forthc* r<
The  total  irrigated  and  rainfed  net  cultivated  arras  also  do  not  j^ea  is  f**1’** irrigated area equals the net irrigable area, the net cultivated rain                  ^n<j
the area of land suitable for irrigation outside the irrigation design rainfed culm-anon), all of which suggests that cultivable land rcso
committed
The net cultivated area of the sugar estate increases initial!) the small! medium commercial agriculture area, and <»n y c
* IT7w/7 hw/.'M «.O 4 Ollndo Systems Inc was used, which n an Excel add tn
fully
1 at the exf*0*
H
UH M Main Report (I
:64(nndlMdc bnd i, «« ™„ vlUbfc b
ro ™,^ bnd)
p^p. mllWdc„ „
, o       unable     land,     and     5omtwhw        between     Opbon     3     md     ,hf       fuU       cstlte        .
"CB1
net Joss of projected households from the project iT„ 
t.,„d toed » Mtan „d ,»fmBTO^
decline, torn Oponn I. indie, unp dui .mdlhrfdei „on
declining
Unallocated land (u unused land not tn command) WjJ„ from supr estate has no need of land not m command, them i
6 „, miod <nd
,
enable bnd
for   smallholders,   a.,d   the   deehmng   number   of   mulholder,   in   the   scheme   have   less need for land nor tn command for non-irrigated land use
The ratnfed net cultivated area docs not change dus is be™,,.,  K mis u became migration into rainfcd SDA is nor permitted.
The model, being a theoretical construct cannot way easily be translated to planned land use on
in anv spatial distribution. whilst the model assumes that within an SDA irngable land is juxtaposed with rion-irngablc land for the convenience of the layout of even smallholder farm This of course, is not the case.
Figure 4-6 below* shows one interpretation of the model output for development Option 2, with slight changes to the location of the small/medium commercial farm area to possible
"extension arras" suitable for larger scale farming in SDA III and VW. This interpretation is suggested for the proposed project, which has the following farm type net irrigation ireas:
•      Sugar estate: 36,225 ha
7
•      Smallholder farms. 22,8 2 ha, and
•      Small/medium commercial farms /' potential expansion area for the sugar estate: 4,773
ha.
165
17 Mat IIif Efayt*. Mwtn •fVP'&r <*"
Etb"f>tj» Ntfr
aid Draiuge !^r.r
Srtikme*   A IidrMfAKrafv
n-mfcd J
.uiiit M»«m ofl
Su<w F.KHc
■K bslfaud
>mg«»rd
13
-jt*
,ivn  k n
jlVB U
IrvRb s
IM*
R.i r 103211
I Mi
Model i •input
Miikl• uTamI Stunban dan
Model ntnp irt
158,145 * 8«'HID* 1IH2
Optun 0 S«» *(v rviar
6\8"1
Mi>>?
ijjm
92*1
12,723
9/22
14,144
54/*'
'AVt
1^5 1
10.751
M.V|
5/>74
68.945
118.145
OplBHi 1 Miwmii
6\ri
2IX.I
B3W.
24>44
9241
22.-25
*».P0
12.179
M/*5
1J4V
1355 |
119211
65.n
5P’4
6A?45
158.145
’ tp« «t J < ntr
51 >71
4773
22JPJ
924'
ZZ'I'
•>211
lOJ’”
Ufe*1
IjUO
1355
14 AM
M.ri
5?'-4
68,945
118.145
jt ’•pv « 1 (‘ofc » nm>n
njri
to/m
-
12'6>
9>3
22.n1
9215
10415
U'JH
3>w0
13'5
14 >71
uja
5JT4
fJt.Ml
158.145
It           $ A| TU^M ««
Wi
e>7i
9245
22T21
■Jul
2J»2R
U,?*1
•'**»
------ 17^
24JM
55.8-1
5.C-4
AA/Ma
158.145
[No u unmen-ui farmi
6'A'l
21.X-
*»»■»
•>261
2’m
9pl1
1^-
Alp.J
1------------------ r
li«2
rjji
51.749
1/815
52.8*4
158.(45
Sartibk I vid it i'o’-Wc fn< imjpex’o but nutudc wntruum 4r»yti am It a awned tn hr sort able lor run fed aiHrtTtann “* NJbnd u unsuitable fut wnptKin vid outside aifflmad mq It ma -4 ww "««t be sutfdbk- (nt ranted aabavuhrm
’ hit bvakdnwni o( the datsm these adumns «x spreadsheet * Nlandxtm iVx3S«io lot \wye scale luprorarUB IM Xlun Report (1}
167
|7-M*y ’.1Fnirru/ LW-jn.'
Zhtfu* Nik I'r^o* ■nJ Dr*’*' P^n1
Table 4-11 reflects the situation described above, but gives more information
• With no sunt estate, 30,92 households can be accommodate .•
23% and 62% of die area of irngable land respectively
• With Option 2, because of insufficient land father lack of irrigable land m
SDAs, or lack of land out of command for non irrigable land use (in, fVC N) SDAs arc “full” in respect of the number of smallholdings they can accommoduc If there is excess irngable land m any SDA (III. and IVC N), then small/roedium commercial farms are taken in, which do not require non-irngable hnd.
Note that an adopted model constraint prevents household* from bring re settled from irngable SDAs to non-irngable SDAs. so although all rainfrd SDA have both available ninJfd land and land available their population remains the same in all of the *crnanos conwdcrro.
Optimisation modelling gives the population movement required to achieve an optimum distribution of smallholders to remaining irngable and non-irrigable land resources after allocation of irngable land for the sugar estate It is assumed that this movement will take pl*1 over a reasonable time penod (e.g. the proposed construction period of nine years, and that" movement will not incur public re-settlement costsHH •' prvfdrttoo
IVB F N
IVB U
IVB KS
IVC N
rv<: g______
ivc s
1*0 t»l»
No                vol < >pt>on I Mi
Opr» »n 2 Cinn:
20,52*
non
2U.526
2O.S26
t.AOl
2»»^26
 23<?<^ Model o u'
Model o
Mudd <>u
Mudd
SC4M
29,22*
M»,S?5 2S?»4
IA.4O1
ZS.4»g 3 In* I
l7..M»y*U
169
l!H F4 Main Kep<»r« (0V
J /dha Dwwiraff.        tfEtfapa. Minufiy rflVatrr &Enrr^
Ednfim .\7i lm&twt nd Dnanjp Prvffrf
Given that in Option 2 about 1,563 in-migrant households will mo\
about 1,996 households of the present population and their progent '°
0         nV)'e
between SDAs to achieve an optimum distribution of smallholders"^ ^ ’°
imgabk and non irrigable land resources This is no more than 11% 
households tn the scheme This re settlement is summarised in Table 112
.«,m households can be accommodated with the irrigation land holdup b                f ,hc p"“'" n'“nb" °r h““'holds' "d ”* *■ ’”w
(■ °" ’* °
tom WWW “d * wou“
*'*“*«•
population can b„ he to mzen at      « ’01» 
and
U 'nh ‘U"wa'‘"
> Re-aettlcment
,h ™ f'"*™'-
SDA
Present
household 9
2010
Houaeholda
po*t re-
aetdement 2010
Projected final
houvchokli,
2020
Morrnttac/
houieboidi
2010*2021
LA
1,349
2.393
2.530
l
IBE
823
Jl
r
I
0
IB W
858
0
IB S
246
0
00
ill
1,757
3.414
3.896
IVA
1,113
1.113
578
g_
sJ£
IVBE (X)
750
750
8”9
IVBW
380
0
0
(
MIE (S)
1.088
389
469
IVC N
■*L'
3,726
4,262
4.136
—- L2'
01
~
IVGE
1.323
1325
13?8
-
ACS
1.701
2,253
4,386.
V-N
1,783
1.783
2,635 _
-- *
V-W
570
0
1.11#..
vs
904
904
1.037
—
Tool
18.382
18.584 J
2X263J.
— —-
43
433
Irrigation Demand and IScD Engineering Infrastructure
Cn)ppc*X and AV/ Cmp Walrr Vuquinfnrntj
Crop water requirement* for the following four categories of farms have been
rc d.
•      bum caregun 1. Smallholder farmers irrigating on luvisols;
(^j
•      barm categories 1 & 2 Small / medium scale commercial farms on u
vertisols; and
.
•      harm category 4: Large scale commercial farm growing sugarcane on
vertisols
a
The calculated monthly net irrigation crop water requirements were determined *<■* proposed cropping patterns for each farm category as tabulated below, sec 1  ^le
Table 4-14 (for sugarcane). Details arc given in SR-01B: irrigation & Drainage De*e
CBHMam Report (I)
1704 lj.
Crop Water Requirements by Farm Category
Mar Apr
farm cropping on Luvi^ob
May Jun
F#fm «_•«£’*
~~ innwn/^L
4.8
4.1
y
0
0
0
0,1
1145
*
135.4
125.8
153
0.6
17.4
01
17
0
0
0.4
1.7
04
12.7
1.6
50.6
475 mm
043         0,56         0.47          006         0.07        0.0!             0            0            0       0.01        0.05       0.19
in jnm/day
TdoI (rnrrt}
inl/s/h*
farm dirgoty
jfi mm /day
m mm/month
ToiiJ (mm)
in l/j/h*
r Commercial farm cropping on                   Luvuoli
16              5            4.7          0.7          0.4               0            0            0            0            0          03          1.6
112.1
0.42
1+0
0.58
144.5
197
133
0.1
0
a
0.8
as
10,5
50.7
493 mm
0.54        0.00        0,05
5            a            0          r 0       0.04       0.10
; Commercial farm cropping on Vcrtiwls
4           4.6             33          0.4          1 3         0.4            0            0          o.l          0.1          0.4         1 9
122.7
129
109.3
jj .
41 1
12.7
0
0.1
24
2
113
59S
503 mm
0.46
0.53         0.41
OS
(1,15
0.05 |
—d                 0.01
0.01
0.04
0.22
Table 4-14: Sugarcane Net Crop Water Requirement!
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Au fi
JgP
Oct
Nov
Dec
Opoon A 5 ratoon plantings
in mm/day
3.0
3.5
4.2
5,2
43
0.8
0
0
0.4
2.0
38
3.1
in mm* month
93.1
97.9
I3L0
154.9
1347
22.6
0
0
12.8
603
1133
973
Toed (mm)
918 mm
in 1/s/ha
0.3S
0.44)
0.49
0.60
o.5(]
0.09
0
0
0,05
033
0 44
036 1
Option 0; 6 rato
on planting*
in mjn/day
32
3.5
4.2
4.8
3.9
0,6
0
01
0.5
zo
4 0
3,4
_   ““Tt/month
ifi
110.4
99.1
1293
143.7
1203
193
0
0
13.7
63.5
1 119.7
106.3
__ Total (mm)
915 mm
___ ml/s/ha
0.37
0.41
□ 48
0.5S
0,45
0,07
o
.0
0,05
0.24 I
0.46
0 40 ,
°P['n<i C: 4 rim
on planting*
___ ui mm/day
_ za
3.2
4.0
53
4-5
0.5
0
0
05
10
4,0
32
87.7
90.6
1239
1603
140,1
234
0
0
14.0
634
121.4
98.9
(mm ?
h's/ha
922 sun
033
037
046
0.63
0.52
IJ.09
0
01
0.05
024
0.47
037
C-ROPWATfl d
Goes not allow crop durations exceeding 12 months, and water requirement* for calculated for the following three ratoon planting options:
option A: five staggrred ratoon plantings each over 20% of the farm area until planting ’ n dr) season starting on 15th November and continuing over fix e months to 15*
flitch;
cl PUon B six daggered moon plantings, lour ova 15% of the firm area and two cncr
" w«h planting m the dry season starling on 15* November and continuing over six ^nthstcli-h April; and
171
;7-May-llXi* /"’?**•   D'“^
• Option C: four staggered ratoon plantings each over 25%  f .1
o
planting in the dry season starting on 1" December and conn
to I" March
For all farm categories, except for the large commercial sugarcane estate
February and vary from 0.53 to 0.581/s/ha, averaging about 0.55 l/s/ha An j
demand varies from 475 to 503 mm
For the sugarcane estate the peak demand (duty) occurs in April varying from 0,55 »
l/s/ha Annual demand vanes from 915 mm 10 922 mm.
4 J.2        I mutton kfiifUM and IFaftr Ormands
(a) Conveyance Losses
Conveyance losses comprise seepage losses, operational (management) losses, for exampledut to mismatch between supply and demand, and evaporation losses Of these, the most significant are seepage and operational losses. Seepage losses arc generally predictable arxi ire dependent on canal type (ic lined / unlined), canal condition, soil type and canal nil Operational losses can be low (ic less than 5%) with good canal management, or high (kemr than 20® 0) with poor management Good canal management requires appropnair nunigrtDc: institutions and farmer training/ awareness, but is only enabled if appropriate flow control art measurement infrastructure is provided.
7
A flat percentage approach  mas* be used for conveyance losses and the following eificx are suggested Ihcse percentages assume good canal operation (le operational losses m order of 5  ©)
CifU3
e
Table 4-IS: Conveyance Efficiencies
Unlmed canal
Lined
canal
Clay/
Vertnob
Adopted fort
Commercial
Loams
Canals
Main canals
Branch & Secondary canals Tertian’ canals
90%
90«4
90%
Overall conveyance
73%
85%
69%
Pipeline   for   pre*sure   (sprinkler)   irrigation
Pipeline dntnbuiion]
For rhe Upper Belcs scheme the Main canals will be lined, as well as the bran canals on slopes greater than about 0.8%. Unlinrd canals will be constructed “I 51 day material tor which seepage losses will be low.
^.irt'-
ofrhe ryT
-
For the long Mam canal, seepage Ims for each reach have been determined using an equate (TQ°' where 1. „ rhe reach length. Q the reach discharge and C a seepage lost coefficient
UH J 4 Mam Rrpon I)
1 -• • ££
L ___  _educe operational losses appropriate flow control and measure structures will be provided T °/ ,          duck-bill type cross regulators, and balancing and night storage reservoirs.
jflCjUU IJF?
adopted main md secondly conveyance efficiencies are 90%. The adopted ternary j Jobation ’y,lem effi“eoc’“ uc 85’° °verall conveyance efficiency is therefore 69%.
p r the core commercial sugar estate where pressure (sprinkle) irrigation is an option
o nvcy»n« loMCS occur from leaking pipe joints and operational losses, and 90% is adopted f m the pipe offtake from header reservoir to the sprinkler head
(b) Application losses
\pplicauon losses for the various surface and pressure (spunkier) application methods arc CI1  below *- Slightly higher efficiencies arc adopted for commercial firms than for
smallholder managed land, as commercial farms are more hkelv io have the equipment, expertise and will to reduce losses
2
Table 4-16: Application Efficiencies
Application
Method
Smallholder
Commercial farm
Clay / Verdaoh
Ixiama
Chy / Vertisol*
Loam*
Basin
65% (7£f%)
55% (60%J
70*. (75%)
60% f65%)
Bordet
60% (65-70%)
50% (55 60%)
65% |70-75%)
55%£60-65%)
Furrow
60% (65*70%)
50% (55-60%)
65% (70-75%)
55% (60-65%)
Rotating ipnrikJer |
n
‘‘a
80%
Note  figure  tn  brackrt*  are  efficiencies  with  night  srnragr  for  which  *n  tncmtr  m  ipplxionn  rtfiomon  for  surface migannn of 5-|Q% i« hkdv
Application efficiencies, particularly for border and furrow irrigation arc also influenced by the proposed provision of night storage reservoirs at the head (and along) secondary canals. With night storage farmers irrigate dunng daylight hours and can therefore react effectively to stop supply tn the heads of furrows / boarders when flow reaches to the (Ails, Also on the terraces, u bere basin irrigation is envisaged, night storage reduces the nsk of over-supply, terrace breaches and soil erosion.
\dopicj application efficiencies (with night storage) axe therefore.
Commercial sugar estate area with Furrow irrigation (LUT 2): ’’0% Commercial sugar estate area with pressure (sprinkler) irrigation (LUT 5): 80% Smallholder farms with (terraced) basins / furrow irrigation: 65%
lmgar>on Design Duties
Veco f°r aPpkcabon and conveyance losses die design dubes at the head of ternary and
ar » canals are determined based on the peak monthly net crop water requirement ion (i) ^*rm$ rtUnCTcu^ sugarcane estate extending over at least 36.225 ha; and (u; the smallholder
s  lending over 22,872 ha
~ ----------------------- ------------
«dp»*«.,MetapK r ,
'’"“•-"tn
173
17 Mjv-11Shwfn rflFjfr&’EtffQ
litkgfalU .\7Jf Im^jfmn Jftd Drjrejff prvtJ
The monthly net crop water requirements arc given in Section 4 3 commercial estate (other than sugar) the peak dudes average about <! - ’n’* *ahoJ‘ie» ft commercial sugar estate the peak duty is rather higher at 0 63 1/s/h^ 55 pot
Gand design dunes are tabulated below and indicate that design (peak) dunes secondary canals would be between 1.18 l/s/ha for the commercial sugar
l/s/ha for the smallholder farms and small/medtum estates growing a range of
dunes are for continuous 24 hour supply. As night storage reservoirs are proposed hours irrigation per day. design duties for secondary and tertiary canals will be doubt
hour duties tabulated blow. Tilts additional capacity of lower level (ie smaller canals) *1 * provides additional flexibility in canal operations. For example, in any one secondin’ m demand prnod, irrigation could occur for more than 12 hours in a day. for example io, ly4
hours to meet a localised demand
Ir is highly unlikely that this demand surduip
would occur in all secondary units simultaneously, and the Main canal would therefore
lx   >.
ar
to cope ’.
Table 4-17: Peak crop water requirements and typical design flows
2
~                   —J* 
-
Item
Units
LUT 2:
Commercial Sugar estate
(surface)
LUT 5:
Commercial
Sugar estate (sprinkler)
Lurm
ur.dhw*
tank c pinscd
------------------ -----------
Tool Net Irrigable .Mra
ha
39.980
Net peak crop water requirement!
l/s/ha
0.63
0.63
------ -- ---- -
Application elbcencv (with rught storage;
%
70%
__________
CWRar Geld
Ternary system conveyance etboenev
l/s/ha
%
0.90
85%
rc
C\VR at head of ’erriarv canals
^ 2’25^Q. canal conveyance efficiency
f AX Rayhead of secondary canals M«ny anal conveyance eftkienrr C\VR ai brad ot main canals
l/s/ha
%
1 s/ha
%
l/s/ha
1.06
90%
1.18
90%
1.31
Indicative design flows
I eniirv < onunand unit
ha
60
Tertian design discharge
1/s
64
80%.
0,79
90%
___ ______ •-
ft*
90%
0.9'
—__ •
__-
A- -
i
i
——i
—
_—■*-**■' 1
Secondary command unit / block
Secondary deMgn discharge
ha
l/s
600
70S
______ -
At  tertian  system  level  floui  will  be  spin  to  allow  2-3  imgaior  group;-  to  imga,c simultaneously with field channel (on-farm) design flows, of 10 15 !/»•
.•» If ability to meet irrigation demanc ‘ surcharge" fie to Ixuld in operational flexibility) wa* 1
* 
required, then the Main canal duty could probably be reduced AS the probability <» needing peak requirement* at the umc rune it unakrh
n. otcon^lZ
' ' c I *
IB N Main Krpuft {IA "“"5
]3l ] trug’tion water demand will fluctuate, typically increasing from zero during much of the
L  <riii and peaking from January to April for dry season cropping
wet 5CflL
ddly for die commetoal 5ugu t5Urc ira for pressure (sprinkler) lrngarton of 0.88 1/s/ha is
^iher higher than rhe de-facto duty required for Finchaa of 0 M lA/ha. This i» considered due
rather lower rievanon and lusher temperatures of the rommand area at Upper Beier.
Water Demands for Proposed Development
(i)              Introduction
( mp rcquirc£ncnls and mnrllblv irrigation diversion demands are determined assuming (i)
irngauon is supplied to crop before critical soil water depletion is reached thereby enabling
npiimum crop yields; (if) lor the three major farm categories (large commercial sugar estate,
smallholder farms and small/medium commercial farms); fui) for effective rainfall calculated
using die USDA soil conservation service method and using 80% dependable rainfall; and (iv)
for the adopted water conveyance and application efficiencies.
Irrigation  demands  are  estimated  assuming  only  surface  irrigation  and  would  be  slightly  lower  if pressure (sprinkler) irdgahoo was adopted over part of rhe commercial sugar estate area.
(ii)             Water Demand for Mix of Farms
Water duties and demand flow’s and volumes arc tabulated below in Table 4-19 for the
following mix of farms, similar to that proposed for Option 2A:
•      Large commeroal sugar estate: 39,981 ha comprising 23,098 ha on the right bank and
16,88.3 ha on the left bank;
•      Smallholder farms : 22,872 ha comprising 8,411 ha on the right bank and 14,461 ha on
thr left bank; and
•      Small/medium commercial farms in SDA V-A: 1,018 ha (left bank only).
Io  addition  irrigation  water  demand  for  20,000  ha  of  commercial  sugar  is  allowed  for  Hyma (tpper Dindir), SDA II.
T   th
c   nght   bank   development,   including   Iiymi,   monthly   flows   io   be   diverted   at   (he   diversion
°
Clr PCa^ aT
 **5.0 m'/s. For the left bank monthly flows to be diverted peak at 33.3 m /s. Pdk flows ar  rather less than perhaps may be expected because the peak oct water
3
c
^toetnents occur in Apol for the command sugar estate su 0.60 l/s/ha  and tn February for
t
e  smallholder firms n about 0.56 1/s/ha,
sarrw ai^C tO
tiinrc C i* 
dates could cause die peak crop irrigation requirements to occur in the P ru^cn^ to design irrigation lnfrascmcrure,. particularly structures, for this
snutflh ^5Crvac’Ve assumption. ic peak simultaneous demand for both the sugar estate and dc4 »gn fh c* tlntlS However in this case spare canal capacity (freeboard) for large catuk (ic with
m °rr tHin 15 mVs) could bc 4af<dy rcduced M ±c P,obabUlc* of
ent!^ ^curnng simultaneously over ven’ larg« itcas is low.
175
17 May-! 1Ffirm/ !****&>      cf E/httttJ Mtn/tn */'Vatter c*- Flwry
Eth^ftM i^iit Imgat/M miDnttiWjf PrvrrJ
Monthly   water   demand   for   the   scheme   (including   Hyma)   peaks   in     \fv    (
1
totals l.404 Mm  for the year There is little / no demand during the «?//'
Junc/July   to   September,   and   during   the   dry   season   there   is   substantial   flue'*’0’’ shown on Figure -1-7. For example, as percentage of the peak demand
scheme water demands are as follows:                                                                                1 h* avcr^
•      34% in October;
•      64% in November,
•      64% in December;
•      “n% in January;
•      84% in February;
•      100% in March;
•      88% in April;
•     77  c in May, and just
c
•      13% in June.
**•*
*n<lt^'
From  vent  to  year  there  would  of  course  be  even  more  variation  depending  on  runiaU  Mid actual cropping.
(iii)       Water Demand for 100% Sugarcane CroppN’K likclf In earning out reservoir water balance to assess the dam storage requirement- variation in water demand tor a range of future possible demands, both large* J gnen above (for Option 2) is considered. The maximum demand wOuM be that 100% cropping of sugar cane, and this is tabulated tn fable 4-20.
UH ’-4 Main Report I)
176•                            MiK f' rv oflFtfrr&E*rnp
(rv) Summary of Water Demand for 4 futn cn.
Mofl[h y
l  demands and dutrw for four Afferent combinations
o f tirm
,
been determined and are summansed below in Table 4-18 and on lyj 4 8 Th/T 7 are used for reservoir water balance to determine »Or>ge requirements
Options A (Low) and B (Medium) represent just 20% and 45% of commercial su respectively. while Opnan C (High) is ccpuvaJcnt to rhe recommended develoJXo , C>e a core sugar estate in Upper Beles and I lyma. areas of smaller Xmm I"
farms in Upper Belts) Option D represents the highest likely demand *irh Intr """ sugar in both Upper Boles and Hyma. 
*
,
° commcrcial
Table 4-18: Gross Irrigation Duties at Diversion Point (l/s/ha)
Month
Option A
(Low)
Optian 8
(Medium)
Option C
(High)
OptionD
(100% Sugar)
Jan
n.fio
0.78
0.79
a. 69
----------- — Feb
1.01
0.95
0.95
0.77
<—--- ------ Aiir
0.90
0.94
1.03
0.96
Apr
0.72
0.88
0.93
1.31
Mav
0.50
0,64
0.79
1.08 I
0.16
0.16
0.14
0.19
Jiihf
0.00
0.00
OW
0.00
Aug
0.00
000
0.00
0.00
Sept
0.04
0.06
0.07
0 10
Oct
0.18
027
0.35
0.50
Nov
0.40
0.57
0.69
0.98
1 Dec
0.49
058
066
0.77
Avera gr
0.43
0.49
0.53
0.61
17 Shy IIFfjfru/ Prwsmsft. RrpaW. if R/An^m, Mtmifrt tf^Mrr CT Evrr^
I'.tbfo^M Xik              4*4 fWiMp Pnyrrt
Table 4-19: Monthly duties and water demand* for die Option 2 mix^ll
i
I wt /^
Month
NOV
Eff /
' Net DudesJ/s/ha
r
Commercial Sugar with surface lmganon
UJT2
smallholder far mt with surface irrigation
LLT   1
Commercial with surface in;g.inon
LUT2
Gross Dunes 1/t/ha
Commercial Sugar with surface img<non_
Smallholderfarms with surface irrigation
Commercial with surface irrigation
Right Bank Water Demands (m3/s)
Commercial  Suga/  with  surface  urigation
23.098
16 84
19.25
Smallholder farm* with turface irrigation
Commercial with turface irrigation
8,411
0
8.04
000
10.47
0.00
Sub-to tab excl Hymi
24.88
29.72
32.36
29 99
25 00
25.37
20 83
22.11
20.87
16.96
Hyma fl/pper DinAr), SPA II
31,509
20.000
1458
1667
20.42
Sub-totals iocl llvmi
51,509
39.46
46.38
52.78
54.99
46 20
18 33
40.44
15.00
35.87
12.19
29.14
*
Left Bank Water Demands (tn3/l)
Commercial Sugar with surface irrigation ___________
16,881
1231
1759
15.48
Smallholder       farms       with       surface       irrigation
13 82
Commercial with turface irrigation
1540
093
Sub-totals
32,362 I
2WL
23.14
20.18
17.17
19.27
J5.6J
‘loui52 05    s excl llvma
53.14
4554
3928
40.14 I 3Z56
Totals tad Hyma
66 63
78.14
66.38
12375
I 55.14
44,75
!tn M.» /
V.
10570}17 May-
179
IJB H4
Main Rnwx* 0)htdrru/ OtfH<rufi; Rfpttbbc »(izJhta/MJ. Ab'wjhy 9/ ir aHr <"* Ewtjp
Kite !>rr^riO" t*d
I*rwr»r
Table 4-20. M
onthly
duties and water demand
s for a 100% Migar ^Magmum jL 2_
LUT/
EfT /
Month
JUNE
Area
Net DutiesJ/^/ha
i
Commercial Sugar with
surfac
e irngaaon *1
LUTZ
Smallholder     farms
with
surface     irrigation
LLTl
- Commercial with surface ungaBon________________        LLT2
Cross Duties l/s/ha
___
f
Commercial Sugar with surface irrigation_________ Smallholder    farms    with    surface    irrigation Commercial with surface irrigation_______________ Right Bank Water Demand* (as3/s)______________ Commercial Sugar with surface irrigation_________ Smallholder- farms with surface irrigation Commercial with sutLkc ir f i^itjon____________
__ Sub-foods excl Hy ma 11) ma (Upper Ihndirj. SPA II___________________
Sub-totals incl Hytna
31.509
31,509
20,000 i
51,509
21.66
24.29
1542
1■<
1 L
22 25 1       24.95 ]         31.01 '      42 48 1
0.00 1          000             0.00          0.00 1
1 0.001          000             0.00        1 0.00
n.zs'    24.95  i        31.01         j 42.48
1      ■      —      “
30.20
19.17
49.36
4L36
26 25
67.61
34.13
21 67
55.80
30.85
19.58
50.44 39.70
19.31
12 26
3L57
Left Bank Waler Demands (m3/s)
Commercial Sugar with surface irrigation
S2.J62
16 18
3169
2495
r
Smallholder firmt with surface Lmgahon
10
Commercial with surface irrigation                                                   0
Sub-totals \      32362
I___  Totals cxdHynu 1 63 VI
Kight Bank W Met Demands incl 1 lytna folmS)
\
43.91        I 49.23         I 61 21  |     8383
69.19 '           11.98
3L69
62.54
2£95
49 23
T5o7t.a6l6s incl H6y4m.a6583,871
ao.sa
9036
1573
41.94
94.85
<>605          132^1
110JM
175.23
a. 4V
/
/ LIT /
/
srr/
1 Area j JAN
Muatb 
\
\
/
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY |     JUNE
1 Totil UFarrr Dcnuusda iucJ Hvma (Mm3)          1
JVVY 1     avgF SEPT I            OCT \  NOV        DEC \ Avg \
154.44
156.40
215.28
215 53
243.36
40.76
0 .00 '     o.ocT     22.65 i          11232? 21X86     173.16? 134 ?n\
1
/
0 69
0.77
0.96
1-31
1 0B
0.19
0.00 1     0.00 1         0 10 \           0.50 'i        W1 i      0.77 y 0.61 '•
/ Pcrcrn rages of peak month] \ demand
544%
54 B%
75-4%
100.0%
85.3%
14.3%
0.0%
o.trzo
1
7.9% | 39.4% 74.6%  60.7% T 1
| Pc rern rages of annual demand
9.6%
9,7%
13.3’ -
17.7*/.
15 1%
2.5%
0.0%
0.0%
1.4%          6.9%
13.2%  i wn% \                  \
L
1,617 
1                |
1.
31
28                31
30
31  L
31           r^r
r »                 TVI 1 lb
Secondary rorabom
None                   None           None          None        2 in 3       1 in 2 (I)      Shut        Shut       1 m2 (T)     I in 2 (I)      2 in 5       2 ini
Note * I: 3 planting options looked at, giving peak requirements varying from 0.55 to 0.65 l/s/ha
i H h'-l Main Report J
181
17 May tl” orlu
4.) I . fopowid irngatxm and drainage development composes the following engineering works:
•     Main Irrigation System compn<ing Main, Branch and Secondin' canals,
t  pressure irrigation system in pan of the *ugai commercial estate (if adopted .
O J arm Works and luind Development of consolidated holdings;
n
•     Main Drainage System including Flood Protection, and
•     All-weather Roads
g^rtlemcnt, land acquisition and land consolidation would be earned out pnor ro on farm infrastructure works and land development.
A farmer contribution to rhe capital development cost of about 10% is required'” and envisaged tn take in part, the form of labour for on-farm development works
Details of the engineering • infra structure; works arc given in SR 04A: Enginccnng Irrigation & Drainage, and SR-tMB Engineering: Storage Dam
4         Mjtn I mgifton Systa*
(a) Irrigation Canals
The main irrigation system comprises of two Main canals, a large number of branch and second ary canals and associated structures.
The right bank canal is 100.3 km long and is supplied from the nght bank Diversion Weir (micro dam; about 30 km upstream of Fcndika
The main canals will be lined, largely with concrete trapezoidal sections, largely due to steep cross slopes.
c down-slope branch and secondary canals will also be lined, largely concrete trapezoidal sc «>ons. where ever slopes exceed about 0.8’. Where slopes are less than this unlined canals 110  proposed
lr s «ondarv canals are to be covered, or buned (concrete / PVC) pipeline conveyance to be
ad
17-Mk n
183i-fdfrui Vcwufi;        tfE/totptj. Minufry of IFafrr & £ wigr
E/Mm Xtir ImjjtfTJM jkJ Druwp Prytii
Figure 4-9: Typical Main Canal Trapezoidal Cross Section
(b) Irrigation Structures
Associated irrigation structures include
•      How regulating structures: cross and head regulators (checks & outlets), spill-urxn escapes and balancing and night storage reservoirs;
•      Conveyance structures: drops, aqueducts and inverted siphons / siphon aqueducts;
•      Culverts and bridges;
•      Cross drainage structures culverts; and
•      Social structures including washing structures and livestock dunking troughs
The cross regulator structures incorporate overflow spill sections to facilitate operation. Figure 4-10 below
Figure 4-10 : Plan of Main Canal Cross Regulator
I ’B r‘4 Main Rrporr 1)
1«4FfapM !”Wr,i* 
Fftyf.*
Sifihl stonp reservoirs will be provided at the h J
°* .^
(
wr
 not ,nore rh.n 2 - 3 houra. S(dc
«»«v.i. 
X”2x^’' ° *■" twd
»«i«,
W ’“T’ and u, „ , „ 
t     o spiU (nf
ed«.ely dou™u     .re c!o,ed. 
imm                                      Mm                           w
]j
^ ntton of
« the
«
*
I
I
185
t!FfJrrj. Dt/wfi. ty*                        Mtwfi) ofV afrr ew
'.‘ttywa .V’i           j<c/ I         P/wr.f
Bibnang reservoirs are proposed along rhe main canals where J
f   lrr
meet (any) mismatch befwern supply and demand and focilito.,. '* 
,ra,c
W   c,c
 canal
''   'i- h
opcfj6nn
tvll
Prawn ImfiitiM Optniu
Pressure (sprinkler) irrigation systems arc proposed as options for the following two development areas:
•  Area  IB  pressures  zones  1*2  (right  bank)  with  a  net  irrigable  area  ofabt commercial (sugarcane) development, 
Ut '
Area IVBAX' pressure zones 1. 2 & 3 (left bank; with a net irrigable ha of commercial (sugarcane) development.
Irc * about fyp
Of these two areas, pressure (sprinkler) irrigation is most suited io Area iVB-Wu-herctbek^ is more broken, fragmented and steep than in IB
Pressure irrigation layouts arc given in the Map Album and included in this report n F igure 4-14, Figure 4-15 and Figure 4-16. A typical on-farm pressure irrigation (sprinkler; bynuts shown on Figure 4-B
Figure 4-13: Typical On-farm Sprinkler Layout
CH /'4 Main RcprtfT (1}
1861
UB IM Main Hit** 0)
17 May-UDrw^rj,?.
•/' l-lbnptj Miattny •>' U'atrr X- Emr»p
F.fhs^»jn Nik        rfnrf DmwMp Pny*T
S^r- ^Si ■:
-4r< —
EgUH I 4 Man Report (I)X
/'Mm/
Effafia. Mwftt) of’Vafer cu l:<wg,
Etbofiijn Xdr Imption jnd Dnauff Pn*a
Pressures for sprinklers would be developed by gravity requiring dow conveyance from header reservoirs supplied by open canals leading ft ^'P^e
Trunk or Supply Mains GRP pipelines would lead to on-farm nr "
composing:
pressure “ngatinr
cam
• Branch and Sub Main pipelines with control valves and devices GRP pipes of various sizes and fornung hydraulic units of about'aoo^'’* I-ateraLs with qmck couplings taking water from the In-drants Ur... j
GRPSub-Mains;
‘
Drag hoses leadmg from (3") aluminium or HOP hand move laterals , i
and
Sprinklers spaced in a rectangular gnd and mounted on steel tnpods
era,S,o’,*W^
Sprinkler irrigation would be practiced about 23 hours each day. with downtime r<> move sprinklers, and night storage reservoirs arc not therefore required
4)6            (> ft-fam Ic^D IForkr and lot nd Dcivtopment ofConsolidated i lo/dtny
A mix of basin and furrow surface irrigation is proposed, with basins located oil the 'terpc tcrtaccd land and furrows on the plain l*hc use of hydro-flume* m replace earthen field channels may be (gradually) introduced along with other project funded in t erven turns to promote good water management and enhance efficiency.
Basin irrigation is the simplest method for smallholders with little or no irrigation expenerxe and is wijiablc to all crop types, including row crops, flcxxled nee and orchards. Furrow* p1,e
< me advantage* for row crops providing furrow shape (depth), spacing and length art appropriate to stream wc, crop type, soil type and slope
Iertian and field drains to remove excess water into the drainage system thereby prevents landing water damage to crops, as well as to safeguard against terrace failure and soil
arc proposed.
I.and  dcvdnpmcnt  including  termcmg  and  land  smoothing  will  be  carried  our.  «th 'lopes up tn P. (vertisols) and 12 4 (rc<j bfown
.
4.5,7          Wain Dratnatf fyitan ndudin^ I’tod Protrcfron
The irrigation command area is characterised mostly by flat land of heavy clav durmg the wet season parts are vulnerable to water logging For example tn stage development area LA where it merges with the broad Dcrcbay plain and J
In contrast the upper parts of SDA IA and IVA development areas on mc respectively compose the rough, alluvial fan area of the Enat Belts, which is * moderately to steeply sloping and undulating in many areas These, together '* [frraiii tertian drainage density have created a generally rolling or moderately iindulatw’^
nature
port of
N.n„.!
„ cWc (
A.,...v Bu,,;.,.                A^. 
<;*H |Ul
„ mn
a
UP I I Main Rq*»rf (1)
190g!^"'
LUhn Asivl, S!bta,t;iIa’ Slronga, Gtiman, Cbaqm, Burtbur, Gichig. Kewaxemcna.
X B^ '
s
Chfln!i°' E"at and W Chl
New   on-farm   drainage   ditches   (field,   lerdaly,   collector   and   main)   will   be   constructed   for   the sift removal of excess rainfall into these natural drainage rivets and streams.
Associated   drainage   structures   include   pipe   junction   culverts   and   drop   structure   to   control   flow rates and proc nr erosion of the drainage ditches.
4 i. J     zl/Z If WArr Rpjj/j
To improve access, gravel surfaced all-weather roads will be provided throughout the project
area, see Figure 4-18. ’fhese will consist of 12 Access Roads, with six being upgrades of existing
roads. These access roads will connect the whole project area tn eluding the proposed
commercial estate area and existing settlements and link with the proposed storage dam / left
bank offtake to the north, Fendika to the west, Wrrk Med a to die east and Gilgrl Beks to the
south.
Connecting   with   the   Access   roads   will   be   21   Village   roads   with   10   being   upgrades   ofextshrig roads and 11 new roads
Finally, seven Service roads will be proved along selected branch / secondary canals.
°r cane haulage four tin-surfaced toads arc proposed linking to the proposed site for the new e crushing factory' Tlicse arc aligned on both sides of the llelcs River,
all weather roads will be gravel surfaced Associated structures will include belli foot ind r °ad budges over streams and rivers.
*  die tollowing lengths of all-weather roads are proposed; •  J^Cccss r°ads; 260 km (125 km upgrade of existing roads) w  ^ g  loads; 1 ”9 km (79 km upgrade of existing roads)
ae
Inspection / service roads. 255 km
191
17Mjv-1I1         Sl'”,r^ *',r*"r c~f *rt>
W *'*f
.JZ'rrw^* 
Iifnisfrv.iHrT Otftoitf
°' With »uch i Ixrgc scheme (eg nghl and left maln onals
« ^porunt ro make correct / appropriate choice of ungatxm mlhstnierure X
]
u
effectn-e water distnbudon. WT«le the feasibility  .  ^
1Iudy con>uJflntJ   rrcomnwi<Jj|
'
choice of irrigation infrastructure were broadly accepted by stakeholder, at the develonm
workshop in December 2010. three broad engineenng        s               winch have LrT' ■
USUC   Wcnr rased
fisher con^dcrauon These wrrt
&ncn
. Specd-pf Proicct ImDlemcnuqoo and the proposed lminp of the Beks Right Bink Main CanaJ.. Stakeholder's were divided between rwo development approaches.* (i) a “quality tnfrastrucrure’’ approach from the outset with, as proposed by the feasibility study consultants. concrete protection provided to a geo rex ole over a geo membrane- lining; and [u a ’‘cheap and quick” approach iitiliiifig for exampk. an unprotected geo-membrane to line the main canal, whilst accepting that regular replacement of damaged lining would be required, and / or that upgrading could then be considered at a later date Requests were made to scope out the advantages and disadvantages of the latter
n       Pumping versufc Gravity Canal DcveBopmenr for (part ofl die Left Bank Command
Area the current proposal is to command the entire left bank with a high-level open main canal supplying water to provide for cither gravity or pressurr irrigation. Requests were made ar the December stakeholder workshop to consider direct pumping fmm the nver To command all or part of the left bank area. Two scenarios have been considered’
L Scenario I: pumping as a perm.anrnralternative to the left bank main canal, either for part or for all of the kit bank area Permanent pumping from the main Beks River would negate the need for the expensive Jxft Main (Lanai (and possibly the storage dam / diversion weir‘J, and
it. Scenario 2: to use pumping to enable early irrigation development of part of the kit hank area, pending possible construction of the Ixfc Bank Main
Canal
Choice of Control Systems and Flow Control InfwtniCTIK Ml 4* Mato MM* Secondary Canals. Requests were made to compare the choice between upstream and downstream canal control systems, particularly for secondary canals feeding smallholder farm areas where a v ariety of crops may be cultivated. Also the choice of irrigatuxi control strucrures and particularly cross regulators siructures eg gated duck bill war versus simple lift gate structures.
SR  04A (Engmeenng-Imgation dk Drainage), consider* *c options described above- t consi ts
W                                    alternative forms of engineering infrastructure that may reduce the ini construction “‘•s and reduce development ume. either through permanently changing the
or  temporarily deferring some investments. It also discusses and seeks to quantify the ns < mvo ,n  *c doing.
‘Turr (ij
193
17 May-IIf AJrrj.
fapuM* of f           Mrwfry 0/ II aftr c'~ Eawjj
Etiwpjil Stif IrrrtMM JKfi Duty profit
4, J. 10     Cojtl^imatf
(a) Right Bank Cost Estimate
A preliminary cost estimate for the right bank command area has been fable 4-21 The estimated development cost is USS 5,838 /ha Nearly 50% ’nd “P^ mam canal channel and structures (about USS 2,707 /ha) I lowcver r>,rr r’ ' ' with the proposed development in Upper I lyma. 
Table 4-21; Preliminary Cost Estimate for Right Bank Command Area
S!  'Jn
No
Description
Amount
ETBM
Amount
US$M
US»
/ha
%
1
General A Prehminin Items
166.0
9.9
314
21
5A
Diversion Weir*
0.0
0
0
0.0*1
3
Main Canal
1,424.9
85.3
2707
46C,
4
Branch Canals
48.2
2.9
92
l,6*.
5
Seconder Canals
243.8
146
463
7.9*.
6
Tertian- A Field Canals
216.3
12.9
409
70*.
7
Land Grading A Terracing
464.0
2*8
882
15J%
8
Collector. Tertian and Field Drains
182.9
110
349
6.0*i 1
9
Roadworks
131 "
79
251
43*.
10
Miscellaneous Other works
50.0
3.y
95_
1.6%
[ Contingency (G 5° •
146.0
8.7
276
Total Cost
3,073.7
184.1
5.8M L
100.OW|
Xdupted rate: ll'SS ” I-ITB tG 7 (IJcccmbcT 2010)
• DivcTMun Wet emt is assumed io be a *ur»k < ««r
(b)                   Bank Coat Estimate (All Surface Irrigation)
T bl
C 'HI C5tln“,c f°r t^e I'h bank command area has been prepared and is prew-^-
’ ‘        -2 Tlx estimated development cost is USS 8,226/ha. Nearh 50% of the cost is f*riu mam canal channel and structures (about L'S$ 4.289 /ha). While rhe proportion if the costs <> ’™ r “ for ’he right bank area, the indtv.dual costs, particularly for rhe canal works.
2" Vie b°,h ,hC IOng" lc,‘gths for clful ** » 
and the difbcuh ,erTlm that ha, t[)
M ngb'
by
jDOfl.l
Table 4-22; PrdmunaryCoat EstimateJo,Left Bank Command Area (All SurftM*!^'
No.
Deacripcion
Amount
ETBM
it J Amount 7 (jgj /h. S
1    General A Prehminxn Items
2
Diversion    Weir   /    Option    D    Dim’
240.0
0.0
2,3183
314.3
30". 5
LY
T     Main Cam!
4      Branch Canals’’
T i Secondary Canali
^4- Ceman A Field Canal*
land Grading A Terracing
8 Collector. 1 ernary and Field Dramt
Roadwork*.
I R F4 Main Repot f i1)
194tl’*f<4*'
_______ _ __________
50,0
10
(-rtrttingency @                ________ _________ _
*” Total Coal ------------- ---- -------- .------------
-— . 11SS = I’TH 1.6.7 (December 20IQ)
x d-npttdi raw -    ■
■ u ver**** Weir /f< Trt<'° 13 In*™dcil1n n»Fpk-rrwTJtiQ’ report SR C4H
“ njl frtm Ihe " " for V *
3
93
1.1%
2120
12-7
392
4.8%
4,4467
2MJ
8,226
-------------- -■ 100.0% |
jhr whole project area rhe total cost is estimated ar FTB 854 billion (USS 450 milhon) with an average cost of USS 7,051 /ha for surface irrigation
( c) Left Bank Cost Estimate (IVB-W Pressure Irrigation)
\n aJtrrname option for the left bank was developed with all the SDA’s the time as the surface irngaoon option above except that IVB-W is pressure (sprinkler) irrigation. The c«tun.itcd development cnst M USS 9,152/ha.
Table 4-23: Preliminary Coa< Estimate for Left Bank Command Area (TVB-W Pressure
Irrigation)
No.
OecctiptioH
.Amount
ETBM
Amotmt
USS M
USS /ha
%
I
General & Preliminary Items
278.0
16,6
492
5.4%
2
Diversion Weir / Option D Dam*
0.0
0
0
00%
3
Main Canal
23183
138.8
4,113
44.9%
4
Branch Canals’*
3143
18.8
557
6.1%
5
Secondary Canals
251.7
15.1
44"
4.9%
6
Tertiary A Held Canals
146.4
85
261
2.9%
6b
Pressure costs
777.7
46.6
1381
15.1%
7
I=and Grading & Terracing
4620
27.7
821
9.0%
8
Calleetor. Tertiary and Field Drains
156.7
9.4
279
3.0%
9
Roadworks
1555
93
276
3.0%
10
NfiscrUaneous Other works
50.0
3
89
1.0%
Contingency @ 5%
246.0
14.7
436
4.8%
Total Cost
5,156 6
308.8
9,152
100.0%
Adop^ rilc jUss a b7rB ]6 7
(|) .ccmb«20l0)
t
-t rit I'ln'cTMua \Xc3t /Option D mdmJrd m suppLcmentary itpofr SR.-04H
Includes main ctmal from the Pawi War tor area V W
overall cast is estimated at 1-7TB 8 23 billion (USf 493 million) with an average cost of US$ 
b5S5/h>
Ulth prcs5Ufc m  VBAV
|
195
17 Ma? 11EjhnpM Niit ImsMi mJ Dnunttf Pw1
4.4        Stonge Dun Development and Engineering Infrastructure
4.4.1         Bo.Ignma
Modelling results indicate that no reservoir storage is required for a net irngatl(in 75,000 ba if the Halcrow GIRD operation rule is adopted (for water demand M Option 2 mix of farms), but just 50.000 ha for die SMEC operation rule, above storage is required Dmg term irrigation development envisages about 10-20.000 hi b^* developed in the adjacent Hyma river catchment in addition to 63,871 ha in fppa Bdo‘
If there can be no agreement regarding the operation of (he Tana-Bdcs hydropower  * r»
s4     n
been argued by some that it may be prudent to construct a storage reservoir to ensure " supplier foe about a month at peak crop demands. For example, a reservoir with a Ove 203 Mm’ (dam option A/B in this report) would meet dry season crop water require^-, fa about 5-6 wrecks This would provide security to farmers in rhe event that upstream hnbop^. releases are less than expected for whatever reason. However this scenario is considered vm unlikely to ever occur, particularly as a bv-pass tunnel allows flows from the Lake into the type Belts valley to be maintained even if power generation is dosed, for turbine maintenance replacement / etc
Providing seasonal reservoir storage is therefore not recommended lor an initial tmgauor. development of 50 -75,000 lia and it is suggested that the Upper Bdcs right bank and Hum is should first be developed (Lc. SDAs 1, II & II] for about 42-52,000 ha corapnstng the nshtta command area of 31,509 ha and I lyma for 10-20.000 ha). The Upper (Enat) BeJcs stori?^ could then be built simultaneous with development of the Upper Belcs left bank cotnnunu event the size of die dam would depend on:
•      Actual net irrigation area and feasibility of irrigation development of Hynu •
•     Actual operating experience of the Tana-Belcs power station; and
•     Actual crop waler requirements for the right bank (and Hyma) command
As (hr total Upper Belts aid Hyma irrigation area is unlikdv to be more than about then a small dam (type D), high enough to command rhe Upper Bdcs Left Bank canal full supply level at its head is about 4-1355 m) is likely to be appropriate The s would be sufficient to cater for the diurnal variation in hydropower releases
7C|j5 lX0b
t
r
l-H E4 Mun Report (1
196MnufQ 9fJTttrr&
f £^^*D~‘*p’*‘'
p* ad RfiW Si^r Op/iaxr
i.c
A wmnw)' of iU of rhe mcmw storage opnons ,tudlfd u opnon^ ue il*o shown on figure 4-19. 
_
helou-
Tiblejfc?*^’
Item
Units
Option
A/B
OprionC
Option D
Remarks
[Resen^^ functi<»n
Seasonal storage
Diumal
storage
Full supply level (FSL)
mas!
1.405
1.420
U60
Gro.1 rr«r«Mr storage
MCM
230
378
20
Storage ar MDL
MCM
27
45
14*
1 jvc stongc
MCM
203
333
6
Gross stongc - MDL
lave storage as depth over lmgabk area
m
0.32
0.52
0.01
Assumed irrigable area: 63,871 ha
Reservoir area at FSL
km-
84
11.6
1.7
Minimum reservon arra for environment
Ion-
21
29
0.4*
25% of area ar FSL
Minimum drawdown level (MDL)
masl
13M
un
U*
For environment / to
l ixnnund Right Mair. Canal fi.c. FSL ♦ 1,355m)
Reservoir Area at MDL
km’
21
3.0
1.2
<  peraoonal range
>
tn
41
49
4
FSL MDL
Reservoir area
fluctuation
km-
L
6.3
L
8.6
1
0.5
Seasonal (options A.B & C); dnimaJ option D
■Du minimum drawdown level (MDL) was set on the. _ k b.su,,,.   o eof environment^ constraints and a minimum reservoir area of, i  25 '  w no ot f th ien arc area at  ea ai  fu rlrl supply level was proposed
To meet peak monthly crop water demand the \ohime o 
f that needs <0 be diverted from the
Qp on A therefore stores
0
nver to the command area is about 0.32 m over the net irn^  . r cm meet demind for
a
sufficient water to meet water demands for about 30 days, w < p about 50 days based on a net irrigable area of 63,8 1 ha
The small dam Option D does not provide seasonal storage, 
' weekend flow fluctuations released from the hydro-elcctnc
fot  irrigation command areas. It also is sufficient high to c rnun llle  raavoir FSL areas for Opnons C ind D ire shown on H^rc 4-21
suffiaent to bilancc out diurnal
providing near uniform flow
rnain canal
:7-Mw n
19-V'tAtral Dr**ru/ir   •/ fz/Aupw. Mwrfn * »>r* L«ry
NrZr
j«4 Pnatrftf Pn^.r
Figure 4-19: Dim Development Option*
MM OCVBJORBCT OFTOKSUR K4 Mun Report (I)
199
17 May 11Ptarml Dravniti: RtfMc if Ethiopia. Sltmrtr) of W ater & F.ffny
i:!*opra* Xtit Im&tw* and Dwa^t Pnjta
4.4.)           Dam Dtrigi
Feasibility level dam designs were carried out as detailed m SR-04D p
(
Dam), and drawings for the dam options arc included in the drawing aJb included a dam body composing layers of quarried basalt rock with an ash) Outline designs have been prepared for drawoff, bottom outlet and sn 11 
Drawings for dam option D, the most likely dam to be adopted, are included ’ easy reference, including: (i) a plan of the dam, Figure 4-21; (ii) a sectton (hLA'*114 embankment. Figure 4-22; and (iii) proposed draw-off arrangements whereb • structures are selected to ensure near constant water levels and How downstre^^ upstream fin the reservoir) water levels, sec Figure 4-23.
' C°re*’l
4 4.4 Dam Conflnhrioa Period
'l*hc dam construction period is largely dependent on the volume of dam fill and hkeh construction periods vary from five rears (dam opoon C), to just two years for the ^malicrcui
option D.
4.4.5        Dam Co ft I Estimate
Cost estimates for each of the three dam options have been prepared using the project ituulinJ rales  where appropriate.  For speaal  rates relating  to dam construction, experience from other projects has been used to estimate rates.
‘l*hc estimated costs for cadi of the dam options arc summarised below tn fable 4-25
lable 4-25: Comparison of Dam Op non Costs
Dam Option
Estimated cotutrucdoo
coat* (ETB)
Reservoir gro»s storage
(MCM)
Cost per MCM d
fcoctvair •
A
1.724,363.000
230
7.497 230_-—
r
B
1.993,629.000
230
8,667,952____ -
C
2.235.H51.000
378
ynvKL——
D
617.H91.0U0
20
Vl 894,55L^-
exclude* bvdrofMJwcr tMihno (fipbun A-Q, prdtminarirs, unbilled items and ctMitmgmof*
L H F4 Main Rep°rr
 f )
1
2(10UH H Main Rqwxi (1)
201
17-May-llttdrivl Dtnwuh; RipvWr.- h E/tapM. .\frm/n                  f*r E«r»p
t\iff /rn^uOM jcrf LhofHjgf Prt*i1
Figure 4-22: Section through Dam Embankment - Option D f------------------------------------------
i
k *
» =■     > ■— 
UTTER Kill DAM
■ECnOM At-At THROUGH DAM EMBAMKMBMT (ORTTOW 0)
Hale row —1
*
■
1
■ 7  ->
*i*
■
i
■
1
1
J■i
h
i1
ll 1 lj I >l~
J.
1J
i
i  Mill
llpl
■wjyoff
_________ J
UR F4 Mam Report (1)
203
17-May 11Ftdrrai                RtpMc fiflithncu. Mtnffn of ITjfrr cu Etrg E.ivcftj* .\tlr Imfjftou anti Dm^r PryM
4.5
4.5.1
Resettlement and Land Consolidation
Rf-Httkmfn! Rtqmftmtittt
(a) The Dam Site
When land has to be acquired in the public interest some households
property and/or access to farm land and may have to be relocated rhroi/
resettlement Normally alternative resources arc made available and or UUrj^,riir.
following statutory* guidelines Involuntary re settlement will be necessary r7lPCn'>r’Ofl 11
the construction of die Left Bank storage dam and reservoir Adopting i|)c
(ic dam options A, B or C) about 65 households arc resident within die rcserwT
cultivate about 130 hectares of land An additional 138 households cultivate la^^^
reservoir area but live outside the area that will be flooded. 
b) Re settlement during Scheme Construction
To acquire land for the construction of irrigation and drainage infrastructure a feu houses udl demolished, for example near Fendika Land take for irrigation and drainage intrastnjctiurn about 6,580 ha (4.8% of the gross irrigable area) but given the low density of population r. ifo protect area, the total number of affected households is likely to be small Damage to pcimm trees, farm infrastructure, and other semi permanent features is likely to be greater, buriru envisaged the costs will be absorbed through land re-allocation. exchange and local ncgoimx
(c)            Re-settlement for the Sugar Estate
It is proposed to allocate 36,?25 ha for the development ot a commercial sugar estate (Development Option 2) and to achieve this re settlement of households located in p all of IB. pirt of IVA, all of 1VB and part of IVC will be required Hii* re set tiemen also includes the re location of rural households presently resident in the northern p HI and SDA V-W because Option 2 anticipated that these areas would be alloc®1 small/medium commercial farms Sec Figure 4-6) Option 3 (see report SR-°-B • OpUor
i’t
“ **
(
envisages that these two areas will become extensions io the sugar estate In cith 2 or Option 3) the households would have to be re-located
(d)           Overall Re-settlement Requirements
with
The  estimated  number  of  households  to  be  relocated  due  to  the  construction  ot  *  f<.qiur^ reservoir area), the development of the commercial sugar csiaie and the re-seftlem
as  a  result  of  allocating  the  extension  areas  to  cither  (lie  sugar  estate  (Opdem  3)  ,)r small/'medium commercial farms (Option 2) is presented in Table 4-26
It  is  estimated  that  for  Options  2  and  3  about  6.274  (34%)  affected  households  h*'c resettled, including 3.044 households on the nghi bank and 3,230 households or11
j_yjspb^^" Affected  households  are  those  that  will  have  to  be  rc-scrtled.  often  within  die  SD- households  arc  those  that  will  be  moved  bom  one  SDA  to  another  The  number  <» households is about 4,341 (23%)
In  both  cases  re  settlement  costs  will  be  incurred,  bur  the  distinction  is  made  to post re settlement population by SDA.
( H 14 Main Kepwt (I)/Pt*’**
!' W '
r
n 9 a”-1 
P'Wta
Tabte ‘
Estimated Number of Affected *nd Displacedfiou.ehokl. ((>p i„  2>
(n
*’nA r Total I Commercial Sman/rocdram I Present 7 Number of
SDA
NIA (ha) Sujpr Estale
area (ba)
commercial
farms OR
estate
extension (ha)
number of
affected HHs:
Option! 2 & 3
Number of displaced
HHs:
Options 2*3
203
203
203
7,879
4.113
1349
275
IA ______ —
6.853
6.853
823
823
823
IB E ____ _  - -
IB'*'
IBS __ _________
hii
6.066
6.966
----------------------- -
858
858
858
1.410
1.410
246
246
246
n      __ _— —
8.400
3.755
1.757
639
Sub-Total
31.508
19342
3.755
5337
3,044
2,130
L-------- —------
IVA
. 
Hvb&n_____
fVBE-S
2,909
2,154
1.113
467
750
1.088
I\W
6,631
6,631
389
1.088
1.088
JVC N
13.984
8,097
3.726
1,105
553
ivge
1323
j ivc s
5.361^
1.701
ter
2.457
1,783
vu
1.018
1.018
570
570
570
V.S
904
Sub-Total
32360
16.882
1,018
13348
3330
UH
Total
63,868
36324
4,773
18385
6374 ’
M41
34%
23%FhM rtfHfM. •fElbitpJ Minty y ITnr c  H/ft/p
u
Uffapw XrJt ImfjfiM J*f DnMQT Profit
The proposed SDAs for the resettlement of displaced households
households in the post settlement situation are shown m* i r ii i>n 1 able 4-2?  ’ ** UcI1 ” the „
n ‘1 ^br. .
Table 4-27; Proposed SDAs for Resettlement of Displaced Hous >
Location/SDA
Number of 1~ Pr
oposed 
-
affec1 t1 ed
- • 
relocation
HHa
Dim and jeservoir                                                    203
LA
275
SDA
LA
LA
settlement
1,349
 fl
2#
IBE                                                                                  823
823                  C
IB W                                                                               858                                                          858
IB-S                                                                                 246
III
111
IVA
JVBE-S
IVBE S_ IVBW
IVC-N
1VCE I VC s
639
Sub-Total
246
1757
5,237
1113
750 j
.088
389
3*26
0
3J14_
W
UN
’5'
v
4,2*2
1.7m
I "83
Tool |
3,230
6,274
The relocation of existing settlements situated on land suitable for irnga $ considered as this would be ven expensive, as well as for the following 
ondcveM^^^
j cnsitv <>e
•      Existing settlements do not occupy large areas ol suitable land as          jong rheK<c“ is low and surrounded by farm fields or the)’ arc constructed dire
roads until the field starting immediately behind the houses,
•      Existing family, social and cultural networks arc not disturbed, an
•     Il is not necessary to replace the existing social/public intra-'(rurnif health facilities, offices and access roads
•I
.M»C
|7
l IH 1*4 Mun Report (1)9         lJUnJ'’-"-’ '—
Existing small landholding household (Sih*, iverage 0 61 ha) receives 0.55 h* of
irrigable latidi
—
«  Existing  medium  landholding  household  (LI  to  2.0  ha,  average  1,16  ha)  receives  1.06 ha of irrigable land' and
•       Existing  large*  landholding  household  (>20ha,  average  3.27  ha)  receives  2.97  ha  of irrigable land
«     Ram ted holdings in SOAs HAHBE N and rVBE S, rVC E and VS keep their present
The Baseline Survey showed that present land holdings arc almost entirely cultivated. Households obtain their non-cultivation requirements (mostly grazing and woody binmass) from communal land These communal resources arc internalised into the household land allocation, ensuring that they are obtained from non irrigable land and existing important
environmental assets (eg. riverine corridors) are maintained. These are;
•
0.2 ha per household for housing and livestock tethering;
•
0.05 ha for public in fra structure
•
0.1 b* per household on the nghi bank and 0 15 ha on the left bank for communal or
private grazing land
•
0 1 ha per household on the right bank and 0.15 ha on the left bank for communal nr
private fuel wood lots
•
Minimal allocation irrigated farms get the same allowance for housing, public
infrastructure, grazing and fuel wood as other farm size allocations
•
Minimal allocation rain fed farms receive only the housing and public infrastructure
allowance.
t^pnmjsalion Model, Lius model is described in SR 02B Section 5.5 and summarised in Section
207
17 May 11Fratmi/ Dt99cra!fi RtrMr Etfrafw. Miwty tf IT *tr Eirrg
Stir
and Dnggj^f Prw.t
4.5)
Rtitltimt
” 1 Pm^1
,, a Modalities for Re settlement
With  regard  to  the  relocation  of  project-affected  households,  the  follows adopted
In accordance with World Bank OP 4.12. involuntary resettlement
where feasible or minimised by exploring all viable alternative project des^,
9
9
9
Project affected households and host communities must be Fully 
In  OfIncd
f
consulted throughout the entire resettlement process.
Project-affected households must be relocated in the same village as much
so that they could retain the family, social and cultural networks;
If relocation in the same community is not possible, project-affected household be resettled in host communities where they speak the same language, pncnctikt same religion and have the same cultural background.
Selected resettlement sites must be suitable for residential use;
•      Where household* have to relocated for the construction of an irrigation scheme V. must obtain equitable benefit from the irrigation development through the allocirrc of a plot of irrigated land within the command area of the planned irrigation xhcat
•     Displaced households must be assisted in their efforts to re-establish thar hrdihoots at the resettlement sites through the provision of farm inputs, advice and tcchrual support, including agricultural and veterinary extension, skill training and ertdr facilities, and
• Sufficient access to public/social services (Le. health, education, potable water, agricultural and veterinary extension services, access roads) must be ensured at rhe resettlement sites for the displaced households and host communities
(b) Relocation in Existing Settlements
relocitr
In line with the aforementioned principles for resettlement, the first pnonn l looted c project affected household* as much as possible in and around existing settJeme
the selected settlement sites. To facilitate the relocation of displaced household settlements, it will be required to: (i) select and prepare sites for the constn|cr
the resettled households, and (ri) rehabilitate and upgrade existing social mfra $crvxT’ fa construct additional social infrastructures to ensure sufficient access to basic
lhe resettled households and members of (he host communities
(c) Establishment of New Villages
If die relocation of project affected households in existing villages in sites tt not possible, new villages have to be established. Any new village
selected
f>r *5
of • '
possible be sited on land unsuitable for irrigated agriculture at a lUaX1^ ^ntC (4 to 5 L from an access road, whereas fanners must be within 1 -hour walking
then fields
According to data provided by the wcreda offiers for three wexedas sicua villages have an average number of 101 households, ranging from 50 hous Dangur Wercda to 152 households per village tn Pawe VCereda In SPA
per
,
sD;U^
f
.
4’
t'H F4 Mam Rrpnn (J)
2M-
ls 539 h"u5'‘lloW'' vajy” B
1     frum 91 houjeholds per village ,n |awi Weteda ro 5!5
j^hoM’ P« V'HagC m AcHCf“ WCfCdi
luining purp"*”1 11 “ PrclPo5cd 1,131 cSth new vlllig  wil haw 1,000 to 1,500 houscholdi.
e
bch is iign'lican,,1’r ,BrgcI tbln rhC avef*8e iize of miK 'CTilrmenfc. Bawd m an avrtage
* Ufthold size of S.0 pe«onl’Thc ,ouJ population of a new village will be 5.000 to 7,500
persons
I ensure rh-at rhe resettled households have sufficient access to basic social services, it may be !red to construct the following public infrastructures in each new village (i) 1” cycle
fC<nurY school (il) 1 kalth post; (uf) Potable water supply scheme fte. wdh with hind pump);
Jv) Chinch and/or
(v) Hour mill.
]f ill 6 2?4 affected households have tn be resettled in new villages, about 4 ro 6 new villages have to he established in proposed relocation sites.
The provision of adequate housing and basic social services, such as po table water, io the hired labourers on the sugar estate smoll/medium scale commcrod firms will be the responsibility of rhe private investors
4 >.4 La*d Cffrrjo&faftori
(») Existing Land Fragmentation
Thc overall average number of plots ranges from 1 4 to 2.9 plots. The average number of plots among small landholding households vanes from 1.1 to 2-6 plots .Medium and larger
Lind holding households have an average number of 1,8 to 3.4 plots of hnd. Efficient irrigation will require kind consolidation to address issues related to fragmented landholdings. landlessness, irregular field layouts and non-optimum field sizes If land consolidation is neglected, the potential agncultural and livelihood benefits associated with a shift from rain fed to irrigated agriculture air unlikely to be realised, and inequities in household income are likely to increase.
(b) Objectives of I-and Consolidation
Land consolidation should be earned out to the extent acceptable to farmers. The objectives of land consolidation arc as follows.-
•     Addressing the existing fragmrn ration of landholdings by reducing the number of plots owned by each household to one and exceptionally two;
Guarding against an increase in inequitable farmer income by achieving a more equitable distribution of (irrigable) landholdings, including the allocation of a small (nummaTj irrigated bolding to landless households; and
Adopting rectangular layouts and optimum field si7.es co enable high water use efficiency with simple system operation and to fadbtare mechanisation
■
* Mowing tw’o land consolidation options could be considered:
Zinnal land consolidation & acquisition activities; or
address landlessness, fragmentation of holdings, suitable irrigation farm size, and land ac quisjtjon for irrigation intrastrucrure-
209
17-Mny 11FhM ')r*OiTun -
t                         Fjfaptd. Mnuty tf ITJfrr& F.trrg
Fffatin .\ik lm&»9 mi Drwugt Pt*.*
M Modalities for I-a nd Consolidation
The modalities for the implementation of land consolidation are as follow,
. Fragmented smallholder landholdings are consolidated into one (rr.u^
irngated holdings within a single tertian unit, if possible;
•     To the extent possible, consolidation of fragmented landholdings is being sddre^. voluntary exchange of land between households;
•     In principle, no compensation is paid dunng the land consolidation process
With regard to the allocation of imgablc land, n is proposed that:
•     Landless households receive 0.11 ha of irrigable land “minimal allocation”),
•     Existing small landholding household (< I ha, average 0.61 ha) receives 0.55 hi of irrigable land;
•     Existing medium landholding household (1.1 to 2,0 ha. average 1.16 ha) rccom 1 t ha of irrigable land, and
•     Existing larger landholding household (>2 Oha, average 3.27 ha) receives 2 1 imgablt land.
A process approach to land consolidation involving the stakeholders is essential and i include the following steps:
•     Awareness campaign to inform all households within the project area ab°ut important aspects of the land acquisition and consolidation process, in needs, expected benefits and conditions, in particular die reduction of exi P
•
Signing of a land acqu
isition
and consolid
ation agreement by at least HO
<» of the
existing land use right
holder
s;
•
^reparation  f
o
of
dle "
households,
who are rodent within (he pioj*'
•
‘"frastrucrure
as u ji
f°r
^^^pnxint ol the lmgauon
L’B F« Main Report (J)
210G'J***4 *
Present non of rhe new consolidated plots of trrtgabk land to all concerned households using detailed maps indicating the location md size of each consolidated plot of hnd as well as rhe names of ill households;
• Signing agreement by all court med households, and
« Registration E^c nffW consolidated plots of irrigable land, including rhe issue of new
land use right certificates
!< j) Number of Allocated Plots of Irrigable 1 .and
j q general the following run types of sods can be found in the project area
•      Verasols (black soils), which are fertile but have a timrlincss problem and restricted cropping partem; and
•      Luvisols (red-brown sods), which are less fertile but easily workable and with a broad choice nf crops
With regard to the number of allocated pion per household, rhe following alternatives arc
run 5 id cred:
•      Each household is allocated one consolidated plot of irrigable land within nne tertury unit irrespective of the type of sod; or
•      Each household is allocated two plots of imgable land with one plot on vertisols and
the other plot on hivisola.
The mam disadvantages of the first is that (i smallholders with an allocated plot of irrigable bind on vertisols are restricted in his/her choice of crops that could be grown; and (i?i smallholders with an allocated plot on vertisols will only have i short tune period to
prepare/plough the land- Due to ir.i heavy structure, <ccw to tractors for preparing and ploughing ihe vertisols would be essential
The main disadvantages of the second arc that: (i) smallholders would have plots in two separate ternary units, which are managed by two different water usees’ groups (Vt'CGs}; and (hi travel time in and from smallholder's plots of imgable land would be longer.
fhr preferred option is to allocate one consolidated plot of imgable land to each household within a icrtiarv unit as close as possible to the settlement where the household is living. In that «SC, the smallholder will be member of only one WUG and will not lose much nmc tea veiling
^d from his/her plot of imgable land Furthermore, each smallholder will be able to transport any surplus produce co the nearest markets due to the development of 1
^Ptehensivc network of all weather roads within the project area,
the end. each individual household should be given the opportunity to decide if (s)hc prefers
°r h <aa°n
°nc consolidated plot within one tertiary unit irrespective c>f the sod type
r ■Doettfon of two plots of irrigable land with one plot hiving vertisols and the other pbtPwRcpoUc
EthnpMO jX'fit ImfiOK* aol Dnno^r PfOfta
•‘ V^rr & Eons
impltmtnlalion Proctduntfor Rtstttlmtn! and Land Allocation
For sector investment operations that may involve involuntary resettlement, the
requires that the borrower (Le Ethiopian government) submits a resettlement
(RPF) prior co the appraisal. The purpose of the RPF is to clarify resettlement pnndpfa^^ institutional arrangements and design criteria to be applied to subprojects to be prc
project implementation A RPF for the Ethiopian Nile Irrigation and Drainage Pro|CC prepared in 2007 by Environmental Resources Management Ltd.
A Re-senlement Action Plan (RAP) would then be required for the Upper Beks lmgatJor Scheme. The preparation of the RAP is not included in the Consultants* TOR but tk
is described tn Supplementary Report SR-03B to provide a basis for costing RAP prepay n In summary, following public consultation and participation, these arc a preparation phase (environmental and social screening, socio-economic survey, land asset inventory and jdcctcr. of re-scttlrmenl sites), an implementation phase (notification of expropriation order, preparation of individual compensation dossiers, preparation, approval and signing of compensation contract, payment of compensations, preparation of resettlement sites, resettlement of affected households and takeover of expropriated land) and monitoring and evaluation of the process.
4.5.6 R/ settkment Costs
(a)            Compensation and Re-settlement Costs
Supplementary Report SR-03B gives (he unit costs used in the cost estimate and a detailed calculation and breakdown of the re-settlement costs expected to be incurred The total estimated compensation and resettlement costs for the Upper Heirs project are jiunnumcdin Table 4-28
Table 4-28: Compensation and Resettlement Costa
Number of
re-aertled
HH
Total estimated
coat (ETB)
Estimated coat per
affected household
Dam and reservoir area
203
6,350.192
SDA 1A
275
10.222,650
__________ 37j7t
SDA IB
1927
68.570,637
352>M
SDA 111
639
20.854.071
Sub-Total
3.044
105,997,550
SDA IVA
467
13,075.089
27.‘«V
SDA IVB 5X
1088
34.073.871
3l5jjJ
SDA 1VC-N
1105
32,140.447
293^J
SDA VW
570
16,870.730
29.598.
Sub-Total
3,230
96,160,137
29.77L
Re location of existing villages
Not considered
__________
Internal M&E
1.500,000
_____ --
Total
6,274
202.L57.687
32^L
7
Contingency 10*e
20215.769
 r
Total |
6,274
222373,455
J5.444
(’B 1-4 .Main Rcp<.»rt ,1
212& S'"®
rhf      IO»1    comp««,t'on      and      fr'r'tlcmrm      Cost5      for      lJPP«r    Belts    irrigation    project,    including
O
» /Jh conringerKT, ’5 estimated it ETB 222.4 million, US| 13.3 million, cxduding the costs
1 hied to lhc »1Joc*non °f (con’oljd"tcd)
land to the relocated households Based on a
K J number of 6,2’4 households to be resettled, the estimated compensation and resettlement disDl*«d household is ETB 35.444 (USS 2.122).
fCjSl U r"t
(b)          ConsljIrauicy Support Costs
Tc» ensure C*1BI r^c cnhre resctdemeilt pmeni is earned out properly and timely, it u proposed
to provide consultancy support The consultants would be positioned within the proposed project Implementation Office (PIO). The main risks ind rcsponsrbdjtics of the Consultants is given in Supplementin' Report SR-03B, as is the detailed coil estimate. The cost foe consultancy support related to resettlement is estimated at about ETB 87 million or USf 5,2 million.
E*t*re           ContmercM Farm Devchpmmr
I/tftodirfMir
In this section the proposed development of (i) the large scale sugar estate, and fii) small / medium commercial farms are described
Ldny S&& Sugar Prvefarfitor
(a)            Size and Location
Considering now planned agricultural land use in more detail, a sugar cane estate and factory is (hr main large-scale agricultural development proposed for thr project area Following Option 2, the proposed estate would have a net irrigable area of about 36^225 net irrigated hi located in SO A LA and LB, IVA, IVB and part of TVC-N A partially mechanized estate will be established io supply a sugar factory', According to the sod survey results aboul 81% uf the land allocated to the estate arc vertisols, 9% arc special measures sods and the remaining 10% are luvisols.
(b)            Yields and Production
As the expected area is so big, it is important to estimate the productivity expected correct!), nil( just for valuing output (in fact the fin anna I value of sugarcane is only ofnucmt to out growers and being an intermediate product u has no attributable economic value) but also to Sl2c rhe factory’ capacity required. However, an advantage tn ihr assessment is that estate fTUnagenient will be uniform and therefore more predictable, and the performance of irrigated su Karcane is well known in Ethiopia
.                shows the theoretical production of cane likely from □ core estate area of 36,225 ha 111 thr I pper Bdes project area. Note no out-growers are included in lhe calculation;
the               q£ out-grnwer productJOti is assessed as an option in lhc financial and ’it’mic analysis (see SR-06 and Chapter 6). The assumption* bcliind the estimate ve
Other crops’* compose I 0% of the gross culnvaied area and arc expected to be food Oo pi for the- labour force and satisfy the limited rotational requirements of the mono-
e   ctoP car>c production system.
Seed cane would be 2% of the cane area and 1.8% of the estate area ‘ allow m any year would be zero.Ptticrul                   HtpMc of Fjbtopta. Mim/tn of ITtier & EnrrjQ Ethof*/* Niit Imj&fio* a*d Don nap Prwt.r
Plant  canr  (planted  directly  with  seed  canc)  would  be  24.5%  of  the following ratoon crops would be 73.5%.
. . for plant canc is assumed to be 18 months and the h^..
The harvesting p«'°
p.nod of14 ™
harvested.
..
a calculation of the annuil UtJ
'rhe yield of plant cane is expected to be 160 tonnes per harvest™! k
r                  **  na and theJi**
u
ratoon canc is expected to be 144 tonnes per harvested ha
These assumptions lead to an estimated 2.4 million tonnes of cane harvested per annurr
an overall yield of 73 tonnes per hectare per annum of the total canc area and 145 tonueipj^
of harvested canc area No difference has been assumed in the yield on luvisols and ven^
though if this was significantly different it could be factored into the estimate because tbr fag suitability of the estate area is known.
lTic theoretical size of the factor}- to  mill this production, assuming  210  cane crushing  dr., v- annum would be 12.000  TCD. At 875  tonnes of canc to  one tonne of sugar the out-putefar factor)’ would be about 220,100 tonnes of sugar per annum
Production  of  food  crops  would  be  significant  given  the  size  of  the  estate  (about  5%  by  w of all crops produced in the project area except cane)
(c)            Irrigation System
Ihc estate ma) use both surface and pressurised irrigation systems, depending on the slope of the land and the advisability of conserving water. Howev er, it is envisaged that most of theiin will be irrigated by furrow. According to the engineering design of the project. the left and rtf' bank main canals have capacities (at the head) of 40-50 m’ /s and supply water to branch canals, or directly to secondary canals. Secondary canals flow capacities are typically 0.5-2
m’/s and command about 400 1,200 ha These supply tertiary canals with design capaonoei
30 - 60 1/s and commanding 30-60 ha of land. Tertiary canals supply field channels and these supply field furrows or. on more slop mg land, basins.
The estate may also use spunkier irrigation wluch is relatively free from topographic constraints. Where spunkier irrigation is appropriate, the command is divided into prepare zones, each commanded by a high point. Within each pressure zone the command area is divided into 200 ha blocks or units. Sprinkler lrngauon is proposed as an alternative to 5urfKf irrigation for a net imgable area of 7.083 ha and 8.482 ha in SDA IB and JVB W respect Each lateral would irrigate about 5 ha and the sprinkler urigation would be practiced about 1’ hours each day.
L’B 1-4 .Man Report (1)
214?  nrA* 
' \ >& *">*"*’ P^
Mwfr> y IP/rrr
(d)            Input Requirements
Seed   c«e   or   «r:   Yield   of   sugarcane   „   dependent   w propagated by cutting a section of seed CMc
44,000 seed canes per ha,
* Ieft’ v^tt. Sugarcane „
P tu1K ra'<- range, fmiD 37fi0(t f >
Fertiliser There is an ininaJ phase of slow cane g^.g, n[
_
faster  rare  wluch  lasts  for  another  6-7  months.  In  the  second  h  l
mnh
° ] ’  !nUow«i  by  a
accumulated. Therefore the nutrient supply must be 'ufTidcnt
U * °
rna,lcI “
increase.  Fertilizing  at  rates  of  2(U  leg  of  urea  and  100  ko  rn  an  ’rtOrnrDnt,:lte  t}us   <10’  «»tter
M 1 
per hectare will be required
Chemicals: For estimating the chemical costs it              ,
ls Msuraed
area affected by pests requiring chemical treatment of ETB 340 p^
pUnw6on
Labour  Manual operations would be about  43  person days per ha for seed cane and 40 person days for raioon cane It is assumed that harvesting would be done by hand
Mechaniaarion:  Tractor  powered  operations  would  vary  between  2.35  tractor  days  for  seed cine on vertisols, to 1 3 tractor days for ratoon cane on luvisols.
Finn operation* for the cane enterprise are described in SR-02B scctxin 3.2. Input requirements arc specified tn morr detail in the crop gross margins; see SR 06 Annex E. j\n estate budge! is given in the same volume. Annex F,
215
17M3t.11F.t/wfito* A7<* Jrr^uet* ■#•%/ Dneagr Profit
T.kL. d 70 Fwtif’«-fr<i Cane Production from Upper Belen Cote Sugar Eatate Area (36»ZZ3—aj------------------------------
--------------—1
ba
O titer crop*
ha
Seed cane
production
ha
Fallow ha
Plant
cane ha
Racoon
cane ha
Harvested |1
plant cane, 1
ha
-{arveated
ratoon
cane, ha
Tons   of   plant   1 cane harvested
Tom of I
ratoon cane |
harvested |
Theoretical 1
tom of cane 1
harvested 1
1A
4. IB
411
74
907.02
2,721.07
148.15
1,714X7
23.704
246.855 T                270.559 J
IB E
6 853’
<>M5
123
1,511
4533
247
2,856
39.490
411X57
450.746 1
IB W
6.966
697
125
1336
4.608
251
2.903
40.141
418,036
458.176 j
IBS
1.410
141
25
311
933
51
588
8.128
84.642
92.770 1
III
_
-
-
-
-1
IVA
2,154
215
39
475
1.425
78
898
1X414
129X82
141.696
IVB F. N
-
-
-
-
-
-
IVB W
6.631
663
119
1.462
4.386
239
2,763
38X10
397,935
436,145
IVB E S
-
-
-
IVCN
8.097
810
146
1,785
53S6
292
5J74
46.659
485.921
532.580
IVCE
—
•
-
-
-
-
lives
•
-
IV N
•
-
•
Vvw
-
Fs
-
\0utgrowen
4------
S                      J.623                   652 J i
•
y otal Ettatc
|           3&J»-
-       1—
7.988
\Toiah                         |          3632
i                   5.625 1                65: 4
23,963
! .365
15.097
208745
2.173.928
2382.673
7.988
23.963
I/’’- |             15,097 J                  208.745
2.1*3.928
2382.673&nt&’''"
4.6>
Area and 1j nation
^r performance of small and medium sized commercial farms has not met
project area since their establishment from 2005, link emphasis is given to
pecaus
^P^d^elopment in Option 2. Referring to Table 4-10. only 4.104 ha are identified in the Land
• Alloc*000 model, most of which is on vertisols as the luvisol area is preferentially allocated 1             llholders In translating model output to mapped areas, u is suggested that the “extension °       of the sugar estate (Option 3) could alternatively be allocated to small and medium
T    cjiaJ   k    tanns. 4  773 ha ln SDA 111 and VS FlgUrc 4_6
>-
c<jnu <c -
-
(b) Proposed Crops and Cropping Partems
Crop* jnd cropping patterns for both commercial and smallholder farms ate generated by a Farm Revenue Optimization Model which maximizes total nri farm revenue on the (irrigated and rainfed’; cultivable area This optimization is done under specified agronomic constraints (e g limits on cropping intensity and cropping partem) and economic constraints (e.g a defined proportion of lite farm under food crops and a defined proportion under higher value crops) which differ between farms The model also has targets of production it must achieve for each crop (19 crops were selected, many of which are relatively new to the area) which are based on agronomic and market assessments (done separately by the Project Agronomist and Economist and later reconciled) of the production capacity of the scheme.
For commercial farms on vertisols sugarcane was permitted if out-growers are required by the sugar estate In the wet season sorghum, nee, maize, pepper and ncog are crops which will tolerate temporary waterlogging and delays in field operations In the dry season oilseeds (groundnuts and sesame) beans, pulses and vegetables may also be grown, but rice is not considered as a dry season crop because of its high water requirement. Maize seed can be produced during the drv season under full irrigation
(c)            Irrigation System
Th c project area proposed for medium-scale farms would have a surface irrigation system Composing main, branch (if required), secondary and on-farm irrigation infrastructure.
Irrigation would be by furrow or basin depending on crops grown, soils characteristics and land
Commercial farm boundaries would follow hydraulic boundaries.
p
'ft Input Requirements
operations for commercial farms are described in SR 02B section 3.3. Input requirements
k , IC^ more detail in the crop gross margin* sec SR 06 Annex E. Commercial farm ts are given in the same volume, Annex F.
^ DDirncrti>i r
Uea d inning 
barm Mechanization and Equipment
’r
a requires mechanisation to  achieve timelines?  on the relatively  large farm
r
CCf
rn  rc
pto^cr
°     uru^°nn   application   of   inputs   to   achieve   consistent   yields.   The   farm   machinery UJlc COPMncrr>al farmers hive been identified and used to calculate with-
^'^tment requirements, sec SR-02B section 3.3 and Section 6.27 of the Report
217Ffa 
fytir ofHtbiopia, Mtmtty of W ater e* h
1 '.fhopiao Stir !fTtfof?oo tod Dnnoq* Pn^e.r
4.7 4.7.1
Institutional Development and Sustainable OScM
htrnductin
To achieve sustainable benefits from the investment in engineering info,
management, operation and maintenance is vital This Section describes oudt
for (i) appropriate institutions; (li) system operation; (iii) operational challenges
infrastructure; (iv) performance indicators, facilities and equipment and u-a(rr
system maintenance; (vi) a farmer management system for O&M; and (vu)
including costs for subprojects that will support the establishment of effective r»T"
Beles.
4.7.2        Irrjfatmn System Management cu OehVf Institutions
(a)          Introduction
To achieve sustainable agricultural benefits from both commercial sugar as well as smdDicb- managed farms appropriate professional and farmer institutions need to be formed / suppou- / appointed to take responsibility for irrigation Ac drainagr system OAcM
The following is proposed
•     Appointment of a professional organisation (ic Main System Operator) to nunigt lv main irrigation system, including the dam and storage reservoir (if constructed), diversion weir(s) and the two Main and nine branch /'three on the right bank andia:c the left bank) canals with a mandate from the Abbay River Basm Authontyconccnet water abstractions from the river and collection of water charges from users, and
•     Election, establishment and capacity building of farmer ’A institutions, ns WlGt. VCl’As and 1 Scheme Board at tertiary, secondary and scheme level respectively c*
The Upper Beles Sugar Estate would then be responsible for irrigation system OflfM on^ within the sugar estate’s boundaries
Ihr Main System Operator and farmer institutions for scheme OAr.M within smallholder boundanrs no discussed Ix-lou
(b) Main System Operator
eluding the
The operation and maintenance of major / main system infrasirucnu
inC judmg
storage reservoir, diversion weir and main and secondary canals up
vC ar$ wh*13
^’“
x
storage reservoirs will require professional operation, particular!' in the
[hr
O&M insutubons will lack capacity The appointment of a profession
vc
ars wh^c
System Operator (MSO), is therefore proposed for at least nme years, 1
construction is still on-going and for the 4-year support phase of prop
p rain>Pe
staffing and costs of the MSO for nine years is detailed in SR 01B. Inig*
DevdopmcnL
I-n-- ac ----c-or---d--an---c-e-- w---it-h-- t--h--e- T---oR--- p---r-e--p-ar---at- arione n ofor d pet«tai of led **    <McM arrang 
***** '
>
rather rhe focus is on preparation of: *> food iftfoeiaafto** * *w‘ ? 
1
Ht ufrr tef^^
auemmots of the tostitohonal. orgmatrooa/ and manapenai atpeets..........lc
FOfiin Kcpr<r (1}
218f.
-
;„, years O&M responsibility for ihe secondary canal system m the smallholder farm m addition to tertian and on-farm engineering works, mil be taken over by the farmer
,rCj5'
nirucuLarlv bv the WUAs and their water trusters
|rt5U
intion . tn
f
ifiefim ”? 
1 - „ years the tasks of the MSO would be rcsiewed and either taken over by the Ministry
.
•*
\X Atei *■
& Energy (Abbay Basin Authority) or again awarded to i professional organisation.
p-
j
jar
nvmes of financial and economic analysis is mav be issiimed that the annual MSO for the pu i” ' '
continue for the design life of the project.
( c) Farmer Irrigation Institutions
|o manage: (i) construction of ternary system infrastructure during the implementation phase; usd (ii) f°r management, operation and maintenance of the completed irrigation and drainage infrastructure within the smallholder farmer area, suitable non-profit farmer institutions arc required with compulsory farmer membership based on hydraulic (not village) boundaries. AU fanners with an irrigation land holding in the command area would be members.
The proposed new’ farmer institutions will comprise- fi) informal Water User Groups (VTUGs) formed at tertian system level; (il) formal (ie with legal status) Water user As social ions (WUAs) it Secondary level. and (iii) a Scheme Board ar main system level represen nng ill WUAs
Ar (he end of the support phase of rhe project the Scheme Board will rake ov er some of the CMkM dunes and responsibilities of the MSO. but nor those pertaining to the dam and storage reservoir, diversion weir and Main and Branch canals, Also the Scheme Board would only have jurisdiction of flows and secondary system O&M within the smallholder farm areas.
The nrw farmer institutions will lack the knowledge and skills to carry our ihcir OflcM responsibilities so this capacity will have co be developed. Also guidelines and the legal framework for WL A« (and the Scheme Board) currently do not exist and need to be formulated
I ypically each secondary Water User Association would comprise 5-8 tertiary Water (Jsrr ,fnuP * where each WL G has 40 io 60 smallholder farmer members.
T
s
T
^hc   approximate   numbers   of   seco ndaty and tertiary irrigation command units for the proposed LrT^atton scheme arc as follows:
^ght Bank Secondary units: (i) 73 in commercial sugar estate; (ii) 32 in smallholder larrri areas, and (iii) 14 in the potential expansion area;
^ght Bank Tertiary units* about 531 tertiary units in total with an average net irrigation tea of 59 ha. About 142. tertiary units tn the smallholder farm area.
Left Bank Second ary* units: (fj 72 in commercial sugar estate; (ii) 62 in smallholder arm atcas; and (iii; 4 in the potential expansion area,
X 1 Tertiary units; about 691 ternary units in total with in average net imgation ca of 4 ,• About 309 tertiarv units are in the smallholder farm areas.
219
]7Ahy-11Fe^frui  Dwtntic  Ksftid.  ofEfbiepw,  Mmnfn  c/  Wattr  rt*  llntrg Lfhropwt Sdr Irrigation ami Drautqt Pryr#
*. .mJlhokfc. ta •— ■*« “ ,bo“‘94     *”‘US' "™" ”i"' "’** '*
47 i Syjkm Option
*     , r\ i
i r-\
Operation objectives, and system opcratmn for; (t) the storage dam; (u) mam and
cl nal including the night storage reservoirs; and (iii) ternary system are given in SR-OlB Irrigation & Drainage Development
The operational challenges and irrigation flow control and flow measurement mfraiti^
choices are also desenbed and justified in this supplementary report
4 74 Syjtcm Mmttwna
As the Upper Beks protect is i new irrigation development farmers do not currently app^
,he maintenance needs, activities and costs to keep the engineering infrastructure in good working order. If maintenance is not carried out. or frequently deferred, the scheme will
Considerable efforts arc therefore required to build awareness of maintenance requirement!, support development of a maintenance strategy rhat has the broad approval of farmcn.iod develop farmer (institutional) capacity to implement the strategy
Maintenance requirements for engineering infrastructure fall into the following categoric* r Prevrntative Maintenance, (u) Routine Maintenance; (iii) Periodic maintenance, and F.mciptflo repairs
Preventive maunenance works arc those required to ensure ease of operation and smooth oning o ie I&D systems and involve only minor expenditure for labour and matcrx>
Examples are lubneanon of gates, pamung, ueed cutting and minor earthwork dresswg
Routine maintenance will commonly be executed during the seasonal closures and wc identified by observations and inspections. Examples include sediment removal atinta structures and from the canal and drain prisms, removal of weeds, repair of damages3 affecting freeboard, and minor structure repairs
Periodic maintenance addresses major repair works and may be implemented during «t°* annual closures Works may include pnsm rc-profiling and quite major repairs to structures
panul or complete system shutdown and
Emergency repairs arc those no, foreseen .u
U “JCL
^  must be undertaken immediately to *
1
vt ’
arise because of extreme events - fLwwi j u^qucnt loss of agnculrural production These nu' in ^ge. sudden failure of a structure and so on-
L’B F4 Main Report (1)
220, prjtllJy PnfrXr
during Lmplrmcn-.atK.n of the pro,crl 1 M"nlen«« StelteR d^uld be prepared. The Stnugy
indude: fl) »" «*•
M a description of maintenance categories. requirements
nd coiB (possibly introducing yardsticks for maintenance cost estimation); (tu) a description of intcnance cycle including preparation and implementation of annua] maintenance plans; (iv)
^^nce funding arrangements; and (v) maintenance mitigation measures (eg by carrying oGl maintenance tn timek manner).
4/5
Famrrr
tyUM/er Ot!nM
lc
4
n  WX’As / Scheme Board will take over management, upcration and maintenance of the
c£Z0ndir\ ind tertiary l&D system within the smallholder command area by the end of the support phase of project development, and by that time will need to have adopted a smallholder management information system to: (f) provide timely up-to-date O&Nf information; and (ii) control financial income and expenditure.
Design, transfer to thr VCT’.As and Scheme Hoard and training of at least two operators of a modular computer based farmer MIS is required. Ii is envisaged the M3S will comprise the following modules:
•      Administrative module concerned with WUA and Scheme board membership and names and contract detail* for Waler Misters at tertiary and secondary level;
•      Operations module concerned with irrigation flows, equity of distribution, etc
•      Maintenance module concerned with maintenance activities; and
•      Financial module concerned with record* of income and expenditure
In additional lo the management information system lor tanners, rhe Mun System Operator
and the commercial farm would design and operate similarly structured management information systems for scheme O&Nf.
dftd Oc^Vf Cojb
(a) Introduction
O&M costs comprise
*     Costs of O&M. Subprojects to build up. strengthen and support tinnier managed O&M during (he project period,
*     Costs for the Main                   Operator tor nine Tears (or longer) and recurrent cost* tor system O&M for the design life of the project.
(h) O&M Subprojects and Costs
ob i«=dve and activities of the proposed subprojecu to build up fanner insmution? and
Clp4c,t
T
y  o manage O&M of secondary and tertiary system* within the smallholder farming area
lf1 'marised below, and tn more detail in Annex C
v.
(i)
O*M-1;\KliACiM<3ty Building
objectives „e:
Formation of about;
(i) 451 WUGs for each tertiary uiui within the smallholder farm
«ca; (ii) 94 WUAs {32
Qn fh(   Rjgh( Bank Wld 62 on
.
the uft Bank); and (ill) the
Sterne Board able to
take a proactive role in scheme development, and by the end of
17-Mnpl1
221Ftdrral Drtto.ryfti Rfpubi, of Ethiopia, Mim/fr) o/V j' ftr & Enffgy EthnpUft Nik IrrtgatfO* and Drainart Profit
the support phase of the project to take responsibility for scheme
maintenance within the smallholder farm areas
Support development of guidelines and legal framework includi
for the new farmer institutions.
Sub-project activities include
Formation ofWUGs. \WAs and Scheme Board including ® awareness through an IEC campaign & meetings, (it) preparation and use of mass media, holding of elections for the WUA committees and the Scheme Board.
3r>|
Training and capacity building for the General Body fie fanner members) Ui for example, fi) formation and structure of the new institutions, (ii) their purpox function; (ui) roles and responsibilities the institutions and thar committees i\
holding elections, etc
• Specific training and capacity budding for (elected) members of: (i) the WUA Management Committee, (ii) the WUA Audit Committee; (iii) WUA standing committees concerned with O&M; and (iv) Scheme Board. I’his could include, for example, book and record keeping and setting up and management of bank aacxrn Note: specific O&NI training, including construction of tertiary level l&D infrastructure (but not land terracing / levelling / smoothing), is provided for node
O&M subprojects.
• Budding awareness among die \X1_’G & WUA members of other (non-O&M) subproject interventions dial arc planned and implemented through kebek & village centred institutions including the kcbcle council and cooperative societies.
(ii) O&M-2: Improved System Operanon by Farmer Institutmos Sub-project objectives are to build up farmer (WUG, WVA and Scheme Board) capacity** about ten years to undertake irrigation management and operation achieving: (i) reliable, transparent and equitable water distribution (particularly downstream of the Mam canals in & smallholder farm areas); (u) operanon and water application that meets crop water require®** with minimal water losses; (ui) minimal damage to canal prisms and other infrastructure including farm terraces, and (xv) financial self sufficiency by raising funds to meet fullopen^
costs.
llic subproject will assist in the development of the operating strategy / procedure5
/guidelines for the project (to be drafted by the project consultants / PMO office staff) covering (i) dam and storage reservoir and left bank diversion war; (u) Mun canals, (w' secondary and night storage reservoir operation, (tv) tertiary system operation and flow including efficient water application by furrows and / basins; (v) crop water requirements. yield and irrigation scheduling; (vt) seasonal crop planning including crop types, water application method (furrow / basm) and planting dates enabling preparation of distributin'1 schedules; (vii) role and duties of WLG /WL’A Water .Masters to oversee flow rotations u'd water distribution, (viii) management of system infrastructure particularly regulators and fl"* measurement structures, and (o, practical ways to assess soil moisture and need for ung* ”'
01
222
LIB F4 Mam Repnn(0rr ^r
ect activities include capacity building and training to achieve:
Sub-pw
‘   ..K• .n<roi^^^   consensus   to   the   operating   procedures   /   guidelines   prepared   for   the   project
*
.metog ^A members
Agreement of water charges for trngmon u*t« to be levied on ’AU A members as well tS how funds should be collected and action to be taken against defaulter!. Appointment of competent water masters able and willing to cany our their O&M Juries at ternary (443 units) and wondairy (93 units) level
•fh 5uh-project will also support comprehensive training / capcity building in operating
ft^cdures guidelines for: ® the Water Masters appointed at tertian and secondary unit level;
u ) members of WUA standing committers for system O&Ni is well as the System Hoard.
(hi) O&M-3: Improved System Maintenance by Farmer Insmutions The subproject objective is to build up smallholder farmer (WUG. WUA and Scheme Board) capacity within ten years to undertake system maintenance 15 1 timely and sustainable manner so that die constructed infrastmerure performs as designed for its design life (30-50 years).
Subproject activities include:
« Support for development of a maintenance strategy / procedures / guidelines for the scliemr covering; (i) asset inventory; (ii) maintenance categories, requirements and costs (possibly introducing yards tides for maintenance cost csrimanon); (lii) maintenance cycle including preparation and implementation of annual maintenance plans; fiv) maintenance funding, and (v) maintenance mitigation (eg by carrying oul maintenance in umeiy manner)
•      Building general body awareness of the importance of maintenance and its funding.
♦     Capacity building of concerned WUA standing commincc members and Scheme Board members including dissemination of the maintenance strategy / procedures /
guidelines
*     Specific and ngorous training (formal and on-the-job) for those selected by the WUAs and Scheme Board to supervise / implement main I r nance including to the water matters concerned with OdcM at tcmaiv (443 units) and secondary (93 units) level.
•     Support to farmers (WUG and WUAs) to implement ternary systrm constnicnon works during the implementation phase, including. fi) tertiary canals and drains; fii) tertiary system structures including concrrie division boxes and drops (note: steel shutters to be provided to the WUGs / WUAs).
Mentoring of WUGs / WUAs / Scheme Board as well for the water masters in carrying out maintenance, initially focussing on (labour intensive) routine maintenance ^0 bench terracess canals, and drains, and griduallv building capacity ,o enable them to ’ike over full system maintenance, including repair to secondary system structures and ^ht storage reservoirs, by die end of the support phase (year 13) when the main
s ) Mem operator will handing over O&M responsibility for the secondary canal systems.
C(J the Scheme Board
Provision of tools, equipment and materials for maintenance.
I,
223
17-May-llv
FkM Dmotraric tyiMc tf&hnfM. Mnutr) tfV'ntr C* £w»J>
Ertopw* Nfi
and Dwwp Pnyfii
(iv) O&M-4: Farmer .MIS for system O&M
The sub-project objective is to establish a management information system for finne
cffecthclv carry out scheme OAtAf.
Subproject activities include
Design of a simple Management Information System to be controlled by
/ Scheme Board comprising the following modules
Administrative module concerned with WUA and ScW
membership and names and contract details for Water Matte tertiary and secondary level;
Operations  module  concerned  with  irrigation  flows,  equity  of
distribution, etc.
•      Maintenance module concerned with maintenance activities’133
•      Financial module concerned with records of income and
expenditure
•      Training of at least two operators to manage computers and to enter and proem du collected and produced by the AUS, providing information both to ihc Scheme Bod and WUA members at regular intervals, and also to the Main System Operator;
•      Procurement and installation of necessary hardware (computers, printer, etc);
•      Mentoring of MIS system for 10 years (year 4 to year 13)
(c) O&M Subproject Costs
Tbc cost of die four proposed O&M subprojects to be implemented over about ten yeanis summarised below* and totals US$ 2.56 million, or L’SS 40 / ha over the net lmgabkarri ot 63,871 ha.
Subproject
Tide
O&Al 1
WUA capacity building
( MkM 2
Improved System Operation bv Farmer Institutions
(McM 3
Improved System Maintenance by Farmer Institutions
_ -
O&Af 4
Farmer SOS for system O&M
Total
Estimated
083 ndbJ"_
0.67
__
0.28 mJ**-
2J6
(d) Recurrent O&M Costs
Including for the cost of the Main System Operator, annual recurrent costs for systt^
r
.
are estimated to total I S$ 9.3 million / year (T*1*B 155 million / year) as tabulated Table 4-31
It is proposed that this cost be split according to net irrigable area between the sugar
. . j brio*0,1
cc*off
and small-medium commercial farms, and the smallholder farm area adopting at rate o 145 / ba per year (1£TB 2,430 / ha per year).
224
UH J‘4 Main Rep**1r
Tab/r               KcrurTrnf O4M Coats
1
Item
RctponiibiJity for
Axtivibn
Rate
Net Irrigable 1 Command ,
Area
Annual Co«*          i (nri&ori)           \
1
USVta t
(ba)               I USI \
ETB "1
I Mainteiuncc Co*ta
1
Swage Reservoir and Mun Canal Irrigation Infrastructure
Main System (ipenitof
32 0 1
63,871 1
2-0 I.
1
34.1  |
2
I Mun System Drainage & Roads Infrastructure
Mam System Operator
32-0
63571 1
2 .0 |
34 1 ]
3
Secondary and Tertiary Irrigation & Drainage Systems: smailhnlden
Secondary fie tertiary WUA*
40.0
23,109
0.9
15.4 |
4
.Secondin’ and Tertiary Irrigation & Drainage System , commercial farm
1
Commercial Estate
36.0
40.762
245
Sub-total
6.5
1081
101.4
1,614 2
Operation Cott*
—
1
Main System: (local} staffing, (laliries de equipment
Main System Operator
22-0
63,871
1.4
235
2
Secondary fie Ternary Systems: staffing, facilities fir equipment
Secondary fit tertian' \VLAs
22,0
23,109
0.5
83
1
Secondary 5c Tertian- Systems: sTifting, facilities fie equipment
Commercial Eirair
22.0
40.762
09
15-0
Sub-total
za
46.9
r
44.0
734.8
Total
93
1554
145 4
2,429 0
Note:        Full OfieM costs to be met by WUlAi / Estates Exchange rate ETB USJ: 16 7 (lice 2010)
UP Pt Mm rtvpnn [I)
225
17-Muy 11hdtru/                RspiM. ofEjhnpta. Mnajfri offTarrr&Eutip PdhHpM Xit imfdfwt jm Dnanqp Pryrf
4.8 4.8.1
Smallholder Crop Production
PnptudS^hoUcr/Ignailtuft
( a)            Farm Areas and Farm Sizes
-rue km of the .nullholder firm « expected to be about 22,872 ha. ofwhich^, 
(54 2%) are expected to be on vertisols and 11.000 ha (45.8%) on luvrsols The
obtained from the Land Allocauon Optmusaoon Model, see Table 4-10. Taking 
the cultivated land allocanon and non-trngablc land requirements (see Table 4-2) .bout farm households can be accommodated tn die scheme (see Table 4-11) of which about W* households will be trngators and the remainder will be located on rainfed farms
(b)           Crops and Cropping Pattern?
As with commercial farms, crops areas and cropping patterns for smallholder farmi
generated by a Farm Revenue Optimization Model which maximizes total net farm revenue the (irrigated and rainfed) cultivable area under agronomic constraints which are described ir SR-02B section 5.9. I*hese constraints may be summarised as follow's:
•      Farmed area tn the wet season and farmed area in the dr)- season cannot eicccd cultivated farm area (thus capping cropping intensity at 200%)
•      Annual food grain production must be sufficient to provide 70° o of households food energy requirements, at least half of which must be in maize (to accommodate changing taste in staple grains)
•      Following land suitability classification, vernsols are unsuitable for many crops, particularly in the wet season (when very’ good drainage and timeliness of opcnoccis required) though they may be cultivated in the dry’ season, key crops for vcrtisoh irr noog, cotton, rice and sorghum; the detailed crop suitability for vertisols is given in
02A
•      No dry season cropping is permitted on rainfed farms except for perennial fruit.
•      The sugar estate must grow enough food for labour; the types of food crop a*
to pulses and grains.
•      No out-grower sugar is modelled, though it could be;
•      Seed maize is mostly confined to cultivation by commercial farms on luvisols in the th season, but may also be grown by smallholder large farms.
•      Irrigated forage is forced in on irrigated smallholder farms - being an intermediate product it has no meaningful gross margin;
•      \ ertisols arc considered unsuitable for perennial (run, and
•      Oilseeds, lentils and vegetables ire suitable for vertisols only in the dry season, bi* pepper can be grown on vertisols in both the dry’ and wet seasons-
-
The harm Revenue (^trnusatton Model overall farm revenue, within further
CX  CU  J
*   1  tes the combination of crops thai ma«m*sc’
scheme food demand (including the d ''"k '*^UC^  ’P
1
access, and maximum production, set
price instability. Die combtn.non of c> ' achievable by smallholder farms of diffe^ d’ *"
CC3fy minimum production, based
Url>an P°Pubmon,' and expected iruikfl
VOlumes thal no> ft,u( mluke,> a"d
0       b>’,hc n,odcl seu thr cropping pattern’
to maximise overall farm revenue Th ^7' ’,tua,ed different land suitabilmc W
' n,Odd i“‘
advantages of operat.ng tn a
H F4 Main Report (0
226iC<-J mafkct pnvuoumcnf and the ability fr> seek the most profitable crops for the different
’P**             . j
p-pes
on
 | nd and labour resource*.
a
("be farmers ui the project area do not have adequate experience tn irrigation water
*n acceptable level to mininiwic soil erosion and enhance crop production,
’the lrngators will establish water users’ associations to manage the water resource in an
efficient way and to avoid, conflict tn the allocation and disLnbutxjn of imgadon supply, as wrl!
« establishing a system TO recover management, operation and maintenance costs.
On-farm water management (OFVl'M) will be established through the provision of training,
rrials and demonstrations. The trials and demonstration practices need to be developed in
conjunction with PARC (the principle research and development organisation in rhe project
area) to develop the system and enhance farmers’ capacity for efficient unlizaocm of irrigation
water PARC itself may require technical strengthening in this matter. The main topics related
to OFVCM will include the following aspects of irrigation agronomy:
•      Application of proper amounts of water at the correct time and frequency ro optimise
crop production and water use efficiency;
•      Improved land preparation to ensure sufficient infiltration of irrigation co the root
zone.
•      hand levelling / land grading to facilitate the uniform distribution of irrigation water
and to avoid water logging;
Improved   layout   of   fields   and   suitable   furrow   alignment,   length   and   size   commensurate with irrigation supply;
Ituproved crop husbandry practices (ic- mulching, weed control) to reduce water losses due to cvaporran5pirjllj0[L
re given in the same volume, Annex F
22"
17-M.iv-11Mrs! OtmHTVfh- RtfuM. tfE/biopta, MfBJfr) tfWaftr £*Entrg,
bfhntuaf Nik Im#*™ and Dnaitagf Pnpt
4.8.2 Prvpojfd In/trvrnlioHJ I Subpmjtch
Interventions will be required to up-grade stakeholder beneficiaries
1
farmer, stalk and resources and enable the switch from largely ramfed^^ ' During project implementation, the proposed interventions may be vaned^'^ ^ according to specific needs of farmers in the command area, and after di$ and other stakeholders The main purpose of packaging interventions as s
0
‘ ndlr
i
->
provide structure and cost to this aspect of project design. Dciails of th are given in Annex D.
(a) Enhancement of Soil Fertility (CP-1)
P "*Ct5" b
° ProP<>sed subr^
Subsistence farming is characterized by low yield and low use of inputs In most pans of tf,. project area which have already been intensively cultivated, the decline of soil femlirr hu identified as the main constraint lo increased productivity' Therefore the improvemcatind maintenance of soil fertility will be an important intervention This proposed sub project address the danger of a long term decline in soil fertility by promoting increased useofoqpa; and chemical fertilisers 'rhe activities of the sub-project include:
•      Promotion of (he use of the recommended amounts of organic and chemical ferae
•      Adequate and timely supply of chemical fertilisers through the service coopers
and private dealers,
•      Promotion of the distribution of chemical fertilisers through private dealers,
•      Supply of good quality fertilisers through the construction and/or rchabilrtitBfl ft warehouses (belonging to service co-oprra rives) as well as quality control
•      introduction and promotion of appropriate crop husbandry practices, including acf rotations with leguminous crops;
•      Promotion of integrated nutrient management, including the production of compoc
and
•      Promotion of access to credit allowing smallholders to purchase fertilisers anti to srrt* in the development of their crop land
(b) Increased Supply of Improved Seeds (CP-2)
The availability of improved seed for virtually all crops has been identified as • m«l°' c00'” ’
1
to achieving y>elds of irrigated crop, at full project development A specific intervene » required to address the constraints to the availability and use of unproved seed, thesr are
•      Short supply of improved seeds by cooperatives, agricultural office and P^^(
•      Low level of use of improved seed varieties.
. lack of access to a wide range of improved seed varieties;
•      1 nsufQaent and untimely supply of unproved seeds.
•      Lack of knowledge on seed multiplication iechnnlog.es.
The proposed sub-project activities therefore indude:
Introduction and promotion of the use of unproved seed varieties.
Promotion of seed muluplKition for major crop, through contracted farm^ 10 J project area.
Adequate  and  nmeh  supply  of  unproved  weds  through  die  service  co-operate private dealers.
228
I’H H Main Rrpon (1}Im pfove the warehouse capicity by construcnon/ or rehabtlnauon of Imons md Ferners' cooperative's wirehouse; and
promotion of access to credit to allow farmers to purchase unproved seeds.
rrduced These crop losses include:
.      | ligh crop losses caused by weeds, pests and plant diseases,
« Storage losses caused by rodents, insects and fungi; and
•     l.se of traditional slorage facilities.
The proposed activities of the sub project include:
•      Improvement of farmers’ knowledge of prevention and control of weeds, pests and plant diseases;
•      Introduction and promotion of improved crop busbindry practices to present weed problems, including crop rotation as well as intercropping and alley cropping;
•     Promotion of correct and safe use of agio chemicals.
•     Introduction and promotion of integrated pest management (TPM);
•      Adequate and timely supply of agro chemicals through the service cooperatives and private dealers together with advice on safe and appropriate use;
•      Introduction and promotion of unproved storage facilities at household and kcbcle level using locally available materials;
•      Promotion of treatment of stored crops with safe agro-chemicals to prevent attacks by rodents, insects and/or fungi, where appropriate, and
•       Provision  of  access  to  credit  allowing  fanners  to  procure  agro-chemicals  and  the construction of improved on-farm storage facilities
Price fluctuations for most crops.
Inadequate market infrastructure and storage facilities.
’’ries of (he sub-project to address these constraints will include.
S ^ppomng maintenance and gradual extension of the all-weather road network built
nt
f
k  ^e project (proposed infrastructure works are detailed in the engineering
c PCft), through a partnership between the government and the villagers ;
(1)
229
17-Mav-llhdtru/ Dt**vafti RipttUc fFjhttfw. AfrfUJfr) of IVafrr d’’ Eiftqp
Ethtopan Nik Imfifwt and Druin^r Pn^i
Introducoon of marketing information system (t.c. market pnces
through the service cooperates and union, DAs and/or kebcle
regular market surveys earned out by ARD wereda staff;
Promotion of collective marketing of crops directly to wholes^,, 
apo-processing industries (through service co-operatives and union); Strengthening of the marketing capacity of service co-operatives and then Promotion of contract farming and establishment of linkages between agro-processing/marketing companies (value chain);
Improvement of marketing infrastructure in the command area (at kebtfe mcludmg the construction of covered market stands and small warehouses; Improvement of storage facilities through the construction and/or rdubifa^. warehouses (including cold storage of vegetable and fruit crops) as well B control, and
Improvement of sound marketing practices, including a reliable detenrjm^n
control of the quality of agricultural produce as well as the enforcement of
weights and measures.
(e) Strengthened Agricultural Extension Services and Research Acmntxs
(CP-5)
Agricultural extension and research should be connected to provide coherent and effcctne support to farmers, whatever the size of holding and management level- The Upper Belo project area has a good track record particularly through the activities of PARC Ntvcfthden, with the implementation of the project the scope of research-extension activity will widen (increasing number of enterprises and available technology especially irrigation) and the demands on the service will increase (many more farmers and a much larger cultivated area,'
While PARC is Gt-for-purpose at present (tn fact it is a leader in research-extension actnW* the project area) the centre needs to plan to maintain and enhance this role in (he with environmenL Die present capacity of the extension service tn rhe project area is probabh slight)} above average, but barely fit-for-purpose even in the present producuon envu°nrna” Considerable up grading of skills and resources will be required to provide an effcctwr with- project extension service The main constraints that need to be addressed are
Weak linkages between agricultural research and extension services.
Poor facilities and budget for DAs to provide an improved and effective services; and
Inadequate technical skills and knowledge of extension staff with rrspe^1 crop production, producuon of high value crops, as well as crop stor*gr an Shonigc of budget to undertake research activities on farmers’ fields (eg- trials) and io promote community based participatory research programs Lack of training facilities to disseminate the released crop varieties
I’he activities of the sub project wil] include:
. Establish demonstration sites tn different part of the project area in colhborat** *1 the agneukura! office
• Conduct on farm farmer (raining for the new agricultural technologies
U
I IB 1-4 Mun Report (I)
230Establishment intensive ind effective linkages between agricultural research cent™
3 n<l the extension staff in the A RD offices at regional and wtrdi level;
Pfiwtsion of essential facilities (j_c.  .reference' books,  training  matcrMls.  tools md equipment) and sufficient budget to  the DAs to  ensure the execution of the necessary fii triers' ,f aiming courses, trials and dcmoristrarion-i. and
provision  of  regular  in-service  training  for  all  extension  Maff  at  wrreda  and  kebelc  level in order to enhance and update their necessary technical and extension skills
around   200%   and   about   16,000   smallholder   farms   arc   expected   to   be   invoked   in   irrigation   Tlie vast Tnajnntv of smallholders lack the necessary knowledge and skills, to practicr irrigated
The activities of the sub protect will include
•      Development of appropriate irrigation extension packages aimed at appropriate on farm water management (OPiX’M) and irrigation agronomy;
•      Provision of in-service training in OFWM, irrigation agronomy and modern irrigation technology' to extension staff ar wereda and kebele level (Lc DAs);
•      Provision of sufficient budget to DAs to provide fanners’ training courses in irrigation management and irrigation agronomy*, and
•       Provision of demonstrations and farmers’ training courses in the field of OFWM and irrigation agronomy at kebcle level.
areas only eighr SCAs arc established out of 37 project kcbelca to support the farmers- This
1  ^.cibtatiQQ  of  the  supply  of  short,  medium  and  long  term  Ioans  to  houschokJs  through Regional SCACO by providing seed capitiL
231
UFfdtrul OnmxYudc        of Elbtofna. Mmufn of W ater
Elhtopiari jW'Jif Imjtflfion and Drutnagr PrvftJ
4.8. J       Smallholder Crop PrufartOH Subproject Costs
The estimated  cost for the suggested  sub-projects are summarised  in  Table 4  p exclude consultancy  support costs Many  of the subprojects will be implemented eleven kebcles within or partially within the project area.
Table 4-32: Cott Estimateyfor proposed Sub-projects
Sub-Project
CP-1: Maintain and Enhancement of Soil
Fertility
Tnals, demonstration, training and institutional
strengthening
sub total
CP-2: Increased supply of improved seed and
agricultural equipment
Tnals, demonstration, training and institutional
strengthening
Strengthening of implementing institutions including co operatives and saving and credit
associations
sub total
CP-3: Promotion of effective pest control Tnals, demonstration, training and institutional
strengthening
sub-total
Annual Coat
(ETB)
150,000
195.000
75,000
5 375.000
375.000
CP-4: Improved Agricultural Marketing System Training and extension
Construction of market infrastructure
Procure ICT equipment to establish information centre in ali project kebcles
sub-total
50,000 250.000
5                  250,000 4.925,000
3
’50.000 5,925.M0_
CP-5: Strengthened Agricultural Extension Services and Research Activities
Books, training materials and tools for DAs
Workshops, training
listabbshmcnt of tnal and demonstration sites
sub total
CP-6: Irrigation Agronomy and On-farm Water
Management
Trials demonstration, training and institutional
strengthening
CP-7: Improved Access to Farm Credit
Credit provision
Awareness and training
Construction and maintenance of warehouses for
service cooperatives
sub total________________
Total
150,000
250.000
150.000
5 750.001)
5
1.250.000
2,1^000,
67,500
50,0(10
7.600,000
250,000
15,000,00°
2^50,5?°-
232
B F4 Main Report (1)^^Jdopn’efl‘ of irnganon will have i positive impact on the livestock activities tn the
T"  ' irca The main benefit would be in the production of livestock feed associated with dry
e
pr °KC f reduction from irrigated fields, irrigated forage production, fodder fitorn grazing land, "^^fed cultivation, settlement sues and by products from the sugar estate. The dry matter rMjn ff(Xn t|jC above would support an additional livestock population of 89,239 TLU, an
of 1'W <>• Not onh‘ wow^ therc be 2 change tn the livestock population. it is also
»ted that there would be change in the livestock management from the traditional system an improved one with the use of improved stocks and flocks The resulong effect is that
there would be a positive change in the pnxluctivny and production of livestock.
The prop
used   interventions   for   the   development   of   the   livestock   sub-sector   arc LS I Narural Grassland Management and Livestock Feed
•       LS-2 Improved Irrigated Forage Production
v LS-3 Improved Breeding Stock and Facilities
•       15-4 Improved Veterinary Services
•      LS-5 Improved Livestock Marketing and Lredit Provision
•       LS-fi Processing of Livestock Products
These proposals address the constraints and opportunities outlined tn Section 3.8 Details of rhe proposed livestock sub-projects arc presented SR-02C, and subproject profiles arc included as Annex E.
During project implementation these sub-projects may be vaned. mixed and matched according to specific needs of farmers in the command area and after discussions with farmers and other stakeholders. ‘l*hc main purpose of packaging interventions as sub-projects is to provide structure and costs to this aspect of project design
(a) Natural Grassland Management and laves lock Feed (LS-l)
Die natural pasture and grassland in the project area already show signs of deterioration due to over gracing and mismanagement Natural pasture feed includes grasses, legumes, bushes, ihnibs and trees Management of these communal lands is poor / absent and they arc gradually ^ing encro  h d With the livestock population set to increase with the project^ there is a real
ac   c
’hngrr that the natural pastures will be irrevocably damaged without improved management carc This subproject will support: (i) measures to prevent decline in the natural pastures Enhance their biodiversity; (ii) improved use and value of crop residues for animal feed; and
1  Prf>duaion of quality livestock feed from within settlement areas.
(b) Improved irrigated Forage Production (LS-2)
^          ^top-residues as a source of animal feed may lead to nutnenr deficiency
ancc On
5
|,
nc
7 fCCd su       lemcnls             bc
PP         may    expensive / in short supply. This subproject would
lntJoduction
of
improved
forage
into 
the
irrigated
cropping 
pattern
to 
provide
quality
feed.Frirrul Dnwfi* 
9f              Miiiutn of H altr & Ewrg
Ethiopia* Kiir lmption a*d Dratnqtf Pr**1
(c)           Improved Breeding Stock and Facilities (LS-3)
The proposed project is expected to introduce the possibility of increasing Jn consumption from the present 115,454 tonnes pa to 316,839 tonnes pa, sufg
TLU, compared with 51,114 TLU at present. Without measures to improve brJd * 
large proportion of this increase will be in traditional bvestock varieties with *v characteristics. The subproject will promote improved breeding stock and flocks \
within the tsetse and trypanosomiasis belt, interlocution of improved dairy arumah possible As an alternative, an attempt will be made to upgrade the management of h ” animals so that the productivity and production will increase. Improved sheep and t promoted for milk and meat production. Improved pullets and cockerels arc other foth distributed in the project area.
(d)          Improved Veterinary’ Services fI-S-4)
Improved livestock breeds will maximize the livestock productivity gain accompanying the expected increase in bvestock population in rhe project area However, farmers are onhiit^ invest in improved breeds if their susceptibility lo disease and parasites is checked by livestock extension and veterinary services. Further potential livestock production gains couid be offset by widespread disease and parasites among livestock Strengthening veterinary and bvestock extension services is therefore an essential part of the livestock development Jtnlqjr for the project area and is supported by tins subproject
(e)           Improved livestock Marketing and Credit Provision (l-S-5)
Fhe proposed project and increased crop residues will support an increase tn the livestock population The production from the additional numbers and improved animals is expectedtt be significantly more than needed tor local consumption /use, even allowing tor increased nio. and dairy consumption as a result ot increased farm incomes
The project will consiruct all-weather access to and within the project area which will enable year round marketing of animals and animal products to major markets by truck.
It is anticipated that this sub-project will address other marketing constraints including' 'A improved livestock marketing infrastructure in or near the study area; (u) improved midtf price information; and (iii) linkages with (private sector) buyers, which will facilitate the * livestock and bvestock products
(I) Improved Processing of Livestock Products (LS-6)
fhe perishable nature of most livestock products require them lo be disposed of or used quickly Delay results in dctcnoration of quality and low’ prices. Farmers’ traditional conservation and processing systems arc basic Improved processing of bvestock product k (l) extend shelf life facibtating storage and / or transportation; (ii) add value, and will supported by this subproject.
234
IJH f’4 Main Report (I)C^ffT
4.^
^'^t^rrd costs of the proposed sub-projects ire presented in Tabic 4-35, The totd cost of
s ufcHpf<’iett’ldds up ,o ETB 23 4 mJ1'on
- hie 4-33 Ogtfo» t
:                  L VCTWckSwb
PH>>cU<ETB)___________________________ ____________ _______
410           Lfifid J^od Wnfenbed Afinigvmcnt *nd Forestry
j 10J      IiHmtodtofi
To ensure that investments in irrigation and drainage arc successful and s us tamable, assndatrd investmenti in watershed management, composing soil and waier conserviaon, land minflgrmcnt and forestry* are also required. Six watershed management and forestry subprojects have been identified and descobcd tn the following sections:
i       I AFM-1: Linear Plantations & Drainage Corridor Development.
ii. L&FM-l Gully Stabilisation and Rehabilitation
ui L&fMT Community Forestry Development & Forestry in RFCs.
tv. L&FM-4: VCaicrshcd Management of Non-lmgablc SDAs.
v. IAFM-5: Reservoir Catchment and Buffer Zone Development
l T- T-&FM-6: Terrace Bund Stabilisation.
During project implementation the design of these subprojects can be varied according to the needs of local communities. The purpose of packaging interventions as subprojects is to provide structure and costs to this aspect of project design.
In all cases planting will lx accompanied by training, awareness raising and the promotion of agreed community management plans. The managemeni and care r>f these trees will also need
be discussed and agreed with the local communities. It is proposed that the Water User _ Jajtl(nis (WLLAs) in irrigation areas and Community Watershed Development Teams
5 )   non-irrigation   arras   be   responsible   for   the   maintenance   of   any   communin'   forestry
n -s as part of t}lc
activities for the project infrastructure,
F.
S ^ctaj^s on the measures proposed and their costs, refer toSR-OZD, Sections 3, 4 and M  P'oject profiles arc includes as Annex F.
235
17 May IIFtdentl Ptmvnifii           tfFjbiipiA Mnufr) tfUFattrC* E*trg)
F.fhtfpu* .\tk Imgrfioit anti Drxanqp Pryttl
(a) Linen Plantations & Drainage Corridor D^tlnn
This intervention aims to plant trees within the irrigation area along sp^ g 
including roads, canals and field boundaries The atm of the planting will be
irrigated area, to provide shade, for protection of the two Main canals and °
wood, building poles and fodder for local communities in those areas of * 
It is proposed that the wood resources in these areas are managed by the ^* ° individuals and that the seedlings arc sourced locally (see section (d)j
Different trees will be suitable for different situations In all instances it is proposed thni mix of tree and shrub species is agreed upon by the local communities in consular
ARD offices Assumptions as to the species used, planting spacing, survival rates arid harvesting have been made for costing the interventions.
(b) Gully Stabilisation and Rehabilitation (L&FM-2)
The aim of gully stabilisation and rehabilitation is to reduce the effect of eroding gulhn or. ihe irrigation area This intervention will at first require an assessment of all drainage lines entean* the irrigation command area to identify’ active gullies Drainage lines assessed as needing treatment can then be reshaped and re-vegetated Reshaping involves the treatment of the ph head and sides by cut and fill and stabilisation with brushwood layering or stepped stone carpets Re-vegetation should include creeping and drought resistant grasses planted in dense tows on the reshaped gully sides interspersed with trees and shrubs planted at a density of)-
4/m2
st cases gulh stabilisation should be accompanied by treatment of the catchment ibon 1 u 'atcrs* d management programme and this will be undertaker, k
1  ldtI
,c
L N fle S. I\ CE and V S. A wider and detailed assessment of the whole circhmcnri* not within the remit of this irrigation feasibility study although a study could be made in
junction with that for the reservoir catchment area at the time of detailed design and implementation
In addition to gullv stabilisation ,nd „
the stabilisation of drainage n characteristics of the drainage line h measures may be required. Gully rXabd included in the engineering works as tewaces. land shaping and smooth 12%) sloping land and areas mapped^
Kctat*>n of gully heads there will also be a need for drainage lines. The needs will depend on ibe
vc gftativr and stmcnird
Ult ^n 1,10 “Ration development area »
° ^’dopment including the construct*^ parncuJ* tendon are steeply (3% -
irrigation development if terracing and mill ° most prevalent in SDA VN where th f ' rebablbr>t’on
CrO5,On bur
4
 i* implemented. The Nle if**  **
also form appreciable areas in TVCS mtn!* 1,157 *** or 4?C/o
a or 1 %) but arc minor or absenr in other at* '
 of the net irrigation area,
1
Costing these interventions depends on csrmv.
and rehabilitation it has been assumed that lOOd^T numbrr required For gully U*
(mainly in the south of the command) will r been assumed that 2V'o of the estimated 1 tXMj
,WX) Ou,falJ
W5 cn,cnnK thc r(,fnmjnd *** .
for thc " *
 ^ains (mostly on vermeils) will
236
(IB b4 Mam Report 0SDA in Tabic xx-
Thc establishment of forestry on any hills with shallow soils should be preceded by area closure to enable the regeneration of ground ewer grasses and shrubs. A programme of afforestation can ihen be initiated. The relatively high seasonal rainfall of the project area means that water retaining structures such as micro-basins should not be required but a site assessment should be made io assess whether cut-off drains will be required The initial area dos Lire and subsequent ground cover establishment should mean that cut off drains are not required
Suitable tree spoors should be a mix of fast growing (generally exotic) mulopurpose trees such as Gnu flea               Ataeia tka/rmu. CMwtdnj itifottyrritf and JV/ws w# as well is Eucalyptus
and slower growing (generally indigenous) trees such as zkdsu
,4. J'o'jZ -4                BwnrZtw
p^y/rrtj, Chj/jojt wfmrtatyw, Fiau jpp fW Confa afwaitiL In addition fruit trees such as Mango (Aharon? rxdtw), Guava fPjidfamillite Sapotc fCamiwia edkij/ Artwxa jntjfaJtwij, Papaya (CtrrnapcQwjaJ and Avocado (Prnw A Brnttw) could lie phmtd.
As with the other watershed management interventions the supply of seedlings will be from local nurseries (see section (d)) wherever possible and communities will manage (he area. A mix
237
J? May 41hderuJ Drwun; of EjhtoM Minify of U'affr d* /: •ny
E/broptM Niir Im^a/roo Jtd Druitt
eucalyptus and 10% other fast-growing exotics and fruit trees In time
could be replaced by indigenous trees. 
Where water from the irrigated area drains into natural drainage lines it is n will be an outfall structure to dissipate the water and reduce scour and crosjOn j
* C
this will be enough to ensure no further erosion of the natural drainage line but locations it is likely that further conservation measures will be needed as above. 
(d) Watershed Management of Non-irngablc SDA (L&FM-4)
Sec 'M|
Four SDAs. IVBE-N, TVBE-S, IVCE and VS, have only a low percentage of their hnd ngJ f
.
for irrigation (12-28%) and have therefore been excluded from irrigation development
1 lowever there arc appreciable areas of land already cultivated under rainfed condity.™ D stage development areas, fanned without any soil conservation measures, and this could enpi- on the irrigation scheme in the long term.
It is therefore proposed to introduce soil and water conserv ation measures and a wider watershed management package in these four SDAs in order to: (i) improve the livelihoods of the local population (who will not be offered plots on irrigated land), (ii) to improve the sustainability of rainfed agriculture, and (in) to increase the security of the irrigation development in adjacent areas from erosion and sedimentation To achieve this, infoarxrcT soils, topography, land use and current erosion have been collated and a suite of suitable
and water conservation measures have been outlined in order to gain an idea as to the costs involved
Soil  and  water  conservation  programmes  in  Ethiopia  have  found  that  communities  arc unwilling to be involved in interventions that do not provide an improvement in their livelihoods  and  therefore  soil  and  waler  conservation  programmes  are  now  designed  P to  improve  livelihoods  with  soil  conservation  usually  allied  to  agricultural  intensified need for farmer participation in the process is now universally accepted and there is » recognition that the measures must demonstrate, and demonstrate quickly. benefit to tn farmers who are investing their land and their time/labour in the SWC works.
In order to get community involvement the SWC measures need to be integrated with technical measures such as agronomic, agro-fores try, area closure and reforestation
and increased use of inputs that will show benefits in a short time
It is proposed that farmers receive some payment for adopung sod and water consent measures m these four SDAs smee many of the benefits are downstream (ie protects irrigation area).
It is not within the remit of this feasibility study to prcparr t drljdcd watershed nunag^
soil and water conservation programme for these Meas but outline interventions and coStSt^ be indicated and it is proposed that a more detailed study is undertaken during implr'"01'1"^ of the irrigation scheme
.11
23H
CH F4 Main Report (I)..
i-.'Srf^"''
esc nt Acre ire 25 nurseries tn the Bdcs area; 24 private nurseries in Jtwi weteda and I M  nUfscry « Paw1 wefct*x 11,0 numb« of seedlings requited fur *11 the proposed
“ fr hcd roanigcmcnl and SWC interventions described is estimated at about M million,
mg thir the  P
n
ht hank is
6x51 mu 1 5 F" penod then there will be a
' ^rement for 2.24 million seedlings a year from the 25 nurseries Thu translates into about
^000 seedlings per nursery which is well within the capability of most nurseries; Pawi wexeda uncry produced 400.000 seedlings tn 2009 for instance. A nursery development programme as
° n of the project is therefore not proposed since it is felt that the demand can be met by
P  jsung nurseries increasing capacity to meet the increased demand The development of ursencs in Ae nun-irrigation SDA* however is included as pan of the watershed management
programme, partly to ensure enough seedlings for the SWC interventions and partly to provide cmpk>ymem irt Aese areas.
( c i Reservoir Buffer Zone Development St Reservoir Catchment (L&FM-5)
(1) Reservoir Buffer Zone Development
At present there are no specific limits of buffer zones along lakes, m en and streams although the Regional Conservation Strategy and the Rural Land Administration and Use Proclamation put these areas under state ownership and protection
Buffer strtps around reservoirs are usually recommended to attenuate non-point pollution and particularly to protect water supply reservoirs. They are natural or managed areas used to protect an ecosystem from adjacent land uses or sources of pollution and produce a more favourable environment for aquanc ecosystem processes. A npanan buffer is usually split into three different zones (trees, shrubs and grasses) each having its own specific purpose for filtering runoff and interacting with the adjacent aquatic system
However the proposed reservoir is not a water supph* reservoir, neither is it at particular risk from non-point pollution (there being verv little fertilizer applied in the surrounding catchment) and it is surrounded by open woodland in a rockv valley. It is therefore proposed only to create a buffer zone of indigenous trees and shrubs with enrichment planting of the current woodland lD  a width of 100m from the reservoir The pen merer of the reservoir is 50-70 km in length if a ^(TypeA.B or C) dam is buih32. However if a small (Type D) dam is sufficient the
reven oir perimeter will be considerably less, just 15.6 km.
with the interventions in the command area, the creation of the buffer zone will be mpanied by awareness raising and training in the management of the area. The final
5 >on on buffer width, spears to be planted, buffer zone management, access to water for P* pic md cattle and liaison with fisheries will be undertaken in dose consultation with the
Hiunitj   most affected by the creation of the reservoir.
cs
•jv k
C1) Watershed .Management of Reservoir Catchment
rT  .          ‘ LE assessment undertaken of the reservoir catchment has indicated that rhe area has a c ^Os*°n. hazard. However fieldwork has indicated that much of the area is cultivated
*ny soi] WaCcf conservation practices Dan on land use and slopes within the
Rt POtt
239
J7-M*y nDrwo.rufl.'        of PJbitfM. Afi«//n
lithtopiM Nik            ™d Dwqt P*pl
ElmX>
reservoir catchment area show that there is a total of 25 550ha of cultivated 1 
>
reservoir area of 58,424 ha, of which 11,551 ha (45 /o) is on slopes greater dun
therefore a compelling argument for a programme of watershed management ’
and water conservation and afforestation in the reservoir catchment area. [| 
also showed that farmers in the catchment do not have the land user certdicates^^'0
therefore an opportunity to link the issuance of land user certificates with imp  -j0'"
r
management in terms of implementation of soil and water conservation measures
The approach to watershed management and SWC in the reservoir catchmen: wiD be v
that in the non-imgable SDAs (section (d)) integrated with other technical measures *
agronomic, agro forestry, area closure and reforestation measures and increased use of
dial will show benefits in a short space of time The aim of this watershed managemer.i
programme would be primarily to reduce sedimentation into the proposed reservoir.
Farmers will need to  be paid for adopting  the soil and water conservation measures ttoccrtw of lhe benefits arc downstream (Lc the reservoir not silting  up as quickly) although iiri^ the adoption of SVCC with the issuance of land user certificates could be used to mitigate soocx the costs.
Il is not within the remit of this feasibility study to prepare a detailed watershed minigrme* a soil and water conservation programme for the reservoir catchment area However outline interventions and costs can be indicated and it is recommended that a more detailed study» undertaken during implementation of the reservoir and irrigation scheme
(f) Terrace Bund Stabilisation (L&FM-6)
Land has been classified on the basis that slopes above 3% are currently not suitibk tor mjU- irrigation. Only if terracing and appropriate sod conservation measures arc provided a such land considered suitable for irngahon. In addition shallow soils, steep slopes and erosioc-f*”’' land arc all avoided (for smallholder development particularly) unless appropriate soil conservation measures are specified and accepted as a necessary part of any develop®01
Therefore for irrigation development, land on slopes of 3 to 12% («% for vertisols) wiU levelled to slopes of either 0% if basin irrigation is proposed or up to 2% for finro* This will result tn bunds between the terraces that will require stabilisation with gra«*- legumes and/or trees In addition to the terracing there will be a need for the convevafiCC excess waler from the ends of the terraces to field /tertian’ and collector drains to structures that outfall into natural drainage linrs (streams and overs)
o
f I?’
Terracing of the deep, reddish upland soils is feasible for surface irrigation up to 5,opC5
because these sods are more stable and can support steep risers. The terrace end bun - $
soils will have a width of 0.2m, 1 height of 0.3m and uphill and downhill slopes of 1
(vertical: horizontal) This will result tn a 5% land take for terracing
Vertisols arc less stable and are highly crodible even on low slopes due to their shnnk-s^ ^ nature. They will therefore require gentler bund riser slopes It is proposed that these
1
24U
I ’H 1-4 Main Report (I)f>***^‘
nds have » and hcJgh[ of 05m* “  P
u
hdl ,kTc of 1:1
1 downhill slope of 1:2.
’^11 m   15% land tike for terracing. It is also important that the vertisols ire kept
s
sincr it is die UTrang *nd d™ng vcrU5C>ls lhaT ro^t» in their movement ind initiates
,tl0,St
art
slumpingana
Sol 5
<;urr irrigation is feasible on land with slopes up to 12% without the need for terracing to P ^   gently sloping land However, soil conservation would still be required, pnnapaDy to
[e
trol porentiallv damaging runoff On slopes above 8% more intensive conservation
asiires including terracing, would be required and such land is therefore considered to be gently not suitable for pressure irrigation
The terracing of land for irrigation is a new departure in Ethiopia and it is therefore paramount (hit a pilot 15 trialled poor to full land preparation, terracing and irrigation development
This is particularly important for vertisols which are known to be unstable due to then shnnk- iwrll nature
There are no guidelines as to the design of terraces for irrigation. In (Queensland vertisols are terraced for rainfed cropping with bunds (cilled ‘graded banks’ in Australia") at vertical intervals of 1 7m on 2°«slope and 2.3m on 5% slope Probert ci al (1987) indicate that contour banks and grassed waterways are the usuil conservation measures used on verusols tn Australia but that they arc not always successful. Cracking of the banks cin occur, leading to failure ind gullying during high intensity storms They also indicate that contour stnp cropping and grass rotations have been successful in Africa (although for rainfed rather than irrigated land) and that the provision of ground cover is of paramount importance in pres enting erosion on vertisols. They report that 80° o pasture ground cover is required to prevent soil loss on verusols but that 50® o cover was no better than bare soil.
The design ol the terraces described above is reported in more detail in Irrigation 8c Drainage Development (Supplementary Report SR-01B) and was undertaken with different parameters
'uch as irrigation layout and operation, minimal land-take and bund stability in mind For Wince, for bunds on vertisols, a conservative option of a 1:6 downhill slope would prob abb.
csuk m greater stability but the land-take would range from 39% on land with 4% slopes to
8 a on land with 8® o slopes thus removing a great deal of land from imgabon.
* using the design entena described above for a 5% land lake on red soils and 15% on
ols a rota] of 12,21 Oha of Land will be terraced, 6,672ha on the commercial sugar estate and a  m the smallholder area (4,065ha on red soils, 8,145ha on vertisols).
To
arc                   ^^^inability of these bunds (on both red soils and vertisols) it is vital that they
«nd      b)        bcUlR        pl“,cd        with         P155”-      le8umR        and        Qees        gnSSCS        Sh<>uld         **      aeepinB
J erosion. Terracing on vertisols will be limited to land with at most 8% slopes l  Land Use and Suitability report (Supplementary Report SR02A) indicates that
„ ‘ rei“‘am such « Vcnfa. Rhodes grass ’nd BufW F“  » 
5
'P*001 iuch
and 'darhe' planted in dense rows. Trees and shrubs should be planted at a dose
1           *" Apt>nMft>" ,n *™lton contml "*T“nh ”         Aatnltt «         J
”^f>»AhdC"duitv. IBSRAM Proceedings No. 4fyMc tfMnpu- FlbufM* Nik IrrifaM” o«<i F>rawf Pn^
* Veur
spacing of 30 to 60an apart on single or staggered double row. For fOragc f
fixing trees/shrubs such as L^otna kuaerphah. Pigeon pea (CajUHl]
should be used. Acaaa jahpw planted in dense rows can also be introduced and 
mixed with crop residues. On the wider vertisols bunds a line of trees should 
top and bottom of the riser to discourage fanners from ploughing through the b^^'" *
Cash crops can be grown on the bunds, particularly I -2 years after composting hai b*. introduced as an agronomic measure with sunflowers, gourd, tomatoes, cucumbcn Grazing will need to be carefully controlled with no grazing for the first year of otiblu and ideally cut and cany after that.
Costs for land development including terracing and bund formation are included in thr engineering works, while costs for bund stabilisauon are included in subproject L&FM (, Terrace Bund Stabilisation.
1
4.10.2 Land & Fort! fry Mana^mrnt Snb-Jn/tcfj Cos/t
The total costs for the proposed land and watershed management and forestry subproiecur summarised in Table 4-34. This shows a lota! cost for all six subprojects of ETB 3633 milbt.t (US$ 21.7 million) of which the greatest proportion is for watershed management ot cbe reservoir catchment area
Interventions within the project command area as part of the irrigation development and including watershed management within the four non’irrigated SDAs) totals ETB 12^ --^1Dn (US$7.7 million).
Table 4-34: Summary of Subproject Cobts
Intenxotion
LAFM-1; Linear Piantanoni & Drainage Corridor Development_______________
LAF.M-2: GuDv Stabilisation and Rehabilitation_____________________ ______
13cFM-3: Community Foreitty Development & Forestry in RECs_______________
14.460.44*
__________  ._____________ __________ Community Forest a- Development.
______ ________ ___ ____ __________  JmresuyJ^eydoptwntin RECa_
Total L&FM-3 L&FM 4: Watershed .Management of Non Irrigable SDAs
LAFXI-5.  Reservoir  Catchment  and  Buffer  Zone  I)evek  iprncnr
_______________ ._____ 5^ atershed .Management of Reservoir Catchment --------------------------------------------_---- ----- --------- 0of fcrZone Dev el • • n r pc nr
Total L&FM3
LdcEM 6. Terrace Bund Stabilisauon
_______________________________
Total Coat
•I
b’H I‘4 Mam Report (1)
242Ew-'Jy
4*
4.,"
Co/nrn''"^
( t*W"1
j to CoMMHiutjf DruthfM^r
flc
Education »nd Health
«       -« ibcucs have been identified:
ii.  following issues
e
•       I itcracy rate among adult male population in the 16 surveyed kcbeles ranges from 20% to 75% against 5% to ^0% for lhe adult female population; and
•      Mapr health prob Jems arc malaria, typhoid, diarrhoea and/or lnrrmal parasites.
(b) l and Tenure
h  regard to land tenure, rhe following issues and constraints have been identified;
•      According to the Focus Group discussions the proportion of landless households
in 15 of the 16 surveyed kebeJes ranges from 7% to 35%, while according to the
household surveys the overall proportion of landless households is about
« I [ouscbold have fragmented landholdings with 13 to 2_B plots; and
•       Regis (ration of land use rights is ongoing tn the surveyed kebeles in Jawi Wereda
and South Achefer Wereda, bur it has nor started in the surveyed kebeies tn Dangur
Wereda and Pawe Wereda.
(c) Waterlogging and Hooding
The following twu environmental constraints have been identified:
•      Waterlogging is a problem in 14 of the 16 surveyed kebdrs with IO *-© tn 70% of
the surveyed households affected; and
•       10% to 45% of the surveyed households in 15 of die 16 surveyed kcbclcs reported
problems with flooding.
(dj Potable Water Supply
W  uh  regard  to  access  to  clean  and  safe  potable  water,  the  following  issues  and  constraint*.  have been identified.
•      4% to 65% of the surveyed households fetch water from local streams in 14 of tlie 16 surveyed kebeJes;
•       4% to 45% of the surveyed households in 10 of the 16 Surveyed kcbclcs fetch waler from unprotected spring;
•       In ft of the 16 surveyed kcbclcs, 5% to 78% of the surveyed households fetch polable water from open wells,
•       Quality of fetchrd potable water reportedly is not good in 5 of the 16 surveyed
kebdcs
•      5% to 45% of the surveyed household in 5 of the 16 surveyed kebclcs reported to experience water shortage;
Majohty of the surveyed households in 15 of the 16 surv eyed kcbclcs reported the of a toiler for last 2 to 10 yea .
1
(b
243
17-May ItFfdmh Drnnii.
of fiftoofita, Mtftufn oflT'arrr £■
Etfaptn Ntir Impfro/f Drwwg Prttr.1
(e'l Fann Supplies, Marketing and Credit
The  following  constraints  concerning  the  supply  of  farm  inputs,  marketing have been identified:
15 of the 37 kebeles situated in the four SDAs are not accesstble by w
Odt one of the 16 surveyed kebeles has a public transport semce to the urban centre.
•      16 of the 37 kebeles do not have a weekly market;
•      21 of the 37 kebeles do not have their own service cooperative,
•  Limited number of marketing agencies in both Zones and no
enterprises;
»gio -processing
•      Savings & credit associations have not been established in 29 of the 3” kebdo
situated in the four SDAs; and
•      10% to 85% of the surveyed households in 15 of the 16 surveyed kebdn obtunt
a loan during the last 10 years, mainly from the savings & credit assoaatxxi
(f) Poverty and Food Security
I’hc poverty situation tn the six surveyed kebeles is as follows:
•       10% to 80% of all households in the 16 surveyed kcbeles arc considered to be pcci, of which 5% to 20% arc considered to be extremely poor;
•      8% to 50° o of the female-headed households arc considered to be poor, of whiri
3% co 30% is considered to be extremely poor; and
•      10% to 80% of all households in the 16 surveyed kebeles arc food insecure
(g) Institutional Development
The following institutional constraints and issue have been identified: hrruee
• \VRD were da office in Jawi Wcreda is seriously understaffed and it has a
ARD wereth
off|ce .
ind budget __.ii
, . 
“ 
his man v v»c«naes and a shortage of
.
AKO XTX “ n ”
ARI) wereda office in P ^cre^* lacks vehicles and it has insufficient start;
vehicles and bud  as
t
#  n* 
^cks 9uabficd staff and it has a shortage of
DAs do not have ac ** 2 tO *ccess lo improved technologies;
equipment and munmv fC^CrCncc and they have insufificicni budgrt. ?-• > activities id their kcbeler^^1^1 Unt^cni^c nccessary extension and tniniw
•peaabsu m the wereda offices
in-service training aimed at enhancing their skills; 35 of the 37 kebeles have one or more DAs; DAs lack promotion opportunities;
27 of the 37 kebeles do not have a FTC;
12 of the 37 kebeles do not have veterinary staff;
DAj rfo
9 ot
Communal grazing land is poorly managed by the Kcbcle < .ouncil m a
the 16 surveyed kebeles. and
kebek*
Community forests arc poorly managed in at least 9 of the 16 sursc)
(JB H Mam Repon (I)
244Mtw*y offT'afrr e*- c>rT
ft***
' "*rT, I"**"
Subp^ds to Addrw Cowir, l) „^
e     tnl
Community development / support subprojects onproviw a, 
welfare of households in and around the project area as ' i0fX><Xonon* ^tus and
strengthening of key local / scheme level stakeholders
S5C’ nitt P
,ub
 cooper.^, havcbwn
r< *« f„, msnrunonaj
0
As the benefits from trngated igncuirure dcvelopmnu
size of farmers’ land holding with the rehtn dy well off ca mn ° ** Pr0portX?n>J fo d* community development subprojects will be focussed on theT"^^ ''
land holdings, ferrule-headed households and indigenous pc ’ ^lnncn ur*A 'ey small
rhe recommended community development and msututional strengthening subproject
b ”’<‘fi”',he
therefore compose: ft unproved access to potable water and sanuanon; ft) unproved health condmons; ft.) unproved access to energy sources, ft) development of off-farm income generating acmnt.es and cred,, pension, (v) livelihood suppon for mdigenous peoples and M support for local institutions. 
r
'J
During protect implementation, these subprojects may be viced. mued and matched according
to specific needs of the local institutions and households in the four SDAs and following
discussions with the communities The main purpose of packaging interventions as subprojects
is to provide structure and cost estimates to this aspect of project design
The subprojects arc outlined below. Sub-project profiles are included as Annex G
(a) Improved Access to Potable Water and Sanitation (CD-I)
To  improve  the  access  to  dean  and  safe  potable  water  and  sanitation,  it  is  recommended  that the following subproject tntervenuons should be implemented
•      Assessment of the condition and works required to restore the potable water supply system built under the Tana Be les project to (fiilhr) operational coodmon and. if restoration of (all / part) of die system was technically viable assessment of the required institutional O&M arrangements;
•      Protection of existing potable water sources, such as open wells and unprotected springs, including the provision of fences to keep animals away.
Introduction and promotion of the use of low-cost water treatment technologic* at household level, such as (sand/ceramic} filters and solar water purification using plastic water bottles,
Improvement of the O&M of existing PWS schemes, including the formation and training ofWMCs;
introduction and promotion of the construction of water harvesting (roof-top) structures at household level; and
romotion of the construction of toilets through awareness campaigns, demonstrations and health extension programmes.
245
p-mbt-hFtdmtl DffWjfj,               of Erhttfna, Mnuty of ITtier c** Entry Ethiopian Fiiit irruption and Dnnmft Prytri
-■ Improved Health Conditions (CD-2)
Mlbn>
IT"
»  -*- due .0 »»«!«■<« b.eed.n
P
e
i. s.»d^
„ U „ tht
»a use of peeeenove meesuees. >«h ss bed Tvphmd „„ o bob of .seess ,o d« poubk -»•"
The reported water-borne health problems will be addressed bv a rang? of tr building and infrastructure construction support measures Improved health wil’ *' increased productivity and improved quality of life
rcj Uix
To  address  water  borne  health  problems  for  rural  households  the  following  active  t.? suggested:
•      Raising awareness and knowledge among the rural population about approp^ methods to pres ent and control malaria, including the promotion of the use of (impregnated) bed nets,
•      Prevention of standing water by improving drainage in- and outside the vill^es,
•      Improvement of access to clean and safe potable water through the protection of existing open potable water sources, such as shallow wells and unprotected springs
•      Provision of regular in-service training for the I IT'Ws at kcbclc level in order to enhance and update their technical and extension skills; and
•      Implementation of comprehensive health extension programme to enhincc th knowledge of men and women about the prevention and treatment ot tnos- common health problems.
(c) Improved Access to Energy Sources (CD 3)
At present households have sufficient access to fuel wood which is the main source ot for cooking, and collected at a distance of 1-8 km from their homesteads However acce fuel wood may reduce due to the development of the irrigation project as land is trngated agriculture and with the envisaged increase m numbers of households in c
area. There arc private and / or government-managed nurseries in seven of the the left bank project area.
°
t l, 77 Lrbtif
jd
5
To ensure that the households in .Areas IV and V have sufficient access to energy *°ur subproject interventions will include
•      Promotion ot the development of tree plantarion with fast-growing  P* as the planting of trees around houses and fields as well as along rhe m 1° irrigation canals and drains.
•      Promotion of the establishment of private nurseries;
•      Introduction and promotion of the use of improved, encrgy-clf,cicrl
un th
smoke chimneys, and
Uf
•
Introduction and promotion of alternative energy sources, such as r.
I or wind energy.
UH F4 Maw Report (V
246u .-UfC'*** 4
Development of Off-farm Income Generating Activities and Credit Provision (CD-4)
r no to 29% of households are landless, and 43% of households have access to lest prcs^rtT ’ *
th4nL0fc’’ntflA
datively ’mall proportion of mostly poor households tn the project irca aigigc in off-farm conxr-gcneratmg activities, such as handicrafts (Le. weaving, tailoring and ponesy). home
^dustdes (eg brewing talla). transport and petty trade.
Poor households predominantly ram incomes is I mints { shirrcroppers) or through provision G f manual labour. Increased cropping intensities and livestock production will improve on farm and off-farm livelihood opportunities for poor and not-so-pcor alike This sub-project will support training and demonstrations as well as the provision of equipment and facilities through micro-credit facilities to indniduals and groups who wish to take up off-farm income pencratJ^g activities
Saving* & credit associations have not been established in all kebeles in the study area. Partners however have access to short-term loans provided by ACSI and the B-G Micro Finance Company in Fendika and Pawc respectively
This sub-project will
•      Build awareness to inform the "poor and vulnerable^ (ic. landless and icmaJc headed) households of available project support for off-farm income-generaOng activities;
•      Provide training and technical support to poor households to develop viable and sustainable off-farm income-generating activities,
•      Provide micro-credit to poor households to invest tn sustainable off-farm economic activities.
Off-farm actnincs supported under the sub-project could include, for example handicrafts (i.e. ^caving and potter)'), small business (e.g. retaJ shop, trading), transport serviers, fishing. 2 picul hire, repair of farm implements (Le blacksmith), carpentry and crop processing.
( ) Original Inhabitants Support (CD-5)
c
c Agew md Gumuz people arc the orgmal inhabitants of the Belts Valley. While the Agew ^main the dominant group in some of the Jawi kebeles, they and the Gumuz have been mostly
S P ccd in Pawc by settlements of Amhira peoples over the last few decades
th( T "c the orginal inhabitants of the area the Agew and Gumuz people “own” relatively cts <>f land. 11 owes’er under the proposed project those with lands within designated
a k areas will have their large holdings substantiallv reduced Further delmcanon of land
eavir
P rol<xt area to, for example, (communally managed; grazing, to preserve hab,,ats “d natural flora and fauna, for tree plantations, etc. as well is for
Gtrrn ’^^ture by both smallholders and commercial larms, will adversely affect the
topics traditional wav of earning livelihoods, particularly hunting and food gathering
R <FtXT (it
247
17May-J tFtdmiJ Dtf^-run,            afEthupi* MtmJfr) ofW'aler & Entr^
l-Jbrofuan IW Im&ten and Dminagt Prvfta
The Agew will be less iffected as they already practice livestock to the Amhara peoples.
Cr, ’Pping ,
The  Gumuz  are  particularly  unlikely  to  benefit  from  thfe  nrano.-j Project uitFi measures as their livelihoods are traditionally based on primitive and ex
agnculture. producing for home consumption, and on hunting, wild hon^' l°Wpr°daCn. gathering and charcoal production. Cultivation is a shifting hoe culture 1              T"1' "tubba”  and  “kancha",  where  different  areas  are  cultivated  each  year  Th^l-  ltn°*n‘' ruminant) livestock.
This subproiect will support affected peoples, particularly the Gumuz. to adapt byencout^ their adoption of modern crop and irrigation practices, as well as supporting alternative met* generating schemes (such as modem apiculture) as well as schemes to alleviate women'i disproportionate hard work load.
(f) Support for Local Institutions (CD-6)
All local institutions concerned with implementation of the project and achievement of expected benefits will need strengthening to have well equipped and motivated staff with adequate budgets at wereda and kebelc level. Support for agricultural and livestock (vttfflurr services are provided under the crop and livestock subprojects, and support for instituoxi concerned with resettlement and compensation will be provided under the resettlement iad land consolidation component of the project.
ITus subproject is therefore concerned with the strengthening of other important insdtut»» particularly the Service Cooperatives
Other than irrigation system operation and maintenance which will be carried o groups / associations organised by hydraulic units, crop and livestock product* largely be facilitated / earned out by the service cooperatives established at ke
cooperatives arc typically particularly concerned with: (i) provision ol agneu
in  nf
f  tniDcf
farm equipment, (u) marketing of agricultural produce including provision ot p
lC  tU
j  ig
to farmers, (iii) processing of agncultural produce, such as Hour mills or baggmg facilities; and (tv) provision of credit Currently only some of rhe kebelcs m < c btshn*nrfl‘ have established effective service cooperatives. Constraints to functioning an filled effective cooperatives include lack of facilities (Le. warehouses) and equipment,
operatives, capital and business plans. This subproject will address these con>U’l^co0
p  >!*r
er
cooperative performance and functioning and support formation of new effre^f in all kebdes in the project area.
IR F4 Mam Report (I)C * rioted costs for the implementation of the aforementioned community development i * 'ects aft sunumarised in Table 4-35, and total FITS 35,2 million., USS 2.1 million nve? " J * ^15 equate* to just ETB 550 / ha or 33 LTSJ/ha over the net imgable area of 63.B7] nine v^-
ha
TabkJ^
Nr
C- l-.StimaiCU            — —       ------- —t---- ------- — f.wp Community development ■ubpcojecl
Eirimated Coil
ETB
U5»
Improved Access 10 Porablc Water and SaniLanon
9,600,000
LU- L ____ fn.7
c.lj -■
m3   J
575,000
Improved Health Conditions
3.30O.CW
198.000
C-jL^ _
-
CP 1
Improved Access to Energy Sources
3 V.i0JMX)
I98.DOQ
Development of Off-farm Income Generating Activities and Credit Provision
9.0X),00(I
539.000
CD 5
(Iniand Inhabitants (Indigenous PropHi Support
4,000,000
240.000
CD 6
Support for I^jciI Institutions
6.000,000
359,000
Total
35.200,000
2.108,000
112 EsviroofncofAlMit^don nxjd EtihanccxncorMoaum
i. f2, F
Measures to preserve the environment and / or mitigate against environmental degrade non are built into the design of the project, for example in land Lise delineation whereby irrigation is restricted to suitable land, die RF.Cs delineated and SWC measures proposed to present sod erosion However additional environmental enhancement measures arc required Io support
these ‘*budl-in” measures. The proposed environmental enhancement subprojects un
•      EE’l: Environmental Monitoring and Preservation; and
•      EE-2: Support for Reservoir & Riverine Fishery Development.
In addition a full environmental impact asses 5 men I and social impact assessment (EIA/SIA Study  and Consultancy  Support Costs) are required for the proposed project, with particular locus on the proposed large scale commercial sugarcane developmcnt-
Phc Environmental assessment and proposed subproject arc described in SR-05. Subproject Profiles „e included » Annex H
p
( a) Environmental Monitoring and Preservation (EE-1)
cn ariun and enhancement of flora and fauna in the new storage reservoir, as well as in the
^age cornd „ f
< ^enne 1 drainage) corridors along streams and rivers is necessary1 (i) to examine the feasibility * 5U5Tainablc development of Eshen« in the reservoir; 10 aUoW nuWnable use of the
o      Or limited grazing and fuel wood collection, (iff) to ensure reasonable water im °r stTcam and over water sources for livestock and washing; and (re) co avoid adverse
°n down stream water users due to deterioration in water quality and quantity
17 .May-11
249MW
The objectives of the subproject are
To ensure that the required environmental (lows are released dou-ns(l Bank Main canal diversion weir,
To monitor reservoir water levels and depths throughout the vear ..u
** li>t
’ aP nicuU,
l
the dry season.
To monitor flows and water quality of drainage water and water in stIcarra ,
evaluate changes in water quality and identify any pollunon sources ( .
eg
'*Sl
chemicals, sugar cane processing and domestic waste);
To confirm suitability of water for irrigation and other purposes, starting from Tana and along the Enat Belcs over, by monitoring water quality as well as Fnj| p aver flows;
To implement and monitor measures to enhance / improve water quality include planting of wet land vegetation within drainage corridors and within reservoir buffe
zone; and
To promote community awareness if environmental issues and management of reservoir (buffer zone) and drainage corridors.
The water quality monitoring earned out under the project would support data ahead? bcirg collected for lake Tana by the BoWRD.
Tbc main activities of the subproject will include:
•     Monitoring of water flows &. water quality starting from J^ake Tana and at seta location* along the Enat Bclrs river.
•     Periodic recording of reservoir water level and water quality;
•     Monitoring of flow and water quality of selected drains (for agro-chemical rur. of streams into which (treated) industrial effluent and / or waste is discharged,
•     Monitoring of ground water at selected locations;
•     Purchase of on-site waler quality measurement kit with associated reagent t parameters such as temp, EC. DO, pl 1 onsite, and also flow (current) mete
•     Training of staff;
•     Building community awareness of the importance of avoiding environing degradation of reservoir and river / stream water quality.
•     Support to promote good and sustainable community management of th
(buffer) zone and the drainagr comdors, for example through controll
of
fuel wood collection/ timber felling, good use of agro-chemicaJs and p
cropping within the buffer zone; and
--
•     Establishment of small physical structures and biological measure f" c U stripping of agricultural runoff at selected locations
Ware, and flow momionng it .bout 24 sites is proposed Pmmeters to be
ahRhdy for the lake, river and reservoir bur will generally include temperate P  ’ caurm. Close linkage- with relevant stakeholders. mdudrng die Tan.-Bele. HP’’.• BoWRD and the Upper Belcs Sugar Estate would be established for exchange rd «• ° and data.
H
UH f'4 Matra Rcp<»rl (V
250Support for Reservoir & Riverine Fishery Development (EE-2) River Basin including Lake Tina and its tnbuterics is known for its fish diversity
The Abb«)^ jpeoes having been recorded. The Enai Beks is i small tributary within the
with Ovcf
baseline survey indicated presence of fish & some traditional fish catch
Abba}'  kaSin   ]ntftxjuction  of  f»b  speoes  was  reported  at  the  old  weir  near  Pan  e  town  under from <br                   pfOfCCf and fishing is practiced by the indigenous Gumuz. With increased
fan*- following ihe construction of the Tana Bcles power si a non, along with project susiatoed t               cturc (reservoir*. etc.) the potential for fisheries is enhanced
irrigation mlrl5t
Artificial  lakes  that  have  been  constructed  tn  the  Abbav  rrvrr  basin  h
reservoir fishery Examples include the Rosary reservoir m i and the Kogo reservoir m the upper pan.
,.
° UTX
Potential for
^biy Bisw
Fish production from the storage reservoir wil) depend on the suc nf dam adopted bur a ndd
of about 50 kg/hi/yr may be adopted For the Friar Beles river a higher yield of l^kg/ha/vr may be achteved based on the (low flow) area, gn-mg an annual yield of about 30 40
rotines/year for the 100 km EnM Belts river within the project area
Currently there appears to be little interest in fish in the project are*, which is generally only practiced by the indigenous Gumuz using tradiuonal fie using chemicals) fishing methods. These traditional methods arc illegal and cause environmental damage-
Fishery development w ould provide an alternative / additional livelihood to rural households with little access to land, and for the indigenous Gumuz, Promonng or nutamable fishery development and catch methods would increase fish production and reduce adverse impact on the environment.
The main objectives of this subproject are
- A««tmn the viability and modality of fishery- development for the reservoir and Em Boles river created bv the new flow regime; and
■     Facilitate sustainable development of i reservoir & nvenne fishery with <m»- m u fish catch methods.
Ihe main activities of the subproject will be to:
■     Carry out a study on the viability ind modality of fishery development or reservoir & riverine fishery as well as interest of the local communin. and in part*
Gumuz;
a
* .
• Support fishery development whether managed by the community or a comni
concern.
U a large dam was constructed then leasing reserve* m®y allow more effective and sustainable dc^elopmen
resource-
co
rniri ttcxd concern
251
h-Mjit-i:DcvM. R^ •/ Mwfrt of Water & Entr#
Ethiopia* N/£ Irrigation und Dnan^t Prytil
4.12.2      EnnrvnmtnlaiEnbancrmtnt Subprojects Costs
The estimated cost of the proposed environmental enhancement sub and totals ETB 2.3 million (US$ 0.14 million).
Table 4-36: Summan of Environment Subproject Costs
Pf0 ’ects b
Ref
Subproject
Coat (ETFh"^
EE-1
Environmental Monitoring and Preservation
EE-2
Support for Reservoir & Riverine Fishery Development;
--------- ■—■—
Rfrtf»A
Total
——•—- -
--------------------------- jjOOjjty
4.123      El A I SLA Study and Consultancy Support Costs
The proposed irrigation development is a Schedule I projt Assessment Procedural Guidelines prepared by the FEPA
(following Hns-uonmenullcn^
(FEPA, 2003a), and pax to
implementation a full Environmental and Social Impact Assessment is required, with partuj focus on the impact of sugar estate development. With consultancy support this study rj be earned out by LAEP office staff at regional, zonal and wexeda level; and (ii) \\ RD office wafTa
,r
wereda level.
One of the potentially biggest adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project codd result from the processing of sugarcane Facilities therefore need to be in place in nunurscih! adverse impacts from the various by-products of sugar processing, including bagasse isd molasses. For example, if a power plant utilising bagasse is not constructed, then aftcraitne arrangements for disposal of bagasse are needed and alternative sources of cncrg) wiH be -«L to be identified. Similarly, if a waste water / effluent treatment plant is nor installed in association with an ethanol production plant, the “spent wash” could br discharged direc into the Upper Bcles river and have a damaging environmental impact
Study acmidcs would rhenJk ,
• Prm.
fhereforr include
dev^etliopm onofe^nUt EoflAan/SIeXnviro 
’ lnc^Uc^nR mkcholder consultations and the
cn >
deluding  the  sugar  estate  md  dm  m>IU^Cmcnl   P^1   (^MP)  for  the  proposed  pn^ ' uonmcntal impacts and ^^"iniendatjons to minimise adverse
•■onstnjeuon of M cfSaent F U,ccl dc f'  k>pmcnt 2nd mill construcnoo inclusta?
“Mtmcnt
n-P^po^sug,,^^
pIant> in(j ensun/°*Cr Plan( (uulning bagasse) and , w,stc u,tw / effluent 1 fP recommendations are adhered to.
in
• greater Capacit)
' *lU 'ufficaenr to supply a factory of 12,000 TCV.
H." env^ foj Hd >f eane Is g,OWn hy
A $cpm(e and
r °.'n.  fynU   U,'°  ,hf    L'pper  Bdei    co  '  *  V"pr,CMc»1'f>'  of  hauling  cane  up  the  escarp"
” *• “ b-‘ ■>'
Bd„ 
1* bc«d »*. m„ oOh. -■
” ' <■ factor,. ml] be (I) btgijje                       Clr 'hc W«nbcr stream confluence. The main byP^
^bsses which ma, be used fo, .
may be burnt to generate elect not),
sugar factory assume, that these bvPr,L ProducUon  «nd / or animal feed. The anong P^^wtfbeprc^d
(IB F4 Main Report (!)
252wer plant would require water for turbines and is Cooling water Much of the required llK P<c obuuricd from die Mcam produced from boiling the cane syrup However it a likely
^* CX Water! 'rearment Plant may he needed to provide additional water for lhe power plant tbiT X ^-arer from die En*t Beks over upstream of the factory.
iol may be produced from the molasses by continuous fermentation process in an Ethanol p ducrion PW* by-product of the process, lhe "'spent wash" has a high biological oxygen
nd (BoO) and if disposed! of directly into the Enat JBelcs River (or Wcmbcr stream) will h vr a harmful impart on flora and fauna- The volume of spent wash produced is about 13-15 nme, the volume of ikohol produced
[f is understood that about 4,000 litres of ethanol can be generated from one ha of sugarcane, ind that the proposed net 36,225 ha commercial sugar estate would produce about 65.606 m' of ethanol annually. This indicates an annual spent wash volume of about 0.92 Mm2 To treat the ' spent wash" construction of a small waste water / effluent treatment plant is required.
The potentially biggest adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project are those associated witli the processing of sugarcane and whether facilities are id place to minimise adverse environ mental impact from the various by-products, including bagasse, molasses and rhe spent wash from an ethanol production plant
The sugar estate and factory will require a large labour force and the advene impact from any untreated organic u'astc disposal also needs to be considered
The estimated cosr of the consultancy support to carryout a social and environmental impact assessment ls expected to be in the order of ETB 9,51 million (1*5$ 057 million).
^/fef IrnpJanenfjifjon, JnsarutinnaJ Arrangements and M7S
]  -1
,r          J
T
o an extent implementation of the scheme requires adoption of various process approaches, particularly for;
•      Sustainable and Midally inclusive development;
•      Planning and implement a Don of lhe non engineering interventions (subpro[ccis); Resettlement, land acquisition and land consolidation, and
System management, operation and maintenance by fanucis-
Process approach requires that thr vinous identified steps are implemented in a logical ^uence
Fori -
(>)
Sustaimbk and socially inclusive development
tiiipjp^                ant^ mchisivr project development a participatory, socially inclusive impj^ ,tat*On process is proposed, particularly with regard to; fi} planning and
Station ol non-engineering interventions; (ii; resettlement, land icquisttion and
253
17-Vfo 11<Hr/wjfu. Alzw/n < ITrtrr d- fc*T
tr»eaM XJr hrt&t»t Dnavqt Ph?*
consolidation; and fm) system management, operation and maintenance Th. xnmess (I EC) cimpiigm sod ap.o.f building ind .upper. fo, ,hc 'M "w
Soail inclusion is promoted by: (i) allocation of a minimum irrigation area of 01)
■**S
(currently) landless households; (ii) all farmers to lx (general body) members of (J*10 (iii) funding for interventions to support livelihoods of poor (those with little
headed household s
(b)         Planning and implementation of non-engineering interventions The project's design includes a range of subprojects to address key crop and livestock production problems, social and management capacity constraints and environmental
*
Ur ^
including land and watershed management and forestry These subprojects may be vmed, mixed and matched according to specific needs of farmers in the command area, and will be implemented through soilage based institutions, particularly die (ii Kebele council (n)vinDu service cooperatives, and (ui) for O&M activities the WUAs and the Scheme Board. The implementation process will therefore include:
•     I EC campaigns,
•     Partiapaiory planning to agree on (smallholder) cropping patterns and toprrparc annual nucroplans for crop, livestock, community development and forestry, land id watershed management and forestry interventions, and
•     Implementation of the micro plans.
(c)          Resettlement, land acquisition and consolidation
The challenging issue of smallholder resettlement, land consolidation and field boundar. revision needs to be addressed if the full benefits of the irrigation development are to be realised. I’or efficient irrigated farming and ease of mechanisation, farmers owning bn than they can farm, and with scattered plots bisected by irrigation and drainage channels lacking access must be avoided.
(d)         System management, operation and maintenance by fanners
As the project is a new irrigation development farmers do not have any cxpeflcnCC u
an irrigation scheme to achieve crop production potential, nor do they appreciate th maintenance needs, activities and costs to keep the scheme in good working order-
rr Will be For optimal and sustainable scheme development farmer O&M inatirutxmal caPaa9 . jbc built up gradually, over seven years, through the implementation and support phases <• project This process will include:
•     IEC campaigns.
•     Progressive formation of O&M firmer institutions, including W UG* (443). and a Scheme Board, and capacity building for members;
•     Suppon for WUGs io construa tertiary system infrastructure including 1 field canaJs and drains and associated (small) structures, and
• Appointment and training of water masters and pumping station operator-
f  pl4.1
C><rt >bcr 2010 a new inslirurion, the Elhiopian Sugar Corporation (ESQ was formed under (government's restructuring process. The ESC is to administer rhe sugar industry. i job
d 'C n . jnd pgrtb' nianig«l by the Ethiopian Sugar Development Agency (ESDA). and wd]
to rhe Prime Minister ! Office
three existing sugar estates in rhe country, Fincha, Wixip-Shoa ind Merihara. and Tendaho htch is under construction, are going to fall under the supervision of the new Sugar
Corporation, which is iho expected to oversee development of new sugar estates & factories m coming years including Upper Bries (including Hyma) in Amhara i Beneshangul Gumuz
Regional States.
113)            General Arrangement
The institutional organisation setup for rhe Upper Beta irrigation project needs to reengmsr die following
«
V
The importance of the Urge irrigated sugar estate which will extend over about 36,225 ha (excluding Hyma) of the 63,871 ha net irrigable area in Upper Beks. Including for
1 lyma the sugar estate is expected tn extend over about 50.000 ha.
The  importance  of  the  smallholder  farms,  some  uf  which  may  become  our-grmvers  io the sugar estare, which extend over about 22,872 ha;
The resetdemmt implications of the proposed development, both to dear existing smallholder farmers from die sugar estate area, as well as tn for consolidation of smallholder managed irrigation holdings;
The  importance  of  the  non-engineering  project  components  to  achieve  anticipated project benefits including
o      Formation & strengthening of appropnatc farmer and professional irutmirions to lake responsibility for O&M of the engineering infrastructure;
O
Support for smallholder crop and livestock production and tor community development;
'TT
° Support for land and watershed management (including SMC measures), forestry and environmental enhancement measures
c proposed institutional scrup for the project is shown on Figure 4-24. It is considered likely
^at the newly formed Ethiopian Sugar Corporation will be the Executing Agency, but with Pp ri from the Ministry of Water <5e Energy and pamrularlr thr Abbav River Basin
Authority.
p
( c)            Project Level Instirutions ^ CT kvd institutions would include the;
* Upper Beta Sugar Estate, UBSE;
e
’ roJec| Implement a non Office* PIO; and
Metal Engineering Corporation, MEG (particularly for mechanical & dectrical aspects devdopjp^^ including the sugar factory and associated equipment)-ftdtnl
RipMi td'Ethttpia, ,Wn tfValer
Elinapim Nik Irrigatin' and Pm*r PnyM
The Upper Bclcs Sugar Estate (UBSE) would primarily be concerned '
for the estate area as well as office, factory and staff accommodate
The UBSE would be a permanent institution concerned not only 
also with scheme operations following the completion of the project
Given the importance of all project components, including those ass
irrigation development, the establishment of a Project Implementation
proposed for the duration of the project The PIO would manage all pro e '
including required consultancy services, and liaise between the L B Sugar Esta<XMa,,Ont,m medium commercial estates and smallholder farmer Water User Association^ '
(d) Field Level Institutions
Field level institution* would include:
•     Civil works contractors;
•     Contractors to construct (operate Ac transfer to the (’BSE) the cane processing factory, ethanol plant, water treatment works, etc;
*
"
•     Main System Operator concerned with operation of rhe storage darn (if required: a well as the main irrigation system supplying both the sugar estate and smallholder‘ix
areas;
•     Water User Associations concerned with irrigation management within the snullWe farm areas; and
•     Kebclc Offices, Service Cooperatives and I -and Administration Ac L sc Committer concerned with implementation of non-engtncenng aspects of project develop^1
L’H F4 Main Rcpcwt 0).V~»Z-j
Figure 4-24: fnatitutiomil Or^utia^nnn
OWM A’lSATJOJV CHART
UH H M»in Rqwi (1)
257
!7-May4lFtdtfvl Df'tkrafk topMr of Fjbtopia. 4 luurfr} of iT'dfrr & Energy
ElhnfMJt .V/> /m$r>M            Dnra^y Prwr.f
4.1).) Impta* fytan Managrrntnt
(a)            Introduction
To achieve sustainable agricultural benefits from bod, commercial
managed farms appropriate professional and farmer institutions nee^o i” ”   W
5
/ appointed to take responsibility for irogation & drainage system O*M ' f° ’*
n
d
U h, for the Upper Beles Sugar Estate to manage Main System 0&.M,
supplying 
Sugar Estate may u e
to the sugar estate
infrastructure
10 ■"*“""" ““ “”
a con|lict of interest, for example by pnonnsmg imgatxm
,o Ts""
#nd ncglccUng maintenance of communal
Further the Sugar Estate may not be interested / have a proper mandate in working with organisation (and any other small / medium commercial estates) including developing capacity and collecting water charges.
The following is therefore proposed:
♦     Appointment ot a professional organisation (ie Main System Operator) to marugtdc main irrigation system, including the dam and storage reservoir (if constructed, dn’ersion wctr(s) and the two Main and nine branch (three on the nghi bank and mix the left bank) canals with a mandate from the Abbav Ris er Basin Authority concern^ water abstractions from the river and collection of water charges from users; and
•     Election, establishment and capacity building of farmer WUA institution*, vis U LGt WUAs and a Scheme Board at tertiary, secondin’ and scheme level respectively, urt
The Upper Beles Sugar Estate would then be responsible for irrigation system OAt- within the sugar csiate’s boundaries.
llic Main System Operator and farmer institutions for scheme OdcM within smallholder lir boundaries are discussed below
(b)            Main System Operator
The operation and maintenance of major / main system infrastructure tn storage reservoir (if required), diversion wcir(s) and main and secondary can
ding the d*n”,1<l
tu and
the***
including  the  night  storage  reservoirs  will  require  professional  operation,  P °^
ir
years when firmer O&M institutions and the Upper Beles Sugar Estate uill Collection of water charges also needs to be instigated both from the Sugar from farmer Water User Associations.
|S
nr^
p npOSfd
^uhtcd
C S$ 22 / ha 
“PPon ph„« 
O   pm)ecl
f         development. -
of a professional organisation rh
for five ve^ X C2 
17ic 5Uf
^ C^n “ 5fJJ o"
TiWe v and to(aj
Unx a„d COiU o(
l wfoT
*
and for .he 4-^
fot vrtP *
pei
a  cn, [o £13 374 / hi [*■'
“ million. rqmv ;
UBF4 MBn Report (1)
2SS•-            */&***!**' Miwrrf 4f'irater & E^y
Within these woe years O&M responsibility for the secondary canal ... form «e«. in addition to tertiary and on-farm engtn eering 
farmer institutions, m particularly by the WlAs aod the water masters ” After nine years rhe tasks of the MSO would be renewed and other taken
’bolder
“*
of Water *EncrgV (Abbay Basin Authority) or again-awe  arded to ura a ntmo ta Tprofessional organisation.
(c)            Farmer Irrigation Institutions
To manage: 0 construction of tectmy system infrastructure dunng ihe implementation phase; md ii) for management, operation and maintenance of the completed ungation md drainage
(
infrastructure within the smallholder farmer area, suitable non-profit farmer tnstmmons are required with compulsory farmer membership based on hydraulic (not village', boundaries All farmers with an irrigation Land holding in the command area would be members
The proposed new farmer institutions will comprise: fi) informal Wafer User Groups fWUGs) formed at tertian system level, (ii) formal (le with legal status) Water user Assocuuoiu (WUAs) at Secondary level; and (lii) a Scheme Board al num system level representing all WUAs.
At the end of the support phase of the project the Scheme Board will take over some of the OAcM duties and responsibilities of the MSO, but not those pertaining to the dam and storage reservoir, diversion weir and Main and Branch canals. .Also the Scheme Board would only have jurisdiction of flows and secondary system O&M within ihe smallholder farm areas.
The new farmer institutions will lack the knowledge and skills to carry oui their OflcM responsibilities so this capacity will have to be developed Also guidelines and the legal framework for WUAs (and the Scheme Board) currently do not exist and need to be formulated.
In total there are ab«ut 257 secondary and 1,222 tertiary units id the 63,871 net .treble area with average secondary and tertiary unit net irrigation areas of 249 ha and t>2 a respect* the smallholder farm arras there are about ’M secondary and 451 tertia
Typrcally each secondary Water User Association extending over a secondary unit would comprise 5-8 ternary Water User Groups. Each VWG would have from about 4 to smallholder farmer members4.13.4       Consultancy Support
Three consultancy support packages arc proposed:
•     Package 1 Project Implementation Consultancy for Detailed ru
.-
Construction Supervision;
•      Package II: Consultancy for Resettlement Activities; and
• Package III: Environmental Impact Assessment Studies.
I>C5lgn. (Uy e
*
The consultants would be grouped within the Project Implementation Office
(government appointed) Project Coordinator.
(a) Project Implementation Consultancy
This consultancy will provide support for (i) detailed design and preparation of tender documents; (ii) construction supervision; (iS) an institutional assessment including fin? sy z requirements for the MSO; (iv) preparation of system O&M manuals; (v) capacity budding particularly of newly formed WUGs and WUAi; (vi) any new / revised lease agreemen’j fa small / medium commercial estates; (vii) for the project MIS and reporting; and (viii) tow j- the baseline MAcE.
Project Implementation Consultancy support will be required for all project development phases, particularly for Phases 1 and Phase II to ensure appropriate detailed design and construction of quality infrastructure. Consultancy support would be intermittent tn Phis* IE, supporting WUAs and the .Main System Operator.
Project Implementation Consultancy Support costs for 10 years totals E1*B 152-8 milbonv^ 9.15 million), sec Table 4-38.
(b) Other consultancy costs
#
Other consultancy costs are associated with the resettlement programme
(sec Secnon
to carry out a full ELA / SIA study (see Section 4.12).—.Z />->• -           /**>** •
T*t>te 4-37: Main Syarrni Op<rii(or Cd«c«
If -
Duration
9 years
CTB
16 7
/ Mr
/
Poainon
Inpu
*
Kate \
Amount          \
etb/ \
N.J
•m
sm         I
1
/ (Operations Manager. TAcD Specialist
errs
Storage Dam Ar Mam System < ipcration. O&NI Plan preparation
TT
—
34,000 1
------ 1 3 060 000 i
2
Irrigation OAk Af Specialists
Storage Dam Ac Main System Operation. Supervision of gate operators
10 1
900 1
32.000 1
..
28.800.000 1
3
MAcE specialist
MAcE Lquiprnent, Vehicles
2
180 |
32.000
5.760.000 1
4
Agronomist
Crop water requirements. marketing support
3
270
28.000
7,560.000 i
5
Community Development Specialists
Liason with WL’As. dissemination of operating plans
10
*XX)
28,000
25,200,000 1
6
Main Svstcm (kite Operators: lucalh recruited
Main canals gates, night storage reservoirs
140
12,600
3.200
40 'e--'
7
Drivers
26
2,340
3.800
8,892.000
8
Guards
26
2,340
2,200
5,148.000
Sub-Total
124,740,000
Transport (4 VXD vehicles)
26
2340
24.000
56,160.000
Facilities Ac Equipment
1
90
160.000
14.400.000
Grind Total
195,300.000
Contingency at 10%
19,530.000
—
Grand Total
214,830,000
.Amount per vrar
23,870.000
—
1
Amuunt pec year per ha  ETB)
174
Amount per year per ha (l-S$)
22
r
Note main lystcm operator contract to run for <> yran (five year, m unpkmcntanon pha.e and 4 years port cr.tutroction support)
UH IM Mam Report (V                                                                              261
17 -May !>
.....
*• '.t"
- 'f •*'.•/ Hifapia. Mmtn 9fWjf"
ElLtfiM Nib bnpliM Jf/.i L>rntn^f Pnj^t
Table 4-38: Project Implementation Consultancy Coata
Charge Rate
Nr
I
*1
Potation
llSI/am
I n ternational Staffing
Irrigation Development and ( MrM Specialist
Procurement A Cotv  true Bon Quality  Control Specialist
3       Agricultural 'crop) Specialist
4 Dam Design Specialist
USS
1.440.000
320.000
720.000
288.00°
Amount
ETB
24.048.000
12.024.000
12.024.000
4,80*) .600
6
GIS & Mapping Specialist
480.000
3.648,000
8,016,000
60,921.600
National Staffing 
1
2
3
Irrigation Development Specialist / Team 1 .eider
191.617
Dam Design Specialist
45.988
Irrigation Design Engineers (4 Nr)
229,940
3.200.000 768.0(H)
3.840.000
4 Irrigation O6cM / Training Sjxcialists (4 Nr)
229,940
3.840.000
5
6
7
9
10
Contracts  Jyngtnecr  /  Construction  Supervision  Specialists  (4  Nr)
689.820
172.455
172.455
344,910
11.520.000
Construction Quality Control Engineer 1 Nr)
2.880.001)
Agricultural (crop) Specialist
Community  Development-/  Social  Specialist*  '2  Nr)
32.000
2.880.000
5.760,000
livestock Specialist
12
Gender Specialist
122.455
172.455
23W.000
13
14
15
16
GIS St Mapping Spcciaiuts
Roads Specialist
M&E Specialist
Geode tic^Speculi st
172,455
2.880.000
2.880,000
2.880.000
2,880,000
172,455
2.880.000
Sub-total Sub-total staffing
3.111.856
51,968,000
Expenaet
1 —^-Geotechnical Investigations
Accommodation. air transport. pct-diems. \thcki. (aabtieTac equipment, vippott staff 0O*/» of staffing costa)
6.759.856         112.889,600
150.28 J
Ct.OOO. <XM>
_  Suh uital e»pri>»*»
To*—, Phase I (Preparation) over three years;
phase II (Implement a Oon) over nine years for both buikss; mJ
phase ril (Suppon Phase) over four year*.
Project Preparttort- Activities include
« Completion of thw feasibility Study (by HAI-CROW GIRD Consultants);
•      Establishment of key institutions Project Implementation Office A I B Sugar Estate.
•      Procurement of Consultancy Services for RAP. ELA & Engineering works;
•      Awareness. Public Consul tition & Formation of Compensation Ar Ijind Con&olidautMt Committees;
•      Detailed Design and Preparation of Tender Document* (by rhe ADSVXT « per (he rrcentlv. eark 2011, concluded agreement with the ESQ;
•      Preparation & Approval of Resettlcmcni Action Plan (bid. cadastral Al property surveys); and
« Signing of any revised /new lease agrcrmcnt(s) with commensal fann(s).
Implementation phase acttviuc* include for all project components, vis;
•      Engineering I&D Infrastructure Tendering, Award and Construction
•      Resettlement & Land Consolidation
•      Commercial Farm Development Ac Crop Production
•      Institutional Development & Sustainable OAcM
•      Smallholder Crop Production
•      livestock Production
•      Land & Watershed Management and Forestry
•      Community’ Development
•      Environ mental Enhancement
Not including the advance construction works currendv underway comprising construction of tight bank diversion war and (upper pan) of the nght main canal system by the Amhara
onstructian Enterprise and supervised by the A mbara Design Ac Supervision XXorks
Sc paratc coustrucnoti / operate / transfer arrangements.
ITMaydl
263farrA rkmxTtifi. R/pMi 9* Eihtepia. Mimitn tflFalrr&Enfrg
Ethnpta* \‘id ImfiitMH and Dnandtt P^r.f
Other support infrastructure works, such as establishment nf t 7    ' •*“ *' DC\v vi|i
f(>r ’<!
households, would require preparation of separate design and t <4 
completion of the RAP.
Support Phase activities over four years would include continued (j) Cf production, forcstry/watershcd management and community devel initiated in Phase II; (li) support to develop sustainable O&M antj
< ^°Cun>enti
U ’,ervtn*>0f
beneficunes; and (111) support for environmental enhancement measurwT*'7 III responsibility for secondary and tertiary canal system operation will^ sugar estate, small/medium commercial farms and to the smallholder f ,nos{ttKi^
andWUGs.
anDcrPw>pi.tl>1
(b) Fast Track Implementation Option 4
Included as Annex A2 is a fast track implementation schedule associated with Devclopn^ Option 4 for development of 39.175 ha net of imgatcd sugarcane. For this option in implementation phase of 5 years is proposed, with 3 years for post construction support
4.U.6        HIM (’onjtmMn Contrasts and Earner lnno/venent
For the recommended development (ie option 2 or similar) all tanners (land holders} in the scheme area would be invoked in (he project by.
Payment committees" tenun' 181 
IocaJ c'aJuar,on' compensatK-n wd nCW U*ter uscr groups and associations established it
maintenance CC°°^4n 5'5tcni icvcJ For irrigation and drumfire system operation ini
and delink  sc^ctne development costs by constructing  earthen lrugation asib
°f sublc ,
,
5u PPorT,n^ development including iornvD^
f “" <M,M <■» liD mfiomram «,.hm .be ,™UfcJd« v u.e <rfO»M fe* „d
U1thln      thT    OWnCf3h,p     (thouBh     thc     main   system   \XTA)   of   ill   pro/ca   tnfra^^ P lect area, except the storage dam, diversion weir and main cand
forun^'
It is expected that the WUAs will be paid, albeit at lower tlian comm« on-farm works. The difference between the WUA rates and commcfc
-
rc
ial rates. to*
(bf
o
f
contribution to the scheme. To make up a 10% contribution to the cap « * capitai if required* , the balance could be added to the CMfcM water use chaQ,
4
The Feanbdiry Study 7oR suggrs' a jq% beneficiary contribution to the capital co*t of h* 
f
u
H J’4 Mam Report (I)
264_ „,i,rr countries55is that WUAs which earn- out (simple) wnstrucdcm works !cam
/f x Afc*^**"
Syirtm
informsiQori the management in formatinn system should provide to the PMO and ihe Executing Agency, As such, the management information system needs tn address, as a minimum, performance within the following expected project outputs:
•      Output t: Engineering Tnfrastrutrurr,
•      Output 2: Resettlement and Lind Consolidaaon.
•      Output 3: Sugarcane and Small / Medium Commercial Estate Develoment
•      Output 4. Insunitxmal Development & Sustainable O&M;
■ Output 5: Smallholder Crop Production;
•      Output 6; livestock Production,
•      Output 7: Lied ind Watershed Management and Forestry,
•      Output 8: Community Development / Support; and
•      Output 9: Environmental Enhancement.
Ihe MIS would be designed by the PMO supported by thr project consultants and would be a computer based (data  base) programme, with separate modules related to  the Outputs Suggested MIS modules arc as follows;
mnity Irrigated Agriculture Development Project, Pakistan; and fn  she
?
265
17 May-llfE/tepta. ,\fauty jflPftr & Etter#
r.rtrefut NUt Irrv^f aid Prjtej^r Pnrerf
Financial   nunagemenr   syitcmf   would   be   separate   from   the   \ financial accounting procedures of the Executing -\~ „ ° ‘
n
line L
Donor
g‘
Or ” modifi^, J
The project would also support the \XVAS and sntem for O&M of their scheme, see Section 475 
' °ard ,o develop ,nd
"H   P"r fl)
Rr
266. M.. .!&**“>■ e/lra"r
" stakeholder consultations
5
a/
w
|  hc planning and design of the proposed projeeL is well as ro develop consensus
WJf 1 t
1        lcrholders>     consultations     have     been     continued     throughout     tiic     feasibility*     study     period
jerioUg s
ulr.iuons included project level focus group discussions and household surveys. vinous (  f^nrud discussions at various levels of government is well as with the private sector Formal >r dlr?n<-*ns have aJso been conducted through a senes of workshops including an Inception
^^rkshup jn I "’*'
1
2009‘1 Mid trrm Consultation in March 2010 and a Development
Xtdrkshop in December 2010 The consultation process is described in this section. pzpyccrXriW Surreys tnd Canjufottwaif
V riic project level information and data were collected from, and consuliatrnns held with:
•    Farmers and households living in the study area and/or obtaining dteir livelihoods from the study area;
•    Kcbelc councils and community elders/leader* of different socioeconomic groups;
•    Officials from the wereda administrations., particularly representatives from W aler Resources Development (WRD). Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD). Environmental Protection Land Administration and Use Authorin' (EPLAUA)» and Cooperative Development*, and
•    Representative'; of community based organisauoru, service co-operatives, anil N<IQs active in the Study area
’22 BtmJfae Sunvyj <jrrd Cwun/tatitw
(a) Overview
In the early stages of project design stakeholder constdration* were conducted as parr ol the information and data collection activities. The mmi important of these were die agro%odo- cccinomic baseline surveys of farmers and households thing in the study area These were pttmarily concerned with assessing agro ■economic and social / community conditions and livelihoods^, with various themes which influence project design and miplrmentanon including.
•   Sustainable economic development;
•    Inclusive social development and grnder mainstreaming (c.g. consideration of vulnerable groups including landless and women headed households);
Environrncnul sustainability; and
I mate sector development including large scale commercial agriculture.
fr    ther    surveys    were    predominantly    technical    assessments    of    the    physical    environment    and on (he physical and technical aspects affectingproject design
fl r
and p arCa
3,1                 Agro-Socio-Economic Surveys
over parts of two weredas in the Bcnishangul-Gumuz NRS (Dangur *"d PaTtS °f fol,r wered* ln ti* Amhara NKS (North Achefaji™. Akf* and
A chef ) 11,
a            wwet only rhrcc of foui
] 11VC w large propomon of their MM
36~Fedrnr/ Democratic RtptMic of Ethiopia. Minute) of U of er c  Bang)
v
Fjhroptn Xdt Impton nd Dnaufe Protect
within the Study area, specifically: (i) Jam; fu) Drbub Achcfa; and
of the Study (& Project) area is in the Amhara MRS and about
The total area of the affected kebcles totals about 310,800 ha |jlc pr
138,157 ha, about 44.4% of the total kebele area The total rural po about 135.000 persons (about 29.000 households) The number of ru Project area is about 18.000. There are 34 kebelcs in six ueredas that lie fi ^
° VtM^
<
,d ’°ld,ln4*
the boundaries of the envisaged Study (and Project) area. Based on mfo ‘
to the surveys, as well as discussions with wereda officials, it was decided to^
and socio-economic baseline surveys in 16 of these kebelcs which together'ar"^^ representative of the envisaged project area The household surveys
October 2009 to March 2010.
To collect the necessary sodo- and agro-cconomic baseline data, as well as to apptcoaie^ and concerns of load stakeholders, the consultants working with development agents undertook the following data collection activities in each selected kebele
I wehre thematic focus group meetings were held with male and female participants covect the following topics: (i) population structure, demographic characteristics and socui indiatoa (ii) land area, land use / tenure and land use rights (including communal gracing and foresm fin) cultivated area and crop yields, (rv) livestock population and feed resources, (v) crop/ livestock sales and off-farm income generation, (vi) local institutions. social infrastructure access to public services. Hirer separate thematic focus group meeting were held with participants to discuss gender issues.
ndwtd
p nor to conducting die agro d ^^^ntitives households to be °
CC °n°rn,c ^lou^bold surveys, a stratified sample of*
to population and land rights c 11 CfVleUc^ Was P^pared using data and information .'diftd d**cussiQns. in coosultitioi l during the wereda offices and thematic focus grnuf
c °nsu!tants determined for each k ° CunCcrncd DAs 2nd kebele council members, the
USc rights mtn Small M d
e
CC
^ ^ ™terM to be used for sub-dividing household
^dtn-abng other households' h j” ^**8^ laudholding households, landless houxlxM
households to be sunned In purposely sampled to m A 11 
fCnanfs or sharecroppers were included in the sampk^
headed landholding households were dto
} represent the women’s pcrspectnc tn the stnubed sitr-pk;
the foliouTflg top*5
During the household interviews, data and information was gathered on
^-roP    husbandry    prarrir    1    u    °    S'5fcfns     an<^    "umber    of    irrigators,
Cf °P
Estock population, anima] h
^ennary servic„ „ wd] „ 
uko^ ln<J mjcu) <** nurkeung;
U>COfT,c and poverty),
l
“luiPmait
/'°° s;
agnculrural extension/training
P««c«. Jive, rock diseases and
° fS ^’c’ c*ducauon. health, food security. h°u5
m
UP 1*4 Man Rcptart I
26H[ ocjl insarutions (lC- church, mosque, sen-ice cooperatives, watershed committees, hnd administration committee*, saving/credit assoemtions. ihtb, ufrand water
tnan^gement <^ornirurtccs)*
Access to services (eg. education, health, roads/Transport. telecommunications, pntablc water supply* markers, earc ninon/training and credit); and
Gender issue? including household division of labour, asset ownership/control, decision making, membership of local institutions and female headed households.
Kcbclc and Wcrecfa Consultation*
;\l wertua
fevel the consultants collected dan and information for all 26 kcbclcs. which arc
u
rvj livestock population, (v) local institutions and ivil access to public services.
,1 Consufaove Visits Mid Asscfifnienf ofIrrigation Dcvrtopment Practice in Ethiopia
5 J. f Irrigate* Pnxfarf i/t Ethiopia
Irrigation practices in six existing Large irrigation schemes were assessed (o determine best
practice    and    inform    possible    irrigation    development    for    the    Upper    Belts    irrigabon    scheme    Die m schemes assessed were:
•       Wonji-Shua Sugar Estaic, Commercial estate und oui-growcrt
•       Sflle. ('rmumcrCia] estate
•       .Mctaharu Sugar Estate. Commercial eitatc and out-growers
•       Meki Ziway. Commercial estate
•       Amibora, mostlv commercial esiaiex
•       I’Lnchaa Sugar Estate, C««mmercul Estate
Most of rhe existing large irrigation schemes use water from perennial rivers, ‘Die discharge
controlling structures, arc manually operated steel gates with graduated staff gauges to measure
WaI<Lf level which ls converted later into discharge using standard tables. Discharge
measurement^ arc therefore not accurate. Provision of more accurate flume measuring
structures is, recommended for open canals in the Upper Bcfe.s ungaaon scheme.
h the exception of I'tnchaa where the main canals arc concrete lined trapezoidal sections,
C carii^s 1116 largely trapezoidal earthen canals
Fiiirru-u -
w irrigation is the most: retmmfmly used irrigation method, except ar binchaa where
P kiers ue used. Where furrow irrigation is practiced waler use efficiency and yields arc
P^motcd bv
’-■st   oi   42.5   mm   diamrtci   hydro-Humes   tcp^cing   leniary   /   field   channels   and   supplying ^ater to furrows via 70 mm hoses;
* burrow runoff being lead into field drams and not ponding m the fields md Periodic precision land levelling
rtullv or fully) within rhe envisaged projecr area For this purpose, the consultants visited The Agriculture and Rural Development (ARD) u-rreda offices, as well as other relevant uvreda ut&Cfs lf1 nr<kr r° ca^ccT ^lc uiformation related to: (i) population struciurr and demographic chjiractcnsCKS, (u) land area. ^*n<^ UM‘ an^ Usc r^ * (*“) cuitnntrd area and crop yields,
17 Miv U
269^ Ir""  "
c
N<* I”**”* Dnil"^
Irrigation    Wb«oon    intervals    and    depths    depend    on    crop    stage    of    growjh mature   sugar   cane   on   vertisols   the   irrigation   interval   is   20-28   days   ant)    th(., ”Xls'%F from   135-215   mm.   Irrigation   intervals   for   sugarcane   at   Upper   Belcs   where   v
are   likely   to   be   long,   sis.   21-28   days   with   130-200   nun   per   irrigation   For.?***«».        - crops grown on die luvisols. irrigation intervals of 10-14 days arc likely to be
” ’PP'opru:, Several   schemes   suffer   to   some   extent   from   water   logging   /   salinity,   which
by provision of drainage
In addition to good infrastructure, competent management staff and institutional
arc features of the better schemes In Upper Belcs the management of the dam, divcni^ ^ and main canals will most likely have to be undertaken by a professional organisation
COuWl*^
system   operator).   Fanner?   would   be   organised   to   form   water   user   groups   rnd   MsodiDom« tertian’ and secondary level respectively, and with cooperatives for joint activities such u
marketing,   inputs   purchases   and   equipment   management.   If   significant   outcropping   wu proposed farmer cooperatives similar to those effective in Wonji-Shoa may be appropriate
5.5.2         Lartf-Sivk Smallholder Jmpa/ton 1 levetopmeaf Land ( '.onsoitdatton
At Upper Bcles terracing, land consolidation and resettlement of smallholder fanners will bean integral part of the scheme’s development. Large scale irrigation for smallholder farmer a relatively new to Ethiopia with two notable exceptions. Koga and Fcntale
There was a marked difference in the infrastructure choices made for the two schemes laKwi high quality but expensive infrastructure was adopted, including canal lining with concrete prolecoon to geo membrane. In Female canals u’ere unlined, or provided with unprotcc®! membrane. Construction at Fen talc is rclath’clv cheap and potentially allows quicker development, but upgrading and/or extensive repair works may be required in a feu
Figure 51.
Koga reservoir
Koga lined secondary canal *
reservoir
UH IM Man Rcpnn pj
27(1Damage io gcnmeftibranc
The proposed l ppcr Bcles irnganon scheme is complex involving both commcrcwJ (sugarcane) c?-rale development, in which the country has a proven successful track record, and large scale
jllholder managed irrigation development where the country’s track record remains ro be proven ’There may also he substantial areas set aside for small/medium commercial enterprise, J he proposed irrigation scheme may fail to realise ns potential if planners do nor absorb
lessons from previous irrigation developments, both within Ethiopia and abroad. These lessons
arc:
*                Mastering the irrigation development process awareness, in iciest and capacity to master the complete irrigation process from inception to sustainable O&M is
essential
•                Making appropriate choices for scheme Layout and infrasiiucturc informed by ft) topography, land slopes and soils (li) skill level and social characteristics of users; (ui) ihe vision for system operation including opera non objectives, and (tv) rhe
design life desired for project infrastructure
•
Waler user associations for scheme Q&M based on hydraulic units should be
formed and involved carlv on in the construction phase
* 
Re settlement and land consolidation will vary for each new irrigation development
and should ensure both efficient irrigation and irrigators* equity
•
Cooperatives centred on village administrative units are likely tn be the appropriate
institution for agricultural extension and other support services
*                Duties, roles and legal basis of WUAs need to be dearly defined
Main system (J&M will need a professional institution for its operation and maintenance for some years alter construction ol the scheme.
f< /         f***ll/rjflo°s
Fedml Regional Level
^deral government level discussions on project design and implementation ^vment? were held with the following minis tries:
’ Ministry of Water & Energy (Mo WE);
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (Mo ARD); hnjstry of hinanct* and Economic Development (MoFED;,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and co a limited extent with the
' hiopi Q Ej
r
a
CC fnc powcr Corporation iEEPCO).
CP'^t
17-Xta4i
2^1Fr^Pr^^- M**" A
J..^ X..i 1'^                     »”•«
) 4 > -l>r/urj RiJ**^Gfiimurrn/
The fewibihty study consultants maintained close contact with concerned \ h Government bureaux and authorities during the course of the Study, indud^ .**
•      Bureau of Water Resources Development,
•      Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Development;
•      Bureau of Finance and Economic Development;
•      Bureau of Co-operative Development;
• Bureau of 1 .and and Environment Protection (Land
•      Baku Agricultural Research Institute; and
•      Trade and Industry Office (East Wollcga Zone).
Administration Offlcc.
The regional level consultations were undertaken to: (i) identify and assess develop^, constraints; (ii) formulate appropriate development interventions, (iii) assess implement capacity; and (vi) finalise project design including implementation and O&M arrangoncm
3.4.3          fonts bttgil- Gtt*nt~ Krgtona! Goitrnmen/
(a)              Introduction
The feasibility study consultants maintained good contact with regional government msurzr-. in Benes haguI-Gumuz NRS despite the relative remoteness of Asosa As well as conuctofa data collection and discussions of development options, in November 2010 the cnmultinn visited Asosa for detailed discussions with the B-G regional government. Meetings were held with the following regional institutions and persons:
•      Bureau of Water Resources, Mines and Industry;
•      Bureau ot Agricultural Ac Rural Development.
•      Economic Advisor to the President of B-G NKS. ami the
•      Bureau of Land Administration and Environmental Protection
| K appk^ l,‘
It was noted that the B-G regional government has a villagisation programme sparsely populated weredas. including Dangur which tails partly within die p  j.^mal
r
also noted the proposed Upper Bclcs Irrigation Project was consistent with th Government’s 5 year development plan in its emphasis on high value crop Pr artem* I luwever. the B-G regional government suggested that smallholder croppmg P include high yielding food crops as well as cash crops. The performance of in
disappointing and the regional administration plans io screen investors
' }i H Man Rq><»n (1)
272j f7.MP"^
j rJl5Cf. The mi* between sugar estate and smallholders should minimise rcwrikincni costs
Ifid advei,
m °rC . \
c
social ,rnPJ,cf an^ Irllrcx,ucc canc w’t'growCT
0
Inception Workshop was held on 15* and J6* June 2009 tn Bihir Dir, during
.hlTthc    main    findings    of    rhe    preliminary    asjcjsmems    for    the    Upper    Bek,    IniptMM    piojca^ * esented Discussions focussed on the following topics:
WCf , IrdgafJon applKration methods: avoiding pressure systems for 'mallholders but considering a mi* of gravity and pressure for commercial enterprises
f  Development for commercial private enterprise development and/or resettled small holders: up to 40,000 ha net area tn the Middle Zone could form the core of itrigadun development for which half could be commercial with vanow farm sizes and half smallholder/out-gTowcr of which a large proportion would be m-migrants
* Phased development priorities including right bank pnomised before left, and Phase T years I -10), 20,000 ha of commercial surface and pressurised irrigation and 30.000
gravity for smallholder, Phase II (years 8 to 12) 5jM)0ha of mixed large scale enterprise jnd smallholder/out-grower tn the Lower Zone and first stage development of Upper Dindir, Phase III (years 12 to 15} extension into Lower Zone.
A summary’ of discussions is given in Table 5-1.
Table 5-1: Start up workshop - group feedback on UB diftcuaiion topics
Topic
Feedback
Topic 1: Irrigation application method*: (I) Pmnift; (ii) Surface
I’or Upper Belts it is provisionally recommended: To avoid pressure irrigation for smallholders (LUT 4) To adopt surface irrigation for tmdlholdefs in. (i) all of rhe upper zone, ful about half the middle zone; and (lb) U small portion of the lower sone..
To adopt a mu ot surface and pressure irrigation for large commercial enterprise*.
Io a\Qjd| pressure irrigation lor out -growers. (LUT 6} in the early years, hut <  consider it ax a longer term
o
^evclopmcnj of pressure irrigation for larger commercial
cnterpnsM
Aa * group plea^. .
^^TVTlCne °n                      cocisiderarinni tabulated above: J f you agree or disagree with the provisional
Group 1 Response:
[Jp to consultants In make rccofTtrnendatnxis Gravity irrigaocn ts m general preferred dur TD lower cost (at feast on dat / gently sloping land) and suitahihty tn imifl holders Nnnethekii pressure irrigation may be
|us tified for vaccais technical reasons: sods. depths to Wilier tahlr, management aspects
Gtnup 2 Rrspoow;
1 Cost should be a key coiiiMlenuc.fi on sdectiun of application method
Irrigated affriculrure development for (i) commercial private enierprise development; hi) -^^^-^Iboldere.
K
—
Group I Response•
rnci’« for the  N ^
s    c   cw Dam Irrigation and Mcgpch (Robit) Tragation project were a-so " R tHc Xr,c^Pt>on W orkshop
273
17-Mif IIFttknif Dr^o^rjfi: RrtaXj. of Efhtofw. Afrrwfn of If Ji/Zr C" Harrjj
Hj/iopw Xt/r !mutton and Dmituft P^T
Topic
Comments  on  the  planned  balance  between  commercial and smallholder resettlement.
Discuss treatment under the project to those already Imng in the area and (hose transmigrated into the area
from “outside”
Deade  on  appropriate  commercial  farm  size  areas  (eg 5001m; Z.OOOha; 5.000ha; etc)
Topic 3: Phased development priorities
Ai a group please respond to the following questions: Do you agree to a phased (staged! development
approach’ Il not please give comments
Should Phase J be further split into two giving four development  phases'  If  so  on  what  basis  (i)  left  and  nghr frank  command;  fu)  secondary  canal  commands  supplying rhe l>esr (most suitable for irrigation) land; (iii) other —
please slate.
Whai arc other parallel development components'
To what extent are rherc opportunities for private sector ccunpanies Ixr involved in project formulation / design?
»
56  Mid’term ConsulrarioD, March 2010
5.6.1        Grama/
While smallholder settlement
the priority should be for cocr*^. development
Land acquisition / consolidation^ follow government policy Commercial farm areas need to lx considered & justified bv the
Group 2 Response
Priority should be for commercial development but consultants to nuke-h*
recommendations
------------
Group 1 Response.
Agree on phased development apjic^d
which should !»c rapid
Consultants need to study the imixsobH
and make recommendation*
Group 2 Response:
Development should take into iccuuai
government p non ties
-—
It was not
’Hie    mid    term    consultation    was    held    on    15,h      March    2010    in      Addis    Al
jn<u w
| nts    "f
the ToR but was agreed to be necessary bv the (.bent (MrAX'E) and
the (then) lack of awareness of the proposed development for L pp<* ^jydmg the A^’* coordinate between the feasibility study consultants and others ins j_inan. detailed de^ Design Ac Supervision Works Enterprise who were commencing pr
and advancing construction works
Prior to the discussions the Consultants presented development opim ^ pbca°°,1!’ ** *
an j l0 betteJ
inten,V » ff
u
es01^
n
three Options for mixes of commercial and smallholder development
settlement, rainfed agriculture, forestry and livestock grazing rcquirem
Jrvd0,ioff part*1115,
options
also 
considered
water
application
and
deliver)’
options,
oullin
.     tan
pa
mefl
planning 
norms,
resettlement
/ land
consolidation
implic
ations, and i
mp
____________ _____________
Refer
>Ukchulfirr
Consulupon
ISncfing 
Note. 
Preliminary 
Assessment
and
Irnir^H*>n
ano
2“*4discussed following the Flakrow-G I RD prerentanon ur summarised below W’ato* levels 1 Tan"“ Pbnncd HEP generation by EEPCO and bow to secure
supply for th  t-PP*^
c
B<Jcs other ,chenKS (including Myrna for 10-20,000 hi and
Lower Udes developments, about 90,000 ha) concerned several parrioparuv The Consultants requested confirmation from EEPCO that the power station and Lake Tana operating rules were based on Salmi and Pietrangeli (2006) and later refined bi SNfEC taking into account monthly lake levels, EEPCO opera ring rales could not yei be confirmed.
L>am reservoir storage requirement concerned several participants and the meeting concluded that it was up to the Consul ranis to identify the opumum capacity and phasing for any storage dam
m Concerns were expressed (by private investors) about the capital cost of pressure - especially as the difference m water requirement between the three development options was nor apparently great.
Smallholder resettlement — the consultant* were informed I bar they should consider / recommend options and estimate (rough) costs associated with smallholder resettlement and land consolidation
v. The relative share of rhe proposed projrcr between Amhua and Bemshngd (iumuz Regions, including waler ng his, project funding and boundaries, was discussed by participants. These were concluded to he issues needing Federal Government attention to resolve at high level.
vi Discrepancies exist in the boundaries / location of Land allocated to two large commercial enterprises (BDFC for 17.400 ha and CLC for 25,000 ha); it concluded that this was not a problem for the consultants and overbp / review- of allocations would be sorted our by Government
It is currently envisaged that: (i) government costs would encompass major infrastructure for bulk, water supply, major drainage and major roads, wirh (u) private invcstorfs) would meet the costs of the cotnmcrciaJ cstate(s) including factories, on- farm (cane .haulage) toadsb equipment; etc For smallholder areas the full irrigation &
costs would be borne by Government.
!7-May-tt
275___ of&hiopa.
I V^rjn.- M
<y' ^rr fU Enerz
r
hmm
Nik 
Dv>**f
Qhwmww.'pnerulpeshcgftr Vpfxr             ,s '° f>™">'' °>””>trnalfn,,^
pmat sweM ami farm nges, at »r// as thmugh smallholders. W’hik tome
mtgrrt" mat be allowed for. lhe emphatitjor exist,ng non-settkd I aonfarmed
.immensalfarms. To reduce risk and encourage private sector enso/vement. „
ri^rsma) be identified and located with the staff development arras. Locating small mei"^^^^ pnxtualm arras where there is already extensive smallholder settlement and will enable
mntsmiied Me maximising commercial developmentfor < ’pper Be les. The financial <nv^
*> >
commensal inveiton 'houldbe recognised. Commercialfarm boundaries should tdealh lof1'1'’'*'’'"'1'' command unit boundaries with the smallest farms perhaps leasing about 50 ha (tertian block (arms about (sag) 200 500 ha. Larger investors could lease mon than one command ■umf' ’
the financialmour.es to development their leased area. Existing smallholder resident! wouiaoe
the scheme and allocated the minimum irrigated smallholding reautnment It would be Ibe rt^,.' AMRD to ensure new migrants conformed to land use planning norms under a certificate, trngrun'm '
(b)              EEPCO Operating Rules
*1*
Confirmation of the EEPCO operating  rules for IIEP scheme was required by  lhe Gonidia particularly  in respect of any  daily  fluctuations as these would need to  be allowed for rm r & first stage of development.
Stakeholder Response:
It war agired that the Consultants would rant this again with EHPCO after irrigation demands jtMw and hydrological modelling completed.
(c)              l-'inanang development of Leased Land & cost recovery
The Consultants requested that institutional responsibility for financing development o. lew
land and cost recovery be clarified.
Stakeholder Response.
i here are (apparentfi) norms for financing development of leased land which need to be studied in (proclamation 162/2009). It was understood that bulk irrigation water xupph nould be pnr(d
Jarms, and that investors would develop on farm infrastructure. The government would seek to                     & the development from investors though appropriate (water) charges payable after investors bate
oj their own expenditure. The Consultants may consider suitable cost reasven mechanisms a* recently established (notified) Abba} River Basin Authority is concerned with mnr basin pl allocation of water, mam(nvcr) system operations and wafer charges.
(dj Timescale for Project Development
l*he opinion of participants on the time scale for development of lhe f sUlrcd to irt3f1^C was requested. The Consultants noted that development of Area-V wa* l° development due to relatively steep slopes and broken land.
Stakeholder Response:
The consultants wen asked to consider (at least) two development options, one oj w * ■ development of f pper Re les. The staged development approach was accepted.
lC jnd ph^
UB p4 M«n Rrpnn (1)
276(e)
Irrigation Application Method
iltants requested the preference / opinion oi workshop participants between gravity l1lC C°nSLa nre^un^d (sprinkler) irrigation
trrtgann-i           i
Rwpemse:
i ^ra/^fettffti t J if jfJuV f* rrF**“ ’
J
f
'
(ipn***r/ irnjptto* if nipf ttafMtjtr WiuMien bnt .W<f be
torrwJ ■'An* appropriate. The Cwr/tflfarr/f jfvtdd aMjider wphatiM/u of both imjptwr
^fhadf .W rrwfrwrd a* 
to W                d^W-
(f)              Terracing
/prrferrrd mix, C JWffrrmu/ rnf^ftri / vjm t>f nv/er ww/d
J.
Thr Consultants suggested that Terracing for gravity imgatton on (very) steep t lopes was not
□mmended for smallholders due to risks of poor consmicnon ind / or maintenance of terraces, leading to progressive failure and widespread sod erosion
Stakeholder Response:
If j*yj pnerM
/W /erraaqtjbr jiua//hMr irr^fed 
shndd ir It Anted fa dbovt S-S*o jhpei.
i   bnnver   lhe   amndtaittt   fboM   eofurderjitfarrpopuiafion   pnjn/rr,   W   thefaa   /bat   terr^^fo^   irrigate*   of sietper dopes nwZf be de/indde tn /he former fem, and if /he btt/k outer Jt/pph i)rtenr /hoidd td/ov for fbis.
(gj I rogation Water Conveyance
The   preference   of   partictpuits   for   irrigation   warer   conveyance   by   canal   or   pipeline   was requested
Stakeholder Response:
? be Con.! id fonts should examine /he cult and benefits and nuke appropriate rrmrufnendat/aKt.
(h) Activities of AI >SVCT1
Ihe   Consultants   requested   that   the   short   terra   focus   (neat   wo   years)   on   design   and construction of I pper Bdcs (particularly activities of ADSWE] be clarified.
Stakeholder Response:
a '^i’
fhetu^ /
dejimb/e that de failed design and ^nj/n^ticfrt should be ivmp/e/ed df giaMy as pambde,
f  TO/ -tarr what proportion should be done ty fitdmiL rtgrinaJ gnm/nnt level/ and ft rffwiftrT //
Jio/ftf by zl£)j |ijjt /hat firvyrss atprtfent if dependent onjdnding. It war unriear vbt/her /he ledenst nmfffif planned to seek extemai fundtngjor propel tepJwetnfote*-
Bedes' u® R'« Capping
cx Re 51ra tQ P «motr nee within the scheme was raised as in ancillary issue because
r
n ls hy smallholders as this was an important crop in recommended cropping
ln dcr the 1985-caxly 1990s 'l'ana 
Response;
resettlement/agricultural development proper.
k c f tyierafa.
(at /eaff . Y
W*/Xr and bar a buoyant market rid 0 -teawf t-nf) dne to its high »a/er reqjfjrtmerds.
Mtfmwnd in so nee narhkop partiripants Cwultiintf deed to dentonstra/e fbif in
277
t7 MapH*?***•                   AWrty eflTtf/rre>£«v h'AfapM XiJr !mpr»* M* Dr* tuft Pnfrt
relation to outpour sugar (for example). Rur drying and milling equipment
pnmi) but this in itself is not a reason to promote the crop.
£ 7             Development Workshop, December 2010
5.7.1          Gtnerul
The Development Workshop was held on 2nd A 3^ December 2010
of the Development Workshop was to present the proposed project to
their agreement to the proposed protect as summarised tn a Development t out die scheme’s command area and characteristics, proposed land use an I development intent and preliminary designs, institutional arrangements for pl1e:e scheme O&M and stakeholder (major commercial investors and small farm and contribution.
W/             tht tu r
{
Around die time of the workshop on-going high-level discussions were faking place bcru*fn
the Ministry of Water & Energy, the Federal and the Amhara (A Bcneslungul-Gumuz;
Regional governments and the Ethiopian Sugar Corporation whereby the following uu
envisaged:
•       Cancelling of (all) existing commercial leases within the Upper Belcs project ita
•        Allocation  of  land  (within  the  Amhara  NRS“)  to  develop  a  50,000  ha  corrancrax  r® estate  within  Hyma  and  I  ’pper  Bries  by  the  Ethiopian  Sugar  Corporation  JF-SQ.Scpi estate development and management would be by the ESC and protect devdopmer
costs would l>c met by the Federal Government;
Fhe Amhara Design A Supervision Works Enterprise existing contract would be replaced with a new contract (subsequently signed in early 2011) to carry out. ’ i feasibility study to confirm the irrigation development potcntiaJ (for sugar) of Hfciu part of the Upper Bcles right bank development; and (u) for detailed design and construction supervision for irrigation development for the sugar estate within Upi*’ Bcles / J iyma
p «Uapanls it the workshoo h
Ethiopia Sugar Corporauo 
C U,1^>rrunareb’ ^id nor include any representation hreot
Sl ^cholden      attending      the      wo      ln^Onnc<^      ^icse      on-going      high-level      discussions
co ncemm  kev
R
u UT>f * °P UW °Ot c‘mPou'eeed to make definim e dcastnos
e> »>*ues such as rhf kal«
’Kno.lmm etc Nonetheless the workshop
options, and provoking rK«r->
U *S CJCtrcmc
snMd”
^F valuable in presenting dcsek’pn*
^ O’dopmcnt.
100 °n 3 r2n8c °F topics concerned imfption scheme
be VpP^ The    Development    Workshop    is    the    major    stakeholder    consultative    *°^’^SR.O7    1*
Bcles Irrigation Project and is documented in detail in Supplem
for group discussion mostly focussed on key issues concerning agriculture in Upper Belcs and which would guide the Gnabsation addition. Topic 8 presented the overall project design (logical frame*
* Il is unlikely that 50,000 ha would I* available foe a large commercial sugar esute uidun commcmil etale bounding would aenublv eximd inio Benediangul Gumua wit' *
eatme m B-G NRS.
njefJt of irrig1*^1
f^sibiiiQ'
M ik«h
M'
UR [-4 Mm Rrpon fi)
278if*'
rail Drojctc compoacnrs. while Topic 9 presented possible implementation
ju-c a*^c 01 * r
rhc OisCUS-*|,,n topic* were.
•       Topic t: Phoning Process. Framework. Irrigation Uyout and With-Project Lind Use
Topic 2; J-aod Allocation Optimisation Modelling, Delineation of Commercial
(Sugarcane) Estate Area and Existing Lease Agreements
Topk 3: Irrigation Application Options and Pressure Irrigation
Topic 4- I rogation development options: wafer conveyance, canal lining, land
development & night storage
« Topic 5- System Operation and Choice of Irrigation Infrastructure
•       Topic 6: Operation Rules for I -ike Tana and Need for Reservoir Stonge
■ Topic 7: Resettlement., I.and Acquisition and I and Consolidation
. Topic B; Overall Project Design
•       Topic 9; System Management and TmpIemenLanon Schedule
•       Topic 10; Any other major issues a? suggested by workshop participants
The discussions topic briefings and stakeholder feedback are documented tn detail in SR-OT
Due to the separate on-going high-level discussions taking place between rhe Ministry of Wk er
dt Energy, lhe federal and the Amhara Regional governments and the Ethiopian Sugar
Corporation 11 was accepted lhat firm decisions could not be achieved. The absence of any
representation from the Ethiopian Sugar Corporation was also regretted.
During the general discussions it was made dear to all stakeholders at the workshop that
government envisaged a large commercial sugar estate development m Upper Heirs, and
preferably a development that minimised rcscnlemcnt costs- The consultants were asked to
consider the option of cut-growers. The consultants were also asked 10 consider vinous
opunns for implementation including an accelerated implementation programme (at least the
^ght bank command^ so that sugar production could commence in 2014.
Hie main points / conclusions of the Group Discussions included the following:
Measures    to    ensure    terrace    stabilisation    nc    essential    for    the    sustainable    benefiE    from ^ngated agriculture, and will include training of farmers;
1 he (economic) viability of irrigation development in SDA VAX where a long (40-45 km) canal off raking &um the existing wen near Pawn should be cun firmed in view of ttlc Clu“c small irrigation area, just 1,018 ha (net),
1 Jind allocations of just 0,11 ha / HH for existing landless households was considered fr -x> small by some stakeholders. I [awever this is in accordance with Proclamation
1 n /2006; Wr^zbw/5w» NRJ 
ari Ufe
and
merrasing land allocations will reduce rhe area available for a commercial (sugar) estate. The balance between commercial (sugar) estates and smallholder farming was
cussed, along with the our-cropping option. Stakeholders were divided on whether lcr opping of cane should be proposed by the project.
279
17 May IIFjfr f' u- M
Pressure versus sprinkler irrigation was discussed. ln general s that surface irrigation should be adopted for smallholder man °ldCr‘
the right bank. I lowcvcr pressure (sprinkler) irrigation of suga  a
rc  n
’*!>
option for the more broken and sloping left bank terrain
btt
Partrapants were divided on the qualm of proposed infrastructut
designed and built There were two news (i) "cheap and quick” uuh '0|*
unprotected geo membrane to line canals and accepting the quite rep^
replace damaged lining and I or to upgrade at later date; and fa) "qusditi ""d'0
from the outset with for example, concrete protection provided to pm lnj”’ru:v
.. .
lifting.
pcn rncTTibhn
r
5.8 Wearer
Participants suggested that maximum use be made of the PVC pipe and c
produces of the new / under construction factor}' in Bahir Dar
Ihc high cost of the Lett Bank Main canal and associated structures was noted duei traversing difficult, sloping terrain), and the consultants were asked to consider w option of pumping to irrigate (all / part) of the left bank command area
The possible need for any seasonal storage tor an irrigation development af macT.x about 50-60,000 ha was noted, and that this depends on the irngablc irei of Hnai (winch is not included in the current feasibility study area)
Ihi importance and difficult} of iesetdcmcnt and land consolidation within I perr Bcles was appreciated, along with the nerd to generate awareness among local communities.
ar?rf UB Dnm Option CoasuJtudon, December 2010
A mini-work shop19 to present the Lake Tana water balance study report*' and the prop-** Halcrow-GIRD operating rules (sec Figure 5-3) for the lake guiding the inter basin m ,
water from the Tana to the Bcles basin was held in Addis Ababa on I3,h December - possible need for a storage dam for Upper Bcles was also discussed during the cci
Figure 5-3: Lake Tana operating rules (Halcrow-GIRD)
View nf Lakr Tana
Hdcrow-GlR  »|*"“
n
ng n‘k’
' this workshop wai also not required by rhe ToR but was held at rhe request of the M‘»w
Hie report ronrled " IF afrr BtfZwnr AfadrZifatf o/ L,iks Tana and Oprniftona/ Ka/fJ Imp*'10'* -..-(ilflF Mfr Car^rf' dared December 2010 u not required by ihc ToR, but was prepaid D>
wilb the consultant* bid proposal
J7^’:
1 R 1*4 Main Hvywirt (1)
2R0ions / recommendations of the consultation were:
c          (fTjgatlOfl development up to 50,000 hi (net) or more icasonal storage u net
Th<  onc
ired in Upper Beks I fowever storage to cope with duh flow release flucnuD<?ns f ni the power station, as well as weekend fluctuations. is required
ft was recommended to develop the UB right bank command (31,509 ha net) and Hvma (10-20,000 ha net) before making a final decision on the size of a storage dam
for Upper Bek* 
P rocce^,nK irrigation development of the left bank
J
For the left bank (te 32.362 ha net) development a dam is required and 4 options may be considered- Option D for a <mall dam would accommodate daily / weekend fluctuations and command the Ixfr Main canal Dam options A, B de C (all large dams) would provide 1 -3 months of seasonal storage Ihr size of the dam required is not yet certain as this depends on the operating rules adopted for power station this should become clear over time allowing a better informed decision.
• The Lower Belcs (Dangur) dam can store six times more water for a comparable dam height, and has a catchment area 16 times larger. It was therefore concluded that it would not lie cost effective to provide storage in Upper Belcs for the Lower Belcs
command
fins! Workshop, April 2011
A Final W orkshop to present die Draft Feasibility Report, final project designs and implementation arrangements was held on 7 ’ Ac 8* April 2011 in Bahir Dar. Comments and feedback by workshop participants, following up by detailed comments in writing from the Clienr, enabled thi* final Feasibility Report to be prepared.
Ihe design of the project remained unchanged by feedback at the Final Workshop which essentially focussed on derail, though requiring additional work on development options, pameubriy for an accelerated option for sugar estate development (Option 4), and requesting exp la nation concerning the higher than expected field infiltration test results
Current Status of Development Options
development options for Upper Belcs remain the subject of high level on-gmng discussions taking place between the Ministry of Water & Energy. The Federal and the Amhara Regional d ernments and the Ethiopian Sugar Corporation ind final (firm) decisions concerning the
c op men r intent for the scheme could not be achieved under the auspices of stakeholder ^ultacjons camed out under this feasibility study, particularly for the left bank area.
C     *   desiKn    an<J   construction   of   the   right   bank   diversion   weir   and   main   canal   started   in   late n C                                   Amhari regional government with designs and supervision by the Amhara
Supervision Works Enterprise Progress was rather slow. In 2010 the diversion war q_i , nttall\ progressed and the main canal constructed (without lining or structures) for
ya ^t7 km&omiheweir
I-ate in 2(j j a
iUocjj^          K Was ^eed tn principle between the Amhara NRS and central government to to         wlun t pper Belcs and I lyma for development of a 50.000 ha commercial si^ar
funded by central government / ESGI'tdmt/               RfjMi ofEriMp*. Mmuty ofWaftr <> Entry Eth^n Sik Imf&oi nd Drumgr Pnv.r
,' «rt negotiated and concluded early in 2011 between the ESC lnd JX^SupcAWon Worts Botespnso to cany out (i)a teibili, !nrf, „
X»s rtsdop^ po.»od (to, sogu) of Hytna a, p„. of th. fppo
^lopment; and (ii) for detailed design and construction supervise for dcs'elopment
Within L’ppcr Beks detailed design will be facilitated by the topograph and mapping, as well as outline designs, prepared under this Feasibility Study
’*'*
L’B H Mun Rcpon J)
2«26 6.1
r
financial anp economic analysis
Jfjtr*>^ur£^ ccnnornic analysis was undertaken in order to assess the viability of the
,n *^  proposed for the Upper Beks Irrigation Project The proposed project
Option 2-\ sec Section 4.2.7) has a rangr of cost-incurring components w hich at f Xr^ development will comprise
tU F Con Simenon of irrigation and drainage works for a net irrigation development of
6^ 871 ha within the project command area of 138.157 ha. including a storage dam (to provide short term storage for the Left Bank):
• A nght bank diversion war and main, secondary and ternary irrigation and drainage
systems;
•       Up grading of road infrastructure to serve the project command area of 138.157 ha; « .Management, operation and maintenance (MOM) of rhe irrigation and drainage works
provided by a Main System Operator, WUA$ for the smallholder irrigation areas at secondary canal level and below, and private management for the MOM of lrngirjon and drainage on commerclalh farmed land;
•       Establishment of a large scale sugar estate of 36,225 ha and a 12,000 TCD rngar factory producing about 22l).00() tonnes of raw, refined and demesne sugar per annum, plus bv-products of ethanol and electricity.
•       Establishment of 22,872 net irrigated ha of smallholder agriculture with an additional area of 8,955 ha of non-irrigable land for grazing, woodlors and house plots;
•       Establishment of a reb lively small area of private small and medium scale commcrcia] farms, 4.773 ner irrigated ha;
•       Support to about 5,074 tainted hectares of smallholder agriculture with an additional area of 2,028 ha tor grazings woodlots and house plots within the project command area where it is impractical to supply irrigation but necessary co protect down-stream irrigation investment, and
•       Sub-projects to provide support primarily to scheme smallholders including: uutitutionaJ development and CJ&Al support; crop development support; lives cock support; community development (livelihood) support; rr srrdemcnc and land consolidation, environmental mitigation; and land and watershed management and forestry development.
I.enefiK bc fronL
Hie future net value of crop production by smallholders and commercial farms on
u^igated land, less the net value of tainted production ihai would bc obtained ui the
’flnire without-project situation;
Relatively small future crop production increments from runted land within the project ^ rrtnain^ M a result of sub-project support,
e future net value ot livestock production by smallhoklcrs, less the net value of
^ ^t5I°ck production that would be obtained in the future without-projcci situation; %a ^Uc °f sugar cane production from the sugar estate (valued at production cost)
ln ? out’gtQw«3 (valued at rhe price the factory pap our-gruwers for cane); Rross value of sugar, ethanol ind power sold by the sugar factory, less (he value of
^ne, and
283
17-May-H° fWa'tr *
x<* /"S** *rf Drj"'*' Pnff‘1
• Benefits of incremental wood production from communm- ,
Financul analysis was undertaken to determine the likely impact of prOfffI the financial viability of the project as a whole (ii) the profitability of the and factory, (nil farm income of smallholders, and (iv) profitability of commercial farms The analysis also provides an indication of the capaaty  f
o
C0
- COITI-.
^|;
sugar estate, smallholders and small /medium sized commercial farms to meet fun"^ charges necessary for the operation and maintenance (OiM) of the irrigation im
financial analysis also provides; © a financial internal rate of return (I IRR) forlhc * whole and for the three main stakeholders (sugar estate and factory, smallholder, Wd small/medium sized commercial farms); and (ii) farm budgets at full development for smallholders farmers large, medium, small and minimum allocation farms), commcrai
and the sugar estate, and an estimate of the annual financial performance of the fcon
The results of an economic analysis of project performance are also described in ’Jus Cfern. which has the principle objective of establishing whether the proposed investment}
for the economy as a whole On ihr basis ot the project’s economic costs and benefit}, br following indicators of economic viability are determined (i) economic internal rate of text (EIRR); (ii) net present value in economic paces (ENPV); and lii) benefit cost aoo{BQ
The financial and economic analysis distinguishes performance on the Left Bank mu Rjgte Bank of the Boles River separately, as well as evaluating the project as a whole. This is important because the irngadon intensity on the Ixft Bank is lower than desirable,
sharp nse in unit area investment costs compared with the Right Bank which is topqgnp more suitable for irrigation
The financial and economic viability of irrigation development was undefta c
of agricultural planning undertaken to support scheme design, the procedure which are described in SR 02B Agriculture and Agricultural Development I lann g
A number of alternative development options are analysed. Only the results arc reported in the Main Report, sec the Supplementary Report SR
I kco usintf the
|-xdOrC1*
f tnjno>*
Analysis   for   more   detail   Ihe   alternative   options   include   an   assessment   of   fOptk*3^'
economic impact ot planning a commercial sugar estate of different sizes. 2 21,860 ha (Option 1), 36,225 ha (Option 2A)t 40,999 ha (Option 3)
sec Section 4.2.7.
Financial and economic project indicators are also calculalcd for die accele
/(Jpo0151'
633
r
programme  focussing  aduMvely  on  large  scale  sugar  production  uuuaUy  on bfet on a limited area of the Left Bank planned by Government (Opn°D 4)‘
the option recommended tn thts feasibility study, it is currently rhe most like r scenario and should not br ignored,
A number of ude opnons to Opuon 2A are also considered One examines> *e economic unpact of tn, tailing pressure tmganon for estate cane tn SDA I™
11
d£vej,^rt* ’
3
l P E4 Mitn Rrp*'H 0)
!
284t ’g“a
an iujc- the impact of introducing out grower cane cultivation by smallholders md second < commercial farms (Option 2B). A third tests the financial and economic viability
m                         y\x which is isolated and for which a feeder canal must be constructed
o f developing M -
to** F**e
j^fjopment options ire compared in a multi-entcna analysis and an estimate of the
L                             proposed project in rhe context of the Growth and Transformation Plan. 2010 U1 )14^reject nsks are considered, and a preliminary financing plan is proposed.
Project Cvs**
t.2.1
brijpfai
Costi
phe financial costs for irrigation, drainage and road development and axe sununansed in Table
6-1-
Table 6-1: Coat Estimate fur Irrigation. Drainage <Bc Road Development
doelopnwm
LB tJSJ/h-
RB USS/ha
Uhl
MSIm
LB LSI
RBUSt
TocdUSl
W
ToolETB
mifiiM
Ll%
m;
n-r-fij i> I'rtffrni™^' Iff""-"-
445
114
12J62
Jljfrt
l4.«ll/lU
9 173,355
24295
<lL72
41" ■
IlJijrt                 7-HJ
l.Ml
0
yijw
V 7W46I
D
W**
flUJFS
]i ir.
if ■
prt rr» Ti W cm
0
<1
3Z ^
P
1 11309
0
AH
SfiPi
*2*'
ijm
J2.W1
11,5fl0
t ’A J* 1.1.1 *r
2Z4.IF*«
17-e_Mi
£**,
5T -
|Fb]r» h l«1"
5HI
31^
HJfc'224'J
31.^1
.16241
ST f
rr-
hwxnrti'ikH LdTlii'
W?
465
l|>v;
1M1VNT
ivc;
551 K
*4 ,
J esn *nJ rk'kl ■* *■>-»-■■
377
4U9
12J>-142 ■
1SJUJ?. 1*0
25,1*6
41 IM
IK
31"
| | rn"-«r iu<
!
■l'
d!
12JC3;
□
0
fieri
PT J
rr.
L and tiidor Ik irriMTr
a>
5SI
.11 >.9
jr.iRi/*'
5*2TH
JM.fil
51%
>iiln.k.if irrtzxrv aitj firid drum
515
345
JI34W
tc.m 7^!
r
21,191
M
4jr.i
*■2".
P-lathr urLi
2H7
is r
3Z.V.2
92«'XSA
’•n.sa,ro3
n 19T
an.it
54%
Mncdwi^j* nj olhcri-r rLi
91
95
12.362
11 ,v^
Z.WJJM
3 i i25
Sir.
J'.Hal HHT
a^j—'
175251 J*'’?
465,77*
7.77143
D%
wr >
Source C.nrraltaor'a < .o$t Ecnmatc for hngweenng Infrairruciurc Work* SR <MA and SR (MH
Notes! (uti to table 6-1 arr rrprcicnranvc of Option* 0. I, 2 and 3-
<.osr of introducing pressure on 7,921 ha in [VR-W increase* Ixft Hunk cusw by 14% and tomI cmt> bv 9% Xccclrraicd Opdtm 4 develop* onh 39.175 hi (61% of imglblc area, and reduce* local cost* by 53% Unit
*rra com laving* achieved by uung gn> mem brane and reducing rnciarlr proiechon arc 26% nr Ixft bank
and 9% cm Kight Hank
fhc  com   O|  irngatKwi  devdopment  tn  V3X  is  L'S$  5  5  mdlnwi  !  I  2%  of  tool  ciwt  for  1,6%  rd  tmgablc  area
dcvdnp^Tj under
£A}
) ph”n% 0 1,2 jf, j 3 require dam option D. L‘S$ 37 rrulbon. Option 4 does no< requirt i Jam, but does
t
i ire pump staeinr* and storage <m the la.fi Bank near the Bdes River Option 5 which require* Luger Ixh Hank dam it.^agc (dam option A, USS 10326 milhwij. mcrrasjnp Uh Bank cumby 23% and overall Ct4 *Hby J4‘.
Hit
SctbO[) estiniare “eludes the Rjgln Bink diversion weir and upper Right Bink num canal dreadv br^ J^rca^y under construction by the Amhira State Enterprise. These costs hive
tneurred and are therefore considered sunk
•^ftcr
a                          *5C according to the recommended Implementation Schedule, see Annex Al.
^Z7T,,7™^>,h“'          Years          2          to          Year          0.          construction          (other          thin          advance n 'writs) will begin m Year 1 and continue on the Right Bank irrigation system up to
285
iTMiy MFfiM                  Rtf Me of ‘Ethiopia. Miti'hy of II 'aftr & b W/ji
E. f' apjt Xih Im&fiM and Dwhqt Propt
the   end   of   Yew   6.   Construction   on   the   Left   Bank   will   begin   w    Year   4   ,ntl of Year 9 The cost of the irrigation system has been discounted over a 35 v
6.2.2          Irnpfion O&M Costs
Operation and maintenance costs arc applied as shown in Table 6 2 A
(MSO) will lx appointed to be responsible for MOM of the storage d^ “
,
weir and main canals Farmer institutions including Water User Associa responsible for MOM within the smallholder farm areas at secondary and "’ the sugar estate I commercial farms would be responsible for MOM al s
n Sy”°a0pe»>
0
level within die estate / commercial farm areas The total annual MO.M
r
K °,K,ar' ttni
1
9.29  million, equivaleni to  2%  of the engineering  irrigation and drwuge iX^X? *
investment cost, or USS 145 / ha over the net imgablc area of 63.8') ha 
Table 6-2: Annual Operation and Maintenance Recurrent Costs
*
1
{ Rciponaibdity
USS/lu
ha
Ms
LM
UJ
S’
A
Maintc-nance coatt
Ntoragt Rr»cn i>ir mJ Main Canal lnfra«trociurv
MSO
V
61,tri
1-A.
T
MjjfiSs'sUrn Drarugi ir«J Rr>ad« IrUra^trutnirv
|           MS< >
32
6V0I
l.M k
V
Sccundir mJVnuri I&1» Sncm Sen J>mIdcn
|           WUA
40
22T2
' <T
Seo, ndan mJ Tt-rrun l&D Svwrm Cornmcrdd l-arm
b'rtau
36
to.Wtt
i r? >
t
u
Xjhiutd
4.PU3
11
Operational Coii»
—
Mwn n min Am J} soffny, t.ialucs and equipment
MSO
22
0KI
1,4'Ali-
Smalhildcr Secondary fit Tcrtury systrnm uaffHy. facdmuB and equipment
WUA
22
.'illl
(.nmmrrnal Scnmhn A Trnim iruumK uaHvw, faciktu* and < q apmertf
E»u«*
22
Subtotal
local OAM cn<n
"               luM
J
il
li
3
Source SR OlB Impbon A Drainage Dcvclupmcnr
Note; Unit MOM «nti are the same (<n cvnv option considered except for (Jpfion 2<-11<{ Option 2(1 pressure, maintenance of secondary and tertian- (Afl) on conirnrrcial farms •'fl proaurr area, tn USS32 per ha overall For Option 4, nnmrmancr for pumprng station' and
jodOpli*-4 ,tr
pah*
maintenance charge on unprotected geo membrane is added to Main canal jnfras true hire,                I Jflk SS^I* rm the Ixft bonk and ( S$ 96 per ha on the Right Bank A pumping cost w introduced f<’r tHc
ha.
! otal MOM cost* change- depending on the irrigated area dwr loped and the prop x™*1 onaDhuldci farms.
^dXif'fMerOeMnCtOkSt.”r'd^uied
expected
Ue *             CBA T" ’nu^’o'dcrs. commercial farms and siigircst»l« •”
rd*
C5,1,c’ *e
«3.0»M eo,„ „ 
burners. small/medrum cornmcrcti/
*
" U'"
charges i
•he <McM co                    Q7at ui)s,rle(,d f
charged to smaflJ^u^^ *"
-2.OMr ,‘
ICR‘ COInn’wial farms and the sugar estate r>—
■ sug>i estafe qnd *rMe,n °*M
earned out by rhe MSO is tr
nu ”ercial farm irrigators [>n> rub ro their pr"l'l,rP
UH F4 Main Report (I)
286of ibc tn
ungsitc^ area- The charge would be ETB 2*472 per irrigated ba per annum for f"TB ? 405 per net irrigated hectare per .innum for commercial agnrulrure
tnl aUhold<*  *”
s
The
irrigjio^
j     s rhe Consultants to estimate rhe charge (a "capital levy") that would, enable
fC< Wrc
10° q of rhe irrigation investment costs To repay 10% of investment costs interest the levy would be ETB 659 on the Right Bank, ETB 1.064 on the
□ver    --    j    p'jyj    864    per    irrigated    hectare    per    annum    overall.    The    levy    assumes    that ' J Ider bcncGcianes do not carry out any parr of construction work at their own «ml
aJ charges to cover system O&M plus a 10° ® capital am recovery would have to be
*^1C
7
( j_TH 3 2 0 / ha per annum (USS 196/hn per annum). The practicalities of applying the
1
1
1
c
5 a11^ EB 61 per tonne on vertisols and is part of the production cost of sugar (see
Q f ’2-6). Adding the water charge increases production costs by about ETB 33 per tonne fact Er<>dut:cd ro E. IB 92/per tonne of cane — a significant increase. The sugar estate ind
a k  rh the levy m its overall operating costs* but the levy would not be only
so
er charge and the capital levy arc opcrationalissucs, but options indude a combination of
the following;
•       Recovers- based on volume of water used, i.e “volumetnc" charging [see below). « Recovery based on land leased / “owned", and
•       Recovery based on area cropped and type of crop.
\isuniing a gross (i.r including losses) annual water requirement of 1.890 mm ’ (Le. 18,900 mV ha I for cropping then io recover MOM Costs plus a 10% capital levy would require a water charge of ETB O.|73/m  (LIS J 0 010/m ). Charging on the basis of water used encourages good water use efficiency, but will he practical only if the necessary irrigation flow control and measurement infrastructure is provided. Recovery on the basis of area cropped and type of crop is rornmon throughout the Indian subcontinent, though on rhe more modem schemes it is being replaced by volumetric charging Higher charges arc applied ro more “Thirsty” crops, for exampk sugarcane charges are about double that levied on muzc. However the mcihod is open to corruption as well as requiring a large number of stiff to record area and types of crops
bang cultivated cadi year.
The water charge has been incorporated into the farm budgets as a filed cost For Option 2A,
•he water charges arc affordable to smaIlholders-12; the water charge alone is between 2 and 6 P« cent of net farm returns (see T able 6-14). Large smallholder farms ind commercial farms
<>n vertisols would pay a higher proportion because their net returns per hectare are lower than mallei farms For the sugar estate, the water charge as a proportion of net farm returns (which il d 1Ilt^L1^C haulage costs from field to factory) is not calculable- This is because cane is
Im [ 31 PIQdUct’on co>t O’ - gloss margin is zero) which is about ETB 59 per tonne on
£lh " '
1 krtii      m
' JL'thni over th
,
aer nand for the scheme measured at the nver diversion of l»207 Mm , cqkuvaknt to
1
a
7^
ut
T5gaUc 1TO of 63*8“1
'Tr^iK Cither due
^°lcleri) ur Ji i °
' tni«T>ntt iuS|rvtlv' incept, htre taken to mean the level of price of a good or wire u i ptopanxxi
'o pay „ , mi' rcrum' If this proportion o high - iiv above 10% - there is a risk that the fann may be
r* .
Oow problems, the competing irquiremcnis of other household expenditure k to shareholders (commercial farms;Eihnfia Nii /"**•»           D'“’*«'
marginally affordable to out-growers (sec section 6.3.1(f)). Further, the net' would not compete with other irrigated crops unless the pncc p  d f
ai      or
' **
6.2.4
higher (say ETB 42 per quintal).
{'pperMsSt^arVactoty
(a) Factory Investment Costs
The cost estimate for the Tcndaho Sugar Project dared May 2005 Q.p. Mukherji
PVT Ltd.) was the principle source of information for scoping the cost of a 
Upper Ikies, llic Tcndaho study considered a factory to process cane from a 55
and was designed for 26.040 TCD The study’s cost estimate for the Tcndaho factory (excluding 5® 0 pncc contmgcnar* and spare parts for two ve&rs) was USJ 3717 nullr^ estimate was inflated to 2010 prices. It was then necessary to adapt these updated comj y/ the requirements for the Upper Beles factory. Option 2A for example, envisages > process cane produced from an estate area of 36,225 ha, estimated to be in the order of 25 million tonnes of cane per annum and requiring a factory of 11,000 - 13,000 TCD44. Da-
f
benefits of scale to a smaller factory than designed for Tcndaho must be allowed for. PhuCd the Tcndaho study considered die relative costs of one 26.000 TCD factory against run factories of 13,000 TCD at different sites (to gain locational advantages by reducing haul distance). The study concluded that a doubling of factor)* size could be achieved for an K*i increase in costs. Using this relationship and up dated costs, it was evident that a 26,000.2T factory could be constructed for about ETB 0.26 million per 1.000 TCD. whereas a 13,Ou TCD factory would cost about ETB 0.32 million per 1.000 TCD. Table 6-3 shows the extn! cost of a sugar factor)* suitable for Option 2A.
Table 6-3; Cost Estimate for Sugar
.000
USS ‘ 000 2010
ETBmilbooJ!!!
Pncx
Bare
co»
•/•    Foreign exchange
Price
Contingency
Total
Raw sugar plant
77.294
83%
3.865
81,159
Co-genention
93.738
83%
4.68"
98,425
Refiners- plant
14.242
83%
712
14.955
Civil wurU
31,521
55%
1.576
Ethanol Plant 220 KLPD
10.630
84%
531
33.098^
11,161-
Total
227,425
11371_
238796
Sourer Adapted from | P MuiJ^ & Asnoam P\T lad, TmJAn Supr PruxU 2005 
Nncrs; Com in fixwgn exchange exclude duhn wd t«o. Conttngcndr* are pncc no< phy»icxJ and then f CBA
---- -------- ---------- - ------------------------- 4od 1
*’ It t> understood that BSC wul tnstali factory modules of 10,000 TCD in their new “’"‘“"'"of cap*** ‘‘ proportion of f.lmcaiton will lx tn Ethiopia Thu suggests that investment costs P« ’IL
lower than calculated tn thts report However, under and over capac.tv issues «"•)
in*
'
e«at«. which udl .end to tncrease nulltng cost, 
of >uglr produ„d.
“ If the cane estate u ex-ended to the neighboring Hvnu catchment the required mdlutg ‘ «P“   * 
y      |0
bur it may be preferable to construct another factory tn Hyma to avoid haulage of cane ‘ ““
!      nC
up the escarpment of200 metres. The anta „ OUUlde the mnlI of
 f „,bdiry study
c
t’B 1*4 Main Report (1)1^’ n*"r
A ^f^o^'^ould be r^uirtd if
Referring    to    the    our-grawer    scenario    dnenberi    ,n       ^ction       ,    5       .    '"    ’nCr”5c       “«*    prrxi.Khon
l8i 000 TCD to peaces rhe cute «ne; 2.5 nuH^
tonnes per annum from smallholders
The scheduling of investment in the factory infli^^ Ihcrrld be completed to comade with the iv«hWi  of « 
W *PP«>p™  ,
e   tte wouy
* Qnum and a iunher 97q qqq
h
The f>c'a'y
dependent      on      the      completion      of      urigauon      mfrasm^^      »MOC«™fr      which      »      .„      rUftl
Fbght Bank Mun « al * competed in
D
pro)ecr vw ,
” U* ^elopmem. .A,
sununR
ate       of       planting       of       3.100       ha       of       «« 
mold be available by Year 6 Two years should be dlouerf / thould therefore be scheduled for Yean 4 and 5 Co 
m Year 4 and is schcd.dcd for Cf>mplcnon bv\“^ "f tnfrastmemre development will nin ahead of estate dev 1 
pcr annuin frdevelop, wnh ,Q „
°' “** ** Ashing
cot ^^cOoa wh,ch
W Main canal
" “ thaf ^«*>n
env^aged. full facton capacity wdl be reached bv Year |At rhc ™ of pla^
(b) Factory Production Costs
Factory   production   costs   are   the   variable   cost?   of   producing   one   tonne   of   sugar   from   cane delivered m the factory gate and can be summarised as:
•       Raw sugar, co-generation and refinery operational costs: inflating the foreign and loci!
costs estimated in the Tendaho stud}’ gives a factory operanonaJ cost for a 23.OCX) TCD
factor}' of USS 54.09 (ETB 903) per tonne of sugar in 2010 prices
•       Ethanol production operational costs: the same procedure leads to an estimated
operational cost for a 220 KJ-PD ethanol plant of U$$ 8 5 million pcr annum, USS
13.85   (ETB   231)   per   tonne   of   augar   and   USS   170   (ETB   2,835)   pci   KL   of   ethanol   in 2010 prices
•       Administration and Financing: raising Tendaho costs by the Ethiopian GDP deflator to account for inflation and dividing by the tonnage of sugar produced by the 23,000 1 CD factor, gives a personnel cost of USS 20-4 (ETB 341) per tonne of sugar and an administration cost of USS 30.3 (ETB 506) per tonne of sugar m 2010. Depreciation^ : a 12,000 TCD factory suitable for Upper Belts Option 2A would have i depreciation rate of about ETB 278 per tonne of augur produced-
Producticjn costs are not adjusted for the scale of the enterprise because no data ire available
5
Md m lnv 
capacity,
cx cnt
.        managI.men,     ii
cty       to       have     a       greater     impact     on     productton     costs     than     factory
ta Or . (
— -
Sb
n
Imirad a salvage value it usually given it The end of project life However, rvpbcrmea: tk *,4j c<*srs ’*Ui,ty <»f rhe iucron irr included in ihc CHA - in this ca*c the cost of rpre pirn « mehded
^a>
289Wrd DffwaO. H/pM? o' Erhttfua, Mvurtrf #Wafer & Rurr^
Nik lm&fun and Dm/tap Prof*r
£’J        Upptr Mr Sugar Estate
(a) Estate Investment Costs
Arytab Sugar Investment PI.C, Preliminary Assessment of Up
Investment    was    used    as    a    basis    for    the    estimate    of    investment    crJ    '    ”    ft)T
estate The base cost for a 55,500 ha sugar estate in Upper Bek million This estimate was inflated to 2010 prices The r™.
for
^ a,cd «FTn
•’^—nnunsedm-r^
Table 6-4j Financiannvcstmen( Cos(s for Sugar Estate (55,500 h
Tice — mr— <wma
US$ million 2010
I
~
- -
Contingcooea
Equipment for estate
I Transport________
Misc. equipment
Baae cost
31.94
102
0.40
35 13
- 53*33 I
5037
Toed                                                   3535
Sourer A n ub Sugar Investment PU\ Prfhmwwv Attcswncnl of Upper Hda Area for Sugarcane Invcatmrq;
Notes Eidudxng dunes and liars Contmgenoc* arc physical and not price and therefore ire included m the OA. hfnr^. rxd'jdrs roads and bodges (included tn command area development costs i and buildings and unhry supply 'indixlciJrth.tr costs).
3.54          3M.M9                 590.36                                1»L*.
Hw  Aryub  study  cost  estimate  of  roads  and  bridges  in  the  sugar  estate  area  is  excluded,  bn»
it  is  already  included  in  the  cost  estimate  for  irrigation  and  drainage  Investment  costs  ire  151
0]   per   estate   hectare   without   roads   and   bridges   and   USS   1,255   per   estate   hectare   within and  bridges  costed  at  US$  503  per  ha.  The  cost  with  infrastructure  is  similar  to  the  tnvemet costs   estimated   for   snull/medium   commercial   farms   (USS   1.407   per   farm   hectare,   see   S«3C 6.2.  )  but  the  proportion  of  infrastructure  costs  in  the  unit  cost  is  much  higher  for  the  «°* Commercial  farms  have  a  wider  range  of  (annual)  crops  and  have  to  spend  proporwniDv on machinery, whereas farm roads can be constructed to a lower specification-
Clearly the cost of developing a 56.225 ha sugar estate planned for Option 2A ** than those shown tn Table 6-4, and the costs arc reduced />n> rata to area. g™ng « cost of I-TTB 424 millton (USS 25.4 million) tn 2010 financial prices. Cost scheduling f
b
implementation schedule for cane planting, pre-daring the required investment co«  '
(b) Estate Operational Costs Operational costs for the sugar estate arc:
• T’
r °nne ofc^ °fCtnc Prod"ction
Proposed JT 10d US$ 4183 (ETB^,Cd fnm CWglOU nut*IM "E™ '’*
6
v *nabJe           W char«r u-ouy . .
)  '°onc of sugar With-pro/cct, the
7              z zut 1 s$ 2t3,K17              ZuSf~OMP"
P     1,O'*u’« 'he
»bou ETB .f°
f
15 P*' <onne of,
(IB J*4 .Man Report (I)
of 19 km gives USS 20.76
” F:TB 6 "Mon per annum ar full
^^eduJe. estate management co*** wvU^
tU ^ Produced
290^Licemcnt costs of equipment replacement cosis would amount to "5% of initial ^vestment costs for estate equipment, or about ETB 443.5 million. In terms of
j prcdanon cost this is about ETB 839 per ha per annum, or ETB 76 per tonne
c
jugar produced.
o
f
Scheduling of Costs
hed ding the investment and production costs of both estate and factory depends on the rate ubhshmeiH of P^nt c<Lnc' maximum rile of planting obvious!}' depends on the
tpjcCion and commissioning oi the irrigation system, but it can only be achieved if all other CDFfors of production arc available This is a business planning issue (for ESQ and the
’ nstdrmrs arc not privy tn ESC’s resources and pnorines A rapid rate of establishment might br 5 000 ba of plant cane per annum; this study assumes lower rites of between 2,800 ha per mniim (Option 1) to 4300 ha per annum (Option 4), The project implementation schedule for Opoon 2A (sec Annex Al) shows that irrigation development is cipectril to be completed by rrai 9 By this nmr, 88% of the cane area planned under Option 2A would have been established.
The assumptions made about cane planting assume a larger estate will take longer to develop than a smaller, with a correspondingly longer time brforc full factory benefits come on str tank Therefore investments in larger sugar estates and factories tend ro have a lower rate of return than smaller though intuitively one might think that benefits of scale would lead to the converse Bear m mind though that the only benefits of scale claimed in the CBA are in factory costs. Fixing sugar estate development schedules is a business decision for ESC which depends on the availability of resources to rhe company and investment pricrrturs elsewhere
jjftnwdry of Sugar
Ou/J
from these estimates, the financial production cost per tonne of sugar is expected to be tn the order of ETB 3,489 (USJ 208) per tonne, including water charges but excluding depreciation Thr dis aggregated cost is shown on Figure 6-1. This 15 comparable with an estimated ETB -.850 per tonne of sugar (based on an unattribuied source for Wonji/Shoa sugar factory /estate costs) which apparently excludes administrative costs of ETB 475 per tonne of sugar
7 39^         &ianciaJ price of domestically produced sugar at the factory gate is estimated as ETB
f
3 >Txj
toiu,c (>ec Section 6.4.2(a)), so the gross margin on one tonne of sugar is abour ETB
deluding depreciation and ETB 3,450 tnriudmg dtp reaction However, the sugar factory’ ^uces ethanol and excess electricity power for sale, the value of which should be added
v „ ^TOSS fcVcnue from sugar sales before deducting total production costs, These project
f
^ -wdl be quantified m Secnon 63.1(g).FnM Dtotonfi/f Etfa'tpw, Mioi'tr) of II af r c  Zrwr/j;
f
u
Erfafu* .V/Jf             tod Dnt/Mff Pnvr.r
Figure <^1: Estimate of Cost, of Production, 2010 ftp
-- ---- JpenoBn
bu gar
■^'ofcanc
■ fJa"e tramp,,,.
■^tepcnone)
11  tiMatc rcplacernrritn,
6,2. 7        Dmiop*"t Corts of Commrrcia/ Fantts
Hie  financial  and  r— 
llic   financial   and   economic   analysis   includes   for   development   cost*   of   the   small   and   make
scale commerce farm
scale  commercial  faim  area.  Hie  cost  of  farm  machinery  and  storage  ro  establish  a  lOOhi  irs is   estimated   at   about   USS   1.40   per   ha   Investor*   with   capital   aim   for   this   farm   si/eoroipr rhe   land   use   optimization   model   for   Option   2A   calculates   an   optimum   allocation   of4.-.3h
Thc  distribution  by  SIM  is  known,  so  the  total  cost  (about  L’S$  6.7  million  or  ETB  112nub* can  be  apportioned  between  the  Left  and  Right  Banks  Annual  depreciation  is  about  ETB  I.* per  ha  per  annum  Salaries  assume  two  managerial  staff  for  a  100  ha  farm  at  E’I’P  5.<’0,,PG month   Hued   costs   arc   therefore   about   ETB   3.143   per   ha   per   annum   This   figure   »
into  thc  commercial  farm  budgets  Phasing  is  straightforward;  it  should  be  linked  to  the mplenon   of   thc   irrigation   system   on   thc   cither   bank,   starting   two   years   before   and   £
concluded  two  or  three  rears  afterw  ards  The  cost  of  machinery  operation  is  *  variable  c«r therefore included tn thc crop gross margins.
6-M
f
• M,cCQJ
Costs
Estimates of die costs|lof of .the supporting interventions (sub-projects) necessaty|o
rts
Pprr Beta I--
4 KUm ng’bO” Pr<>jcct have b C"0ons (s’'l> projects) necessary to impKZ*"’
° SUPP°rtlnp mtm.
| per Belos Irrigation Project have been made and reported in thc vano<* $
CP °?
|A
Sub Proiecr '
sumnun list of the sub projects is given in Table 6-5 together uith dir*
b “ °f ",C Sl,b PrOlrrtCn
cost Sub projects account for Z9% of the cost incurred in die project lifetime. '
Ip-oJ, 4CC"Um
tC ^nr1cd thc '’3nnus ^‘PP^^
“ r,Wc 65
their esnm.^
1 e *Pend
annual project expendtittUunr.x, e i.nAYc  ears 3-15.
«>«« incurred „ fa propel tifermc. ind 5 * - **
— HERE ••
I ’B r-4 \!Jin Rcpift fl;
292f^^***^
Rr -r,'Gf
\jatc pf Sub Project Total Costs: Option 2A ( Financial 2010 ETB)
Tabk
j^porung Project*
T
L LDETB
’“L k product**?-— _
c
j JV .W^---——~ 'Tt
—----- ----------------------------------
2,820.4ft)
2,144.230
tgTOJZ)
3,698.760
2,58ft J
3,140.280
6,720,<X>0
231WOO
2310^1
630QJNX)
2300JXX1
A200JXJI)
RBETB Total ETB
795320               3.616,QUO
W"80
1,094.280
; „ _ _--------------------------------------------
1.043.240
729,060
835.720
4,742,0X1 3.31 8, 000
4.026,000
—— —----------------- ------- -
Comtnunty PeVel°Pme--------- -- -----
/0 PofjpJf iFafrr drSamtotNm
7-pn^K-rfr^.'^!^—<OT"--------------------------------------------------
~^
c7
afCnfk/JarOffjna tt—nri
9,600,000
3300,000
yr*'onn
9 tXX)J?O0
1
CDif^ofifiriiidis ^ Poqf>lrJ_ 
dXforL&dIftjlttuliom ________________
_  ---- _  __
Sob-tot*!
2,880.000
990,000
99l\000
2.700,000
1^on,rx»
L800.000
b
4,000.100
6,000,000
I
Re-Bcrtletnent and Land Consolidation
pflWjW rr/Arwr jtt.j _ _________________________
JU4M
SDA Ifi
JO-1 J/J 
jd>4 n >j
JJM IT
63S0J92
10322.650
68.5^0.63^
H.o^s.cifeg 
34.073.871
858,109
6350,192
10322,650
68370.637
20.854,071
L3,073089
34.073,8” I
32,140.447 32.140.447 I.SOO.OOO
641,891
Sub-total
SroiHhoWtrCrop Production
daz< ad nbaatnHM of jail frrtihty
^2 lamaitd iNpjjfyji] intprovad sttdaad iquipimat
537,297
! 334,934
234.481
212.703
740.066
‘50.000
1,975,000
^gnmlhtvu/ "fark/btf^ syif9m
4.244,648
1,680352
ExrrW< Swj
1,540.252
609.748
^25.000 2,150.000
rn
artdOnjam lTa/,r
211.033
16369.656
Sub-ttrtaJ
140,519 j 375,000
126,4-67
337,500
6.4W344
22.aW.0CKl
*&»/or Ra
Jfn
a, ^
r
533.221
1,500, 999,789 0X1
SX1.000
Sub-total
feidi
Pfatatioiu &
Prur'ffnjv Omtfo-DfF
514358
1.412J6O097.502
S *M,
^(1}
293
'.7 Mm-11PnM Ik^rafj.-                 atErhtafna, Mimrfry of Water & Emrg, Ejfapia* Xuir IrrigMo* and Dnnnart Pnyerf
Supporting Projects
Canal
Drainage Perimeter
LcrFAf 2 GnfhStMnatioHand Rtbabtbtalinp____________ Lt&fM P PorritnDtvffopimnt in RECj
Conwwmty                 Forestry                 Development Forestry Development in RECs^
LcbFAN; \Fatenbed Management'ofNon Irngab/e SDslr
SWC
LB ETB
L^2.819
JJ80324
V47.48Q
10395.045
25,956,220
21.646.564
i®65,40l ------ A?69j9*)
0
Sub-total
Watershed Management (input! and project management)____________________
LcFFAf J. R/iermrr Catchment and Buffer 7,one Der.
29350358
234,377,613
C
Watershed ft
it of Reservoir Catchment
Buffer Zone Development
L&PXf 6: Terrace Bund StiMsation
317,500                            0 6.139.622                               0
- -- 5
. Pi
<32
Sub-total
institutional Development and Sustainable O&M OcFAff ITU/4 C^Usib BtaUing
7,000.146                 6.815,6)4
mi
1
OcFAL Impeooed Sjjfem Ope rat ton by Parmer Institutions
5.635.743
5.487.177
:U23
OcFAf J' lmpmoed System Mat it/enanceby ParmerInstitutions ~ 0&M4 Parmer XUS forSjsfem O&Xt____________________ __
Sub-total Coiuultano Services________________________________________ Rr settlement slrttot; Plan
E//4/5L4 Stud) and C-onjudancy Support Carts Detakd denp OcFAf Support and (onstmetton Supons ton _ _,
Sub-total Source. Subproject co*t crnmair* in Supplementary Rcp»*rs
6.649,099
2 4(r.5O8
z JTt QOI
tt ”0
r
6.47JJJZI I
2344.i-4\
42322.0? 5.170,565
642,676,781
Total
schedules fn  >k o ^
r                 rOfcCT ^  plcmcntanon Schedule, following the trnplcme^
m
and Uh Bank, ac^Jn1Dd Blnks *«P»rately. and dA tding project coats between
0000
g to the factors expected to principally influence costs.
I
f.'B F4 Main Report (1)
294_     ! „rJ [W"”"J P'V*‘ Ca5t!
, ? JW 
prvdopment Option 2A
r cLPmnicndcd development (Option 2A) the total project costs over the 35 year project
Fnr 1 C
.             „ simply the -sum those desenbed above, arc shown in Table 6-6.
life,, ^hi"1 * r
left
RIGHT
TOTAL
yesuj--------- ----- ~ ,   ™M (eluding Constancy Suppojlli
— ~. - mvKtmcnt costs
in
—      -----------
__
4.851.7
2,926.7
7.778 4
243%
lin
2 J 47.6
2*233.8
4381.4
1X7%
’ JUjO, ff jeac<itr i£nL- i!Mnve_»s-t-m---e-n_t c---os--t-s------- „-----------------------------
1,8267
2,092.9
3.919.6
12.2%
"7"
NugU’ eai_*   ——■— —
feefoev operational costs
^ UJX
development and replacement costs r-‘                J
384.4
440.4
824 .8
2.6%
VjJgD ra«-      J_2_E_------------- -------------- estate haulage inrf man^cmenr costs
5301.9
6.733.9
1X035,7
375%
1,009.8
1,263-3
2,273,1
7.1%
iQpm'rtifTr  i Farm idcvelnpmETTit costs
lfl
239
882
11Z2
03%
oj rets -■                 ---------------------------- -
543.6
197.9
741 5
2,3%
Total ETB million
16,089.6
15,977,2
32,066.8
100.0%^
Total US$ million
963.4
956.7
1.920.2 j
Sure   Development out ftic 36.225 ha time plus Annual repbetmen: renn id 2045, which is cuuiciElrtiily similar
1
fu initial drvdupmmi c«*sT5r far a 55.500 hi estate («.t Tabic -6—
2/ System OfitM (equivalent Io wafer charges) plus DeriilnJl desipi, C MkM Support laid Crsnstrucncn Snpcrvmon plus IwtilutKifiaJ Development and Sustainable O&M
3/  Sub  prTjjreM  cent  (Table  6-5)  minus  Detailed dcyipi,  (JAM Suppcwi and  Lwni&iictinni  Ssipcmugo.  and InmniDLMial Drrrlnpnciit and Surainabk O&M
The HivesimaiT costs of the Project ire therefore expected io total L‘SJ 757 million and the foul i non-discnuntrd) costs during m lifetime are estimated at L’S$ 1.92 bilbon. Variable cosrs of crop production (including cancj are included in the crop gross margins and therefore do not appear as project coats.
The cosn given in I able 6 6 can be discounted (at 10% j over the project life of 35 yean as hown m fable 6- . The total discounted project cost is USf 662,5 million.
—Discounted Project Costa for Option 2A, 2011-2045, ETB million
cws
LETT
2,6212
335.4
1J9L0
1213
885.3
RIGHT
2,0647
407,2
1,364-5
147,8
13040
226.7
48.1
95.6
5358.1 .
TOTAL
4,685.4
742,6
2355 5 _____ 2693
2/1892
42%
—dLSjjfM (including Consultancy Supportj
costs
‘nt^ndrcpla         |- costs
CC<Ttcn
7%
23%
2%
costs
management costs
1713
9.8
169,7
5304.9
-
398.0
57.9
3653
11,062.9
662.5
J9%
3.6%
03%
Sub-projects
Total   E   TB   miDion
2%
100%
TotaJ USS million
329.6   1
3323Mr*                   fyMccfFjht^. Minty ofIFaf/r C* BctipMr Mt Impte* Draw? Prwr.7
(b) Costs for other Development Options
Costs for the other development options were estimated / r
in some detail for development Option 2A. For example the
estate and facton depends to a great extent on the area of the sn^' ’SSOcuted
<kt
irrigation investment costs are broadlv related to total nrr „„ 
..
pressure irrigation in SDA IVB W (Option 2C).
UgarCanc
1 irn
Imposed , *
RlU()n 9 ra<« L                 ' j
’’ “ut “’aeaje (,
Outline   designs   for   a   pumped   left   bank   development   were   prepared   io for Option 4 (refer report SR-04A: Engineering Irrigation & Drainage) This <' * assumed an accelerated implementation programme enabled by elimination proposed concrete lining (relying only on unprotected geo-membrane) but u^h^^'3' maintenance costs.
The costs of subprojects to enable smallholder farmers manage to change from
irrigated cropping are relatively minor compared to the investment cost for irrigaoMi A drainage infrastructure and the sugar estate, but vary according to the lrrigaoon area of smallholder farming proposed.
' 3C’Ul'
uk 'cbc4
Investment  costs  for  land  Ac  watershed  management  and  forestry,  and  for  cnvironmenui mitigation, arc essentially the same for all development options
The financial development costs for the mapr cost items for all the developmentopnoniirr summarised below in Tabic 6-8, discounted ar 10%. The cheapest discounted developoaii ex
ls that associated with Option 0 (ETB 4,906 million) as no investment is requirement ttxthr
sugar estate or factory. The most expensive cost (El’S 9,340 million) is associated with Qp®*
5 where 100% sugarcane is proposed.
The  discounted  cost  for  Option  2A  is  7,558  million.  The  cost  for  the  out-gmwer  Option  2B  ? rather higher at ETB 8,440 million due to the increased si2e and cost of the sugv
The  discounted  cost  for  Option  4  is  ETB  6,512  million,  rather  lower  than  Opoon  2A due to the elimination of concrete lining from canals to facilitate a fast track implcnlc
UH IM Mam Rrpon (1)
296X>
f.W
f''
■ <*■-.
Z
Option
Dt acripu* rn
in-iii*                     mi rzcvriupincai vptiont Net Liri^JtjoQ Am |h,*)
1
t ai>c.tiunte<J at 1UVbJ
Fuiaaeul Devctanmens Com discounted
i(i
Total
L
1 ()prjott0
Sugllt
estate
Small-
liokl err
Commercial I Fttmi        |
IMS
Eneintcriue
Sugar      \ Factor |
Sugar    1    C Estate 1
1 W/» < E 1 b radUcn^ \
Ommtttul \ Total \ Firms               1
I No sugar estate
63,871
0
33.284
(52. Pi;
30.587 |
(47.W) |
4.W
I < Jpu nn I
[ Minimum sugar estate
63.871
21,86<i (34,2*. i.
26.644
(417%;
15,3 66
(24.1%)
4.685 |
1.620 I
itcT
— 4
6,560 I
Option 2 A
(‘ore sugar estate
63,871
36.225
(56.7%)
22.872 (35 8%)
4?73
4,685
2.555
269 1
7,558
( Jpflon 2B
Core sugar estate (ir as Option 2 A) bur with out-
^gniwcrs
63.871
36.225
(56.7%)
22,872
(358%)
4,773
(7,5%)
4.685
3.438
265
rn
|                      48
H,44(|1
Option 2C
Core sugar estate with pressure (sprinkler) in SDA
rvn W
65.161
37.515
(57,6%)
22,872
(351%)
4,773
(™%)
5,030
2,645
276
18
7.999
i
(. )ption 3
Core sugar estate plus expulsion lira
63.871
40.999
64 2*.)
22.872 (35.8%)
0
4.67H
2,890
290
0
7858
Option 4
1
AU sugar estate with only pumped kft bank development Ac. accelerated Implementation
39,175
39,175
(100%)
U
0
2,775
3.344
395
0
6,512
1
Option 5
L
All sugar estate
L
6JJJ7I
63.871
(100%)
0
0
5,289
1667
385
0
9.340
L'H ['4 Vl.iin Report (1)
297
]7 May 11EttauM
6.3
6.3.1
l ‘njKt
Project Benefits
Wirb-PnjHt Renfib
(a) Methodology
The procedure to calculate with-project benefits is described in tictaj] ln s
SR-02B: Agriculture and Agro-Economic Development Planning. Cha i
Land Allocation Optimization Model was prepared which (under consuawu ungable area to the sugar estate, (small/medium sized) commercial farms and (preferentially allocating luvisols to smallholders) and non imgable land to th SImll!5oidtri land use of smallholders (grazing, wood lots, house plots etc.) The opunnz,,^ calcubtes thc number and location of farms (minimum allocation, smal)
smallholder farms, small /medium sized commercial farms and a Larue
■"ge sugar estate;
“P
suitability    class    (summarized    under    vertisols,    luvisols,    soils    requiring    special    mci!u. suitable for rainfed only) and by stage development area (SDA).
The land use opumizaoon model then transfers this information to a Farm Revenue Optimization Model which maximizes total net farm revenue on thc (irrigated and mafcc cultivable area. This optimization is done under specified agronomic constraints (eg tn e cropping intensity and cropping pattern) and economic constraints (e.g a defined proprxc j the farm under food crops and a defined proportion under higher value crops) which drffe between farms Thc model also has targets of production it must achieve for each crop !* crops were selected, many of which arc relatively new to the area) wluch are based on agronomic and market assessments of thc production capacity of the scheme
(b)          With-project I -and Use
A sumnuiy of thc output of the land use optimization model for Option 2A is grtm in fit- 6-9. Benefits arc sought principally from the large commercial sugar estate area £6,225 nd irrigated ha), die small / medium commercial farms area (4.773 net irrigated hai md th irrigated smallholder farms (23,542 net irrigated ha). In addition benefits mav be
the smallholder rainfed area (5,074 net ha), and community and commercial loreslty^^^ on wood lots, the riverine environmental corridor and unallocated land l*hr bene fiom woody biomass will be relatively small Thc production of dry matter (a.
areas is an intermediate product implicitly included in dairy and beef g*°ss fl111# benefit does not have to be calculated.
UH i’4 Mun Report (!)
298-
. - «f Wilh-D*ok Ct La
for
Tub»e±? -^
:
n, ''y—
Right
Left
Total
ut
19J43
16.RS2
36325
rEs     C
— -
-            --
26%
3.755
l.Dlfl
4.773
3*c
8.411
14.461
22.H’2
17%
—--- -
infrastructure
3,268
3J03
6.571
A%
3^,777
Xf,«a
:          70,442
51%
__
F-r’irEital Corridor
.       —i----------  ---------
_
22, W8
27,2*1
20%
Other L*»® --
u
--------
] n-tirld inlm^Lr -
.j -.r«<tmenirc on rainfed land
11
0
———---------------
502
502
0%
319
785
Public
— — — —
1,10*
!•-
r       ™ —rrlemenr out side irrigation design area Rnturig seru*^   * —— -.................
10
538
196
1.033
1%
639
2.453
3,091
2%
Gra^irtfi_____ —---------- ------ ----------------
2T74
2.915
2%
U78
3J46
4.418
3%
fLain fed crop producdon
-1
5.074
5.074
4%
lidl»
_
J
7393
7,393
5%
'Unallocated lurid
3,5.^[
11.344
14.883
11%
Subtotal
4ff.-IL2
29%
Total
46.0*i
92,083
L3BJ45
100%
Smirrc. Ijuid AJincanmi Optimisation Modd iMJtpuf. mapped (wr S lap yhrminc I *r< ye re J VIW Cf ■ >wct Commercial and Smti all holder Jrrrriigeaft«i IX’vdtKTwnefit in Map Fotin.
(c)            N umbers and Areas of Farm*
l*hc total number? and areas of smallholder farms, small commercial farms and the large sugar estate arc shown in Table 6-10. At full project development (allowing for rhe growth of population from its present 18J80 rural households to 20,526 rural households and further in Migration of about 1,563 households into the Srudy Area) there will be 6,589 smallholder farms °° ^  R*ghr Bank and 15, 01 (including rain fed) smallholder farms on (hr I-eft Bank.
tc
7f rJrrM I                JOprMr if E/httpA. Nimitry ifVMn & !iarrji A’/i Imfafm Drj^i^f Prtmf
Table 6-10: Wi<h-i
Numbers and Arcaa of Farm
Classes:
2A
Right Bank
Left Bank
S mu Uh adders
Smallholders
minimum
allocator)
small
medium
large
commercial farms
sugar
estate
minimum allocation
small
farma
medium farma
larrc farma
commercial
farma
•u«ar
rafale
Numbers
l.uviaoh
117
506
40!
1330
21
1.761
1.375
1337
Verwok
116
1.470
1329
493
1
3
1.599
1.543
.speenJ measures
251
1
177
1
677
2,836
367
300
Rjunfed
1
1
1
1
309
1361
1.066
948
Tocab
486
1,977
1,907
2,025
1.006
6,160
4,406
4.128
Areas, ba
l.uvivda
13
219
394
4335
50
1.674
2
950
1.447
3,533
81
598
VrrtMob
13
677
1,177
1.470
16326
0
1
1.674
4.053
900
14.729
Special mesRiro
28
1
186
3
1322
1343
75
1351
388
788
87
1356
Raaifcd
0
1
1
3
77
949
1346
Total*
54
2,802
897
1,758
5.711
5.805
19343
154
3,451
4.755
11,176
1,068
16,882
Note. For modcllmg reasons. single farms must be "forced in" if the land
use optimization model turns out zero farm* in any land suitability class. Resulting changes to numbers and areas are ven small
Source: land ABocatioa Optimisation Model output earned forward to Farm Re\enue Optimisation model(d) Enterprise Budgets
fnr^nsc budge* (phj^l requirement and
hltvc bffn
,«t and future production of 10 crop, and 2 livestock e
merge, fo, Mch
-.
farm types on each of the four land suatabthty type, fo  q j
r
5ffla]IhoWcr
““
smallholder     (ill)     Small     smallholder     farms     and     fc)     Commctad     f     arms     ach     r,     r     t
SpOTl
.nd Ve™*. Two d.laW 
f„,
*
veitisoh and one for luwoj, and speoal measures) ibo economic and Imanaal prices.
; c) Cropping Patterns
reom^n
’ ’Tn
The Farm Revenue C >prunjzarion Model generates a cropping paTTcm for each farm type which is gjvEfi tn Tub!* 6 11 IEe model allocated double cropping tn the mttre net irrigable area. There is * marked difference between (smallholder} cropping patterns on hrnsofc (emphasizing maize, oilseeds and vegetables) and on vrrtisols (emphasizing ncc, peppers and fodder crops) On (smallholder) runted farms (mostly luvwols) ihe cropping intensity does not exceed 104% and is mostly cereals and oilseeds with a small area of perennial trees (as ii is at present) The cropping intensity on the large sugar estate 15 200% but S% food crop 11c assumed tn both dw wet and dry season
17-Mipri
S01f-rintl Dt>**nf,f
.Mimitiy IFj/« <-£w^
EtfafHM Nik Imqit™, Drwu^r Pn/M
Table
2A
t»<AUJIDU>UJI
COMMEMCIAL
COMMI BOAL WGABCANI
I IVltOU
HIT1WU
me MT M
MiNirn
HYIIOU
manto ls
trrrMEAS
aAFNFED
L[TT5OL5
m-mou                  WTC MTAS
HAIMF1D
wrt    j dry
wn
4?
4*
•••
4”
«.i
**
•*t
4*»
VM
we!
*>
«< 1 Ay
w»i
**
wet
*1
•n
*1
Z4F-
y»r-
tir.
inr
4lr
Mm
nr
Hr
<F
**r.
ur
♦ If-
Mf.
Mf.
u 1/F
ter.
or.
Ur
mu
or
i~
IF.
tie*.
r «—nr
• r.
v.~.
4,r,
!’•
It IF.
Sr» r»y»
Vafew..
tier.
Utr,
ftf-
Mr.
silk »n
tnr.
IIS
r*M' '>«•
• r.
i*r.
Hr-
tv.
_______________
hy.Hw.
l/r.
IftX
l?r.
• r.
1 e.
«(r.
4V.
L><* n
IGlF.
!*r
frew.
nr.
nr.
MF.
IF.
I r.
'’■V
4.-.
*r«
u.
If.
/'.Inhuwnl ’n»r ■■
HfF.
■HIT.
"Hi*.
ntf.
♦ter.
•OF.
fog
|M’k
M r-
ur
tr
Vmw?4
mir.
IT.
1 4JW
Mf.
lie.
N2X
IU'.
15 r.
tl*.
wf.
4 IS
’•
1i»r.
i»ir.
MV.
MF
Srtan
Mf.
inr.
|.IF .
r.
trTxU
1 Wl
K«M
M*
w-
Mir.
SpT4
i ••
tar.-.
w                1fl*
1 •*
-ft™
1ffl4
!«*.
t«r.
rev
:atr.
IMF,
i«r.
j£2
2d 2!
t iv
ion           i n
1 411
i.’TS
ir;
11 £a$
r;
4FF»
Sourer I >m> Revenue < Jpnnwunon Model gen ernes emppmg pin™ to
mwmi/r with project crop and livestock benefit*J‘arm Budgels
budgets   are   *ko   generated   by   rhe   Farm   Revenue   Optimization   Model   for   (i)   Large, Mode1         <«™      Snull         Farnjs.      Minimum      AHoomona;      (v)      Commceia]      Funu;      and      (vi)      Sugu
(«) Medtuni-
& special Measures. and Vertisols Gross Margins and Labour
F‘tJ'C'    nts    "T'    obtained    from    the    Enterprise    Budgets.    Food    energr    calculations    are    based    tw
Require'
t “H,SC .
budgets is a tn™ 
ronne and prepared on the basis of farm production and number of Id members. both of which vary with smallholder farm size. The significance of the
. measure of the returns to project stakeholders is a rank of the proposed
ri
hewn in Table 6-12, incremental crop returns per ha between muled and ungiird farm.s satisfactory. Irrigation effectively doubles the nd cultivated area and crop yields
lease by about two or three timri so production can increase by four to sue times. Aho, the
,
of necessary lower value crops (to meet rotation and food secunry requirements)
be achieved on 1 smaller area, leaving a greater ire* for higher value crops, so vahir of production per unit area increases
Tabic 6 42: Crop Returne fof Model Farms: Option 2A
J JUlt U-
’ ■ " X------------------ --
Vcrruola
Luviaoli
Spec. Meat-
Rainfcd
Minimum zlliKJirion
31,686
41,256
41356
3.771
SrrtalJ Farms
38,197
35,672
35.94"
4.445
Medium farm st
43,991
46,589
64,422
4,690
Ijrgc farms
33.454
23.784
33.011
4.53"’
Commercial
22,052
59,466
27,701
Sugar estate
75&
1304
1304
Source. Faim Revtnuc Opfiiaisinon Muddl
\ ertisok usually yield a lower crop return per unir area than luvisols. Partly this is do with increascj labour and machinery costs, but mostly it is because of the more limited range ot cropi that can be grown.
Weighting the farm net crop returns by rhe area they occupy gives a more realistic estimate of contribution of model farms as shown in Table 6-13. Overall, crop returns per ha on
Ufarms (El 13 32,000 per net cultivated ha) exceed I hose achieved on rain fed lams
th
DCf cuJ^vatc^ hectare) by a factor of seven Including the sugar estate area in culatjoin reduces the crop returns per net cultivated ba considerably — this is because cane
tuar * n ^1C cstatc is valued at production cost (i.c. gross margin is ETB 0 per hii and only the ood crop production has a positive value.Fttkful Dtnuxrutis RrtM.- tj Elhupia. Muu»tr> »f II aftr c  Ew/jy
v
l-fbiofUN Nik Irngattcn anti Druntd^t Pnmr
Table 6-13: Crop Returns for Model Fanns Weigh
ted by
Ar <* in Sch
Net cultivated
 ha
Scheme
Rainfed
Source I’ann cn»p return* in Title 6 12 arc weighted by the area they occupy on JifUrenr muJ types, Khcmrrnr return* arc calculated In weighting farm rrfum* by rtu area thev occupy within rhe scheme
Ibe coninbuuon of bv^l
lmplcd flm budg„, „
c
p ““, “fcl“ T f<«“• '•-I M ,, n.
,i„ lm, modd, „ 14XS00. Numbns „f dairj jnJ
-
projccced from project numbers per household reported from the Baseline Survey
Fixed costs in the farm budgets arc land tax, took and supplies, and (for commerod firn.
pX'Xr 7 CSU,pmCnt and Saknc5 Land ** * 
to be ETB 25 per ha A not^
I                     ^inn ^aS k°Cn a^owc<® ^or f<>ok. buildings etc Commercial farm overheads act in more detail, desenbed in section 6.2 The impact of water charges on firm
-8 J* houn m 1 able 6-14 For smallholders the water charge is demonstrated tn be affordabk, being tn most cases up to 6‘ o of net farm income.
cos Th F CStatC ^°nC cannor •flord to pay water charges because cane is valued at ptodur^
g margin on cane land is therefore zero. Positive gross margins arc only >d»on- proportion of land (10% of the gross cropped area) tn food crops. Houwer. the
nr If S Pa t °
>nd th<‘ SUgar rnrcTn^ as a whole is only concerned with d*
□avab?    7"    C°5t      O<      IO      Whlch      rhe       charge    would    be    added    The    water    charge
Section 6 3 6 
and 11 *las alnad\ been demorutrated that this is affordable, s*
X: “t- Aof
ch rg n
,    ,  6 ,o «*o--k—
- ■>* p-c nffard bvi,
b Mound two thi COni"’On Mdo of SUK" revenue split between cane growers and
Zu^e’X’Z" Wd <>nC
cxdustvc of depreeutx.n (sec '    ° "
8T  U
8,055 'nalgw ""
15 ,b°U' '
for Option 2A would be VTbZT"n
" C' °f
*'
this is accredited to cane p ,
rodua
° n' ,C‘»“*nn« 2 5 mlJlwn ',’nncs of
the pnee payable ,  out growers f 7 
o
*' VaJ*" °* Cane ” ab<,u, hTB 225
f c rule of thumb described above is fol
lowed
*
CH 1-4 Mam Rcp*»r» (0
304Valuing outgrow cane at ETB 35 hcctw of E™ 23,324 
xeducoon ofrbout 27% of p Ofr ^^chd-noting 
firn r^couc ro nwly fof
« about
r aei v.
r ^er. 
** of Qop p
P^Tedll^^r°PP,ngP^
°*f>V'd to f ■ Ku u tirdrrm PfWM»nh.
Mvs/Im. Muntin •/ ITj/h- &
Etbi^iaH Nt/e Inform and Drjjmtf Pryttf
Vertisols
Special Measures
Water charge as % of net farm
income
Luvbote
No of
Vertisols
Special
measures
ETB/ha
No of
farms
ETB/farm
Area
No of
farms
ETB/farm
Area
ETB/farm
Area
Water charges payable ETB
Luviaola
[Saidttwildcrt
2.472
134
272
15
116
272
15
929
272
102
321.601
222%
243V.
2.22%l
<ni!l
2.472
X267
1.352
1.169
1,472
1.134
67Sl
2,436
1.352
1551
4,398,784
4.48* •
4 50*.
4.94%l
medium
2,472
1.77S
2304
1,441
2,928
2.407
2.451
545
2,608
573
13,012.995
4 00* .
4 10%
3.11%
brg<
2,472
2367
6497
7.768
2.036
6.706
5.523
300
6.497
744
34,796.744
7 87%
6.02%
6.05* •
jSmdlhuldcr* Toni
7,047
10,793
6,552
9,064
4,607
3.014
56.550.129
Commercial farm*
2.405
1
195,297
41
1
8,013330
3,332
1
6.497
1.410
11599J50
427%
1273%
9.80%
Sugar Ernie
2.405
1
5,462,692
X272
1
74,640,041»
31,055
1
6.971.219
2899
87.113.991
Water durgc payable
155243.469
Source: Iron Revenue ( >pnrrM«annn Mudd and Table 6-2
Table 6-15: Water Char^ra as
Per Cent of net Farm Income: Out-grower Option
Vertisols
Water charge as % of net farm
income
No of
ETB / farm
ETB/farm
Luetsob
Vertisols
1 Special
1 measure*
2j
222%
251%               2.22%l
77ir.               729%j               7.9.1%/
7.7*.                7S6‘ J                    7.7V J
Sntalhoklni Tool
' nmmttcn) (irrn»
>jQ64
6.OV.1              10211./              2 SV J
J
J
V>S;g>?
R ••! X ■• VI
Waler   charges payable ETB
M V98.7M4 1    I.IH2.995 U, 796.74^
ST.,5 V 1.12* II isn
-2JJ ’.-y y
% *«“-/        iq at-*- ./
J941- -1' "•■"I’   ir^"'1"       U,,,l,‘9' /'m‘,r
The family and lured labour requirement y
m ,uiremrOa fon e,Bmud
/anrn arc an average 4 day, per
heciuc un irngared farms ate about 190 days 0/^ dements
^ped 
ben rhe
tequirementa for commercial farms (83 da *nnUm lnd
’» about 3 ^
lc
(even management, .hough this (5 a
’ nn^ P« ne,
LabliU[
use per hectare ts less than on smallholder f * "Ot ‘ ^ed 
K
bemcathusr   e SOfJJC
The mtal labour requirement withpmgrct (OptKJn 2A1 „ agricultural labour requirement is expected tn be shout 11.4 
()|j
J,
^pn,) Ve lU lured
“'. *
labour  requirement  for  livestock  is  stnubr  to  the  family  labour  ™.nr though livestock contribute only about 25“ □ to net farm income ikcy mrf ' household functions, notably traction, manure, wealth bolding and cultund vJ Tn labour accounts for of the labour required for emos thr rr u >
households hire about 10% of the total agmultuntl labour rcqtiuemen^^ farm labour is expected to account for 12% of the total agneulmiral J
,., labour dm p.r ofwfcb W7X« snullholdrr farms, 12 * on conuncicul farms and 53% on die sugar «we.
Cf °pi ^tV”1
Figu re 6-2: Agricultural Labour Requirement With-projcct, Labour Days per annum With-project labour Days per annum
■ Sil Family crop
■   SH   Hired   crops
s SH Family nock
W  Cornrncrrtal 1  li red crnpi
■ Ejuir Hired craps
The total rural population of the w’lh
t
'P y 
__ schememe ibcs ertcng   p^^*»’
UU, be about llO.OW^’00
Ifro
,bcU
' ’ tcsldclll
. household *rC
residents and 1.3.500 seasonal migrant labour' - . ^ed to move into the scheme bet— 201 1 population is fit for farm work .All of
120 days pct annum and migrants uc »v c
Assume 80% ”
If resets arc-aria
diy& per annum. ,bal ‘
annum, compare'1 sn‘1
^cultural labour force will be 12.25 million *, _a  miect are tb«ef
D
ort irl
|  for
. bc
days
c ord,t of
^A.ClOO)
—ted    I    -about    resources    required    by    the    P^’^    be      the    urban    poP^
to labour available- Other sources o
17-Mar-H
307Federal Dffimrafir PafiMc of Ethefea. Minute) t>f Wafer Energ
pjtnapi" NtJt Imfa/ior and Drainage Pryea
wluch  could  account  fot  '70,000  casual  days  per  annum  But
suggest  that  there  will  be  sufficient  work  opportunities  in  the most importantly, the
irea for labour associated with minimum allocation farms.
agricultural sector of the pt>^.
The return per family labour day is the net farm return divided by the n labour engaged tn production. Irrigated crop returns per family day aie ^k
n
,Ofd*P'>heii,
rainfed family returns per day. Irrigated and rainfed stock returns arc similar th’1' will be grazing and agro-forestry initiatives in rainfed SO A which am
which will give similar stock returns throughout the scheme The overall w for the scheme is expected to be ETB 130 per family day.
Tabic 6-16: Returns to Family Labour Weighted by Model Farm
. * Pt0Rn,ict
to y kc L * k
-
to 13IT1! Fv L|L
Crop enterprises
Stock enterprises
AB          emrrpntef
Rainfed farms
109
60
72
Irrigated Farms
227
62
135
All Farms
220
62
130
Source. Returns to family labour by farm weighted bv labour input* to crops and *tock
The socio economic survey reported that between 15% and 80% of rhe households m the project area are considered to be food insecure With project the food security situation a
per o improsc Only farms with the minimum allocation and small rainfed holdings vj unable to meet basic household food energy needs: these farms represent about 12% of the
projected population. Even on these farms 80% of household food energy requirements wJlbt
. fied by on-farm production. Furthermore, there arc likeh to be sufficient rural emplonnnn opportunities for households in the minimum land allocation group to generate off-tan”
income.
(gj Sugar, Ethanol and Power
The entry of the benefit values from the sugar industry into
the financial and economic anshw
requires care to avoid double counting. The gross financial value of sugar factory gate is the value of domestically produced sugar at the auction floor in
« ...
haulage and marketing costs between Addis Ababa and rhe Upper
....
u
the Upper Belo
less
JOU HlA>» ».) <■._
Belts factory (ETB -.392f»
tonne, see Section 6.4.2(a)) To calculate the net vi
made:
ahic of sugar, the following deductions air
Prodpeurcttonionnecosoft cofancane ane d^I-TH <>O ”fafe loculated from rhe gross margins IT?
Fi
w *»•«■ charges)
P ».'-n>ents to out growers f.
'atc pos(-han.cs[ coj
**" ronnc l,f su8ar P,u» ETli 363 per ton of ’«g« / Canc Purchased by the factory
Per tonne of ,ugar includ
’’•ctory processing 
“ d nun3
pmeni (see section 625(b) ETB M ’
1
dc P^anon a, ErB 111 per tonne of sugar)
^eprecunon lt j.;rB ... '** ’CCnon b.2.4(b): ETB 2250 per tonne ofsugu
9 per tonne of sugar)
• rrrtt 3 339 per tomic
.
Therefore the gross margin on *ugar including depreciation is r.i o .
UB 1*4 Man Report fl)
308j|o*<ver 1,hl, I, arc included in the factory pracawngcosts. The expected valueOf«hinot
0,70 g/ ”
17JOO hft                e[Jiana] Wlt tafcen at USS 1,000 per tonne* (ipeciiic gravity of ethanol = (coiioto**7  ^iJjjaol value is l‘SS 0.7 (F- HB 12) per litre) -.chile the ftninctal value »u liken
1   1 s° fbc va|uc of diesel at ETB 13 per hue.
.„ ,____ „»r4trd from bagasse and a proportion of this can be sold to EESCO. The
KESCQ industrial tariff is currently about ETB 1 28 per kwhr. but EESCO would be unhitch
to buy power lor much more than the cost of hvdropower generation, which is about ETB O ’
per Kwhr The annual income to lilt factory for power sales would therefore be about ETB
96.8 million.
Ethand  and  power  arc assumed to  be produced in direct proportion to die size of factory and estate.
Factory and estate costs have alrendv been estimated and included in prefect costs net of depreciation, so estate and factor}' costs (inclusive of depreciation) air added back co the net value of production of sugar to return to the financial factory gait value, from which the value °f cane is then deducted to avoid double counting in addition the financial factory gate value?
17-MapH
309l-tfitfu!
of Ethiopia. Minftn of U ‘af9r & Eati^
Ethiopian Mt Irrr^ifioa and Dhjhmp Props
LJXi-* "»■
1
production (gross income minus variable costs) for the scheme with the relative distribution of benefits between commodities, highlight!
’ and „kuh«d <hc Odeq-re. F"» "^S»» « » P™” * "> ^M> dw „„
•”* ”'” °'J' 
’"
° lmTOd "»• ‘th»weir «.
products of sugar, ethanol and power. Figure 6-3: Net Value of Production (Option 2A)
>nng the value ofptftc^
■ drains
mdptic
■ fruit and ■tgra .
f
■Sugarcane
■ ('•her indunmi □»
■ Dm
SBct!
■  Sugar  protest
Value of eriawl
■ Value of povsub
A breakdown of net value of production is given for each river bank development in Table
6-17.
Phasing of these full
f able 6 1 
u
3^^.^ SCVcn
No net benefits from in
L ^°ne J>v ’fuming the net value of producooa dw*n«
atm^ctlun construction on the Right and Left
Car 9 on the Bank ^r< croP* W chimed before Year ’ on the Right Bank and production u assumed Disrunfif nstTuctlon 1$ completed the without-project crop
l>eforc G 4 completion will aln
n
UrlnR construction is incxitable. and any ungotjoti supph'
^peeted to begm one Vcaj.. -
B ^nks. b j| benefit from c* 
cfT 4inli be diverted to cane production. Cine hio'cst^
the^0'*
15
u
C °mp1ct*m of ‘he irrigation development on the rcspe<^ ,S CXP™* «o be achieved by 2025
IK 14 Main Report (1)
SIU5
I
n- —1
□e <*>
e- —
in
■□o
5!
’ *n Sfl
ei
F-
■o
c
ri
□e
e
e«
n
5,
■Tu o
fl
ek»
■i
e,j
r
r«
SIS
F ?
e*
p--
▼.
p«
<
3
C*
ifl
n
3
■a
r-
8
rfi
3
c*
?4
R
*oi
■^ r'r a
j
• : v
N
5
■»
u-
2A
R 3
r- oa |J
C*. &T 3 X‘
- 5
c
5p
“‘if i]
r
x
R
Xi
s>
2 
--
rJ 
?,
”i
*
N
*5
PS
r
—      - rE
—
g    p n <
5 5
O
-»S
r-
m
3
f-P
&
X
c 
Cil
'5
f-
rl
a
5
3t
■£> , •*
55
? 8
un e-
r*
1 ■*!
a
O
W>.. f-
*■<
3
z
1 -#
■ i*i
O o
■*
n
a
o
H
“1
N
a“
S°
t>
8
90
■H'
»1 p=? kT rfi
■at
fl-L
W
f
»-?
q
3
r^i
3
fc
3
C
r--
».
o
1 ff"
i—
s
-*
a.;
©c
■K
q
c•n 
* 
“I
C
"0
o
i
3
&
-3
i
i
£
3 
$
c
£
2
t rr
■H
1
E
£ ?
A
£
1
I
•i
a
1
1
J
•«-
t
Lr-
i
i
b
h 
u3-
FtiM Dtvomt}. RrfM. 9f'EfL<9pa. Atwffiy cfW’affr &Ewg
kttetyOK .XfJf ImfOftot! jnd Drutaj^e Pttytrf
63J          PfYJCft! and Fuhtrr II HM-prytrf He nt fib
(a) Present Production
As well as estimating with-project benefits as described above the
Optimisation and the Fann Revenue Optimisation models can be AUcc’bf'n
future without project benefits Both arc important and if under ' '° CMlnu'c pit^.
to an over-estimation of net protect benefits. The present situation households (of which 8% are landless) with an annual rainfed cultivate I ' 8’*MI addition there are about 1,700 ha of rainfed cultivation tn commcrcidfaX” '*33,000 h productivity of these farms is not significantly higher than that achieved?" imgated area is at least 200 ha, and some of this is ven productive duLn 'th™^ ^ Present annual production in the project area is about 12.000 tonnes of sot hu"
r
° b*’0°‘lJ o-l
0
of  finger  millet.  15,000  tonnes  of  maize,  2.000  tonnes  of  nee
6  000  t,«  ’  Uln
-  b   0®  loa*
o
, t n. tonnes o| i*rr>Qfir| n.M
3,300 tonnes of sesame In addition small tonnages of higher value crops arc produced about 400 tonnes annually The total value of present production is about ETB 351 rrui ” annum, see Tabic 6-18 
Table 6-18: Present Net Value of Scheme Production, FinancjalETB chou.and
’ r^°
Sn*lll>okfcn             Commcrrul I* Ann*
Sugar E«Utc F Total NnVi
ltnwncui| bxoaowc
kill i Lfononuc
RIGHT BANK
I.naps
'• s ii rjrv
61,72#              59.SJ »m
h>MCT U>~»
I tfrnrol______
WmW
197,1 M9|
177,137]
35.176|
BOTH BANKS
<-rr»p>
213,726]
3)74411
36,971
Scytur cjnL
I>atn
Beit
46.2*5
15.735
254 >4
Hnc-CMcd *4;ar
T 4.79
C,
lYm er salt
I rHna
Ww/___________________________________________________
—
IxM c sUfr. xrxi fact I in ijnrkrdn>; Jqnriculirsn
TouJ_________________________________________________ Source barm Revenue Opnmuat>r»n Mudrl
275,745]
247,692
CH 1-4 Mam Krfxrt(l)
312.***
J,^"
flic
future Without project Production
Wcct  future  benefits  arise  from  the  projected  growth  of  agnculturai  produce  .n medium or large scale public or institute rial investment in irrigation
|fl
develop^ ' in-migration of (smallholder) households;
the pfO<dcr ’ sunlITian. the characteristics of the without-projecc future situation would lx
1
*     * 'li uiiuial productivity increases on smallholder farms but limited area expansion
‘
io d^1™* m managing vertisols
.ricinri of rainfed commercial agnculnirc on vertisols, which may be quite
t  Area expanse
in the proportion of oilseeds (particuhdy sesame and ooogj in smallholder comfneroaJ firm cropping patterns:
Slight increase in Lhc proportion of higher value crops tn smallholder and commercial farm cropping punerns. and
Increases in the (pumped) irrigated area particularly ar low rlevabons along the Bries River by both smallholders and commercial farms
TIk present and assumed fururc numbers of households and areas of smallholder farms, and areas of commercial farms, dis anguishing between rain fed and irrigated, are shown m Table 6 19. A 38° a increase in households has been modelled, which is equivalent to saying the rural pApiihnnn will grow at three rimes rhe national average tn the period 2010 to 2020 Rain fed smallholder cultivation will expand at a similar rate. The area of smallholder minor trnganon ts expected io increase from a few hundred hectare* now to over 1,000 ha, Ccmmerda] ratnfrd culrrratjnn will also expand at a rare similar to smallholder riinfed cultivation. However, if the investment climate is good, anti investor*’ activities are monitored and managed properly, a rapid expansion oi commercial irrigated agriculture is expected
Table 6-19: Present and Assumed Future Without-project Farm Num ben and Areas
WTTHOUT-PROJECT FUTURE
Righy             Left
PRESENT
Total
Righy
Hoexhnldt Number*________ ___ —
y^a&Mjl<kr fajnfed culnvatiopjjjB—
jaullhnlijtr :nig3ird cultivation, ha
Pjcanerciil nupfed culriyatioft»              _
^*0^1X01 irrigared cultivation. ha_ 
jJJ34
8.666
27
___ 80
10
13,348
24,259
114
1,568
0
Left
18,773
34,1 SO
603
2,1 tO
1,600
e
"W be suitable for tainted cropping Mod * 
«ken up m the penod of foe projection - » 
Jc W»4wnn wuhnut-project. unk.sS'.V mt* Versified cropping pattern is expected, compo* 
area of higher value crops This change » b'oUS TP^nunines fox higher value crops'
WUwUer m ™ ..m.-JI.«•»<■“' 
«' >b'”' 
nfed ciiltr*’aao11 rithtr
of *l*b
pus inei^ t ^pmg maodveeJ 0* P *
( |.c rfs jiff',)■'n                  v (,5%) mU *<nu^1
foy Ifnpro\
”x.
313
[7 Mjf nM'Wln                 tf Ew®
SjhtpiM Sih Im**" ati Pnn.njf P'W*'
The model calculates the net value of production in the same wav as
protect situation in section 6.3.1(f), and a summan of the results is pve„ Without-project. the value of crop production would be about 44% nf ' r,l*6-2n crop production, wlule the value of livestock production would lw
° fu”l>5 .
t
would  be  no  sugar  enterprise  in  the  future  without-projcct.  so    total  benefit  * expected with-project benefits The future without-projcct total net value trf
586  5  million  in  financial  prices  is  phased  in  to  Year  15,  or  2024  Growth  fro^^ *
•      •ir
.
iu y a,*out 4no v, r
1   00110^
(ETB 351 million) has Iteen modelled as linear, and averages about 4°
plttesr
and 2® o pct annum for livestock.
Table 6-20: Net Value of Production, Future Without-
® P*r •nnum faff,
n°P
ct,
Smallholders
Commercial Farm
Financial '        Economic
Financial J Economic
—Financial
RIGHT BANK
Crop*
93 R
85 2
44.0
46.0
137*
Dim
166
9.(1
16.6
M
Bert
5.5
5.5
53
II
Sugar cant*
Procrued ugai
I
Sugar factory costs
1
Total
1159
99.8
44 0                         460
1599
Id
LEFT BANK
Crop*
250.5
2352
110.'’
118 5
36121
Beef
Sugar cane
Prr»ces5cd Migar
bugar factory costa
lota!______________
BOTH BANKS
Cr< ips
Dairr
Beef
Siyn car*.-
Processed v 11^41
Sugar factnrv  com
Total
344.3
277.4
320 4
110
154"
I H ! '4 Main Report (1
314/>****'
Irrigation Construction
nt to economic prices for irrigation construction wis issuted by a detailed
0* ld,°* ^cosB bv the Left and Right Banks available from the design engineers The
btflk^^
m'd—
•ersmn factor for irrigation construction is about 0.8' . Che conversion factors for
■‘*
U C  n>
of the main nafld sub-main systems were assumed to be similar to the conversion factors
°    —:
e5llm«tcd f°r construction cost.
,^,i Sugar Factory, Sugar Estate and Commercial Farm*
nomic values of each of the various components ot the works required for the sugar CC <zar estate and commercial farms were calculated on the basis of their 2010 financial
factory, sug*'
As in the original estimate IT is assumed that sugar estate ind factory imported
...
,.
,f
Equipment would be imported free of taxes so economic prices differ litde from finanaal - the conversion factors arc about 0.93.
(c) Sub projects
The detailed finanaal cost estimates for each sub-projeer were sub divided into an estimate of traded good*, non-traded goods, skilled and unskilled labour and duties and taxes. The SCF (0.86) was applied to the financial pace of non traded goods and skilled labour, the shadow pnee of labour (0.7) w as applied to unskilled labour costs and duties and taxes were chminatrd to arrive at an economic pnee for each of the sub-project services. Note that compensation payments for re-settlement are transfer costs and therefore have no economic value, so were eliminated from the economic cost The overall conversion factor tor sub projects was estimated to be 0 79.
Prues for Prv/fit Crop Benefit!
(•) Crops
finanaal and economic import pant)' paces have been calculated foe the main traded
’fficulturaj commodity components (pulses, maize, sesame and fertiliser). The conversion °rs arc applied to the financial values as they’ appear in the gross margins (together with the
^•on factor to give the shadow price of labour,. The valuation of sugar is discussed in the
50X1 ’ection.
Ty^,              (b'1 Processed Sugar
processed sugar tn Ethiopia became enneal in 2010. Annual
Uj nncx m ^ °^
r
Vestment
UCtlOn ls ,n <hc order of 310,000 tonnes but consumption was about 460,000 is forecast to rise to 580,000 tonnes per annum by 2012 (Sugar
the regjJ™'f >PP°rtUn,T)’ Profile El A 2008) Ethiopia has the lowest per capita consumption in ^°dd Eco nl' *k°ut kg per capita pa), and a GDP per capita growing ar about 5% pa (IMP k’ding to Rl3C ^^doolc). llic elasticity of demand for sugir and sugar products is high.
^  ^ ctjon i
ro   u
and CXPan^m2 rapidly as incomes grow’. Government plans to expand domestic
ptQduc ^’000 tonnes as soon as possible; a 'Ogar estate of 36,335 ha in Upper Bek*
^ °Portio
r
0 o f ^°ut 240,000 tonnes at full capacity and therefore meet a substantial c mcrenient required to meet the target-Wri Df**vutK RfM, of&hivpu. Miaiffr) ofll'a/fr r* Etfupiatt N/r Irrit^to* mt Dnuo^f Profit
1
ft. dome." Mta » «**• *W* “
*°
'" •“ ««*. fc.
through bi-weekly auctions. A reasonable wholesale pncc is con^.--
March 2010 a variety of factors including speculation caused wholesale nJ-T n
traders (ETFruit and MVCTIT.) to bid for an increasing share in the sugar auctions March 2010).
tonnes, an increase of a factor of 10 over 2008 imports. This implies that imported
about 30% of the volume traded in the auction in 2010 and its cost thrr^fr r
.
uicicrore excm a urr^,
influence on the floor price. The import pncc of sugar rose from VS$ 390 per tonne in ? /
about l’S$ 800 per tonne in 2010 (GIF). ’1‘hc doubling of the import price was caused by shortages of supply in India (a net importer in 2010) and the increased use of sugar for crhicd prnducnon in Brazil The supply situation cased a little in the latter pan of 2010 due to increased Brazilian exports and the GIF price fell back b\ about 6%. I lowevcr. thcScptcrr.be 2010 devaluation of the Birr meant that though cheaper sugar imports saved a brtic foreign exchange, they became more expensive to domestic conMimcrs On top of the CIF pncc« border costs, ETB 4,197 per tonne (about 11% of the (.IF pncc) and government taies e applied;. ETB 8,000 per tonne. In 2010 therefore, imported sugar cost E! B 25,600per twre
tax and duty pud and about ETB l*\600 per tonne tax and duty free.
Domestic sugar can be produced much cheaper The production cost of cane grown or
sugar estate is about ETB 699 per tonne of sugar, plus ETB 36.3 per ton ot sug*1 incite
rharoec Fl aula cm* tn ftw* Far-tnrv /»crat<* minaorfTV'nt and rcnlaCCment COStS of C^Uip^
2,259 per tonne of sugar (sec section 6 2.4(b)) including depreciation. 1 ran*pnf
meant that imported sugar cost much more than this.
7
< Assuming CS$ 0.072 km/ton including tundlin/,
UH H Mam Report (!)
316,, Miurltn rf
lr  jr,r r  h h
’
-    "'T
r5 ',’v '
„>» J"
‘■^‘J
|-TH 11  OOO per tonne (assuming no qiuhtv issues between the two sources)
p
^e  flo',r   P’'“  '  wf)u]d  enter  at  ETB  8.053  per  tonne,  represraung  a  niaigin  of  nearly  1(10"
[hen dorT,,*tlc ^O!i|
6-21 shows the ven simple calculation.
os J re of financial Ffjce of Domestic Sugar, MIO
Table 6 ^- ’i*"---------------—
inport price
USJ/tnil
import
price
TB/tco
(CIF)
Border chattel tod (rampart io
Addif Ababa, ETB/loo
Taxes arid dmia,
ETB/tftn
Dotnertic
production
price
CTB/ion
Doroesik
price
rapport, RTB/con (
lo«l£t
■old in auction |
ETB/too
Aertiaii traded 1 nbc,
ETBm
1.018            B.OCU
raja
18,0,36
TH
XM5
4,419                WM
2,1*7
-mi.DQO
1
II.(JOO
i
Note- Ftnaflci-u P ‘
i-lmnc-rtc wMf iUuc hifiWieht) W '“‘Ived bzch^nginp «be level nd J<«mmnr pnee luppnri io
nu
j[htV(. rht- tjxjuirL'J Jurrion fl-H-r price frcllo*
The financial value of sugar per tonne at rhe factory gate in Lpper Belcs is ETB 8.053. minus the financial cost of haulage. ETB 64J1  per tonne. The project's financial value of sugar al the factory K-*’ therefore about ETB 7,392 per tonne
c
The economic price- of imported sugar ar rhe Upper Bde$ factory gate in 2010 can easily be derived by nuiluphmg the CIF price of imported sugar by the SF.R (which is ETB 19.42 to USS 1. giving ETB 10,570 per tonne), adding financial border costs multiplied by the SUE (which is E‘IU O.#6, giving ETB 876 per tonne), deducting (axes (ETB 8,000) and subtracting ihr financial cost of haulagr to rhe Upper Bdcs protect Arca multiplied by the SCF (ETB 569 per tonne). The project’^ economic value of sugar is therefore about ETB 10,878 per tonne Dividing by thr financial pnee of domestic sugar fETB 7*392) gtves a conversion factor of
■boui 147.
^idi-pmiect, lull clrvelupmem of s ugar producnon in Up per Belts is twJi expected to be achieied until 2025, though the first production, about 12,000 tonnes would hnpetuDy be on
ircajii m 2016. Ry 2025, the demand for sugar will have grown to 1,600,000 tonnes Fhis jtimare is simply an extension of the projected demand for sugar 2001-2011 (El A 2008).
projection (winch is only a quadrant equation not a multivariable linear regression ToLIq^011 PQP l* ton and income), it implies .i population of about 110 million in 2025
ut
Blu
an<^ Prnkab|y an over-estimate) consuming 14 5 kg pc pa, which is reaituiubk.
onlv rl°U ^1C PCf CaP,ta consumption of sugar tn Kenya is over 22 kg pc pa Supposing
sam
?
demand is satisfied through the auction system (as now, because using
Phs Pf°,Cchon demand is 526,000 tonnes pa and supply is only 310.000 tonnes domestic
1 bj*= >Vbr tQnncs iniportcd) then in 2025 rhe auction system should be trading about
’ 00
of sugar pa.
_ J1,C Rovtm,
Befcj
ryiCnf aims rn achieve a domestic supply of 600,000 tonnes tn the short icrm. Upper
Project situ               &uPPh' W3%   %  of (he increment required and we are considering the with-
a °t»n, so jt i5 reasonable to suppose that by 2025 domestic supply would increase by
l7Njp1l
3!”1
Vnirj. Dtwix,Rftbfc
M'.ni'tr. tfWattr
lilfacwi Xtlt Impf** a^i Drjrijp /Vwrtf
rather more, say 125% to 750,000 tonnes pa. So if the auction ’ projected demand, a further 525,600 tonnes of sugar will have to I C°n,,nUc to
W orid export market m -
• onW is m the order °f 50 milhon ‘°nnC* 
2(M)8 soB only lcCoum
P Evw ,lW
h X«“ports. Ethmp.a will remain a pn« taker «.if
0 25% of thu year r*
.nulhon mnnes m
According io the W orld Bank Commodin- Report, the I'OB price of sugar
will be USS 360 per ton in today’s prices. It is assumed that border chin
P ‘0,cctcd ^3%
marges and tramon..
remain the same as present, but the duty is adjusted downwards bv 8(f »to r .fl
CIF pnee Table 6-22 can be reconstructed with the projected figures, resulting m a term financial value of domestic sugar (because the proportion of more expensive imp^r ' sugar has nsen from M% to 41%). Subtracting the cost of haulage to the Upper BcJe< area, the long term factory gate financial price will be ETB 7,894 per ton
Table 6-22: Estimate of Financial Price of Domestic Sugar, 2020
Border
charge* and
Domrilic
import price
transport to
Ta>ct and
pHnluLtson
pnee
Domestic
price
fiippon,
4r
ai
US$/lon
Addii Ababa,
(CIF Djibutt)
ETB/ton
1,018
duties, ETB/ton
6.3 J*
ETB/ton
ETB ion
[Imported wjyar
<27 1
•
IU*
[Dome MU ynr
4,i >56
4
Sold   trough   aucnoo
R«parvd (k»f pots
I lowever, according to the World Bank long term projection, imported sugar ha
II FTB 8 700 P<r ,o<lDC relatively cheaper. I’hc long term factor.- gate economic pnee will be r.
gmng a conversion factor of only 1.10
t*TB 11 Pcf ,<1!
Therefore if Government wishes to maintain auction prices at L-1 o •
equivalent in constant paces) in order to achieve affordable wholesale an sugar for downstream then estimating the long term financial and economic price
pnee*
involves deciding between the alternatives: r nnee of^*30
•     If international prices remain relatively high, then the econo CO(npcn5,|!C
remains high, but the financial pnee of domestic sugar will t
increased proportion of more expensive imports
f   ecaM
nC
t(,r
•      If international prices fall (as suggested in (he W orld Bank co 
o
f
2020), then the economic pnee of sugar will also fall, but the
c
he*Pcf
domestic sugar will rise to compensate for an increased prop
<>fd*
Khe present situation and the expected impact on financial and econo P alternative future situations are summarised in Table 6-23.
UHHMmi Report (!)
M8
m eir ^ocn^or^Proje^d^ricenf Sugar Produced at Upper Bej«
Based on prevent
impofl
rrquirefnetita
Prrsrai inrerMtioaal price
L'S$ tonne
470
I fir*ndaJ taer^ry gajc pricc_ _
ETB/tonne
IJ?2
470
5.415
| eccMiomic focrert gate price
F.TB tonne
Pjojected imematinnaJ price
U5$,       tonre
! linanuaj Men jgarc pnee
ETB/rnnne
nor applicable
I economic factor. >7,1 fr p net-
ETB/tunne
<3
The Hirtmuoonal sugar price used in the analysis should he rhe World Bank prajected price for bearing m mind rhat full factor}' production is not expected until 2025
yfaapciAi           Economic Cost Benefit Analysis of Option 24
Pryttf fadMifor?
The detailed CBA for Option 2A, sei out in flnancaJ and economic prices is given in Annex G and Annex 11 of SR-06. T he results of the analysis arc given in Table 6-24. Project indicators are derived for die whole project, and additionally for <mallboldrrs. commcrciiJ firms and sugar estate from the point of view of the prefect implementor.
Table 6-24:
Indicamrs:                      2A
1
Financial
1                  Economic
Indicator
LB
RB
Total
LB
RB
Total
3S ttrterptBn
IRR
$59%
9,16%
7-90%
«73%
1152%
10.19%
‘■niiini.-jli.liyrs.
IRK
7,01%
11.93%
8-81%
8 04%
13,10%
9 91%
J^qmmEfcilJ Farms
IRR
n/a
7.84%
n/l
n/a
8 73%
n/a
Jj-gir Enterprise
IRR
7.93%
8.62%
8.30%
10-79°/#
1139*/-
11 12%
■jlgqEmq
N’PV ETB m
1335
367
1.729
469
642
149
[■
2’^^oldcn r
1H , 
~“
_N?V ETB m
426
1«0
275
253
261
20
NPA E J'B m
370
122 I
488
419
19
434
t
enr^                         '
NPV ETB m
539
425
965
202
423
621
^holder ~~~----------- '■
.BCR
0.76
0.93
0.84
090
L13
1.02
[
i^ntenr^i t?
J
BCR
0.71
1.24
0.88
080 j
14!
0.99 j
JzSP Eni>~. •.
-
BCR
2.40
0.60
0.09
3 82
11.75
028
------ J BCR
.' ’ ——- 1
__
tn ’hat n„ W r'rld Bank ptD’ected P°rr o| >ujnr to 2020 of USS 360 per i.imw JOB
Cra *t,Cj,,Hj‘"’unforIRR„ vwfabl .
ae
0.S6
0.90
0.88
0.97
1.02
100
n ^" iiktira
U Ptlrj  j.
n
I
° rca*on  f
^Tiolc f II
s   Of
c, Herpnsc.s on both banks) is a poor performer financially. There arc
p
ncc  n^V lo maJn[a|n the auennn floor price of sugar at abouT ETB 11.000
rejj^ *  ^ciisity -
° rts* ^cconcyv mc5tical|y produced sugar must counterbalance much more expensive 0                         >Xt lrngarif >n development on the Ixfr Bank is high because of tow
' fy  HtaU areas \t
cs
transported long distances over difficult retrain to supply
° c ot the financial indicators for the Left Bank justify theinvrstinent
n
I’n.
319
17 Mar-11Ftdria!
of EtNo^ia, hfairfn of U'-'afer & Izntr^,
Et/npai XtJt Im#*™ JfV Dr^t^t Pnw.r
-     -------- ,,,* °nilpnc
o
BWg»r projected to 2020 of US$ 360 per tonne, which is much lower than the present^ .
PM
VS$ 470 pci tonne Naturally, the future expected demand and supply of sugar (see Table 6-22) to estimate financial and economic nnces Th—
Note though that the F.NPV of the Ixft Bank development is negative, I'113 - 469 mily-nmd the EBCR is only 0»90. The I^eft Bank would not be acceptable for development or. these terms. Option 2A on the Right Bank has positive economic indicator* which suggest itisin acceptable project for development
higher financially than Option 2A as a whole. Smallholders arc modelled to grow crops with higher value than cane and their financial gross margins arc good. For traded commodities rdi as sesame, pulses and maize, gross margins expressed in economic prices are strong, though t f non-traded commodities values are weaker because of relatively high labour costs (sceseftrnn 6 4.2) Fhc smallholder project does well on the Right Bank In the without -project fut-ffr the Right Bank (large areas of imperfectly drained vertisols) will br difficult to
smallholders but with-project smallholder development will be widespread in LA households or over 35% of irrigated smallholder farms) But smallholder agncidturc c
” ,ke‘hep,0’e«P«vOnthcL<>-
1
ornme
rcia] |Mrni
" rttWlClal UI economic
terms
"^X‘, 
' 
T 24 ” d™1’-
■" Of
th ' *
6J 3(b))
C
/cu ^ Arning and r> •
•              project future,
<Ufe W1lh
and an expansion
Suited  m  l,nu'iCOUriKlnR   ^’uJts  of  c/'  lrrig’t10'’  Was    '"odeDed  in  the  former  case  («tooi> 'Teators ,K                   in a,nonercia 1 (,n/T1CTCuI ,arr™ng in rhe area in the past decade h»«
CdonWc»anentaJbe
0°*^ erOaitauc Tc^
so the fmuncid rnd ecoc^c
& 1 a!>)<- 6-24 is the indtoiton that the sugar entcij*^’*•
„„ ,h„ , bink cvcn tbough (he
UM J-4 Stain Repaart (I)
32dfijfj
- R cOflcerncd with establishing long term financial and economic puces for secfi‘,f1 6 4 J avy;,r[j Bank projections suggest a fall in international paces from the present USJ
«uga  Rc
r
47Q pcf
fCOt . <JS> 360 pcx tonne in 2020. presumably due to an expected increase tn
|j WIt]c (o gain benefit nor only for sugar but also for energy by-products This
p]>nun£ areil j^xror|d Bank projection. However, if the project indicators axe rr-calculated valval’ usc5 5UgaC production holds its present value, then rhe econonvr value of sugar
^tuning 
bur its financial vilue (which cross-subsidises expensive imports)
produced wit              _n _ Government holds Lhe sugar auction floor price at a constant ETB
ac
, section 6.4.2(b)). The linanctaJ and economic indicator? using the present
Table 6-25; P«
jipe d ■ • •                    _i _ Indicator
Financial
Economic
Tata!
nut____________ __ LRR
RB
3- I«J f7ttlt
11,93%
Total
■f 4 ‘7* 4
LB
1 1 770
RB
J enieirrwc-
LB
Ji tiiofi.li . U 7.01%
fl.81%
1J —to”'
8.04%
*     l J.vj B.10%
9.91%
.srJiiiriujocjj' ____ ________________ Tr^-ntf-fLw bairns
1RR
n/a
573%
n/a
n/a
8.73%
0/i
x ju EnierpfUE
IRR
2.62%
3.27%
2.95%
14,15%
1436%
14 43%
,-xL rnrripfues-
NTV F-TR m
2.412
1.652
4.090
478
1.771
2325
SmiUhniJen
NTV ETB m
426
184)
275
253
261
20
. 'rxrjnrjLiil Firms
NPV ETB m
370
122
488
421
52
469
1        E^recprisc
NPV LIT m
1.616
1,710
3,327
1.148
1,552
2.6W
Afi crjitr^riies
BCR
0 56
0.70
063
1J0
135
122
‘■^njlDiTildrrs
BCR
0.71
1.24
0.88
0.8U
1-41
0.90
i --Ansocfcu] Farms
BCR
2.60
U.64
0.10
3 72
0.97
O.<?'
^tcipriise
BCR
0.59
062
0 60
132
U8 |
1.35
N<3|£_   1‘rrp.tftt]   LWF1E   ilic   present   internariunaJ   pner   «d   ,o    2020   of   l?S$   470   per   trxinc   FOP n/a indicates that m rnuhmianva! sulunun f« [RR is avubblc
N.„ ta totoi to to—* 
„  a., „o. ch.„ c - a. 
*” d„, 
wE
L to .
p«' ’f
. Opto 2A on *. W
,£f« to »*
to  ,««* p«to «°7“
„ *. —. to*
indicators.,   entirely   due   to   improved   benefit   rom   •   o    However,   financial
urgency for increasing sugar production under curt ** extremely poor . because it is assumed that e
o f domestic su£*r ,
proportion of the moon
international sugar is highly priced and contributes            noof pdee at 201® levels demand, and Government maintains the sugar auct»
r d>le 6-26 shows the impact of cost changes on ccon° w.. The SVorU Bank piojcctcd price of                     W f0,t5 ,o only *15% of esumated levels of both the sugar a
1
^IRRontehcduclxfn°t.^n ^in ^m; vestm
10
w  HIRR !o 9 8% niC5r arc onlv sraal| movements tn W
“^P^ticuhrlv sensitive to cost changes Nevertheless, 1
»n m«e«e ln EIRR from 10.2% to 10.6* «, while w tn« 
.t
cnsts of 5’'.£«** 1
* concluded *c *nl ’*
w oR the
*’
[l)
321
ILMar-11n & E«rzp
EibMpi* Mr Imp"" Md Pr**l
economic viability, and even a small change in project costs can mean in unacceptable and an unacceptable project. For example, if ^^7° d,ffcr^c |,
of expected on the Left Bank, the EIRR would be 9.7% and annr< > J"’
oJ^'
Note that the project indicators arc more sensitive to irrigation dcvcl
costs of the sugar factory. The former is twice as expensive as die latter^01
scheduled for construction in project years 4 and 5. so its cost is more h
lhe irrigation investment scheduled from project year 1 to 4 As a percent™
costs, irrigation investment is 49® o. while total investment for sum® ,<
. . °
- «a,‘son>y25%(5eeT |)k
,
^
Table 6-26: Sensitivity of EIRR to Changes in Invest™ent Co b t r
Left Bank
Change m sugar mill jovn..^
87%
110%
105%
100®;
110%
105%
100%
7 9%
8.1%
s § 5
8 2%
8 4%
8.3%
8.6" o
8 7%
8.9";
90%
9.0%
92%
93%
95'a
Right Bank
Changr in sugar mill investment cost
11.5%
110%
105%
100%
95%
e •. n
u
E  ? •* 5   bi *
110°;
10.7%
10.9"®
112°;
1J4'.
Ilf.
105%
10 9".
11.1%
113%
116%
Ilf
100° .
11.1%
11 3%
11.5%
11.8%               !:•<
95%
112%
11.5%
117%
12.0%
U?-
90%
11.4%
11.7%
11.9%
122* 3
CA
Change in sugar mil! inr
110%
94%
95%
9 7%
98%
100%
100%
*! 2  S
fl.l
U
Both Banks
102%
110%
I ______________ 105%
> _______________ 100° ;
i________ 95%
90%
105%
9.6%
9 8° o
9.9%
10 1*
103%
10.4%
1<)5%j
h • uft.
Table 6-2  shows the impact of benefit changes on economic IRR t>n 1 c fccnCfits th**^
Banks rhe project indicators arc more sensitive to changes in with-pmjee An increase in the value of benefits to 110% of estimated levels leads to an from 10.2®-® to 116%. and if combined with a reduction in costs to EIRR rues to 12 1%. Benefits are likely to be more poorly estimated (
fclRR
jn
d !^r
'
■ i’TRR rise irv»»
g
increase in with project benefits on the Left Bank would see die Hin poor, to 10.2% which exceeds the discount rateto
res In Wilh-projcrl Benefits
6-2*
11*■T~ ik
8 7%
Change in imgarion and mill investment cotta
.
inr/i
118%
105%
100’/.
95%
W%
9.4%
9,8%
102%i
ia.7%
11.2%
~ |05%
8.7%
9.1%
93%
10.0%
105%
100%
7.9%
83%
8.7%
92%
9.7%
~ 95%
7.1%
73%
7.9*4
83%
8 8%
90"*
6-3%
6.6%
7.0%
“4%
72%
"
B
J1s
|£ S J i %
!2 j
ank
115%
lJlro
105%
Cha
inge in irrigatior
110%                     105% 1 ** 0*4                    12 4 «
n
1 1.4%                     H.8%
i and mill invrai 100% 129%
122*4
meat coati 95%
133%
127%
90%
13 8%
132%
lfl.7%
114%
115%
120%
124°/.
95%
10.0%
10.4%
10.8%
112%
112%
90^1                9.3%
9~%
10.1%
in.5%
10.9%
Both Banka
10.2%
Change in irrigation and mill investment costa
110%
105%
100%
95%
90%
cV
1 g
J £ Jf
k
110%
10,7%
112%
11.6%
121%
126%
105%
1O.1%I
10 5%
10.9%
11.4%
11-9*4
100%
9.4%
9.8%
ID.2%
10.6%
1L1%
05%
8.6%
9.0%
9.4%
9.9%
103%
90%
7.9".
8.2%
8.6%
9.0%
93%
•Switching values (die percentage required to achieve an E1RR equal to the discount rate) can be calculated for both the Left and Right banks as shown in Table 6-28- An 86® o reduction in cost? or a 108% increase in benefits would achieve an T'IRR of 10% for die Left Bank- A 119% ^crease in costs or a 80% decrease in benefits would achieve an EIRR of 10% tor the Rjghr
Nince rhe F-IRR  f the whole project is 10.2% it follows that the change in costs or
o
,tS fc4ULCtd to achieve an EIRR of 10% u very small
_ Left
Right
Both
86.4%
119.1%
1022%
____ 108.0%
89.1%
99.0%
tj LVt^ 1
c *tiinare O£  ^
ei     sw  tc
’  ^ing values for the Left bank (quite within reasonable tolerance of lhe
not.  Btr,  C°  U   antI   benefits)  it  is  very  difficult  to  sav  if  foe  Left  Bank  is  economically  viable  or
^vu,Ctj
'"■■*ause the h c
r netns, of public sector projects arc usually over -estimated, prudence is
* 
'
323
17-Mit-lTF**ru.
66
of E/faefw. Altm.itr) tWa/tr &EitQ
Slit Im&trt* >nti Dngtjft Pr»cj
Muhi-cnteri* Analysis of Development Options
Tabic 6-29 tabulates key data summarised for all the agricultural dev |
The  objective  is  to  identify  the  most  negative  aspects  of  pcrfonnanc  '/v*"*"'  °pt,On' each. In nummary
Option 0 (no sugar estate) is not favoured: there is no irrigation
sugar estate, labour requirements exceed labour availability and th” *tht production from smallholder and commercial farms i5 hkehm f00dc,0P
to absorb it, leading to pace falls for most commodities producecT^ Production under Opuon I (21,861) ha sugar estate) is also hk l
c
f
c v tf,
market capacity and lead to price falls for some commodities, there ull"4 marked fall in performance of commercial farms as they are ma 
and location; in other respects this is a viable option with p.xmI
*° *’
nsi2e
i
• rciurns to the relam
rr
-, * olh n’w
small sugar enterprise because of easier and quicker implementation.
Option 2A (36,225 ha sugar estate) is tile preferred viable option: food crop
is in line with market capacity and labour occupancy is nearly full, the only negatnt ' aspects arc that returns to investment for smallholders arc slightly below the discount rate (smallholder farms arc concentrated on die Left Bank in Option 2A. hut pin i larger share of the Right Bank in Option 1) and commercial farms are ode lined fa development
(JpDon 3 (40.099 ha sugar estate) secs the complete loss of commercial farmtanda larger sugar enterprise, the development of which is expected ro be longer than Pt Option 2. resulting tn a lower EIRE for both the proiccT atul the enterprise, nevertheless this is a viable option
Option 4 (the accelerated implemeniation option of 39,1 "5 ha of sugar, excluding in irrigated smallholder and commercial farms) has a higher economic rate of return ran any other option except the out grower option (sec below), but there arc signify disadvantages:
Only 63% of the potential irrigable area is developed;
,
Equity is poor 86% of project benefits go to the sugar esta 14% to smallholder farms (which are derived from rainfed cr PP smallholders would have anyway secured without project). , ^^:jcXCU: - No irrigation investment is phoned for cither smallhol
farms so all irrigation investment will effectively be a benefit of domestic sugar consumers (mostly urban).
Labour dis-occupancy will be very’ high, even with opportunities on the sugar estate;
firmed-
ovrf d*
I-and    productivity    (value    produced    per    hcciarc)*    cflof^ on^,cU\
n
scheme area, cane will be valued at its cost of pr
i t o krv factor i will be dominantly rain fed agnculmre - land. -
o
f
not given its value;
Food security in the project area will be unimpf 55.000 lonncs of food crops harvested (a l,td<:rcM111^
, of                                1 .
pre*c,lt‘1
62* o of households producing less than their t ^«j-p target' a GDP per capita would remain significantly be
t'B 14 Mun Rcp«in 11
324'’
Market opportunities for food crops will be unfilled: the scheme will suppH’ only * PpTcn0^ marker demand.
5 assigns rhe whole irnK*
b,e of 65  8?1
-
*° > sugar estate is not
oil 11 jlClld^d'
tCC° Equity is very poor, with 98% of net with protect benefits accruing m the
sugar enteipnsr.
I jbour occupancy is poor onk 60% employment is estimated;
I and productivity is ven* poor as 90% of the area will be cane, valued it its
production cost;
\ long development period is required for an estate of this size, implying a commensurate long period during which rhe sugar factory is operating under
capacity;
Re sett lenient costs are very high because some 75% oi the population would need to be moved.
The financial cost of the project is higher than any other option,
Onlv 15° c of marker opportunities for food crop will be met;
pood security issues arise, and 42% of the remaining population util not achieve on farm food energy security; and
GDP per capita would remain significantly below GTP targets.
Therefore, of all the options considered Option 2A is preferred, followed by Option 3
Two vanants of Option 2A have been investigated, the inclusion of pressure spnnklcr irrigation m 1X3 W (about 7,921 ha) and a consideration of the use of (Hit-grow ers to increase cane production Where these sub options perform significantly better than Oprion 2A the data cells arc highlighted in green Where performance is significantly worse, the highlight is tn red. On balance, the pressure sub-option is a good one:
•      1 he net irngable area w increased by about 1,300 ha.
Land productivity is increased by about 4.8° 0 over the scheme area is a whole and sugar production increases bv about 3.6%; and
lhe ENTV of the project as a whole increases a little, but the returns lo rhe sugar ^nterpmc arc a little pcxircr because of the high (up-front) cost oi installing pressure ‘rogation
much                 5Ub-oprion is also interesting, the E1RR is as good as Option 4, the ENPV is
pCr annum
ausfactory than any other option and over 330.000 tonnes of sugar are produced
Land ' S^Cr5‘
°* nct wjth-ptojcct benefits accruing to the sugar enterprise;
E'I*B  Uct’v,t>’ declines with so much of the area tn cane, though cane 1$ valued at P °du S^ntal which is congruent with the present financial value ot sugar
r
(cane    cuPancy  is  poor  with  labour  opportunities  only  7%  of  labour  avadab.e Project               much less labour per hectare per annum than most other crops in rhe
• most of which are cropped in one season',
325
17-Mar-llEtlMp* Xi* Im&h" Mti D*W
•     Food security suffen: 60% of households will not produce requirement (assuming cane is exclusively a cash crop), ** Cn<^
•      Project costs are high; and
•     W ater charges to out-growers rise, particularly for larrr
farms
vctteo]j
As suggested by the low return to land, out-growers will be unwilling to b
firm revenues ire possible from growing other crops. Tins opn< ,  would r<*na,cd:
n
financial value of sugar were higher It is estimated dial cane would have ml*■ '*’* *'**
ETB 42 per quintal to raise land productivity per unit area to thr i <
P 'lrclll,cd
**nc ■eveJ  i.
for irrigated smallholder agriculture. The auction floor pnee would thm k
* 
u
a
w
iiicii nave to nse b\ uk
maintain the profit margin for die ESC (see Section 6.3.1(f)). I lowcvcr givir.g |anj
requiring ESC to pay out-growers its equivalent to the opportunity cost will impbar subsidy paid by out-growers to sugar consumers.
riwninitc the
UHF4.M  R p
ac   C   ort(1;
326Z
OPTION 0
i I OPTION I OPTION-! \ OPTION XC\ 4             I 5 I \ PBESSVTRE. \
oftaon xb
ovtv-Ckovjew
/ Sugar estate
17
21.860
36,225
40,999
J9.F5                 63.871
1 Smallholders
'         33,284
26 644
22.872
22,768
1,648
0
/ Commercial farms
30.58’
15,366
4.773
0
0
0
/
Total )          63,871
63,870
63,870
63.767
10.811
63.871 I
Net nuafcd area, hi
Sugar ci tare
0
0
0
0
0
Smallholders
5,074
5.074
5.074
5.074
33.464
5.074
°l
10
5.074
5.074 |
Commercial farms
0
0
0
0
1.900
0
0
0
Total
5.074
5,074
5,074
5.074
35,364
5,074
5,074
5.074 |
Number of irrigating smallholder farina
Minimum alloc adon
1.750
1.566
1.183
1,343
3
3
1.404
1.183
Small
9.509
8,071
6,575
6,476
934
3
7.158
6,575
Medium
7347
6,275
5.246
5403
247
3
5,590
5.246
1-ar^r
7.797
6.256
5,202
5125
266
3
5,228
5,202
Total
26.403
22,168
18.206
18,247
1,451
12
18,206
18,206
Minimum allocanon
309
309
309
309
1.676
309
309
309
Small
1,561
1,561
1.561
1.561
7,604
1.561
1.561
1.561
Medium
1.066
1.066
1.066
1,066
6.776
1,066
1.066
1,066
948
948
948
948
6,188
948
948
948
Total
3.883
3,883
3,883
3,883
22.244
3,883
3,883
3,883
Labour occufMUMT)_________________________ | Labour requirement "/■ of availability [
121% |
100*7
93%
35%
59% |
UR H4 Maia Rcp^tt (l)
327I tiktj/ UrwAntfh R/jwM,- tfErhitpj Mwifry •fW’aftr & EiHijy
EtkHfin Ifnjjatiwt aid Drawer Prvrc.r
OPTION
0
OPTION
1
OPTION
2A
OPTION
3
OPTION
4
OPTION
5
OPTION 2C
PRESSURE
OPTION 2B
OUT-GROWERS
Land productivity
ITB/scheme ha/pa including esrate
20.298
13.288
11,728
2.726
1.266
13.753
9.970
.
p'j’B/Rcheme ha/p i ex< 1 tiding estate
31.551
29.359
27,133
27.778
4.888
6.973
27.744
20.147
Equitv
Proportion of ner benefits to sugar enterprise
0%
33%
54%
60%
86%
98%
55%
70%
Proportion of net Isenefits to
smallholders
62%
51%
41%
40%
14%
2%
40%
27%
Proportion of net benefits to
commercial farms
38%
16%
4%
0%
Ota
0%
5%
2%
100*z«
100%
100%
100%
100%
100°.
100® o
100%
Economic Return
E1RR of full project
12.0%
11 2%
102%
9.6%
117%
7.0%
102%
11.7%
ENPV of full project ETB million
1,295
84“
149
-334
1,031
2.925
152
1,447
E1RR of smallholder project
12.5%
11.6%
9.9*.
9.4°, o
0.0° a
n/a
10.2%
7.3%
F.NPV of smallholder ETB million
834
414
-20
-126
0
-1 376
42
453
HI HR of sugar enterprise project
n/a
125%
11.1%
104%
12.6%
,
9.0%
10.9%
13 6%
1 ENPV of sugar enterprise ETB millson
I
829
623
289
1*05
1.U47
560
2 >(M
1 EIRR of commercial farm projcci
115%
7.0* a
n/a
O.iE o
0.0® a
n/a
n/a
| ENPV of commercul farm ETB million
460
-395
-454
0
0
513
lean to full development
-450
<d)4
1
i >«.«»» sacuxy operating al tulj
e.
, 
r«         —— i                   —                  -
____
Vcapiaty 
V alue added
|
13
15
10
19
13
-----------------------------L2J
„/
■                           pvoauccQ pa at tuil \ development
1
ll 132.BOU
1 221)066
249.064
237.987
1K8.U10 /
227.903 /
J JI on j
’ 1VV> iVumaarxl p>
O ]          707.02'
>1      1.172.446
1,52 \O 11
1.2*8,350
2,075.1113 J
t.            //
J option
-LL°
/ omoN
| option
1 1
L j*
option”!
OPTION I   orrioN \ V
option m \
owr-awyrous \
/tr«rrr/cn>cof
/ Znvufafimry fc sertietnent, people
I if feet ed
Financial
____________
13.253
IB.183
18.183
19.182   1        65.978 \
1 Eiamited coat, IzTB million
8
110
187
187
155                      V'
1 New' in-migranf households
9.771
5,524
1,565
1.604
2.741 1
Irrigation. E'l'B million
4.685
4.685
4.685
4,678
2J7S 1
5^1
Sugar Factory, El B million
0
1.620
2.555
2.890
5.345 J
H 3.667
Sugar Estate, 17111 million
0
186
269
290
595
585
Commercial farms, ETB million
221
69
48
0
0
0
Total, ETB million
4.906
6,560
7.558
7,858
6,512
9.340
Food
Food crop production tonnes per
annum
504,859
327.285
225,820
187.951
55,260
24.262
225.763
100.380
Percentage of food energy- insecure
households
7%
11%
12%
13%
62*.
42%
12*«
61*.
Share   of   GDP   of   smallholders.   USS   per capita 2/
675
659
630
629
150
in
623
509
1 Scheme production as % of market | capacity for food crops
232%
158%
117%
98%
35%
15%
/sninry io pay waver cnargca
I Smallholders.  %  of net farm income per
» annum
6%
6%
6%
6%
6*/.
8%
1   Commercial   farms,   per   cent   of   net   farm i income per annum
8%
10%
12%
9%
20%
»' Distribution of with project net licnefiis (net of production coin) exclusive of investment costs or deduction of without protect l*cncfits 7r  An estimate based on net (arm income per annum
l H IM Mim RcpcMi (1)
329
17-May-11Xr*              **rf'P"^'
(5 7 The Project in the Context of GTP
The Growth and Transformation Plan (G rP) is a medium term S(T
period 2010-2014. It succeeds the previous Plan for Accelerated and to End Poverty (PASDEP) The major challenges encountered m thc
PASDEP implementation were:                                                                      pasI f,'c
•     High inflation resulting in macro-economic instability
•     Inadequate domestic revenue collection
•     Ixjw level of domestic savings to fund investment
•     L’ nrcliabillty o f rain fall
Nevertheless, thc performance of thc GDP under PASDEP Dolirwc
fu • '
-?<*></ "
• 
* 
irtiprca t
growth in the industrial sector did not match growth targets between 2005 '’•<19 i ' under thc GTP the vision for thc economic sector is “to build an economy which h and productive agricultural sector with enhanced technology and an industrial sector/ a leading role in the economy; to sustain economic deceit >pmcni and secure sow] lu tlct
,
J
increase per capita income of citizens so that n reaches ar thc level of those m middk-inwJ countries*'.
Measures introduced under the GTP arc aimed f<> increase < J DP growth, meet 2015 Millennium Development Goals for education and health, improve governmental capo?ird stabilise the macro-economy. Thc pillar strarcgic\ of the GTP arc (i) faster and equitablegrrv.li through investment in infrastructure and social services (ii maintaining thc focus onagncuiir: is the driver for growth l ii) promoting private industrial investment for import sub<ntuDor ird exports (iv) infrastructure development (v) expanding human capital and development >.vi capacity building and good governance (vuj expanding the economic contribution made women and youth. Economic development plans have been formulated for the major including agriculture, trade and industry, mining, infrastructure Social dcvclopmcn. plan*,
on education and health GTP will be ltnplc merited in a climate of increased govmw*"- capacity.
Ke}' indicators of growth under CHI’ which arc relevant to the proposed pi f ^^iniart**- tor expansion of die irrigation area from only 2 5% of potential to 15.6 n. a
per capita GDP (to L’SS 698 per capita per annum) which may be achio
larger proportion ol smallholders farming with the benefit of irrigafi° ’ p oducD^’’'
n
r
c
increases in agricultural value added, including a 45% increase in rrtm L1^ar about 840.000 tons by 2015.
lo (Gn’i5C%p*
n^Cttd *Ll
Political commentary on the GTP has been positive": implementation
A* *
reduce the dependence on foreign investment and stimulate a local!)              oVCr tk b-'[ economic growth rale of 14.9% per annum is expected; an increase o CDlinm 5
t lf
year mean The plan predicts a huge expansion of infrastructure. ' ’
 . tfUca<»n oi
production set to increase from 2,000MW to lO.OOOW and the cot* railwiy lines The plan is also designed to ensure food secuflt) as *
— 
See prw wka»e .?                  n_-iiXukZllsr t(nfr-.Kt/nfw, arrliivr/Kthiani.1 j
|hf
., x?1t'
r
r' ,J
UJ< 1-4 .Main Rcpon (I)
3.HIrd>"d  , youth and women by expanding 
tl
soaj/
nxnond content. democracy Md deveZ^** P'°^ w lhe,
^mre U cruel for social 4n
d economic devrL ' <””tnue, , ^   W
f
ot
Pn *”'
n
Pkk^ kngaur>  Project generally conforms to the pnnoples. strategy and detail of
7hc l-’PP®1 t>n 15 the project would be implemented hr domestx financing, and on 
C TP. Hie ,nr<^ inMnCing Plan has been prepared (see Table 6-31) The impact of the
this pn«ciplf 1                  on gtp indicators is shown in Table 6-30. Except for those options leRveailsse. GOP per capita in the project irea dose to the planned avenge (niraJ and urban)
• Reduce food poverty;
Significantly add ro agricultural value added through sugar processing, contributing about 4% m planned incremental growth.
Make a substantial contnbutJon to planned sugar production, accounting (at full development) for 45% of planned incremental production; and
Make an additional substantial contribution to planned irrigation investment, bv raising the proportion of ungable land developed from 2-5* • in 2009/10 tn nearly 6%.I f' drru/
B/At^iatt NrXr Draup P^i
^fW^rr t” E^ny
Tabic 6-30: Impact of Development Option* on GTP Indicators
____
pSTP Indicator
Baar line Plan
2009/10 Target
OPTION I OPTION I OPTION OPTION OPTION OPTION
0 J 1                         1
2
3
4
5
OPTION 2  OPTION 2
PRESSURE OUTGROWER
Per Capita GDP ar Current Marker Paces (LSD) 1
401
698
675
659
630
629
150
172
623
509
Food Poverty Head Count (%) *
28%
21%
7%
11%
12%
13%
62%
42%
12%
61%
Agocuiturr value added (in billion Birr)
584
862
0 00
0.71
1.17
1.33
127
2 08
1.22
1.78
Stigar production fOOO mm) 5/
350
840
0
133
220
249
238
188
228
332
Road density (km/1000 km
445
1237
549
549
549
549
50
50
549
549
Road density (km/1000 population;
064
154
570
6.63
7.77
7.81
2.56
2.56
7.77
7.77
Power generating capacity (MW)
2000
8000
0000
0.016
0026
0 029
0 028
0046
0027
0.039
Rural potable water coverage (within 1.5km)
658
98
100
100
100
100
40
40
100
100
Dcvckiped imgabk* hnd (%) 4
2.5
156
5.9%
5.9%
5.9%
5.9%
53%
5.9%
5.9%
5 9%
Estimated for option* on bans of net with-project household farm incomes, therefore excluding off-farm income
Estmattd for options by percentage of households who's food production does not meet food energy requirements
GTP  source  avadablc  suggests  baseline  production  is  17.7  m  tons,  in  fact  onk  about  0.31  m  tons  reported  passed  trhough  the  auction  m  2010  Total  production  m  2OO"/O7  was  297,84’’  (CS.A Large & Medium Manufacturing Industrie* Sunn- 200ft). Therefore 0 35 m mm taken as baschne and projected by p tinned ’ • increment
Assumed to be percentage of irrigable Lind, taken as 3.7 million ha (Water Resources and irrigation Development tn Ethiopia, 1WMI Working Paper 123, 200 
by CSA as 154,000 ha
2010 Irrigated area reportedthe Right Bink i* Years 1 -7 and 62% on rhe Left Bank in Years 4-9). The re-locatxw
kebete local government.
The international price of sugar is not seen as a major proper nsL The mremaaonaJ puce sroujd noi dedine so much that imports become cheaper than domestic sugar when due allowance is made for parity pnong. If the international price is maintained nr increased then the economic case for domestic sugar is even stronger, though finansaJ pressure on thr
tndustn- will increase if the Government continues to hold down domestx wholesale and retail prices.
]hc price of cane tn out-growers is however a risk, particularly if the industry is under financial pressure. Farm returns under cane are lower than alternative irrigated cropping partem* even with cane prices at ETR 25 per quintal which would be the "industry norm" under the present Lntneial environment. It will be easier for the industry to engage out growers successfully if the nirnuiKknal price (alls. or if Government allows sugar retail prices to rise relative to other
unr
secondary Solees have been used to estimate the investment cosh oJ the
333
:7-M;r 11FaW Dfwtnmr
•/Efhtopa, Mttuirr) ofVafrr^ Evt^.
Ethiopia* Xtit Impfm and Dna*W Pn^t
sugar factory and estate. However, project economic indicators have been sb
relatively insensitive to cost escalation of these cost components (Table 6-26i
35% of total investment costs and because they arc more heavily discounted . ***
a ln  the CBa
69
Financing Plan for Option 2A
A   possible   financing   plan   appropriate   for   development   Option   2A   is   shown based on:
Investment costs of engineering works and Detailed Design, O&M Supp< Construction Supervision and Institutional Development and Sustainabl by MWE, possibly with donor funding support,
The   Ethiopian   Sugar   Corporation   responsible   for   all   investment   and of the factory and estate;
opcritJonZcoM,
Private investors responsible for commercial farm investment and operational cm* The National Regional Stales (Amhara ind Bencshangal-Gamuz) responsible fot rc settlement (which falls under regional legislation), and the costs of the supporting wb- projects which arc largely to be under taken through the wcreda offices;
The Main System Operator recovering MOM costs from irrigators; and Smallholders, commercial farms and the sugar estate responsible for O&M at secondary level and below, and paying water charges as described in Section 6.2.3
The Table shows that MWE would be responsible for 29% of costs while Ethiopian Sugar Corporation would be responsible for 69%. Re settlement and sub-pro|ects (excluding Ddaikc Design, O&M Support and Construction Supervision and Instituuonal Development and
Sustainable O&M which would be the responsibility of
may be met by the Regions ins
would be only 3% of costs. System O&M would be met by irrigators. 56% by the sugar estate, 7% by commercial farms and the remainder by smallholders Note the MSO contribution would be zero. The amount of the capital levy is shown were it applied — it would result tr. t repayment by irrigators of 10% of irrigation engineering costs at 5% interest over S
LIB F4 Main Report (1)
334K J™■W/P'***'
.nd Conch>»k,n,‘
.
gf"* *
1
, Option 2A. the protect financial cost estimate is as follows:
f     *   fZorri-   E>rvel,iptX'     -2     draina^     ,nvcsMncn,       costs       amount       to       FTB        "     78        When     of     which     62% '*** incurred on the Left Bank, which will contribute only 51% of thc net ungxcd
ir< ’ diversion weir and Main System maintenance will be ETB 534 per irngired
•      P*Xe Plu* * ,UTuiaT amounI for Ma,n SJwem dr«n»ge ">d roads maintenance, and
^*36" Pcr 'tngatcd hectare for Mun S>’*’em
0
 Of*™ " ~ 'hew costs may be met by
L-tors through the water charge
M^ntenance of the secondary and tertian, sy stem for smallholders will be ETB 66« per
•             ated hectare, and for commercial and estate land will be ETB 601 per irrigated hecurc Operational costs will be ETB 367 per irrigated hectare these costs wiU be met by irrigators through the water charges
O&M costs translate into water charges of ETB 2.472 per net irrigated hectare for smallholders and ETB 2.405 per net irrigated hectare for commercial farming
•      Irrigation consultancy support costs for detailed design, O&M support and construction supervision will be ETB 1528 million
•     The sugar factory investment cost will be in the order of ETB 5 92 bilhon
•     Sugar production costs will be ETB 699 per tonne of sugar tn (estite) cane productm costs (exclusive of water charges), ETB 1.136 per tonne for estate overhead* (haulage, equipment replacement and management) and ETB 2,259 per tonne for factory processing costs (refinery, co generation, ethanol, administration and salines
•      Development of commercial farms will be in the order of ETB 23,500 per farm imgaied hectare.
•     Re-settlement (from the dam site and to make 36,225 ha available for the sugar estate) will cost H j 'B 1B6.8 million and involve 6,274 households.
•     Sub-projects to support implcmenranon will cost in the order of ETB 597 >6 miUion.
lA project benefits per annum it full development are expected to compose:
tonnes of f<x>d crops with a net value of ETB 1.1 billion per annum, 951 tonnes of maize seed and cotton with a net value of ETB 11 million, plus 20.000 tonnes of fodder and 2.5 million tonnes of cane which are intermediate products Additional benefits will be gained from incremental livestock which are expected to Crease from the present 60.000 head of cattle to 150.000 head, there will also be
•                 P^ucuvity increases.
i 7 
tons of processed sugar with a gross value at the factory gate of ETB
1 ‘74 billion
* 
Abo
* 
Ab<
MWhr per annum of power sales valued at ETB 9 milion-
• 
milli
on litres of ethanol per annum , valued at ETB 232 milboti
5 UlJI lncrcmc
maiiy.      ** 
ntaJ crop and livestock benefits from 5,074 ha of rainfed
pro c       ‘             tn
dtr   BricuJturc
SDAs IVBE-N, IBBE-S IVC E and VS as»result of sub
’ ^ere wdT SWC measurcs
non i J L SnuU
n 'Une»blc land
from fbel wood and budding pok production grown on
b
17,Mw 41
337FtdrrvJ Dtntoavtic R/piiU f'  ofElbt^na. Miwtrv ofVafir €> F.nrrg Ethiopian Nik Imgahon anti Dmn^t Prtpc.l
S^SJSSSSa
m wdlbc Year 1-7 for the Right Bank, Year 4-9 fot Ae u
The CBA was earned out over a period of 35 years usinv a 10% 
n
smallholders, commercial farms and the sugar estate and factory.
Development Option 2A has a F1RR of 7.9® o and a negative INPV of EI3 - 1.73 bill™ Thr F1RR for smallholders is positive (at least on the Right Bank); the problem is the financial value of domestically produced sugar is low.
Option 2A performs better in economic terms, with an overall I JRR of 10.2* o and ENPV of ETB 149 million. The import parity price of sugar remains quite high despite the prospect o! falling sugar price in future. The Ixft Bank gives consistently poor results for smallholder farming but the economic return from (he sugar enterprise is positive. ’Ihe Right Bink is suitable for Lrngation investment
Sensitivity’ analysis shows that project indicators for Option 2A are not very sensitive to changes tn costs, but arc sensitive to changes in benefits financial viability as estimated through the farm budgets is moderate, with water charges likely to be affordable by a smallholdei farms and commercial farms on vertisols *l*his is because their cropping? arc assumed to be less diverse and cultivation per unit area is less intense
more attractive by making the Left Bank project area smaller
COOK longer TO caiavuau 
net benefits of the scheme.
situui uikj, uiai uit uiggci -------------------------------- ----------
UM 1*4 Mam Report (1)
33877>e our-growrr scenario considered w
m.000 TCD factory feasible. The affn U’CTt* ' cane
s
«ne price ofE'TB 25.3
quintal to compete other irriga^ ^Ofc** 
"*e
by
attractive. The Left Bank also bee
for      the      protect      as      a      whote      was      estimated      L'^K         the      ^e      to
’ f 'J- 7%, u  k
1t
?
2020 ,. 
'’ ,Oou'^o^."^n-rr,,
"***•4^
«
**          40
ETB 191 
miUlon Bu{
^non^ * ^of^** th, j*
339
VShj.tlFutord DmoaufK             lilixcpM, Mtmsfr^ afWattr & i-ntTg, EfhHptm Nik ImtOKK and Dranutf Pr*trf
H Main Report fl)
340annexes
nation schedules
* |M1’LEM1
^g QAL framework
B pROjFcr L r OPVEIOPMENT AND SUSTAINABU- O&M SUB PROJECTS
I
''■"Sc iNsrrrm0^1
op
production sub-project
^psma^’^evelopment sub-projects
sfxf iJVE*roCK ^.j-ershi d management and forestry sub-projects JUF:                                                       "support SUBPROJECTS
anexgt(^ml ni                enhancement sub project
ANEXH ENVIRONMr
ANEXI COST BE-
<ss ex i cost benefit an ai. .  .
SE ’
ETB FINANCIAL PRICES (WHOLE PROJECT eTB 2010 ECONOMIC PRICES (WHOLE PROJECT?Ftdtrd                Ktpbht tf               Mtwtry IT'aftr & Ewrrp EAitpi* Xilt Impfin nd Drm# Pr^eiT
UB 1*4 Main Report (1)ANNEX Al
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
OPTION 2 (RECOMMENDED)
1
7Mit4!-nr-^T^l^’o^GIRO CONSUL TANTS) _.
I F-M*y SnJ^Xnrd Suds' Estate and project Implementation Office!
■1jj Pea* *
.    n^ticm    •w    Sendees    for    RAP    S4EIA    4    Detailed    Design    /    Construction    Superman T  nl ’Lz’^aJtehon 4 Formation of Compensation 4 Land Consolidation Committees
5 ^^^P3r»t.cn Of ender Documents & Construction Supervision
r
tf c***1
? 
of Resettlement Action Plan (md cadastral 4 property surveys)
impact Assessment Stirfy_____
_____ — 
_
U 500,1- ^Lireementtn with “other- smaiVmedium sired commeraal_farms
H “ 
nF-****
f IMM eg'**'"* " - T«nd«rtnQ Award  ---a--nd   ----C---ons - ---t-r-uc-- 'ti-on   ----_--_--_-_--_--_-_--_--_-________
of diverse weir 4 pad of nflht bar* main canal syswm (ACE)
Rf
®
'P*^* .
(ind Land Development)
-----
ffi hdup? Right Mam
ft tetkage 1U8       k .
rn Muos4 Vlage 4 Access Roads
S Sr? 5 T.na5 TlryrtkSn^geiSn  hon* D4raDinarageinageSysStyesmtsem(Ws U(WAUcAonctonractrtsac! ts)
"1 teMOJwnmt A Land Consolidation
3j ftmodwiirs of EPLAUA twemda) 4 Land Admm.stration Committees (ketiele level) 1j toeeftarton. allocation 4 registration of (consolidated imgable) land parcels to households 13 »ajwwnl of compensation to affected (la including reservoir displaced) households
rMaHtament utes 4 re settlement of affected households
’**'*•' —  —  r
L
-
24 Pf^eisor o'rwettiement sues o
------
i rMMtxul Development & Sustainable OAM
pc*
B Ejfrjj’rl* Smi I Modwm Commercial Estates
OUT WUA Capacity Bu*d*ng 
<lOU;C hvoved System Ope'aton by Farmer Institutions
a;CUM Farmer MtS for system O4M
iwMsr Crop PPrrooduc   ductitoinon
Enhancement of Sod FertAty
beseted Supply of Improved Seeds
P-mcton of Effective Pest Control
tnprowd Agricultural Marketing
5 Stengthneo Agricultural Extension Services & Research Activities ‘J_*pn>»od Agronomy and On-farmWator Management
’ hgrorocI Access to Farm Credit
^Production
,- ***J,»| Grassland Management 4 Livestock Feed t"**0**1 *T9*tid Forage Production
Brwong Stock and FacAties
Vetennary Services
-J’'**’ L"*,toc> Marketing and Credit Provision oc *tl‘n9 of Livestock Products
^* >  Management and Forestry
0W3 rproved System Maintenance by Farmerjnstitubons
1d
3*«Q Gufcs27lbOn‘1
^”0C 4 R*h>b*tation
Comdor Development
^,22? ForW Development andI Forestry « the REC»_
ft ^7 ,
t
d Wan*9»'-*nt of Non-Vngabte SDAs
T *rr*?o 
Ofxl Bunef Zone Develop"
.r^BundStablnabon ‘
D *'*‘opm.nt " ~
’’pti’ed AttM.-L n —----------------------- ------ h P**5 He-?~ OUW* Wa*' * Sanitation
l ’’^^?0'XW-'on*
: *^en^‘riErWf2y -Sou,ces ~
d-J?’?™ 'Q9*ne Generating Activities & Credit Provision
___________- -
--
JSftcentent----------------------------
for      Ro^?°p      4         *6erva*n
-wL - - Rlv*nri* Fishery Development
15/05/2011ANNEX A2
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
OPTION 4 (ACCELERATED)Federal Democratic RfpMc of Ethiopia. Mrnitfiy of Water & Energy Ethiopian Nile Irrigation and Drainage Project
UH 1-4 Main Rq**t (1)
2Ci)             unt^Fwr*/ Demcrdtjr Pspitch: of Etbtopw, Ministry ofWattr e 4* Effrrp EthfOpiM Ni/f Im&tiM jnd Dnmugt PrvftcANNEX B
PROJECT LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
t 7-MatPtderal Dtmoirafn RfpttMc of Ethiopia, Mini/tr) of W ater & Energy Ethiopian Nik Irrigation and Drainage Pnyert
I B 1*4 Main Report (1)
2? Jvufr v-rw* A,"u’”ofnjr''
**-*' !**'*
OOrCAJ- FRAMEWORK FOR UPPER BEIJES SCHEME (OPTION ZA}
----■- il—'
__
PeHbirt»*nC* Targets
-■ _______________■ l>*H
Tl Dtt'laat. Ca  LnnS-uoui—-rK fces /
*.             ■
Assumptions and Rukx
Derir1
'     ' ( H,cf 36 years alter project lniuarjon:
Pf ^I^*cr
(G<*0
Enhanced
<r du<«J
portny
Benefits from irrigated ernp^ including sugarcane, food crops,
I
I
maue seed. cutton and fodder.
Reporting
__ Mechanism
Protccr MIS
Income and Poverty
impact study
IJvertodc benefits-
< Jurconx:
Enhanced
I productivity
* aiistimxhLbry
of inrigaied
i^nculturr
Power (bagasse) and ethanol
produewn;
rncrrmenlaJ crop A lives fork
bene fi ls fr om nd.fi l ed a reas
Project ElRR (all enretprwes) of
102% with a NPVof F.TB 150
million and a BCR of 1.02.
VC irhm 2 rears after delivery of all outputs:
Development of a Large sugar
estate over 36.225 ha with a
12,000 TCD sugar factory
producing alkjut 220,000 tonnes
of sugar per year plus ethanol
and eiedxiaty,
Establishment of 2X872 ha of
smallholder irrigated agccuimre
with an additional I Cl.,983 ha for
grazing, woodinn. and house
plotl.
Project MIS
I
I
«
«
Establishment of about 4.773 ha
of small /medium irrigated
commercial farms.
Support co about 5,074 ha of
smallholder rxjnfed agriculture.
^errvu,
’^^re
h 111 9 year, of 1[art of pfu,ct-,
^Plemenuiuoo 
phMe) tendenng_ lwud
!Uld Ctm‘^™on of the fdlowing:
Storage Dam
^ain Irngaritm System
^lain    Drainage    System    including
Plocd Protection
Xond      Development      of
consolidated holdings
^-^^UTwearhcr Road._ _
Tender & Contract
QpciLrnm .Is
Commerced farm
lense agrceruciiTH
Government    water    mourcri deixfoperMTn I policy and IrgulitiOn   continues   to   b* ruppLinive
No  wvere  ecoruwoc  rw  pob  licit crisis.
Sugar estate etwbbshecL
Smalt / medium corruncnral
fanw'sj established with revned
/ new kasc agreements..
Rescrilcment of existing
sriaBholiJcr fartuers earned out
without jenous confbci
Project uauFunorai indru-dins
Main System Operator and firmer
WUGl, WUAi and Scheme
Board perform ulufactonly.
REPCO operate Tana Bries
power station according To agreed
operating rules.
So extreme weather droughts.
Crop aod livestock prices art
sustained n reasonable leyeh
Quality  detailed  designs  and tender doouffienn
Quality confracron bid !ot *vrks
Quality supervision of works.
Suitable  commercial  farrr.  lease
agrrrrtKnts signed-
X WL'A agreements
'^(l)
iZMtryA!Ftdtml  Demotmtit  RepMr  of  Ethiopia.  .Minirtr)  of  W  ater  «►  Ener# Ethiopian Kite Irritation and Drainer Pryert
Design
Summary
Performance Targets
Data Sources /
Reporting
Mechanism
Constructton     by     WL’As     of     the     following within smallholder farm areas:
• On farm tertiary & field
irrigation canals and drainage
channels.
for tertiary J&D
systems
Payments to
contractors
Quality Control
reports
Output 2: Resettlement and I .and Consolidation
Within 8 years of start of project (ie in implementation phase):
• Delineation and agreement to revised land use for project area.
•        Finalisation and Agreement to Resettlement Action Plans
(RAPs) .
w
•       Strengthening of EPJ Al’A
(wereda level) and 1-and
Administration Committees
(kebcle level)
•        Allocation and registration of (consolidated) irrigable land
parcels to households.
• Construction of (new)
settlements and associated
infrastructure.
•        Rr settlement of households within project area and out from areas designated for commercial farm (sugar) production
Resettlement
Action Plan(s) including cadastral surveys A asset
in ven tones
Protect progress
reports A-
compensation payment records
'fender & (Contract Documents (for
se rd emen is)
Payments to
contractors
Quality Control
reports
Funds are rrui!*    j{ resettlement k lee activities
Rrsettkmer: and ae consolidate is ifrd i j tannen and proper implemented (r.icsdu: RAPs)
Qitahry detlAjrt ites sd tender docixrrnh
Quality cocir*^1 ,ft* Quality supcrnsix *
«s
>•
Output 3: Sugar cane A
Small /
Medium
Commercial
Estates
Development
Starting in Implementation Phase (years 1
Establishment ot
to 9), and extending over Support Phase                            Upper Belts Sugar (years 10 to 13):                                                                    Estate.
■ Development of a large irrigated
sugar estate including*, (i) sugar
Slew / revised lease
factory, bagasse power plant and                   aigreemcnts with
-omnicro*
sen00’ jyullholdcf
transmission lines; water                               c
ommcrcial farm’
treatment & ethanol production                   ( including f<x 1*°^
plant; (ii) workshop, vehicles & <3 equipment; (iii) offices; and (iv) k
---------- accommodation arid facilities for p
c water charges,
ind husbandry
radices O&M —.—
** Note: Preparation of Full RAPs u nof pir, of Eeasibdity Study UH F4 Main Report (1)
2"IL V'*    w **"**P™T
Ju (Di"flty
p<fform<ncr Tirgch
permanent    stiff    and    seasonal
workers.
• Support far small / medium convncrai! estates to adopt
sufl-able and sustainable farming systems try commercial farms
Data Suurces / Rrportinjg
____ Mechanism of IflcD system within estate boundary)
Au uro prion s and Ruka
Chitpu*1
lnitinjrio*“J
Prvrlnpmrru
4 Suiuiruhle
(UeM
From the sian of rhe project and continuing mro support phase, yean 10
13.
Main System Operator (MSO) far s roragc dam & main system O&M appointed and carrying out dunes as per contract including MIS records.
O&M L Election, ent»bb>hmeni and capacity building of Wl J Gs, WUAs and Scheme Board at ternary, secondary and it heme
level
MSO contract
O&M & MIS data A’ records
Neu* / revised lease agrrementt with commercial tirtrj (far land A water charges, erej
WA-decnom
MSO appointed that is able to carry out required main system OfcM duties
MuWR & rrgwul local administration support for WUA development.
WUA internal conflicts prove difficult to  resolve, leading  to ux-ak WUAa
Suitable CindjdiTei ire Selected &
*
•
•
O&M Z Improved System
Operation by Farmer
Institutions,
O&M 3: Improved Syncm
Maintenance by Farmer
1 ns nrutioAi.
( McM 4; Farmer MIS far ( McM.
Farmer MIS records
trained  is  water  rruAlco  at  lertiaiy & secondary svstem level
OlUjMjt g.
-Starting        lrl Implementation Phiw (yean 1               Agreed nnucrn-plaos A and extending over Support Phase                 for Agricultural
^JCtUT,
(ytira 10 to 13), implementation of the
foflwfag interventions    the   ^«
In           pf
•
•
•
CP 1! Enhancement of Soil
be ratify
2- taertaaed supply of
Improved Seed,
CP 3: Promotion of Effective
Fest Control
CP 4. Improved Agnculiura]
Marketing
cp 5- Strengthened Agricultural
1 tension Service! 4 R«™th
Activities
—--^Hrnpruved Irrigation
Development
Project progress
reports
Project MIS
•
«
Cooperatives ' WUAs and farmers willing to engage with
project.
ARD offices at regional. rone and woreda level and Kebelc DAs support efforts of Coturnunjty / WVA* and project consulfinft
Cooperation with and njppor from service crxjperatrm,. saving & crrd*T issociannns, NGOs. private stclcc enterprises A
snicr&hruace malutfoni
•
——--------———■
17-Mer-11
3Ptdtrul  Dr*ocr&\  R/pM\  of  Ethiopia.  Minijtn  oj  r   Water  &  Iintty Efhtopiun Nik Irrigation and Drainap Pnyf't
Design
Summary
Data Sources / Reporting
—Mechanism
Output 6:
Livestock
Production
Performance Targets
Agronomy & On farm Water
Management
CP 7: Improved Access to Farm
Credit
Starting tn Implementation Phase (years 1 to 9). and extending over Support Phase (years 10 to 13), implementation of the following interventions in the project area:
•        LS 1: Natural Gras stand
Management & Livestock Feed
•
LS 2: Improved Irrigated Forage
Production
Agreed micro phr.s for livestock Development
Project    progress reports
Project MIS
•
15 3: Improved Breeding Stock
A Facilities
•
LS 4: Improved Veterinary
Services
•
15 5: Improved Livestock
Marketing A Credit Provision
•
LS 6: Processing of Livestock
Crjof*r^,^
project
regwnil.iDneiftkrtj,, and Kcbde D.ii iijw'- of comnur-T > project coniuhrn
Cooperite mi wilt ui or from >errx c exoeirc n A trrdr jsoaitrtu .Qs private sw’sr efls^*5 4 fnim> tUUT'rc
Products
Output 7:
Land A
Watershed
Management
and Forestry-
Starting in Implementation Phase (years 1 to 9), and extending over Support Phase (years 10 to 13), implementation of the following interventions m the project area;
•       LAFM 1: IJ near Plantations A Drainage Comdor Development
•       LAFM 2: GuOy Stabilization A Rehabilitation
•       LAFM 3: Community Forestry Development A Forestry in
RFCs
•       LAFM 4: Watershed Management of Non irrigable SDAs (4 SDAs on left hank)
•       LAFM 5: Reservoir catchment A Buffer Zone Development
•       LAFM 6: Terrace Bund
Stabilisation
Agreed community action plans for forestry, SWC and land management
Establishment of wereda / communin’ watershed devclopmeni reams in SDAs
Project    progress reports
Project MIS
ft
pmt*1
,upp(’rtT't
J
I B F4 Main Report (1)
•I<WU‘ *!
pertlop11*^'
Sitpp ^
0
Output
t4muunniCn:aj E’Junccancn!
Performance Targets
■" Imph-menMtlon Phase (>™s 1 to 9), Bnd extending over Support Phase (year? 10 to 13), .mpkmenmuon of the following interventions in the protect area
. CD I • Improved Access to
poutilc *arcr 8r sanitation
•       CD 2: Improved Health
Conditions
•       CD 3: Improved Access tD
Energy Sources
■ CD 4: Development of Off iarrn Income Generating Activities 6: Credit Provision
» CD 5: Indigenous Peoples
Support
•       CD 6: Support for Local
Institutions
Starting it. Implementation Phase (years I
■u and es tending over Support Ph a** (years 10 to 13, implementation of the fullnuing interventions in the project urea:
EE-1; Environmental Monifoang and Preservation (LpMream of rhe reservoir including Lake Tana & Taru- Bdes I IPP, Reservoir and Drunage Corridor, Plantation,
I" *rtory);
Data Sources /
Reporting
Mechanism
Asvutn prions and Risks
1 Agreed micro almq ' for commurun,’
development.
Project progress
| reports
1 1
| Project MIS
Community and indj'vjd'jjJ
h-OLLjeholds willing to engage with project ■
Concerned staff al regional, rune, i woreda & kcbcle level roppon efforts of cornmurnty and project consultants
Cooperation with semce
r<K>pcTanvn  NGOl and pmite
n
sector enterprises
Environmental reports including
(rtver) water <(uilitv monitoring
Fnh produmon &
use
Commercial Farms and Cnmmurunr willing to engage urh project.
Concerned -staff at regional /one. woreda & kebele level support
rt'forts of convrv-inify an J project enrmifauitiL
Project MIS
EE  2:  Support  tor  Reservoir  <Se Riyertnc Fishery Development;
-*l^Mile,(o
L
I ■TO^InfrMtxucnw
Rd
f
*  "H^civui Fmn,
’‘^1^
Discounted Total Project  Financial
Costs (Yean 1 -35)
Irrigation Engineering Investment ETB  4,685  4  million  (US$  280.6
million)
Consulrancv Support & ImgaDon 9&M: ETB ”42 6 million (LISJ 44 5
Undiscounted Total Project Costa (Yean 1-35)
krigUKHi l-lcginernn^ investment ETB ?7»n million (U$$  4455J rrulbom
Consultancy Support & IrngariiKi Q&M: ETB 4.381.4 ouliion (US$_
>
5
17 Mar IIMru/ DrnotTtfi* Rsp/ihh of Ethiopia. Ministry ofWattr Enrrg, fitkopwn Nik Irn^atioft and Dnana^ Pryia
Design
Summary
Performance Targets
Data Source* /
Reporting
Mechanism
4: Institutional Development Ac
Sustainable O&M
5: Small Holder Crop Production
6: Livestock Production
7: Jjmd Ac Watershed Management
and Forestry
8: Communin- Development /
Support
9: Environmental Enhancement
Sugar factory Ac estate development costs ETB 2,824.5 million (US$ 169.2
million)
Sugar factory operational, haulage and management costs ETB 2,48"T.2 million (USS 148.9 million)
Small /Medium commercial farm development: ETB 57.9 million (USJ
3.5 million)
Supporting subprojects ETB 265.3 million (USS 15.9 million).
-62.3 nuHjon,
Sugar Sc torr 4
million)
management com |,^ nulbonft’SI 856.5 rJhx,
Small /Medium coirrwraihr: development ETB 1112 nxlr ’3 6.7 million)
Supporting subpmiKt EI3'L* million 'T'S$ 44 4 nulhc
CH F4 Main Rrp<*n (J)
6RfMrfEMp*                 •f irmer &
^K*5** ^Dnn^ Pwf
ANNEX C
INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABLE O&M SUB-PROJECTSFtdtrvl Democratic R/paMc of Ethiopia. Mr rusty of W.jter & I inerg, Ethroptan A7/i* Imgotion and Drainage Project
UB J’4 iMau> Report (1)
2Z3
^b-Prajecf
j^isltng fanning in the project area comprise tmaUhntacr managed runted agriculture tnd livestock grazing There are small areas of imganon managed br individuals or tmadl group of firmer* pump^ wafer from nrrama nvm tfut flow through the project irra Era ting ctlfnrnunrtv based organisations include: (Il Land admfotttodac committees Io adnumstn. regisrer and certify land use rights in 17 of the 37 Kebdcs fully purially in the project ura, (u) wurer management caeninittm (WMCs) formed to manage potable war er supply schema / faaliries in 24 of the 3? Kebdes; (iii.i savings and credit wocabons in 8 of rhe 37 Krbriet. and /iv) cooperative societies which engage in provision of agricultural inputs and equipment, marketing of produce and micro-eredir tn 16 of the 37 Kebelev Cooperatives arc profit onenrated enterprises with any prufir distributed among its i bare holders according id the number of shares held. Membership is voluntary.
'the village Ifciscd cooperatives are suitable imnrutiom to rmplerner.i many of rhe agricultural, lives rock, land and watershed management and forestry; commurjty development ind environmental subprojects (intervenaOflSj. However is cooperative! are usually village based,
not suitlblr minrutions for (i) construe non nf Irrtlary swtem / on-fzrm infrasfrucrure; or (ii) for management, operation uid mimic nance of completed Lrnginnn and drainage infrastructure within smallholder firm wcondarv irrigation units.
The proposed irrigation development is for a targe commercial sugar rstair of shout 36,225 ha. smallholder farms over about 22.872 ha and in expansion im cither for small/medium commercial iarms or for the sugar estate over shout 4,773 hl. The approximate number of secondary and remm  irrigation command units are U follows:
1
I7 3by 31
1M Dtmotmtit
Ethiapw Nik W"1 ‘",d Dra" V
,
ofE'hi^. Minute of^rr & E^
Pn ^'1
Title
O&M-l: Water Uaer Association Capacity Building
Sub-Project
Rationale
To manage: (i) construction of tertiary system infrastructure
and (ii) for management, operation and maintenance of the comply
infrastructure within the smallholder farmer areas, suitable non-profit .' ’* *’^
Jrm
M    nd4
required with compulsory farmer membership based on hvdraultc (not vjj ”'t
farmers with a land holding tn the command area would tie memlien n.
institutions will comprise: (i) informal Water User Groups (Wl’Gs) formed ar level; (ii) formal (ic with legal status) Water user Associations (Wl'Aj) at
(iii) a Scheme Board at mam system level representing all WUAs and able to li^
System ( Jpcrator and. as required, wirh the Commercial Sugar Estate. At the end of Phase of the protect the .Scheme Board will take over some of the Odc.M dut]a responsibilities of thr MSC \ bur not those pertaining to the right bank divtrwor
and storagr reservoir commanding the left main canal, and the two Mam camb institutions will lack the knowledge and skills to earn- out their O&M respcxuibihnes icfa capacirv will have to be developed .Also guidelines and the legal framework forUl'AiaW* I Scheme Board) currently do not exist and need to be formulated
t>Xaij6n ‘J
Sub-Project
<>bjccuvr(s)
Sub-project objectives arc:
•        Formation of about: (i) 451 WUGs for each ternary unit within the tmalhuxrac area; (ii) 94 WUAs (32 on the Right Bank and 62 on the Left Bank , and (■)& Scheme Board able to take a proactive rule in scheme development.and braced •' the support phase of the project to take responsibility for icheme openoae ix maintenance within the smallholder farm areas.
•        Support development of guidelines and legal framework including mks sod x<. for rhe new farmer institutions.
Sub-Project
Activities
Sub project activities include: .
•        Formation of WUGs. WUAs and Scheme Board including ® awaten gt-
4 it«e of
,
through   an   1EC   campaign   4k   meetings;   (ii)   preparation   ana holding of elections for the WUA committees and the Scheme Bo
•        Training and capacity building for the General Body fie larmer m example, (i) formation and structure of the new institutions, fu) function; (iii) roles and responsibilities the institutions and rhe
holding elections; etc.
•       Specific training and capacity building for (elected) members Management Committee; (u) the WUA Audit Committee. fol)
committees concerned with O&M; and (iv) Scheme Board example, book and record keeping and setting up an
Note: specific O&M training, including construction of t
. tank
A manaECt1*-01 °
1
infrastructure   (but   not   land   terracing   /   levelling   /   smoothing)
subprojects.
^   >n
nC
•        Budding awareness among the WUG & WUA members of                                            A *ubproject interventions that are planned and xmplemen
centred institutions including the kebcle council and cooped
I’H I-4 Main Report (1)
2Wafer
Th* _—
I spb-f’””^
;;hin Benefit
jnJ EJentfieudo
O&M-h Water U»er Aaaociauon Capacity BtriM^
~-------------------------------- ---- -------
Implementation would start from year 4  , rarfm- (impler^X^------------------------------ ------- ---------------------
o
f
to rhc_end of the support ph Bite [year Ur * *' phase) and continue thn,^ The outcome of rhe subproject <• expected to be
Ml nf J ~ ~------------------------
able    ro.    (i)    constructmmor    FAD    infrauntam    it    tntury    ^,rrir.    j    *    j.    *    ****Schemc     0Oard
and nuuntarn jec.ndan and tertiary system uifnatrucmre uu-L t
The eatrmated wb-pro,crr cost is ETB 13.fi nulbon (USS 0 W trails „ tabuUted
W man*e- of*™e
Sub-lW^
Nr oiWUAl
Hr tff WUGl ____
5u*i l'IEC cimpMlgfi, »!c|
Hr
W
44i
____ UOM
--------------------------------------------------
CoillfTl]
753VJK 1500, OTO
C«UM
LBJFJ
. 477. M3
_ JSS!
■27 JSl
Implementing Agencies
Sub-Pro jc<T Performance Mofirfrrring
llir luhprojrtr would be implemented by rhe Project Implrrneniiaon (office (PIO) working wrrh the wrreda and kchclr staff, particuUriy [he DA* Cose coocdwannn wr-u!d be rrutnnmcd with tlw Main System ( Jpcnfor.
1 he performance of the sub pm,ect wall he morrnntrd tn accordance with the fijfa-ing indicamri.
•     Formation of WUGl, WVAs and the Scheme Heard
•      Ability of farmer. (WVGs and WUAs) to c^rruet
system level
Ability of VCLGs, WUAi and Schrmc Hoard ronunagrrnent O&SL
„,[MTl lnWnj(hlrr 1T lDtwy 1
JUtKJ ancj
, -nt*'TTaflnrj ^
c
Lack of legulauon tQr frmnatton of WTAs with x 
■ Farmer disputes
sanding
5'"'T
-
Pn ^‘-
ThJ? —
In line wnh government policy fanner beneficbon through iheirTZL •----------------------- “-------
---------- ------
7 ^i’^
ctT
at rertuuy level. WUAi at secondary levd,    j Srhcme Board i
Bn
the WUGt
u
responsible for miem oprranon after complete of thr
storage reservoir, left liank dherwon weir ind rwr, Ahin can.1 A ''
the requisite former CMcM insnrurions starnng bv year 4 llf.
phase) and graduaUv  strengthen them tn take fij ^nuWin,
(support phase)
' ‘bm lfkJ
' O'm
be the end of y™ J J
Tine approximate numi>cr of secondary and Tertiary iragatiofi twnnund units are ar folkjwn-
•
Right Bank Secondary units: fij 73 m commerezd ruga* mate: (ii) 32 tn smallholder
farm areas, and (in) 14 tn rhe potrntial expansion area;
•
Right Bank Tertiary units: about 531 Ttruary uruti in roraJ with an avenge net irrigation
area of 59 ha. About 142 tertiary units in lhe UTullholder farm arrx
•
Left Hank Secondary units: (:» 72 m cnmmeraaJ sugar estate; (u) 62 tn »maDho[der
farm arras; and (ill) 4 in the potential expansion area;
•
Lefr Bank Tertiary units: about 691 tertian* units tn total with in average net unginon
area of 47 ha. About 309 Tertiary units arc in the srrullholder farm irca.%
In totzi there are 257 secondary Jiid 1322 rrmary units in the 63 &71 net iropl4e area, with
b
I
Sub-Proper
average secondary and tertian unit net irrigation areas of 24*) ha and 52 ha respectively. In ths smallholder farm areas There are about 94 jccocdar. and 451 tertian uiuti Fur each secondan umT in thr smallholder firm area a VfL’A will be strrngthed to rake over O&M. and similar for each tertiary unit a Wl ’G will be strengthened to lake over (JArM.
Al the I ’pper Beta Inaction project is a new imgatinn development farmer! do not currently have am experience in operating an irrigation scheme to achieve full crop production paten dal
I he farmer institutions and capacity therefore has tu be developed.
Sub-project objectives are to build up former (WUG. WUA and Scheme Board) W about ten years to undertake irrigation management and upeanon achieving: . transparent and equal able water diiinbuaon (parocularly downstream of « smallholder farm arras); (ii) operation and waler ippUadon that meets crop
wuh minimal water losses; (ill) minimal damage lo anal posms and o<h
including form terraces; and (tv) financial self rnffioenev by raising Wnds to meet fu- cpcnn
costs.
__________ I The sub-p______________                        rojecr will assist i_n________________________                                          the development of the up*___________________                                 ___ 7Jn^^P^ct5ufCS '''6'cUovt danCn5n'g’ 0)                I
tor rhe project (to be dratted by the protect coasulti’t
(hi)
an ^
and storage reservoir and left bank diversion ■*^ -
r
11 ^<ain
storage reservoir opera bon; (iv) tertian system opcm water application by furrows and / basins; 'S LfC'D
inewkng effc*"1 I
llir tfnen^l crop ri^W J»nd irog>br ^cer appbcatvofl method vtuiwv. .
scheduling,  (vi)  seasonal  crop  planning  including  crop  7*  ueduics;  (vii)  r°le  and  duties  nf Uun) and planting dates enabling prcpan.0™ distnbubon K
M^WA VChcerNUsters co oversee mtibocs and-------------------------------
*' k
^(1)
5
17 May-11Mral
EthHfM' N/* Zrn^oB «^Prar»«* Pn^
°-l W’Mr "IiKt^
Sub Project
Implementation
Main Benefit*
and Beneficiaries
OjcM-2? Improved System Operation by Farmer Instituti
of system infrastructure particularly regulators and flow measurement
practical ways to assess soil moisture and need for irrigation
Sub project activities include capacity budding and training to achieve
Clarity and consensus to the operating procedures / guidelines
among VCD A members
Agreement of water charges for irrigation water to be levied on VPUA
as how funds should l>e collected and action to be taken agair.r defi. Appointment of competent water masters able and willm* To
duties at tertian- (443 units) and secondary (93 units) level
The sub project will also support comprehensive training / capacity buuLnginepetr^ procedures / guidelines for (l) the Water Masters appointed at tertiarv andsciordm and (ii) members of VCD A standing committees for system O&M as well as the
Implementation would start from year 4 or earlier (implementation phaie) lrd umioe to year 13 (ie four years after completion of infrastructure construction).
The outcome of the subproject is expected to l»e functional farmer mstinmons 'Vn.’G.IT.' and Scheme Board) able to take delivery of bulk water supplies at the head cl wcoohnuc manage its effective distribution to farmer fields (including supply of required vuuma.. Wama sugar estate) leading to agricultural crop benefits and enhanced Irveiibooh. ir^rt
would be the l>eneficiancs.
.____________________________________ ~~
Sub Project
(Josts
Ihc  estimated  sub  project  cost  is  ETB  11.1  million  (USS  0.6  -  million!  parDtubrh aenvines, demonstrations, materials and equipment.
•nrinw
M®C
’ UOOD_
’Km
5 nsJ*_ 1
Li
_____________________________________________ ______ -—-
~   jffice
_
Implementing
Agencies
Sub-Project
Performance
Monitoring
The subproject would be implemented by rhe Protect Im pl emrnta o 
Srr*fl3,If£
with the wereda and kcbclc staff, particularly the DAs- Close coordi
with the Main System Operator as well as with the large commera
I’he performance of the sub project will be monitored in accordan
mdteaton:
forihe****
•      Development of operating st rat eg) / procedures guideline
K t»
•     Consensus by VCD As and their general bodies to rhe operati g P jpJ k
•     Appointment of Water Masters at tertian and seconds
Committees for (McM.
•     1 raining and Capacity budding earned out.
j iof-
)vcn
•---- Records of scheme operation including flow records at tl ----- and to I from each night storage reservoir-
I B 1*4 Mun Report (I)
6f
fteM* 
AJ/.rfjr^ afli^ff^
p^r
*
' Cumumw
/ • Nl n
;--
F^;
~~~
^■•ptrmcn, 
^"fFuhon ,„
r>Cr^^^~' -—^^
dar / ach
„
 ”2nal rr°p p^.      "tff(ff J Hnf’-
w er
I
' hn,1-P^c,H /      ^ 5
Cn/Jf
difficult ,0
f^’ ^      *h J"  '  °     ^«
fh 1 h            Cr 1 f  r 3en
L
r,f,und> co,,e^dC
C r *<* ZZ**^-n(fnjp""",rr ~ Ew®
” O&iM -' lr"£Lnvcd System Maintenance by Farmer Itutirubonj
-
B
scheme- The project will' therefore form the requisite furrnrt OflkM Lnstitubgiu kk vear 4 or Eftriier of the project (implementation phase) and gradually strengthen rbem tn lake full fC5punsibiliW for O&M by rhe end of year 13 (support phase)
llie approximate number of secondary and rerhair irrigation command unit? are as foUws:
I* Right Hank Secondare units: (i) 73 in commercial sugar rsrace; (if, 32 in lmalihriidrr
farm areas; and (ill) 14 in rhe potential expansion area;
• Right Hank Tertiary unirs: about 531 tertian- unais in totaJ with an ivragc net irrigation area uf 59 ha. Abour 142 tertian- units in the snudhoider farm arrp-
• Left Bank Second art’ units: ft) “*2 in cummerciT sugar estate: fui 62 tn smallholder firm areas; and (ill) 4 in the porcntul expansion ars,
■ I xt.fr Bank Tertiary units: about 691 tertimy units m total with an average net irrigation area of 4” ha. About 309 ternary units an- in the smillhddcr farm arras.
jn rural there are 25" secondary and 1_222 tertiary muts in the 63J371 net urigabk area, with average second art and rertauy unit net irrigation arras of 249 ha and 52 ha respectively In tht smallholder farm area* there ire about 94 secondin’ and 451 Tertian- turns. Fur each serondart unit in (hr smallholder farm area a VtUA will be sfrengthed to ukc over <MfM„ and similar for each tertiary unit a WUG will he strengthened to take over O&M.
As the Upper Belcx Imganon project is a new tmganoc development fanners donut cuomih appreciate rhe maintenance needs, activities and Conti to keep rhe scheme m good working
order. If maintenance is nor earned out. or frequently deferred, lhe scheme will deTcriorate resulting in its inability to perform at designed and crop loss. This subpraicct therefore needs rn build aware           of mni n Cenance .requirements. suppurt devEkjprrw-nt ti( a maintenance strategy
the broad approval hv farmer!!, and develop rhe capacity to impkmror rhe itnttgy
Sub project abjective* are to build up farmer (WUG, WUA and Scheme Board) capacity within
j ears ro undertake system maintenance is u timely and vjj tamable manner W that the constructed infrastructure: performs as dnigoed for its design life (30-50 years).
^bproject acijvtm incl.de
Support for development of a mamrenjince strategy / procedures / guidelines for the scheme covering: (!) asset Ln ven ton- (iij maintenance categories, rcquirtmen's ind Ct,at* (possibly introducing yardsticks foe maintenance cost estimation/; (in) nrtaintenrafljce cycle including preparation and. imptenroertraiion. of aiittuil nuintcnince plans; (iy) maintenance funding; and (v) muarerutnee miligarion (eg by carrying our
^untcnanir in timely manner),
j inC vvjrh government policy farmer beneficiaries through their 0&M insumtioni, the WTJGi a r rectiiry level, aTTAj aT «condarV and Scheme Dm rd lt num syiron level uqJI becorne resporisibk for system maintenance (alm  with rhe commercial estate) after romptom of the
building Renen] [^y awurenew of rhe unporunce of rmtniouiKf
Capacity budding of concerned Wl 'A JiiniriR committee membert ttid Scheme
■    - jSoaxct member, including dissenunanan ot thcjTuuiTfnMKC rrratri^
"* furufirg
_ _Mral Dt**rMc
Ethiopian AWr Irrigation and Dnanasr Pro/ea
of Vater & Enr^y
Q&M-3: Improved System Maintenance by ^  mcr
af
guidelines.
Specific and ngorous training (formal and on lhe-job) forth* and Scheme Board to supemse / implement maintenanr. /. masters concerned with ( )«cM at tertian (443 unitd
* \
CC
and $CCon<1
i         *•»
Support to farmers (\XUG and WUAs) to implement ternary n
works during the implementation phase, including trw.
& v/ 'cnury canals ind rU
tertiary system structures including concrete division bni* , a □ shutters to be provided to the VXX’Gs / WUAs).
Mentoring of WL’Gs / WUAs / Scheme Board as well f , .l,
.
o
Mi
« ana dronj inrw..
1,86
Wltff raaMtnm
earning out maintenance, initially focussing on (labour intensive) truant
C                 tOen^^Q
take over full system maintenance, including repair to secondary system viuau^ ( night storage reservoirs, by the end of the support phase (year 13) when thenar system operator will handing over ( responsibility for the seconds
to the Scheme Board.
Provision of tools, equipment and maicnals for maintenance.
to bench terraces, canals and drains, and gradually building  apadn
Sub Project
Implementation
Main Benefits
and Benrficiaries
Implementation  would  start  from  year  4  or  earlier  (implementation  phase,  and  cixitmuc  ikxr to year 13 (le four years after completion of infrastructure construction),
The outcome of the subproject is expected to be functional farmer uutltutxmi (TTUG.'M ij and Schemr Berard) with competent and motivated O&M executive staff (water tn»tn
J
Sub Project Costs
maintain fit for purpose project infrastructure below the Main canals leading r<» benefits and enhanced livelihoods. Fanners would be the lxneficianes
The estimated sub-project cost is FTP 13.1 million (USS 0.9 million, as tahub
mn»i
30 000
Nr of WUM (training of
committees, etc)
Implementing
Agencies
Sub Project
Performance
Monitoring
Nr of WUGt (training of water mastery etc)
Sum (general body awareness, prowls*on of tools for maintenance, etc:
The sul>pro|cct would be implemented by  the Project Implemrntan with the wereda  and kcbelc staff, particularly  rhe DAs. Close coordi with rhe Main System Operator and the large commercial sugar c
“
—--------------------------------- ---
'    ~ .        —l«flL'C with
The   performance   of   the   sub   project   will   be   monitored   in   acco
indicators: |J)e jfhrn*
•      F>cvclopmcnt of maintenance strategy / procedures / guide
•     Consensus by WUAs and their general bodies to the operating |
•     Appointment of Water Masters and WUA Standing Comm*
•       I raining and Capacity building earned out.
•      Records of schemr maintenance including (i) cleaning < I prism damage repair; ill) maintenance <>l
storage
UR F4 Main Report (I)
10//*•*****
„ 
cw
Rafa tod
a* J Dv^f
O& M - Jr Improved SynremMarnfm
steelwork   and   greasing   of   gates;   and   fw)     rcf>ljri
etc.
* Poor coordination between the fannen (group board) and die M^Syste^T^n^ / commercial sug^* estate
•
« Non-payment / reward / recognition
--
r
maionry / gabion stwerum,
/
Son agreement from farmers to operating strategy / procedures / guidelines
5-»_ .aMft.3
•     Annual maintenance plans nut
staff (eg water muiers} for services,
I
•    Nrm-pavment / cnUecnon of    •' ..j to executiveappstrafovef (de,g orwatunerdemrfakunedrse)dfor services,
of funds collected and their
1
prepared or Approved or w —* 
*
warer charges, th'eft of m' oon ...to collected. or non • traruparmcv
use.
I
11Federal  Democratic  Rep  Me  of  Ethiopia,  Ministry  of  II  ater  &  Enern Ethiopian Nih Irrigation and Drama# Protect
” B ,M MtUn Kcport (1)
12?-■ 1
; ^wJF jM
A# /**'*»* <***        Pty*/
O4M4;
O4M ----------------- ------- —_._____
In Unc with government polity farmer benefice, [h fc“——----------------------------------------------------------------
BH^nd
at tertiary level, WVA» at secondary level, and Scheme n™ ■ resporuibk for jylcm nwntenance (along wrh !hf
scheme. The project uiB therefore form the terete flffWr < i&M earner of the protect fonplemenunon ph W) tmdgmdtujly tWnpI^‘ rrsponsibiiiry for (-teM by the end of year 13 (support phase)
- 3 ar
m ’t:tu'JOns, the WUGj
maun svirem It-vri ri l
‘ Nff,me
CDmpWo" of ,ht
°'
1
I
l-—7
HyjLindr
4
the Upper Dries IrOgali™ project is i new irrigation development Carmen do not currently pp ccrate rhe maintenance needs, acmntia and costs to krep the scheme tn good working
r
Sub Picnert r fajettivcfs)
Sub-Piuieci
Artmtie*
order I f main tens rice is not car ord out. or frequently deferred, the scheme will drienrare
resulting in its inability to perform ai designed and crop lens. This suhpmfect therefore supports effective scheme O&M by supporting adoption of a farmer managed / controlled management blhnnadon lystem (MIS).
Sub  proinrr  objectives  are  to  establish  j  management  tnfnrrmnrHi  sntem  for  farmers  to  enable them to effectively carry out scheme O&AL
Subproject activities include;
• Design of a simple Management Information Svstem to be controlled hr farmer XH ’As / Scheme Board comprising the following modules.
•       Administrative module concerned with WVA and Scheme board membership and names and contract details tor Water Masters at
tertiary and secondary level;
• 
Operations module concerned with imganon flows, equity of
distribution. etc.
• 
Maintenance module concerned with maintenance activities, and
• 
Financial module concerned with records of income and
expenditure
I
■
•        ! raining of at kast two operators to manage computers and to enter and
process data  collected and produced by  the MIS,  providing  information both to  the Scheme Board and WUA members at regular intervals,  and also  to  the Mam System Opeainr,
Procurement and installation of necessary hardwire (computers, printer, etc); Mentoring of MIS system for ID yean {year 4 to year B)
Implementation- w---ou---l-d-- s--t-ar---t- f--r--om---- ye ----ar--- 4 ( -- conimtpmleumr tchnrGouftghonT poyw , r B fie four years after completion of mins true tore construction)
^tcome of ||^  subproject is expected to be a functiorul MIS system used by farmer XX'UAt
c
ftr
Wi -
Z ^hfrnc Board.
' esdmaicd sub-projcct cosr ls g 43 million (US$ 0.28 million).
13Vtfkrul  DtmthYohi  Rtpioh:  of  Ethiopia.  Mrwitn  of  W'dfrr  &  Enrr#
Ethiopia* .V/Z* Irrigation and Dnti/tigf Prvjr.l
Information Sv
Oft M 1 Farmer MIS for Oa M (of secondaries a te rtiary systems)
Nr of WUAS (training of 2 system operations per WUA, etti Scheme board (raining of MIS operators)
Sum (provision Di cqwpii'cm
Nr
______ „____1
__ _ ____ 94
— 
- -a®
—ash
»ooc
Implementing
Agencies
Sub-Protect
Performance
Monitoring
Risks and
Uncertainties
The subproject would be implemented by the Project Implementation (Ifa consultants, working with the Main System (Operator (MSO)
l*he performance of the sub project will l>e monitored in accordance with
indicators:
•      Development of a computer based MIS to inform farmer managed O&M Kin-.iG
•      Appointment and training of (ideally) 1-2 MIS operators for each WVA, u •tluv operators at scheme level;
• Data input and output of the MIS. and use of the output to enable imponr. ipatm W}|
•      MIS operators leave following training;
•      Non funding for computer repairs / MIS operator salines faDowanmi fcC^ completion of the project;
•     Poor use made of the collected data by tarmcr WL’As / Group Board and Mxn jntr
(Ipcrator).
CH 1-4 Main Report (1)
14S *W'^olOtR
C<0,,f«o»ucr,0.
r -- <-r/
vFrdenii Deaiwuth' RtpMc of Ethiopia. Minitfiy of VFatrr €> Entrgy Ethiopian Nih Irrigation and Drajnqgt Pry fit
UB F4 Main Reporr (1)
2i.X^ -
e
cP 1:                               of Sod Fertility
SubMitcncr J arming chine rented by low yield and irw improved input unkrauon ti the
mak* *  prnducnon system of the pri>|ect arri. tn mmi parts
r
o f proj^
4. Description
jetmoranon of soil fertdrty has txxn identified as the main coartcunt tn unmoved crop productivity
According  to  the land suitability  and mm! andvsis results of she prefect area. thr lavvnl sol] type fa*  ^cn exhaustively  utilized Ik franco  due io  high cone err tratjon of papula  riofi and frequent cultivation. The mil femhty  iheli of Hie lumped im » ranging from moderate to poor due to niniril and hurrun induced sod nutrient mining.
The proposed intensive jgnculruraJ producttrwi system require-. rus tumble wd nurdent management which is n*»t currently pin of the production system.
Promote su* tamable sod nutnenl flunigmicnt
Increase the supply of fertilizers through cooperatives ind prmte dealers
Promote improved cultural practices
Maintain soil fertility to attain nptunum yields
The activities of rhe sub project include
• Promotion of the use of recommended lmounts of organje and chemical Ictlilaen;
Adequate  and  timely  supply  of  chcmicaJ  fertiliser*  through  rhe  service  co  operatives and private dealers,
Promotion of the distnbxjhon of chcrracaj fertiliser* through private dealer^
Supply   of   good   quality   fertilisers   through   the   constructum   and/or   irhabshliLiw   of warehouse* (lielonging to service co operativesj u well aa quality control;
crop rotations with legununnus crops;
Promunon  of  Integra  red  nurnent  management,  including  the  production  of  organic fertilizers; and
Promotion   of   access   to   credit   allowing   smallholders   to invest in the development of their crop land-
Introduction of new technoh®es
Promote   low   cost   and   enwironmentxllv   (acridly   seal   nutdctU   improvement Philologies.
t Atflvi:
IFttitral  Dtfiocrutic  R/pMr  of  Ethiopia.  Miat/try  of  Water  tp”  Ewrp Ethiopia* Ni/t Inr^atio* a*d Drmnagf Prvfttl
L Title
7. Project cost
CP 1: Enhancement of Soil Fertility
Costs for trials, demonstrations, teaming  and rn.titut.ond , Annual estimated cost is ETB 1  50,000  for con.ecutive fij
8. Implementing
agency
9. Monitoring and
performance
Total estimated cost will be 750,000 ETR
Wereda Agricultural and Rund Development Off
• Mbele admim.trat.on and development agent
•Farmers’ cooperatives and union
Development agents will conduct field visit and orgamzeT'T”^—
___
*
UR 1*4 Main Rcp<»n (1)
k_____________________ __
.——— 
°f ImptovejSegda_____ _
__________
~  ^proved seed !< 311 «*«nn^ agnrultwal input proposed tn crop products (| cvcluprncn< project. All proposed craps require high yielchng  rirtttxi to  icquire (he deiiffd yidd. However, the farmera  in die project arc*  have luriitrd rxpcnerxc jp (he use of improved seeds. Some of the constraints in related tn unproved seed utilization i«e:
Short supply of improved feeds by cooperatives, agricultural office and PARC * [jjw levd of use of improved seed varxCies;
Lack nf access to A wide range of unproved seed vineries;
. Inwfficrat and untimely supply of improved seeds.
« I-ack of knowledge on seed muinplicaricn technologies
Improve lhe supply of improved seeds
Encourage die farmers ro become mrolved tn seed muiupbcalion and supply system
Improve farrnem* skills on improved seed productioTi and di5LnburiL.'n
The propoted sub project acDMOei include
•
Intruducnnn and promotion of the use of improved seed varieties;
•
Promotion of seed mulnplicinon of major crops in comracmal basts.
•
Adequate and timely supply of improved seeds through taimen’ icmce co
operatives and private dealers;
•
Improve rhe warehouse capacity bv construcbon/ or rehabilitation of Cnanm
and Farmers* cooperative's warehouse
On-farm training is taken as the major tool for implement nor. of rhe sub-projeer Potential farmers will be involved in seed mulnplicauon icrrotia and adequate technical support Will lx- given from werrda Agricultural office and rrgicnaj seed
=4^Cy
Strengthen rhe capaary of Lmncri' coopcninTi and Uiuons by construcwig warehouses in selected kebclcv
•       Enhance stilb of the farmers on utilization of imjxoved wall
•      Increase crop production
•        Fhe tanners wifi be self-rdiant in improved seed supple
•         The  community  based  tnstLtuti^M^s,    capacity'  wdl  be  improved members and surroundings
Costs for trials, demonstradoo. tfamir.g and imnruoonal Annual estimated cost is ETB 195.000 for OMU«uOw fiveyws Sub-total estimated cost will be 975*000 ETB
Strengthening of implerncnting lnvC.rutiom
gtcdii ass octa dons
tNik Jrrrgari^
of Improved Sceda
Sub-K’^ciomsstot of 1,000,000 ETB
Tool Sub-pro)^ cwt
_________
9. Mowtonfl^ *nd perform*®**
—;^H^TredaSaving and Credit Promotion (Office
and Dw,OPmeW °ffic‘
^le adm.m»«non and development agent
. Parmera cooperauves and union
“^Tonducl field Visit and organize on-farm training pro^t Development agCn'S^ protnoters will involve in moratonngand follow up of ri-
j^tjmplernentws------------------- -------- ------
4
t’B F4 Mai*  Hcport (V
1„
CP 3: p )f^tion of Effccuy^ PrMConixol_ _________________
fl
Pcit infeswBon is a major construnr of crop production in (be project are* *.
Poimoal crop production will not be fully achieved unlrsi rwer.t crop lm»ei arc
s ignihc*ndy reduced. These crop lcns« indudr.
•        High crop losses caused by weeds, peitt and plant disea*ei,
•        Storage losses caused by rodents, insects and fungi. ind
«      Use of traditional storage farihti«.
The proposed crop production development has a  package comprising  igro-chrnucaS ro  control pest damage Thus as a  component of agneurruni inputs of (be protect this sub project will contribute to the effective ippfacanoa of agro-chemicalt
Integrated pest management (1PM) is one of the most environmentally  acceptable pest control measures. It mainly  relies on plant origin pesDades and other itadinnml culrural practices like crop rotation. IBM is rhe most simple, economical and manageable practice The farmers would have the opporfuratv  to  use organ*  based pesticides if they acquire sufficient training on prepannon of homemade pes bodes
•
Reduce the pest infestation
•
Increase production per unit area of annual and perennial crops
•
Promote e ftec five pes t con troi measures
•
Improve the accessibility of essential agro-chenuciis through cooperative*
•
Reduce production cost by using hx alh available effiocnc materials___________________
I’hc proposed activities of rhe sub-project include:
•       Improvement of farmer* knowledge an prevention and control at vveds pern and plant diseases;
•        Introduction and promotion of improved crop husbandn* practices to prevent weed problems;
•        Promotion of correct and safe use of agro chemicals;
•        Introduction and promotion of integrated pest management (TPM);
•        Adequate and timely supply of agio-chemicals through the service ciKpeanses and private dealers together with advice on sate and appropriate use,
•        Introduction and promotion of improved storage tidlitici at household and kebele level using locally available materials.
•        Promotion of treatment of stored crops with safe agro chemicali to prevent attacks by rodents, insects and/or fungi, where appropriate; and
Intensive in-service runnings will be held by technical stiff to promote
CiOq
environmentally friendly pest control measures and similarly m parallel trainings
- --------be conducted on effective application of agrochemicals.__________________ ______ _ ____
u ^*protect
implemenied from the first project year. Intensive training is
squired for the farmers those will involve in the project- Then the development Rcnfs as per required organize training session for the farmers
Dev !
lev |.
c
agents will be the main focal pen on for the sub project al gms rod
'(I)
H-Miy-ll
5Pnv,lT
1. Title
6. Maw beneficiaries
of F.ffectivc Peat Control
CP 3: Protnoann^—          ----
^^hTcrop loss caused by pests
. increase crop productivity
Improve the accessibility of agro chemicals tn apply as ^
t   lrtd
7. Project cost
B. lmplemcnttn^
ageno
9. Monitoring and
Ste      k«S«i"      of      lhe      »*F»»      “      “*d         ’”“h““'
drug dealers
75,000 ETB
AnnUl1 C°1‘ TTZTgT^ i* 375.000 E1-B___________________________ —'^^naGonal and wereda Agricultural and Rural Develop™, t>ffce
• Kebelc development centre
_______  4
6
UB F4 M«i® Rep *
04'CP * t mpr^ Ayrroulrrori Moling
The  project  are’  one   nl    '**  C:lih   cf[>P  c°ni‘Jora  tint  cummih  j^ppH  Jubt
tIrir s
,’
jmrtjnr of sc«m= to local rod «]1Qh mrokcn The lcumc
mrokerinp network dut h«  b«n nablubed ibrougb -he Eihxjpro  Lomnwl^ Exchange (ECXJ  is a  goed nppottuaity  for the project ira  tp c^pjficinth contribute to  rhe improvement nf the crop marketing  rpren. Hownxr this system is found at immature stage and it is focussed on i Lmued number of crops. Despite all these efforts still the agcculrurai tnarketwg system id! Sees cnttcai problems tn
^support chr crop production development in ehc pnwer iroa
Marketing constnun’s tn be addressed by the project include:
Poor condition or bek of aO-wtadier roudi within project icca.
Inadequate means of transport;
(-ack of markering in fnarutsofi for Carmen (lx. marker paces, trader*, market outlets);
•       Pace fluctuations for most crops;
•        Inadequate marker in &ajjtn]cture and tii;-ragr Ctetliaes. _
•       Improve the agricultural marketing system
•       Develop reliable *roragr capacity for penshaWr crop products
•        Establish viable value chain Linkage with agro-proc rising factories
•        Enhance the capacity of community bared orpmi/jnoc to icnvely participate
in marketing system
•        Increase the profit of the agricultural pfodixij________________________________ The activities of the sub-project include!
■          Suppnrtirg maintenance and gradual extetuion of the dl -sealEer road network built  under  the  project,  through  u  plrtficnhip  between  the  gpverrjnenr  md  the villagers;
•    Introduction    of    marketing    information    system    (i.e.    market    pnen,    deaien, oudersj   through   the   service   co-operatrves   and   union,   DAs   and/or   kcbele councils based on regular market surveys earned cur by ARD wtcrdi stiff;
■        Strengthening of the marketing capacity of service tocipcranvTs and ttrir union;
Prcmijtion of contract fiijramg and Estabb-thrnent of Linkages between taimen ind lgro-processing/ marketing companies;
Improvement of marketing infrastructure tn 'he corrjmnd am (it kebdr level), including the construcnan of covered market Kinds and small ware houses Improvement of storage facilities through the construewe and/or cehabditatjon of warehouse* (including Culd <Tooge of vegetable and frail
s
cro P ) 15 well
a5 quality control; and
Improvement Qf sound marketing practices, including i reliable clcterrnmaacMi control of the quality of agnculhiral produce is well is he cnfoccemeni of
—^I^^f’^^c^ghtsjLndjTi^swcs.__________ _ ______ ____ ___ _____ ------ ----------- -
r
a
training component uiU l>c carded for first consecutive Gvc years;item hr IL. ^ork could be completed Within three years
—j^rvigg^ poperauvEa wiH construct the warthquyMof perniable bipP  '■ c<^t
iYtdrral Democratic Republic of Ethiopia.  Mmistn of Water & Energ,
Ethiopian Nik Irrigation and Drainage Project
1 Title
CP 4: Improved Agricultural Marketing~
room) and for other crops. Private traders would be one of the-77 
this sub project.
\
c implex '
6. Main benefits and beneficiaries
•        Develop effective marketing system
'      ——
•        Farmers can get up dated pnee and other relevant information
•        The producers will gel higher profit
•        The community based institutions will develop their barpair.mg u higher selling price by improving the grain quality 
Major Beneficiaries: Farmers, traders and agro-processing enteromn and fr
r
7. Project cost
Training  rxrrnsion service for five vears 250.000 1TR
(annually 5<XX))
Construction of marker infrastructure
Procure ICT equipment for project kebelcs
Subproject total
4,625.000 ETB
750,000 ETB (for 3 von
— 5,175,000 ETB
8. Implementing
agency
•        Regional and wereda Trade Bureau
• Wereda Agricultural and Rural Development (>fficc
•        Kebelc administration and development agent
•        Farmers’ cooperatives and union
------------------
9. Monitoring and performance
The regional, zonal and wereda trade bureau and office, are tcponuble to 
periodically.
Wereda agncultural office and kebele development centre wtll tnvnlrr gnu toot
(
level
_____  ________ —-------------------------
I IB 1*4 Maun Rep on (I)
2CP ‘:<',rrnK^'cor^ *Vic*ttanI Extmioa Semen tnd Retard ACTrnPCT
The JgncuKum; . upper: Mmce. indudm* ** even.™ wd are performing unMUifktonk m roped of the need, of Urmro
extension servfce stiff retjuire. contwunu, up latest agricultural fechnologjes.
rnLning _o
i Objective*
The area  has a  good rcxnpsn^ xW.rages •<> obum reIable xgneuirun! technology could be refea.ed from PARC. Therefore approving the cup,™  f
o
the research centre would have conudenfae itnpacr. nn the option agnoutare development. Simultaneous!,- the existing weak agncdturil extension wrvxe hai to he enhanced to address the mam production cocsuatnB to atom opnmum outputs.  The  main  constraints  encounter  the  research  and  extern™  sconce  ' which nerd fn he addressed m:
•     Weak linkages between agricultural research and extension services;
•     Poor facilities and budget (or DAs to pronde an improved and effective extension services; and
•     Inadequate technical stalls and knowledge of extension stiff with respect to irrigated crop production, production of high value crops, as is crop 1 storage and marketing.
•     Shortage of budget to undertake research acthines ext fanners’ filed (eg I adoption rruls) and to promote commuiutv based panxipaton research I programs
•     I-ack of training facilities to disseminate the released crop vanrnes
Strengthen agricultural ex rm si on service
Support the agricultural research activities
Improve the linkage between relevant msmubons
Imp?' ■ vc the technical knowledge of wereda and kebek technical Safi__________ The activities of the sub project include.
•        Hie research centre will establish tnal and demonstration ures m different parts of the project area in collaboration with agricultural office
•       Conduct on-farm farmer’s training on new agricultural fechnok^pcs
•       Improve the linkages between ignculmnl research centres and the extension provider offices;
•        Proviuon of essential facilities (Le. reference books, training materials, 'ocxs md equipment)  and sufficient budget to  the D.U to ensure the execuoen of the necessary farmers* training courses, trials and demonstrations, and
kebek level in order to enhance and update thar necessary technical iod
extension stalls. 
---------- .------------ ----------------- ----- -
rc giond ancj wards technical staff would hast respond bdirv to condua major ’°mponent3 of the sub project. Provide tamings for concerned development acton
Mji II
3I Dfnro.Tufi. Kapubhr of Ethiopia. Mtnufn of Water t> Energ
Ethiopian Ntit Imparion and Druutatf Propel
1. Title                                     <
:p 5: Strengthened Agricultural Extco«i >nS^XZ~~T----------------- ----
t
6.  Main  benefits  and beneficiaries
•      Enhance effectiveness of the extension service
•       Up-grade the capacity of the extension prmider
•      Increase the crop productivity due to efficient tcchru^l
UPr  n
• Improve the capacity of Pawe research centre °
•      Create opportunity to adopt different technolotae,
''I
|
Major Beneficiaries: wereda and kebelc agnculturahro F                                     1
staff.
'
1
7. Project coat
Books, training materials and tools for Das _____  150,000 ETB Workshops, training------------------------- --------------- 700000 m Establishment of trial and demonstration sites _ 1,250.(MX) |<TB
five years
Sub-project total
2, 100, 000 ETB
8. Implementing
agency
• Wereda Agricultural and Rural Development Office
•       Pawe Ago cultural Research Centre
•       Kebelc administration and development agent
•      Farmers’ cooperatives and union
9. Monitoring and
performance
Joint Management Committee of Extension ind research office will moruiuc tic | performance
Regional agricultural office regularly monitor the implementation
I!H F4 Main Report (I)
4JT'IS
»-----
6; Jrrigation
aod On-Farm Water Management
Currently. there are 'tmU areas of irrigation currently  uctang  waia  from the rivers and streams. irrigated crap production infl be widely  practiced in ;hr tutor uiih project situation and cropping  intenuuu are expected to  increase to  200%. (lowever, the vast majority  of smallholders lack rhe n«ctury  knowledge and skill to  practice irrigated agriculture, particularly  with regard to  irrigated croc requirements and on <«”> water management tecruimes This lub-wrw: wiL therefore address this constraint.
"  Improve the ihilli of the bencfickiks an Lrngatw?n igtwociy
e
• Promote effective on fann wer rmnagemen:_______________________ ____ ______________ _ The activities of the subprajecT will include;
•        Development of appropriate ifrigatfcn extenxuxi pMzkxgn uracd it ippmpnair on farm wafer management (()FWM) and trrigannn agronomy,
« Provision of in semer rnirung in OFWM, irrigation igronctny and modem
irrigation technology to extension staff it wereda and lubde kvti (lc, DAl);
•
Provision of sufficient budget lo DAs to provide lumen' tmrung courses in
irrtgaiiun management a nd smganori ag^cHSomy; snd
•
Provision of demonstrations and farmers' tinning ccwses in the acid □£ OFWNf
and irrigation agronomy at kebek Icvd.
I
S. Lmpk’meQiaUoa              Wert da Agnculrural offices will conduct on site denronsintKin Uainmgs for the fanricn. Irrigation agronomist al wereda Ic'vcl would ironic cuniLStmt on-firm trainings to introduce rhe proposed UMgadon techrtoinpes md rruuntmince of field level strut turc-
6 ’ benefits and
^wbciari^g
•        Improve lmgauon efficiency
•        Eilhajlce the slnlk of farmers
•        Increase crop productivity
Majoc Benetl<3>ues; farmers md 'xcredL* and Irchnici staff tn. LiKnuic^aiJ
tfntcrpnses, kebeleagnculniralists^ ___________________________________ ___ _______ _ Frills,  derncm  st   ration,  training  and  institutiocuj  snrngtherung  Total  cost  337,500 ETB (annually 67,000 ETB)
Weredi  Agricultural  and  Rural  Development  Office
Project office
Krbclc admirusrraTiOfi md development ngcnt
Ksrvrn--- > L CMjpcrauveis and union _______
m XCt management office and uereda jgncultuul office have rrspor.ubility in tpiLtrly monitor the implementation
17-Mir-111‘edtru/ Dtmthrufic RfpitMr t>J Ethiopia. Mt num oflFatrr & Energy Efhtopiaff Nik Im^afion anti Drumagc Pnytcl
1. Title
CP 7: Improved Access to Farm Credit
2. Rational
Uck of farm credit facility is one of thenujoT^^^"
project areas only eight SC As are established out of 37 "'(J
farmers. This implies that the farmers in the proiee" " ' ’
l   hk
access to credit facilities.
Therefore this sub project would have important | ,
me        o
capacity of the farmers to engage in modem agricultural
sustainable development in the area.
w * hast
"*
‘m
3. objectives
•          Up grade the institutional capacity of the credn^m^TT-------------------------- ------- ___
financial support
•          Increase the accessibility of farm credits
•          Build big warehouses to store marketable grain, »„  f
d   atTO
sites
0,11 to P^ide
•Plcrnenn siidectd
4. Description
The proposed activities of the sub-project are: - ------- -
•        f ormation and training of one or more savings and credit lswcanocs E
kelx-les in the command area with the support of respective RcponaJ 5^^
Credit Association Cooperatives.
•        Supply of farm inputs and implements to the farmers on credit bnis Aruugh ih: service co-operatives, and
•         Facilitation  of  the  supply  of  short,  medium  and  long  term  loans  to  housekli through Regional SCACO bv providing seed capital.
5. Implementation
The Regional SCACO will involve facilitating credit provision and branch often «
farmers’ cooperatives will work together in lending and collection of loan.
Wereda -fgricuitural offices will have considerable involvement w thr ptocen--------------------
6. Main benefits and beneficiaries
•        Improve accessibility of credit facility
• llic credit associations and cooperatives will have adequate capacm f’ fl
credit system
Major Beneficiaries: disadvantage social groups, and potrndaHarrt*^—-
7. Project cost
--------- ----------------------------------- 7 ----- 7ftflfl.OOGHP
Credit provision as seed capital for credit institutions--------------------------------        i r»iQ FT
B
Awareness and training 
--------------- —— --------- ~~~~
Construction and maintenance of warehouses for service coop
15,000,000 E'I’B
22iH5C.OO^_-
Sub-project total cost
-------------------^=^==7                “     ”
8. Implementing
agency
•       Regional SCACO and other Microfinance msntuuons
•        banners’ Service cooperatives and Unions
• Wereda C<operative pn»m<>tion office----------------------- “  to
9. Monitoring and performance
Project  management  office  and  we  reda  agricultural  office regularly monitor the implementation
__
LIB F4 Main Report (1)
6W H&" Mlilw,*? />r»r.7 
3/z<rx/yj,
_ fVwA-r
' '*''#'
ANNEX E
LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT SLB-PROJECTSVttifru! Dtfcnfic R/f*bbc of lifhtofoo. Mtgutry of IFotrr c  Hurrp
v
lithtopiao N/Zr /m^rtw aod [>nao^t Prytil' cuduc, and ifrcnnath (ttubble)
and in very mall qmntreer
of rhe fe«d etqoir<-mem. This mwi dur hotock nfr hev* « rhf
dir^°u' rhe year
MtuniJ 
in the penj«r lira include rhe romnwul ^xnng land, VX7X
small amount wound the settfcmcnw. The cutmi me of die natural gruihnd is ntnqied u 5j 447  ha, with frequent encroachment by  die commumtr ind rnnwi engaged n crop production Pan of the exiting  natural granr.g  land wdl dro  be under tagged rgncdw r. the implementation of the irrigation proiecr. Some of rhe current cmp and ntn rumNe foe ^riganon wtLl be converted to gracing land
One problem with the existing grassland is the tflfntanon with ™™ iTtxli loolhr
w
’Tffcx f>«u "md Frfc».A> 4ro*” The weeds jupprtss gnu grawh tnd mck tn the hur nt
J
[hr animals, so it is. sometimes necessary to duck the unis.
Thr existing  livestock population is shout Si J  14a  TLL‘i and is ld rough Winer □nih ihr available feed. Feed shortage is nor as such a  problem in thr proven ires. There is. hi^rmr decline in availability during rhe dry season and in yean 'nth ldversc riroHll shortages
VCich rhe project empping  intensities Maili increase from iboui 95%  to  up to  2CMT- due to irogauon. The large increase in crop residues and irubbic grazing, supplemental by  improved (irrigated) forage and weeding  is expected to  support a  luaturufcJr increase in the lives wci population to about l-Kl.W) TLUi. an increase of 175 % over current numbers.
UnnrtJVr- tk-
___j______ j.
ef j r_________ . —ZU-L* -^IwrwrT 14TXC lOd
IJvrfmi/ DmtM
Miwtiy 9fV4trmi E*f$
Ljhtc^K Ndr lmg&o* <*«d Dnsi^t P^»r
Tide
LS-fc Natural Gnu stand Management and Livestock Feed
promotion of quality forage from within the senlem^
•      eradication of noxious weeds;
•      awareness and support services.
The subproject will be implemented by the community  d creation
ln
opportunities and dangers posed by a large increase in the livestock °
following by explaining the support and components of thi» and P°PUhao" a
Activities to support the conservation and improvement of natural m I include: (i) discussions and agreement to community management plan,
lands under communal holding; fu) provision of forage seeds, seeding interested groups; (iii) provision of (electric) fencing if denred II u »nuapi!nj thui^
* *
j
'
of the land set aside as natural pasture / grassland will be treated under the sub-pmim.
The second best source of livestock feed are crop residues and sometimes hay. The
of these feed sources arc poor and by themselves will not satisfy the nutritive requires livestock. In order to improve quality and intake, poor quality fodder cm be
treated or mixed with iced supplements The subproject will demor.itnte to firroa r -?■ how to mix / add chemicals and feed supplements. It is anticipated that 10 % of tamd farmers will participate in the program
The third subproject component will be implemented within farmers’ backyard! n bocnortt areas Interested farmers will participate in the program Interventions would incMe phr.^( of forage tree legumes in and around farmsteads, with the procci providing  L-
seedlings.
Eradication of noxious weeds will be the other project component- To this effect. be provided with the necessary tools. Programs will also be set to.
participate in |Oint removal ventures.
ndapl
atybujdic«'^
r.urtens'**
ub-project
mplemen ration
Sub-project support services would include awareness, training a 
of farm tools, seeds and other inputs and establishment of a< It**1 respective project Weredas.___________________________ —-- -------------- The sub-project will be implemented over a penod of
implementation modalities include: (1) trials and demonstra extension and training.
p tn'« -'
t
,
n
________
5^5^if5^
lain Benefits and
encficiaries_____
jbproject Costs
nplcmcnring geodes
Ihc main beneficiaries of the sub-project would be livestock
etc.__________________________________
The financial cost of the project is estimated at ETB 3.616.000 investment and ETB 2,027,000 as recurrent cost
The main implementing agencies involved in the implrmrn
•       project institutions including project consultants
•       the respective wereda office staff concernedjvR-
1^'!
< H Main Report (1)
2Pr^1***
oved Irrigated Fon.gr ProJoctioo
P*"ir"  lrt   ,hC    ”U'n   VHlrtCl    °f   E™'o<k    f«d  "  the  .ftaJy  uo.  To
’juts ,nd »fwrn“’h f’wbblc>
,nd w V“T ’®»“ <ww.n« rfanra^.'^rf,
: MSptD|ecr Ratinnde
pri of the feetl  rrqmremrnr. Thb mans tat l^eitock rth hemh-mi die mruni pts®, rfuOuBb«rt'he*“f
Ssrurd grasshuidi in the project area include the oxnmuml paar.g Sards ind seme very
3rr vll amount around the settlements The current sue qf the ra?uaJ grassland h esnmatsd if
5] 447 ha. with frequent encroached by the community end rneston engaged tn crop
production- Part of the rusting natural grazing land wiQ ab-> be under imgji ed igncutanr m
ihc implementation of the irrigation project Some of the current crop land not nimble for
xrrigarion will be converted to grazing kncL
The existing livestock population w about 51.114 TLUi and nrni dry rmrtrr » irahlrc.
Feed shortage il nor as such a problem Ln the project mw There d, hewevw. decline w
availability during the dry season and in yean with advene run Lift ihortagn
With  the  project  cropping  intensities  will  increase  from  about  9$*«  ro  up  tn  200*.  due  to irrigation  'The  large  increase  in  crop  rcuducs  and  stubble  grazing,  supplemented  by  improved (irrigated)  tn  rag  r  and  weeding  is  expected  to  support  a  susTaimbte  increase  tn  the  Jjvtswxk population to about 140,300 TLUs, an increase of 175% over current numbers________________ __ (h-er reliance on unimproved natural gracing as the only usurer of animal feed mar lad to
nurnent deficiency particularly as feed supplements mar be rtpetarire / in ihorr supply Introduction of improved forage into the irrigated cropping pa rem would address this bv
£rm-;ding quality livestock feed. _________________________________________
I "he sub project objective w to achieve an improved supply of qualriy feed for SvrstoiJc leading to increased livestock productivity and production.
Thr sub-project hai the following components:
• irrigated forage development
provision of support services
subproject will support introduction of ar least 692 ha of irrigated forage into the Pp ng pattern, through interested farmer* dictating part of the hnd holding, to forage tion, The subproject u-fl] introduce and rvahntr alternative high nektieg toogv pacts, mg forage seeds, seedlings and farm tools with rarmen pravidirut Labour and other
Lnpurs. |i*          .         ,
lu P °i cr will also support establishment of forage sred ind irrrihngi
rc
Production nurseries in ik
ncx 111 m  respective project werediv
c
J
S' k"projeet n -
t
proje
su Ppon services would include awareneis. training and capacUT ixadsRj,
' md other inputs and c-stabliihrnent of at least one forage nursery = the
The m J
<<
i atresia
4    1CC,*CCt te ^P^mcntcd over i period of about 5 years ^tten the project ura.
- ~ £—mc^aJljties include: (ii Lriads and dcmoris^ratiani; ind
_Ftdffu/ Dtnotrufic RspMt of Ethiopia  Mini tty of irj/rr and  Entyp
Ethiopian Nik Im&fion anti Dnsna^t Protyt
Tide               L 5-2: Improved Irrigated Forage Production_________________ ~~
0 f extension and training.
Main Benefits and               1
Beneficiancs___________ . _ Subproject Costs
-he main bcneficianes of the sub-project would Ik livestock envnen                                    ~~
rhe    financial    cost    of    the    proiect    is    estimated    at    ETB    2,749,000    with    ETB7a^'~^~- nvestment and ETB 2.027.000 as recurrent cost.
Implementing
Agencies
rhe main implementing agencies involved tn the implementation of the tub p™,*,
•        project institutions including proiect consultants
•          the   respective   wereda   office  staff  concerned   with   livestock  and   cownurjn
development
•          the  respective  Kcbele  level  DAs  concerned  with  livestock  and  commuran
development
•        service cooperatives
•        farmers and farmer groups
Subproject
Performance
Monitoring
The performance of the sub project will be monitored in accordance wth the Mora,
indicators:
1      • arras of forage crops introduced into cropping pattern
• establishment of a forage nurseries in / close to the pr<>]cci ara------------------------------------------
Environmental
Impact Risks and Uncertainties
The sub project should prevent environmental degradation, prevent^ orerpu^b. providing alternative source of teed tor li\ cstock                              -----
Anticipated risk and uncertainties include:
•        short supply initial forage seeds
.&
t
.                              «<                                        ”P                      •”»                                             — subproject______________________ ______ _________
6
VB 1-4 Main Report (1)L$_J. Improved Breeding Stock and Facihtiei
Ilhe current livestock population ;n -hr study C0Cpr ~~--------------------- f-------- —__________
cattle, •heep. go* *". equine (bone, mule and donkrr,, aod
luidigmout types with low productivity, bur adapted to 
aunt fated by poor management and djvenc wtock ditra^ ” 
1 Natural breeding using local animals domuurr, current inrstrxk Srni 'area. The selection of a breeding hull u practiced by orJr r veer fc» breeding is extensive and results m poor product™ «d produmnaT^
'government has introduced improved node
U
of
**
***
"
'       P“''
cockerels to some farmers. High prices for unproved mimal. and lack 0( „ ' ?
lot the constraints for most farmers to consider
A further constraint to farmers investing in improved breeding ifock » bck of award quahtr feed supply. Local breeds are typically ha/dv. »ithirarxhng ihortigr of (qualm,i fetd beoer than some improved breeds, as well as usually being more reusrant igurnt Jxsraici
(To make the most of the expected increase in reliable and quairy feed, unproved breeds stock should be introduced so that the proportion of the more productive betrds mutases along with the general increase in livestock numbers.
Improved facilities would also support productivity, such as animal ihdtrn and access *o the pumped irrigation water dong the canals r\v construction of witer t*nr^___________________
Mhpruica RationaleThe irrigation and drainage project by assured irrigation water supphr, drwuge and flcod protection provides an enabling environment for an increase in cropping awcwiaa iron) about 95% to up to 200%. The resulting increase in crop residues uiB support an locmsc b livestock population from about 51,114 TLUs to about 140300HIX m increase of 175 %
Without measures to improve breeding stock the large proporooc of this ©crease wdl be e tradition livestock varieties with poor productMtr characTcmfia. The subprojea udl promore improsTbreeding lock._______________ ______________________ __ ________ _____________ -
t
The sub project objectives arc a substantial increase in the proportion of improved kvesrock ^breeds within the projei f area, leading to increased pn dm miry_____________ ________ _____ _
rhe tub-prvfect component! ire:
•       improvement of livestock and flock by breeding progami
•       provision of support services
Hie types of improved livestock breeds envisag'd ait dsuy 
(’jnprO vrd
Ucpro^
cross-bred  heifers),  improved  breeding  bulb,  improved  P  txrrds  xs  to  be  acto^ apiculture practices will also be supported. Improving P°
through the introduction of improved pulkti and cock
‘^bproject activities will include:                                                          CTrannc trunsig
•      improving livestock breeding pnc^ccs
•      distribution of beekeeping cquipn*ft (LfllPfO'
-              disinbution of lm^r-vcJpc^.cTS li'd ».ock£^_ _ -
"•n
’""(I)
17 -Mir II
7FftM   Of   "oenifh   RrpM<   of   Ethiopia,   Miniihy   of   U~j/rr   and   Eongj Ethiopian Nik Irrigation and Dnunagt Pnj^f
Tide
LS-3: Improved Breeding Stock and Facilities
--------
tu-o purposes: Cl) improve egg production; and G^PR^------------------------
crossbreeding.
• support for improved livestock fidliriei. particularly for ,l
8 °f local po^'T''''
as (i) animal shelters; and (ii) access to the pumped trrio,^ ' "’P*’'"’                              Ki
bv construction of water points
lJCng the
Prices for improved animals and other assistance will be ...t-u
U, ”lducd as appn-pm^
Sub   project   support   services   would   include   awareness.   training   and   capaoty   bu^u. of improved breeds and other inputs.
Sub-project
Implementation
rhe sub project wtll lie implemented over a penod of about 5 vean wthm th?--------------------------------- The   main   implementation   modalities   include:   (i)   provision   of   improved   breed,   it   nZiZd prices; and (u awareness, extension and training
Main Benefits and Bene fi cian es
The main beneficiaries of the sub-project arc livestock owners
Sub-project Costs
Die financial cost of the project is estimated at E*rB 4.974,000 with I-7TB 1.8^6,000 n investment and ETB 3,098.000 as recurrent cost.
Implementing
\genaes
’llie main implementing agencies involved in the implementation of the sub project achxle:
•        project institutions including projrct consultants
•        the respective wereda office staff concerned with livestock and community
development
•        the respective Kebelc level DAs concerned with livestock and community
development
•        service cooperatives
•        farmers and farmer groups_____________ ___ _________________________________ —
Subproject
Performance
Monitoring
The performance of the sub-project will be monitored in accordance with the 6 IL
indicators:
•      number/proportion of improved breeds in projecr area
•      walering facilities along the irrigation canals
•      livestock productivity 
------ ---------- —•        *
Environmental Impact
The subproject should not have any impact on the environment.
Risks and
Uncertainties
Anticipated risk and uncertainties include:
•        short supply of improved breeds
•       poor veterinary services and vulnerability of improved
and parasites
•       reluctance of individuals to participate. __------------------ _ —-
prowled du^
_ — "
(JR F4 Maun Report (1)
8reproved VeterinenrService.____________ ___
_____________
Thereat
tt****.
various infectious paruihe diseases m the study am indme to higk
.
an( j morbidity rates and significant economic >xses. Gn-rn the orw lack
^ r5ffXjc hidings of 2-91 TLU/HH; 392 TLU/krrr. and increase expected under the veterinary services (equipment and staffing) ard andabekn of terdicatemn ire
adequate- Program™** for vaccination against communicabk dneav-*. 'ftatrr.enri of nrnOn livestock ailments and protec Don against parasites have poor peitbrnaacr
records-
Animal health services are provided bv wereda verennirr dimes and aramal health posts. The current services are poor and constrained by poor infminxTure, shortage of reterjun equipment and medicaments, transport and budget constraints and tack of teaming,
Existing extension service* focus more on crop production thin on forestock corutmnn Research and delivery of livestock extension semen are considered mace difhruli -nth slower bene fir accruing. Further changes in the livestock aicnnon approach have negatively affected live stock development / extension work.
Livestock productivity and production, including adoption of improved breeds, is constrained by livestock diseases which arc piociy identified and trared.
pub-ptajrer Ratirmalc  The proposed project and increased crop residues and improvement in grasshnd wdl support an increase in the livestock population from about 51,114 TLL’s to about 1403OT TLUs, an increase of 175 % Improved Livestock breeds will maurnue the livestock productivity gam accompanying this increase in forestock population. However, tumen ire only likely to invest in improved breeds if their suscepubtlirv io disease and parasites is checked by improved livestock extension and vctertnarr servicer Further pocer.tui livestock production gains could lie offset by widespread disease and pirairrn amur.g livestock. Strengthening veterinary and livestock extension jovkb a, therefore, an
^P^ect
^T^n/
essenpa] pan of the livestock development strategy for the pre-ert area. _________________________ I "he sub-project objective is an improvement in livestock health in the project area
(reduced mortality and morbidity) while supporting efforts for imptured breeds, so thai livestock productivity levels ire achieved.
’□bp ro^ect has the following linked components:
C5 tihlishment of additional animal health posts tn the project irea strengthening of livestock extension and verennarv scmccx
ntiCr 'he subProjcct seven additional mural health pom complete «h turrmtun,; md Pfoeni will be constructed in. or near to, the protect uel
new      ,erV,ce'      ,na?      itrengthwied      by      improved      mtfistrucnuc,      «juipfw-S
I
fCr
c ^nic$ md posts with veterinary nurenab and necessary rr.edxunenrs, suppun
Prog^^    ’ncludmS    provision    of    motor    cycles    /    bxycJe    and    implementation    of    tma»« f  r farmen well as technical staff covering inimxl health, brtcdmg and
m xK ^ °
?c
^(1;
r-uivti
91‘tHrruJ  Dr  f90.ru  fr.  Hsptblic  ofEthiopia.  Muujfry  oflTafr?  uod  Eorr^ Etht^uo Ntif Im^atjoa and Drwn^r Pro^l
Title
1_S-4: Improved Veterinary Services
—
Sub-project
Implementation
rhe sub-project will be implemented over a period of about~5~ 
I'hc main implementation modalities include: (i) construction of
'—----------
'** Pr'im
complete with furnishing and equipment; (ii) support for livestock                                           Pwti nduding    equipment,    supplies    and    transport;    (iii)    support    for    vacdi^^ "    *"**’
0
hr) provision of extension and training 
l Hofcr^fr<A
Main Benefits and Beneficiaries
Benefits arising from improved extension and vetennary --------------------------------------------------------
health with increasing proportions of improved hrecds Icadine
productivity.
The main beneficiaries of the sub project would be livestock ™,n
tn ’Ptw«d an&i
8 nax'P««ml
Subproject Costs
The   financial   cost   of   the   protect   is   estimated   at   F.TB   4,742.000   with   ETB   2TMom"— investment and ETB 2.507.000 as recurrent cost.
Implementing
Agencies
lhe   main   implementing   agencies   involved   in   the   implementation   of   the   iub-^w include:
•        project institutions including project consultants
•       livestock health extension and veterinary staff in respective project Wercdn
Subproject
Performance
Monitoring
The  performance  of  the  sub  project  will  be  monitored  in  accordance  with  the  folkrnng indicators:
•      functional animal health clinics animal health post in the project area
•      training programs implemented for farmers as well as technical staff cornier
animal health, breeding and marketing.
•      animal health including mortality rates
_
Environmental
Impact
The  project  will  hinder  the  spread  of  diseases  and  livestock  parasites,  and  should  hive  no
adverse impact on the environment.
-------------- -
Risks and
Uncertainties
Anticipated risk and uncertainties include:
•       identification of specific sites within rhe respective kcbeles for new uumil hnk
clinics
•       recruitment / identification of motivated extension / vetennan staff
•        farmer willingness to vaccinate livestock                                   ------------ —-----------
UK 1*4 Main Report (I)
10^ . (ippeoved I>vc*tock Maffcriing and Qrdrt Provi,^
s
nufnbcr3 decline a» feed b«ome> >bort and vsnals dx, mJ dv> „ 
n
1 C ht«
«l for homC
CDfnu
m f’0<:,n ’nd 10 mli/
» ix
d fere, pa, .-J
i'llUg
rODS.
< roP 1
I"
0111      W'Jy      bv0,0clt
iO
” 
* 
1      1RlaUT      ,rjml!nfl       fot
rural    pojaioaa.
Lrmc" «dl livestock when <n need of wih. and
Currently, asport of livestock within sr.d hm the pr^o a
lack of all-weather roads.
1 kvaiock market mfiwtructure « poor in the roxjy rrn.
con,.^^ nf
1
x
'
octo
supply, storage for livestock products and pace uifonasnon. f-arh^rmr 4.
i _i l -
_r
**-rmciT i nc iTarkrn ire
not    organized   and   buying   and   selling   B     through   ngorous   rtegoruo™,   pace information is not available
•n,™ .. tagh Je™j fo, h,„,«k „j
| in and around the project area
rat «.«.», „„
There is no banking service in the project area Due jq thn fan, the rural Ktro^and rnwr farmers’ access crcdir through informal channels and monev lenden. Iarratanons no use of banking  include  distances  to  banks  (nearest  in  Chagni  1W  km  awayj,  uA  of  awirrneu  of banking services and fear of rhe consequences if loans arc nor settled onoane.
‘ Rationale
Die proposed projecr and increased crop residues and other forage tnrcrmiDcMH will support an increase in the livestock population from about 51,114 TLUi to about 13X^75 I LLs. an increase of 160 %. Furthermore, the lbdicy to pump water W nsuit tn tw
consistent production of animal feed from emp residues and irrigated >orage. bdpng the livestock sector (o be more independent of rain tall The increased numbers of jvestoc
be far more than needed for local consumption /use
17 Alar H
IIrtkrul Ihrnoerati. KspnMs of litbtcgra, \hwtiy of ITa/rr and Enerjp :hiof>ia* Nik Irrigation and Drainer* Pryr.-f
Tick
ub-project
>bjectives
LS-5: Improved Livestock Marketing and Credit Proviso
,
are
for.
(i)
impnwed
Uvcitock  mark
et
mfmtma
ure;
()
tt
Sub-ptoject    °^“^S
ricc
infonnl
uon
to 
Carmen
and
livestock
t
rader,.
Qii)
ttnpmri
o f   up   to   date   mar
ket
pn^
buycn
>
in
d
(iv)   im
proved
acceaa 
t
o
credit
by 
hvcitod
linkage vnth (private) sec o _ 
etnphasu on improved brer s.
livestock sector in the project area »«h »
iub-project
description /
Activities
The subproject has the following linked components:
improvement of existing  markets infrastructure. facilities and establishment of a  livestock market information system with prices for transparent dealing;
improvement in linkages with (private) sector buyers; improved access to credit
tnmpoflAQoc;
up to d«c lrvx^rocit
Market infrastructure improvements to markets in / close to the project area would include: (?) fencing to segregate different livestock as well as penmeter fencing; (ii) Icudir^ ramps to facilitate loading to trucks; (iii) livestock water supply; and (hr) small office building to facilitate data and tax collection and also dissemination of livestock paca to farmers and traders (see below).
Improved all-weather access roads to and within rhe study area will enable truck movements and marketing of livestock to more distant markets, sometimes outside the project area. Farmers’ cooperative unions could be involved in improved nurkecn< h u envisaged that at least one farmer’s union would be supported under rhe pmicct in marketing and transport of livestock.
I
mfOnna0Ori ,S no'
*n and ck.re to the srudr t»
Sloc^ to ma<’kct without knowing current livestock poces, and often fri ven to secure a fair price. The respective Agricultural and Rural Development Offices
P 1 Ca collect market information from selected markets during market dm
k                    are, however, nor very reliable and nor used / disseminated to fanners or traders. I o develop and encourage livestock trading, systematic data coUettiocn prices should be compiled and disseminated to farmers and traders- Ai <dl«
P                g data ar market centres, they may also be broadcast on local radio
c 5u^-project would budd a
I
l^nd would facilitate linkage jcredit would suppon efforts t
OCSS m>fketing channels to farmers in the imdyvr ^ nvarc9 sector buyers.Improved access by farmen ro
/seed   capital   could   be   rn«   ,fnprove   breeding   stocks   in   the   study   area   Provuxm   of
p- l £Ljfea, who 
nr
e
COT
'sicden  rcd to fa
j^
saving and credit associations set up ui the
Sub-project
Implementation
Hie sub prO(cc|
nUJn ^“Hementa 
/“’^structure at up to f
Collection and dissenur^^
-H22PSLto farmers wishing to invest tn improved Inv^gSiL Over 2 P^^od of about 5 years within ihep^* include: (i) construction of improved market
w,dun / close to the project area; fu) supp^
■^^LKn.uns min3tt°n ofn^ket information and prices; (m) faahtstmg
ph...,
UH F4 Mam Report (1)
12^5- Improved Livestock Marketing and C/tdn PnwMWO
support for and provision of seed capital to farmer and credit uionn^? improved marketing and credit avaihbdw provide, an enabimg 
fa rztra^
^'Co,n
I^lcprntfflg
l^bprofcct 't^nnruncc
L
| kn^onng
Ibntock  production  in  the  protect  area,  inntulating  adoption  of  unproved  breed, Unproved livestock practice.
j c main beneficiaries of the subproject would be Inrstock owners
p c   financial  cost  of  the  project  is  estimated  n  ETB  V18.000  wnh  ETB  1,241.000  as investment and ETB 2,077.000 as recurrent cost
l*he  mam  implementing  agencies  invoked  in  the  implementation  of  the  rub  protect
include:
project institutions including protect consul tints and appointed contnernrfs) for infrastructure works
private sector enterprises trading in livestock ind bveitock products
the respective wereda office staff concerned with innrock and comrrnrmrv development
the respective Kebcle level D.As concerned with livestock and communirr development
service cooperatives
farmer groups ______________________________ _____________________________ _ The  performance of the sub project  will be monitored in accordance with the toikw-ng indicator!:
livestock market infrastructure improvements
availability of livestock marketing mformaoon and pnee daia
linkages between farmers in project area arui fpcvxte) sector tnden
availability and use of credit bv farmers for livestock investments
■ he subproject enhances livestock market conditions and marketing and fl f*x expected to have any detrimental effect on the environment
\nti< ipated ri»k and uncertainties include:
willingness of farmers to form savings and credit assoaanom
J7
11L   Rntk
hides Mid .kins for borne u.e and snmetunes are sold in the lord Then
is poor
Live mimali arc traded when cash is needed and without un inempr to impure pon^
condition to maximise paces Livestock sold are often weak, mmenme, iicased indan n« attractive to the traders.
Currently. rhe milk and hones* * processing are traditional. where wuiagr n high cd quxxr a mfctior.
There is likely to be an increased need for processing centres as Irvestock cumbers and productivity increases. These may focus on processing of dany products, hides and decs ind honev, and also fattening of cattle and small rvnunants [sherp and __________________________ The perishable nature of most livestock products require rhern to be duposed of or used quickly Delay results in deterioration of quality and io*' prices. Furom’ tndmotul
conservation and processing systems are basic. Improved procewcgoflnesiock products can: (j) extend shelf-life facilitating storage and / or transportation, (a) add value. ind will be supported by this sub-project.
The sub-project objectives arc to extend shelf-life of livestock products and irxrase viLe thereby stimulating growth of the livestock sector in the sulyn -ct: area-
I he subproject uni] enable improved and more efficenr
honey, hides and skins. Most of these products u? pemhabt.
Currently, product^ of products like mdk .nd honey «low ™ consumption Tradmonal preservation or processing o done .r th, ho«h*|  ^
^project
^project
•
dairy processing;
•
honey processing;
•
hides and skins processing; and
•       animal fattening
XUk for locd " wvU as improved dairv rruy be processed to long »hdf-li& product «xh u
^burt, butler and white cheese (uyri). The final br product of aslk-butrer could be used »
rnirrul feed supplement.
^7'y   5   CUrrCndy    Proved   using   load   hives   and   is   processed   by  the  rndmoad  cctbod  Tbe " Product is suitable for nuking local beer (*y) brewing, but n<X «pprop=« tbrmuir^g
Ubl ' ^standard.
*  Cntiy, hides and lions are dried by pegging them to the ground under the direct sun. The i^ct is inferior and fetches low pace compared to proper!, cured hides and
bouse!,  I,nle   prcPlrltIon  Of  livestock  for  the  market,  and  mon  bvesrock  irr  «w.  vor-
ds need cash taking little consideration ofliveModtc^hg"
"
^0)Vetitrul Dtmo<Tan:                 of Ethiopia. Miauhy ofW'atrrand E/ttrg, Ethiopia* Xt/f Irrigation and Drainagt Projta
Title
LS-6: Processing of Livestock Products
project will support added values with livestock fattening md .
The sub-project would support an expansion of processing fitedities m
--------
area, including construction processing sheds / buildings and
T °riie
f.            proviuo  of neces<
n
materials, training and orientation. These facilities would be link i
induitries.
Mvt
' Jp
Sub-project Implementation
The sub-project will be implemented over a period of alxiut v~ ~77“------------------------------- * j jears within the prr.
The main implementation modalities include, (t) construction and n r w
facilities; and (if) demonstrations, training and support
of nrrw-/..,,
r
.Main Benefits and Beneficiaries
The jub-project would facilitate livestock development potential boT  reached
R                       wlh
sustainable numbers of livestock and higher proportions of improved breeds wh b, k and livestock products processed to add value and shelf life. This would lead to nui. * profits accruing to farmers owning lives lock.
Subproject Costs
The financial cost of the project is esnmated at I-7TB 4,026,000 with ETB 1,999.<MxTZ                   ~~ investment and ETB 2,027,000 as recurrent cost.
Implementing
Agencies
The main implementing agencies involved tn the implementation of the sub project mdixie
•       project institutions including project consultants
•         private  sector  institutions  concerned  with  livestock  and  livestock  product  procenng and marketing
•       respective wcreda office staff concerned with livestock and community dcvclojxrxr.i
•       respective Kcbcle level DAs concerned with livestock and community dcvckpnxnr
•       service cooperatives
•        farmer groups
---------- -
Subproject
Performance
Monitoring
Ihc  performance  of  the  sub-project  will  be  monitored  in  accordance  with  the  folx»«r«g indicators:
•     processing facilities established / improved in or near to the project area
•     livestock products processing and value added_____________  _____ ___ _____ —- ------
------------------ *                         * 
B
.                     rmritJ
Enxironmental Impact
Waste from processing facilities would need proper treatment and disposa iron
Risks and
Uncertainties
Anticipated risk and uncertainties include;
•       poor management of processing facilities, for example leading
mninata*0*
rrulk and products
.------------------- —------  _
UB 1*4 Main Report (1)
161
ANNEX F
( vsD AND WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AND FORESTRY SUB-PROJECTS
i7 Mp nPtdera/ Democratic IfapMc of Ethiopia. Miniftry of Water and Energy Ethiopian Nik Irrigation and Dnanagt Project
UB F4 Main Report (1)
2.jrrP^
LitFM-L Linear Plantation* it Draangt Corridor
II
rhe Srurft- for the Upper Belt, Trngmon
W> of 3" Rebel's in 6 werrd«M
rurrent population is etumued it lojjoo f9«, raal households of which about 3]% 
,          ______
3fxJ
<”« 
Sj
rhe sods of the area are pamanlr vertisol, (50%)
_       ,
‘
Rf ^l Sate,. 7^
fry npwd of about 3j7Q
r,ai “ob and iuuri, „      .
overH%,«nit’'sal»oier5%ofthearea ndvMyih*|j
1
nWlnd " wdln?
over 31 *.. The topography is flat to undulanng with TOrt X<Z land suitability 58337 ha p8*/.«rti*d,J have slope, Of <3. d ’
* Enu
a.d . 530- ha 
have 3 S% 
{12 -
for irrigation requiring sod and mter comervaaon. kunrrw^u
.f
s.nprs for irrigation.
proposed ro ?rmce Und wak >v
waa <* •
ibprnect Ehckground
0
'I'hc Land cover/land use is largely split between grassland with nmngdegrees □( irw cover which covers 51 >500 ha (37%) of the area and undiholder rainfcd firnsrg ufadi rosrn almost 43,000 ha or 31% of the area Woodland coven a furher 28,800 ha fW *} md nvenfle forest an import am 5%.
The Project area covers a tuial of 13S, 157 ha split into tbr ngh* md left banks, hurtled by the Main (Hnat) Bel« river. Ir hai been divided into the mi|ur Stage Devdcpmem Aras
(J-V although SD.A II is Hyma outside the I'pper W  atrj) and sub dhraded mro Eve SDA& on ihc right bank (LA, IBW, THE, IBS & III) and ten SDAi on the left bank IVA, IA’BW (farther subdivided into 3 phases), IVBE-N. B’Bt \ FVCN, IVCIE. IVCS. VNI. VS
& xtx:
’S urer for the imganon scheme will be abwineii frorr. 1 dim aid reseruu « the Belo River with diverted into 100 km Wk
imgable irea i» 70,451 h> (net 63J71 hi) spb< between 36h~5 bi cfccnac &•' development (plus 4,773 ha potential espsrwton, md 22,Wh» mulli’oditr tragi
.ddmon four SDA, on the left bunk (IVBE-N. IVBE-S. IVCE* ™
for irrigation will be developed under a waicrsbcu rranagt^cn. ?£ r-T ^
3
atcr Conservation on runfed land
! The main goal of rhe project ** to mAu** nv develop mens of iustai nabk. smallholder based trnga invn|vemcrn_of the private secwjnja[B£J5?^— 
as 13
m rj V;£SC-L-—' ~ ‘
^tcescncnt h^d 1
1  o  maximise  the  financial  and  economic  return  r°  '  w   meccmg  it<lurCZ
Lr ngatcd agriculture will be set aside foe dut pvfpfjUi for settlements & homesteads and io preset*c
^d io shonagc of •‘other** land for forestry ind grxong irrigation interlines, arc high. Information from land foehvocxl supply exceeds demand in die project atca ’ ^dicated that natural woodland is being degraded io -SPjfpd xlso^xcccds supply. Jmaddiporifodder l>___
corridor*-
ol §DAs wbert
ot&ub
b^ce c^ccJu*
.
|
•
X
&
^(1)
1’ Mir 11Federal Denfocranc RfpMc of lifhtopid. Miniftiy of W'atrr and Energy Ethiopia o AVZf Irrigation and I > rm nap Prycct
L&FM-l: Linear Plantations & Drai
6,3 *- •
„M. 
------—
d "~~‘ "**
Subproject
Objecrivefs)
-------------------------- fine        the        irrigated        area        boundancs.        to        prrrodr The sum of the p----------------------------- delineate a buffer along natural drainage lm.es»-he
pirrrotigat ectiionon arotea and an as
fruit for local communities.
Subproject activities include:
incomc through fueha-ood. building poles, frdde-,^
Suliprojcct Activities
Formation of Water User Groups (WUGs);
Decision on tree planting requirements between WUGs and U ereda ARD [Propose: Roads; Eucalyptus spp, (fast growing) or Srhinnt mode, Flctu # lnd Podocarpus falcate (often grown for shade) zlnsnw mhitca, X serf & A Fruit trees such as Mango (Manjtfrra tndica). Guava (Psidnun                         md.Avcodo (Perna Americana) or exotic ornamental trees such as Jacaranda (Jmamda nrimonfoha) or flame trees (I lefontx rrgjap
Main Canals: fast growing multipurpose trees; (,rrnlita robnsla, Acaaadtmn,
Ca/bandru calothynus and Schtntu mollt underplanted with shrubby fodder ipmei
such as Stsbanta and 1 jttcafma as well as grasses. Also Encafyptnj spp but no underplanting with fodder shrubs. For the branch canals suitable shade trees
include Sthimu molle. Ftmj fpp. Milkteafermjpnea, Afbrfa gnmanfera and Entbnen
abysstntca;
Drainage lines: As for the Maui canals but only Eudyptus and imhgenous trees n
commercial area;
Seedling requirements sent to nurseries;
Seedlings produced by nurseries;
WUGs  organise  labour  for  planting  -  plant  seedlings  «  produced  b>  r.urvr.o. Grasses undersown from seed;
livestock excluded from planted areas;
nuvbc
WUGs   organise   management   of   trees/shrubs   (watenng.   weeding   etc)
communal or individual;
-^Ariing^
Subproject
Implementation
WUGs  organise  harvesting  including  cut  and  carry  of  toddec.  n produce (fruit, fuelwood, poles, fodder).
e subproject will be implemented over 5 years in the project area The mam implementation modalities include:
Formation and organising WL’Gf;
Training Ac technical support;
Decision on what to plant where;
Management of planting activity and subsequent tending; and Management of benefits (communal/individual).
UH F4 Man Rcp<»n (1)
2____________________
IAFMT Linear Plantations & ^peered benefits include:
M'* *""
] jvclihood enhancement through inerrased production of ScH-ond timber and fruits,
Ennrvnmental improvements through reduced need for deforest & degradation of surrounding woodland. and
Beneficiaoes are commumnes in and wound die cojnmand am
Co»t ETB
Roads
Canal
Drainage
Perimeter
Total
_
Right Bank          Left Bank 514.858              897,502
I
775.072
4,655,,209
1.802,81$
7j®J24
_______ 5^5rR_L JW0.M5
TmiI
I Al
2A77J9L
11,835335
ISJ2W
feptancnring
SubpM^Ecl ?*rfarnancc 'Jrrzrftnng
kb md
l*hc subproject will be implemented by the following igendev
•       Were da ARD offices;
■ DAsi and
•        Private and Government Nurvrnrs,
The performance of subproject will be monitored using the following indicator*.
•       Number of trees/shrubs planted;
•       Survival rates, growth rates, production; and
___ ♦ Satisfaction of WUGs with rrurugemcnr of wood resources. __________________ These include:
•        Effective formation and management ofWL’Gs
•       Capacitv of local nurseries to produce rrrjuired iecds and leedhngr. and
____ * Effective management and marketing of produce-
_______LA FM-2: GuIK Stabilisation tad RehibiliuOofl Hx Study »r« ,or ,he UPP“ B<k’ [rnPn<m ?«*□ extendi over iM>000
(part,) Of37 Kebdw in 6 urredas in Amhan and Benahul-Gunxa R*pomlS«a current potion is estimated at 101,700 (79*. rural, eowposrf of about 3.170
households of which about 31% have land user aghu
The sods of the area are primarily vertuols (50%) with red mwnh lnd amoh cxtcndlfig over M%. cambisoh over 5% of rhe im and very ihalhw and/or wry moot leptowb over 31% The topography is flat to undulating with more distecnon n the cut. l0 terms of
“ " *
Und suitability 5843? ha (7«% vermeil) have slope. of <3% 
for
and 15407 ha (66% vertisols) have 3 8% (12%) siopei miimg then fondnomlly 5lrfablc for irrigation requiring soil and water conservation. It a proposed to ternce hnd with >3% slopes for irrigation.
The land cover/land use is largely split between grassland with limng degree, of tree oner which covers SI,500 ha (37%) of the area and smallholder ranted arming which coierj almost 43,000 ha or 31% of the area. U oodland coven a further 28,800 ha (21%) ind riverine forest an important 5%.
The Project area coven a total of 138.157 ha split into the nght and left btnki. bnmed by the Main (Enat) Beles river. It has been divided into five rrnjor Stage Development Areas (1-V although SDA IT is Hyma outside the Upper Belo area) and sub-dnoded tnro five SDAs on the nght bank (I A, 1BW, IBE, IBS & Ilf) and ten SDAs on the left bank IVA, IVBW (further subdivided into 3 phases), IVBE N, IVBE-S, IVCN. 1VCE, IVCS, VN. VS & VW
ater for the irrigation scheme will be obtained from a dam ind mervotr on the Bries Kwr with water diverted into 100 km nghi bank and 130 km left Unk canals- The grow tfHgablc area is 70.451ha (net 63.8”lha; spbt between 36.225 ha of crxnrnoud wpr development (plus 4.773 ha potential expansion) and 22,944 ha umllholdcr imgiocm. In addition four SDAs on the left Ixnk (1VBE-N, IVBE-S, IVCE,* VS) that ire not JuiaKe for irrigation will be developed under a watershed management program with Sod md U *ter Conservation on raintcd land
rhe goal of the project is to “eriw
rr^rf^“
the
cv eiopmcnt of sustainable, smallholder based irrigated agriculture as wv3 as promnong
-^gfegncmof the private sector in large icalc coctfneraal tmgition derebprertL--------------------— c development of irrigation at Upper Beles will require the rcmang of sods lbcmr
and the safe disposal of excess water into natural dranage lines rhesc dranagc cd to be secure from gullvmg and ensure that anv casting gulbes do nor anpin?
,rn Rario  hmd.
n
’ddmon there
u
» need lor suWnin<xl of outfJb -<>
***
’ 1 hr safe di
lpOM  o
|  f cxc„5 ^,0 drainage bnei ««b t0 tn,urt ‘I'tdcral Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Ministry of ITattr and Etui# Ethiopian Nik Irrigation and Drainage Project
Title
L&FM-2: GuUy Stabilintion and RehabiHu,;'^"''^"'—
r
leeds will depend on rhe characteristics of the drainage Im 7 
xith vegetative and structural measures may be required
GuUy rehabilitation and revegetation where necessary will
excess water into drainage lines.
_
K nc at the outfall k. *  ,
11 11            thi?
11 ncip ensure safe Hi.
Cl, posa] of
Subproject
Objective^)
To   protect   irrigation   investment   from   expansion   of   gully   eros^n   due   fo?   v expansion and erosion of natural drainage lines
pJh
Subproject Activities
Subproject activities include: ----- -——
•        Identification of areas of current gullying,
•        Survey of ground conditions at every drainage outfall;
•       Needs Assessment (Number of gulbes requiring treatment, number of fa-fe
outfall areas);
•       Assessment of labour requirements;
•       Seed requirements sent to nurseries;
•        Seedlings produced by nurseries, hire labour; and
•       WUGs organise labour for structural and vegetative measures - the work should be in place before irrigation commences.
Subproject
Implementation
l*he subproject will be implemented over 5 years in the project area.
'rhe main implementation modalities include:
•        Formation and organising WUGs;
•        Survey and Needs Assessment;
•       Training & technical support; and
•       Management of construction/planting activity and subsequent tending                          -----
Main Benefits and
Beneficiaries
'Phe expected benefits stem from securing irrigation investments from erosion.
Beneficiaries arc communities in and around the command area.----------------------------------- -----------
Subproject Costs
The estimated subproject cost is El'B 11,494,960
Implementing
Agencies
The subproject will be implemented by the following agencies.
•       Were da ARD officesl
•       DAs; and
•       Private and Government Nursencs.                             —---- ---------------------
Subproject
Performance
Monitoring
The performance of subproject will be monitored using the following
•       Number of gullies rchalxlitated;
•       Number of drainage outfalls secured; and
•       Performance of implemented works.                   _---- -—----------
Risks and
Uncertainties
These include;
•       Availability of labour to undertake work;
•       Poor design and implementation of vegetative 3c 5tnl
•        Effective monitoring and fcedback^>£p££^£F 4^’—
r
UB 1-4 Main Report (1)
6'
j^FM-yCo^umjy F<^
Ti*.
ThTstS^* for fhe UPP“ Bcl" lrr^!1 Pr'w
(parts) of 37 Kcbcles tn 6 weredas in Amhara lnd
cuftenr population is estimated at 101, .00 (79% nrraj) compoud of households of which about 31% have land ukt nghts
■phe  <xls of the area are primarily vertisols (50%) with red rutuoii and 1^
s
over 14%. cambisols over 5% of the area and ven shallow and/or ven irony lejxrnol,
~
J-
oVCr 31%. The topography is flat to undulating with more dissor™ in the ease In terouof land suitability 58.337 ha (78* . vemsols) have slopes of <3% and „ uataUe lor trnptoo and 15,307 ha (66% vertisols) have 3-8% (12%) dopes making them condioomlh
for irrigation requiring soil and water Conservation. Ir is proposed tn terrace land with >Y, 5 lopes for irrigation
The land covcr/knd use is largely split between gnssiand wnh nmng degrees of tire oro which covers 51,500 ha (37%) of the area and smallholder ninfed tinning which coven almost 43.000 ha or 31% of the area. Woodland coven i further 28,800 ha <2I5»} ind riverine forest an important 5%.
sjjpn^
Boground                   The Project area coven a total of 138,157 ha split into the right and Jett banks. bucacd by the Main (Enat) Belts nver. Ir has been divided info Enc major Stage Dcrdoptner.t Artas (I-V although SDA 11 is Hyma outside the Upper Beks area) and rub divided mto five SDA$ on the right bank (LA, 1BW, LBE, IBS & III) and ten SDAs on the left back; IVA. IVBW (further subdivided into 3 phases). JVBE-N, IVBE S, IVCN. IVCE. IVCS, VN, VS
& VW.
acer for the irrigation scheme will he obtained from a dam and irienrxf on the Beles River with water diverted into 100 km right bank and 130 km left bank camlv The gn»» irngable area is 7O,451ha (net 63,871ha) split between 36,225 ha of cocnmcrod sugar dcv dopment (plus 4.773 ha potential expansion; and 22.944 ha smallholder tragimxL In addition four SDAs on the left bank (IVBE N, IVBE-S, IVCE, & VS) tfat are MX rmtaKc
r ^Ration will be developed under a watershed management programme with Soil u>3 itcr Conservation on nun fed land
main goal of the project is to "rnbana nvxww
rtdta fMrrt) through tre
clo pment of sujtain.Ne, smallholder bated irrigated igocuiwr as as promoting tne
°f the private icctor in large scale commercial imganoc iksekoment------------------- 57,702 h’ not suitable lor irrigation development in Upper Beks, 27,290 ha have
^ignated as R  enne Environmental Corndoes leaving 40,412 ha of land
;V
c, °Pment of homesteads. forestry and graung The Rrwurre .-Ukonor. Modd hat
c d land in SDAs for each of these uses dependent on pott-trsetdeniot- popula (k   n'’n    ,rom     hind   users   and   wcreda   officials   indicates   thit   f-dsivod   1UPP''
del bU' ’ R‘lewood
calculation has indicated that natural woodund » W fuel wood, Building poles demand exceeds
-Prderai Democratic Repubtir of Ethiopia. Minutn of IT 'j/rr and Ener# Ethiopian 1^1 If Irrigation and Drainage Project
L&FM-3: Community Forestry Dcvel<
plantation would be required to meet wood demand in the protect area. There of currently cultivated (ramfed) land in the RFCs that could be used fo, WTOtttul fc
Subprotect
Objecnvc(s)
, u A irnnrovemwM '^ugh P“>™,on of
nmbef • f™»d« font to
and 10 provide pro'et"on fot dCB”dcd bnd m ,he
””
Subproject activities include:
Formation of Water User Groups (WUGs) and Forestry
& Comma
Committees;
n 'Un
Deason on communal grazing lands and forestry lands -
also , nr*
ny
expanded settlement areas;
[Suitable tree species should lie a mix of fast growing (g
eneral), exoru,
I
multipurpose trees such as Grrw/Jh; rvhmta, Acacia ‘
” driwrw,,. Calinfa
Scbtnus nolle as well as Eucalyptus and slower growing (generally mdiger.mai *7 such as Acacia albida. A. iryal. A. sene#!, Hoinlba paprfera. Croton Hacmu^*. fa rpp and Cordia afneana. In addition fruit trees such as .Mango <Afan^fenr^i Guava (Ptidtiim gnafathi). VC’hite Sapotc (Caiimima edalu). Annona (Carica papaya) and Avocado {Penta A/aencana) could be planted ] A nux of V/« eucalyptus, 20% fast growing, 20° o indigenous and 10% fruit trees assumed fa:
Pipa»»
Subproject Activities
Cb and 60° o indigenous trees, 20% eucalyptus and 10% other fast-gmw.ng cxotxi . and fruit trees in RECs
Agree species mix and seedling requirements sent to nursenes,
Assess requirement for cut-oft drains;
Area closure poor to planting - cattle excluded.
Seedlings produced by nurseries;
WUGs organise labour for planting - plant seedlings as produced bs niweon. Implement cut off drains if necessary.
WUGs organise management of trecs/shrubs (watering, ceding e’ej
communal or individual; and
-V^nnc of
WUGs   organise  harvesting  including  cut  and  earn-  oi  fodder,  mar* produce (fruit, fuelwood. poles, fodder).
H,e subproject will he ,_i
/ expanded resettle
delineation
,
° V“ 5 >cars m ,he Pro'CCT »r“ VB DK3,on
—— 
------
° nt aFCSI' to fakm tn advance of communal grazjr.g Ae toosnr
nte nutn 
Subproject
Implementation
implcmenrauon
1 ormaricxi and organising UT Gs;
Main Benefits and
Beneficiaries
•        1 raining A technical support.
•        Deason on what to plant where;
•        M      ®Cnienl *’f planting activity and subsequent tending; and anagement of benefits (communaj/tndmdual)
The expected benefits include:
•rd producoon^
• livelihood enhancement through increasi
I?
l ’B }-4 Main Report (1)
8a fEtter/M Mtand
LAFM^Cmmju^ F«c»Gy Deve)opmcn( p-------------------
rimlicr and fruits; and
Enuronmentd nnprowmwt, fhr^gh kAk^ f degradation of surrounding (natuofl aoodiln<J
Bencficiartw are rommuntnes in and around th, „ 
"      ~~——
** defo«taj»n4
.
Cobu ETB
Commurun Fnrrsuy
Rjghi Bank Left Book
1865JO1
I    lyWMS    I    J4J60.446    I
Forcstnin    REC
_ 
Total
J.S69J99 _  f 25.2955,965,2^52^)
7 ’M,801
-    M^UM
J
_ +CM065_J
\’bpra|«:t Pckunnancc
.'■IcraMfJig
The subproject will b* implemented by the fallowing agendo:
■ Vt’rreda ARD offices;
•       D.As; &
•        Pnvare and Government Nonenes._____________________
The performance of subproject will be monitored uimg rhe folkreutgaidio.-un.
•        PormarioD of WUGs and Forestry Mamgemcnr sub-comninca;
•        Number of trees planted;
•        Survival rates, growth rates, prnducoon; and
____ * Satisfaction of WCGs with znanagcuienr of wood resourtes.
These include:
•        Effective formation and management of WGs,
•        Capacity of local nurseries to produce cetjuaftd wd* md sredJmip; and
__ • Effective nuwmcir and rr.arkmng of produce_______________________ _________
:*■ Mjf 31Fttknal DtMOtrufic RtpMc of Ethiopia. Mintftiy ofW'atrr anti Energy Ethiopian Nth Imgafion and Drutnqp Prvjtrt
UB F4 Main Rq>on (1)
10____
I^FM-4: Watersbed.Mana^^^. ^
The Study area for the Upper Beles Irnganon pfOvct --------------------- ^^J^Aa (parrs)  of  3"  Ke  be  les  in  6  wereda,  ;n    Amhan  and  B^t
current population is estimated at 101,700 pp., households of which about 31% have land user nght, The sods of the area are pnmaolv vertisols (50%t -..l
’ Uroui
Stats The
3.170
■    *' ted mtriois and h'l
..       ,
j over 14%. cambisols over 5% of the area and very shaflow and/
over  31%.  The  topography  is  flat  ro  undulating  wb  more  dissectT"' land suitability 58.33’ ha (78% vertisols) have slopes of <3% 
fncaiin«
10 *r™ cf
i sj«7 h. («•.
hm
.r
slopes for irrigation.
for   irrigation   requiring   soil   and   wafer   cooseninon,   It   «   rw^^i
P ^owd,Dreni«h dwwh>V
0
WHC
•
The  land cover/land use 11  largely split  between grassland »,th ntpng degrees of
which coven 51,500 ha (37%) of the area and smallholder tainfed
(„m
7
almost 43,000 ha or 31 • • of the area. Woodland coven a further 28,800 ha pl*,; <~t nvenne forest an important 5%.
The Protect area covers a total of 138,IS  ha sphr into rhe nghr ind eft bids, b&ccied br rhe Main (Enat) Belcs river. It has been divided into nve ma?oc Stage Deidopmcat .Veu (1-V although SDA 11 is Hyma outside the Upper Bcles area) and tub-dmded into trr SO As on the nght bank (IA, IBW, 1BE, IBS & HI) and ten SDAs on the left hank IVA, I\ BW (further subdivided into 3 phases). 1VBE-N, IVBE-S, IVCN. IVCE. TVCS, VN. VS de VW
Water for the irrigation scheme will be obtained fnxn 1 dam ind rrurvn River with water diverted into EX) km nght bank and 130 km bank orJs Tnc imgable area is 70.451 ha (net 63,8" 1 ha) split between 36^25 h* of oxnnie T_ development (plus 4,773 ha potential expmsioc) and 22,944 ha trusllholde i^X3
SDA, o.             kS bmk m-W.N. ««MX*VS*-“-
for  irrigation  will  be  developed  under  a  watershed  management  prog ater Conservation on tainted land
Hie num goal of rhe project xs to 
fi9
jrnjcJturc U 15 P<Dm00f^
development of sustairuble, smallhokler-based jnyolyement of the private lector tn U*g scak£ 
Pour SDAs, 1VBE N. IVBE-S, IVCE and VS. have or >
•uitable for unganon (12-28%) and have thetefo« t<« "
*rn£igoo 
---------*
pe^eno^ of that jrd
^Eed
development.   However   there   are   appreciable   areas   Lonlfrntwr-   ®rtsu;t’ conditions in these SDAi that are farmed witbW *"T s
Il *» therefore proposed to introduce soil and »■*<« c Wa <enhcd management package in these SDAs111 —cjocal population (who will not be o(fcred£)
R ^easutti
‘ *”* ..
.^ove th'
IT Me 11
11FttM
of Erhopa. Miiiiftry of W afer and Eter&
F.tboptaa St It Imgjnoft and Dnau# Prytii
Title
1A FM-4: Watenhcd Man^eni ofNoa-?^ -T
Subproject
Ob|ective(s)
development area from erosion, sedimentation and runoff Subproject activities include:
-^t-uring acl|oinin
^^tion
•      Formation of Commumn- Watershed Development Teams fCVm-t- .
,-
- , 
" u ‘ -*h<> u-.II
prepare   Community   Acuon   Plans   (CAP)   for   agncultural   intensifies
nrsrl
,,
H./\o
---- - «»»u inu
lnd
„   .
and water conservation.
SSuubbpprroj ojeecctt AAccnnvi vinnccss
Formation of Wereda Watershed Development Teams (WUDT) to liaise
CWDT and assist communities at micro-watershed levels to prepare CAPs Decision on location of cultivated areas, communal grazing lands. i-ommunx forestry lands (as part of CAP) and applicability of proposed interventions [Interventions include Agronomic measures (inter cropping, relay or double cropping, ley cropping, crop rotation, row planting & unproved faUow), Buxogtol soil conservation measures (grass stnps. bund stabilisation). Structural soil conservation measures (fanya juu, stone-faced bunds, cut off drains, spillways), Agro forestry and reforestation (area closure, reforestation). Training and
promotion]
W*W*DT to secure agncultural services as inputs to (CAP) at kebclc level. WOT to facilitate the means to provide interventions required for agreed GAPs CWDTs to organise labour for interventions and planting plant seedlings u produced by nurseries
Construction and Implementation of SWC measures over agreed per.od
work plan in CAP.
Subproject
Tmplementanon
produce (fruit, fuelwood, poles, fodder).
resettlement (expansion) areas to l>e taken in advance of
drhn canon.
The main i1 mipmlpemlemenetnattiatonionmmododalialtiietsieisnicnluclduede
Formation and organising WAWA X'DX1*  DTans danCdW  CWD D TsT,s; Training & technical support;
UH F4 Main Report (1)
12s %
___ 1AFM'4: 5>»,c»hfd Management
cred benefits include;
Livelihood   enhancement   through   increased   crop   produce fuel wood, fodder, timber and fairs, and
—------
P furrt‘or. of
5^' *
1   ,,d
• Environmental improvements through reduced sod erosion and dU. d degradation.
The beneficiaries are communities in the four target SD.U Jnd.
.joining imgmonj£g_ —                       __ ________ __________ _________
xCC^C05n
SDA
IVBL N
1VBES
TVCE
SWC Co«t.               WM Costa
’,293.082
17.U9.7J5
3,848,108                   9.O48.MJ
6,863,246
t6.l38.953
ys
3,644.960
8.571.140
Total
21.649J96
50.908.652
The subproject will be implemented by the following agencies
npcrenting
•{COB
•
•
\X crcda .ARD and other sector offices; DAs; and
♦
Private and Government Nurse nes.
■^otuice
I’he performance of subproject will be monitored using the fottwng indicates
• Formation of WWDTs and CWDTs;
Production of GAPs;
Implementation of S\X’C measures;
Performance of SWC measures and livelihood imprwrmenr. and Satisfaction of CWDTs and kebeles with watershed management inicnenoccv
Thcu* include:
Effective  formation  and  management  of  CWDTs;
Production of suitable CAPs with implementation plans. Construction of SWC interventions to MoARD gwdeHr.cs,
Capacity of local nurseries to produce required seeds and scvdhrjp. asd Effective management and marketing of produce
-ta
1»»l«« for the Upper Beles Irngatior. Project extends
c
•hold!1 of which about 31% have land user rights
1      1     wrt'*o*s (»«'•) ’ith red mmol, wd Wmdlng
The sods of 'he «« «  P ™ '-
ovff U%. wmbtsols over 5% of the ires and very ’hallow and/or very stony Lep^
over 31%- 'Ow rr,P°g  P >' ’’
ra   h
flat *° unduhnng '"!h more dissection m the east ln .tnnj of
Und suitability 58.337 ha (7B% vemsok) have dope, of <3% and uc llBtlb|t fof !rngWon and 15.30" ha (66° □ vertisols) have 3 8% (12*.) slope, making them coodmuruliy suitable for irrigation requiring soil and water conservation It n proposed to terrace land wtth >3*, slope, for irrigation.
The land cover, land ute is largely split between grassland with varying degree, of tree cover which covers 51.500 ha (3^%) of the area and smallholder runted turning ’Huch ccrven almost 45,000 ha ur 31% of the area. \X oodland coven a further 28,801 ha (21%) and rivennr lores! an important 5%.
The Project area covers a total of 138.15" ha spbt into the ngh: and left banii, bisected In rhe Main (Enat) Beks river. It has been divided into ttve major Stage Development Areas (I-V although SDA 11 is Hvma outside the Upper Beles area) and sub dmded taro five SDAs on the right bank (LA. IBW. I BE. IBS & III) and ten SDAs on the left bank IVA, IVBW (further subdivided into 3 phases). IVBE-X', IVBE-S, fVCN. IVCE, IVCS, VN, VS * W.
Afer f°f the irrigation scheme will be obtained from a dam and rriervoe -xi the Bees River with water diverted into 100 km right hank and 130 km left bank canals- The gmn uogable area is 70.45lha (net 63,871ha) split between 36.225 ha of commcraal sugar deVr|opmeni (plus 4.773 ha potential expansion) ind 22.944 ha smallholder irnptwn In
•ddiaon four SDAs on the left bank (TVBE-S. B’BE-S. IVCE, 4 VS) that ire nor nimble uTigation will be developed under a watershed management programme with Sod and
' orient of the pnvate sector in Urge scale commercial rogation devriopir.mr
lhb nal
e
*’’**» fl
r M*r !•Vttkrul Dr*r*rufn R/pttHh' ifEtfapia. Ministry oflTatrr and E*nji Ethicfnan Nik                and Dnan^r Ptvjtrt
Title
L&FM-5: Reservoir Catchment and Buffer Zone Dev | livelihood* of people farming in the reservoir catchment area a 
^ rovc the programme  is  proposed  as  well  as  the  creation  of  a  buffer  zone  of  d
Subprojec t
()bjective(s)
the reservoir full supply level.
Livelihood improvement through provision of watershedn^^ prolonging reservoir life.
Subproject activities for Watershed Management include:
dl gcnous tree, af(Xj^
——_______
^^urcs ai
• Formation of Community Watershed Development Teams (CWDT) who
nH’n^rr t rimmi»r»irxr Irnon                 A
.
prepare  Community  Action  Plan,  (CAP)  for  agricultural  tntensifiutinn   aod
nnrl
and water conservation.
. 
— •-■iuWU
SSuubbpprroj ojeecctt AAccttiivi vittiieess
••
Formation of Wcreda Watershed Development Teams (WWDT) io luuc urh CWDT and assist communities at micro watershed level to prepare C\Pj
Decision on location of cultivated areas, communal grazing Lands, communal forestry lands (as part of CAP) and appbcability of proposed interventions (Interventions include Agronomic measures (inter cropping, relay or double cropping, ley cropping, crop rotation, row planting & improved fallow), Biological sod conservation measures (grass strips, bund stabilisation), Structural sod conservation measures (fanya juu, stone-faced bunds. Iiench terraces, cut-off drains, waterways. spillways), Agro-forestry and reforestation (area closure, reforestation). Training and promotion).
WAX D I to secure agricultural services as inputs to (CAP) at kcbele level. WAVDT to facilitate the means to provide interventions required for agreed CAPi CWDTs to organise labour for interventions and planting plant seedlings as produced by nurseries.
Construction  and  Implementation  of  SW  C  measures  over  agreed  penod  •  E work plan in CAP.
(TWDTs organise management of SW'C measures including trees shru (watering, weeding etc) - may be communal or individual
CVCDTs organise harvesting including cut and carry of fodder, marketing produce (fruit, fuelwood, poles, fodder).
ct activities for the Buffer Zone include:
Formation of Community Reservoir Buffer Zone teams Decision on wtdlh. layout and spectes to be planted tn buffer zon
(CR^ZT. DAs.
Area closure poor to planting - cattle excluded
t 'B F4 Main Report J)
16, y ra,rr
Pry* *1
I
y^FMj:Reservoir Catchment andBuff^^onc Dev
CRBZTs   organise   management   of   buffer   rone   tnchxhng   oM^d fl^rV^tin^of P£<jucc ffuchvnod, fodder)._______________  ™dcr,
subp^' wdl be implemented over 5 rem «
^ptemenution modal.ties include:
Formanon and organising WWDTi and CWDTs; Training & technical support;
Decision on what to implement where;
iiL Bcucim and tetkiioci
Cotts
Management of implementation activities and subsequent mainTenince, md Management of benefits (communal/individual).
And for the buffer zone:
•        Formanon and organising CRBZTs;
•        Decision on whar to plant where.
•        Training & technical support;
•        Management of planting activity and subsequent tending; ind
•        Management of benefits (communal/individual)
The expected benefits include:
•        1 jveilhood enhancement ihrough increased crop production and pronsmr. of fuelwood, fodder, timber and fruits,
•        Environmental improvements through reduced soil erosion ind woodland degradation, and
•                 Benefit lanes are communities in the reservoir catchment area.___________________ The estimated subproject cose is:
•        Watershed Management of Reservoir Catchment CTB 2343^,613;
•        Buffer Zone Development ETB 317,500
Tot^cost: ETB 234,695,113________________________ ____ _________
The subproject will he implemented by the following agencies:
•       Wereda ARD and other sector offices;
•       DAs; and
------ _Pnv*te and Government Nunc ties
performance of subproject will be monitored using the toCowwg xdiciion:
Formanon  of  WVCTJTi,  CWDTj   and  (for  the  mervmr  buffer  zone)  CRBZTs Production of CAPs;
'mplementanon of SWC measures;
Performance of SWC measures and livelihood improvement: md
S »tisfaction of CWDTs and CRBZTs and kebeks with watershed
ajl j^buffcr zonc interventions._________________ ______________ ——
include:
Effective formation and management of CWDTs & CRBZT s.
Production of suitable CAPs with implementation pb**
Construction    of    SWC    interventions    to    McAftD    guidelines.
O f nuncfies lo prOduce required seeds icings.
-^jjectiyc management and marketing of produce^--------------------------------
VAtor11
17Ftdtrd DtataWic ikfpnbhc of E/hiofna, Mint ftry tfVFattr and Entrp Ethiopian Nik Irrigation and Dnan^t Prof tit
18
UB F4 Main Rep**  ( )
1lpnf ^^ ___________________________ ___ _______
T^FM^Terr^cBund Subdi»atioQ
7^7^**™rhe Uppcr Bel" 'fnga,lon PrOK"™
7,) of 37 Kebeles in 6 weredas >n Amhara and Beneshul-Gunw Regional s&tej ffflC population 11 C,tlnU,Cd ” ,0,’70° ^9% comP°’«i °f about 23,170
T^hold’ of which about 31% have land user nghts.
The Sods of the area are primarily vert!sob (50%) wnh red ninsols hx^oj, fnmdlCjj ovW 14%, cambisols over 5% of the area and very shadow and/or very stony Le^o,^
— .
7
?
over 31%- Th' topography is flat to undulating with more dissection m the east. In -erms of Ufld suitability 58.337 ha (78% vertisols) have slopes of <3% and are suable for anpcon and 153°  ha (66% vertisols) have 3-8% (12%) slopes making them condinonalh tumble for irrigation requiring soil and water conservation It u proposed to terrace land wh >3% slopes for irrigation
The land cover/land use is largely split between grassland with varying degrees of tree cover which covers 51,500 ha (37%) of the area and smallholder rain fed tarrrurg which coven almost 43,000 ha or 31 % of the area. Woodland covers a further 28.800 ha (21%) and rivenne forest in important 5*4.
The Project area covers a total of 138.157 ha split into the nght ind left hanks, bisected be the Main (Enar) Bcles river. It has been divided into five major Stage Devdopment .\xeu
(1 V although SDA 11 is Hyma outside the Upper Beles lreaj and sub-dmded into five SDAs on the nght Iwnk (IA, TBW. IBE, TBS & III) and ten SDAi on the left bank !V.\ IVBW (further subdivided into 3 phases). IVBE-N, IVBE S. TVCN.TVCE. TVCS. VN. VS & VW.
ater for the irrigation scheme will be obtained from a dam and rocrvwr m die Beks
Ri'er with water diverted into 100 km nght bank and 130 km left bank canals The gxvsi tfrigablc area is 70,451ha (net 63,8 1ha) split between 36.225 ha of commerui! sugar ^ e%clopmmt (plus 4J73 ha potential expansion) and 22,944 ha snuEhoidcr xmganoa In ‘dduson four SDAa on the left bank (IVBE-N, IVBE-S, IVCE, & VS) that ire not suitable
rogation will be developed under a watershed management programme wuh Sod and
»"r Conservation on nunfed land.
devel 1)0 8<nl °f P"’1"1« to "«*«» naMWlir fW* nW«rptmrtf through the
mvX°f SUSt*‘n’blc- *mallholdcr-b*sed irrigated agriculture as well as promoting *e
of the private sector in large scale commercial irrigation development.
*nd  t^\elOPrnCn'  °f  ,rr*‘no"  «  Upper  Bcles  wtU  require  terracing  of  and  those  3%  dr^e '2,110                *posal of excess water into natural drainage lines- There wiD be i ton-
v ^Uoki1    °f   la,'d   tO    "rn,ced    comprising  5,538  ha  for  smallholders  (2,607  nd  sous.
}              6'672Ha of the commercial sugar estate (1.458 red sods wd UH ««<*>•
I"he end
-Hphdj a_ .  CC  bun<'5  on red soils will have a top width of 0.2 m, a height of - ------Djulhlopes Of 1Q3 (vemcakboruontal). Vertisols arejgMgHg”^ —
•7-MrtFederal Democrat!, Rep* bin- of Ethiopia. Minittr) of If j/er and Energy Ethiopia ft yiiie Irrigation and Drainage Prvytfl
______________________ L&FM-6: Terrace Bund StabiliaatioQ
'
highly erodible even on low slopes due to their shrink swell ntruft^r^T
require gender bund riser slopes. It is proposed that these bunds hav 0.3m. an uphill slope of 1:1 and a downhill slope of 1:2 (or Hatter)
**
The terracing of (vertito!) land for irrigation is a new departure in Eihopu lnd „ u therefore paramount that a pilot area is trialled prior to full land preparation, terno*^ irrigation development. This is particularly important for vemsols winch are ,„w unstable due their shrink swell nature and are easily erodible.
Research has shown that the provision of ground cover is of
.    , 
preventing erosion on vertisols. Thev report that 80% pasture mund
r ^™w,raP<M1>acein
Subproject
< )biecnve(sj
Subproject Activities
i               r, wiu er a recurtd prevent soil loss on vertisols but that 50% cover was no better than bare sod
Stabilisation of terrace bunds to ensure bund stability and viability of w^pen tfUmT
Subproject activities in Smallholder Areas include:
•       Formation of Water User Group, (WLGs) and Forctry & Coramu!ul Gn^
Committees;
•       Decision on location of expansion (and any new) resettlement ami, conrnm grazing lands and forest/) lands;
[Collection and purchase of suitable grass seeds. The grasses should bcaeqaig and drought resistant such as Vetifer, Rhodes grass and Buffel gnu is we] it
local species such as 'semheletc' and 'dasho plan red in dense rows Trees and ihrtxbi should be planted at a close spacing of 30 to 60cm apart on single or suggercc double row. For forage production nitrogen fixing trees/shmbs such is Lenam Intcacephala^ Pigeon pea (Gajttna cajart) and Sesbanra teiban should be used Aoaa saligna planted in dense rows can also be introduced and used as forage mexed with crop residues. On rhe under vertisols bunds a line of trees could be plartn. ar the top and bottom of the riser to discourage farmers from ploughing L-r> 4^- the bund. In addition fruit trees such as Mango (Mangfera tndrcal. Guava H a***
.g*aja*i), White Sapote (Caiintima ednlu), Annona lenegakniu. Papava and Avocado (Perna Amt mana) could be planted ]
Agree species mix - seedling requirements sent to nurseries.
Area closure prior to planting - cattle excluded;
Seedlings produced by nurseries;
WUGs organise labour for planting - plant seedlings 15 pmduted by
WUGs organise management of bunds - no grazing for I - implementation, trees/shrubs (watering, weeding etc) — nn) •*
individual; and
WUGs organise harvesting including cut and carry of produce (fruit, fuelwood, poles, fodder).
Subproject activities in Commercial estate / farm area include
•       Selection of area for pilot scheme;
•       Plant bunds with suitable grasses (NH only grasses in
«
TH 1-4 Main Report (1)
20^'“"0 rMr “*
Title
_______________
L&FM-6: Terrace Bund Stibihiacioq Astesi  most  <mtahle  grass wed  mix  and
Plant scheme with best mix for sod type.
□
ln?Ja1wntannn
The subproject will be implemented over 5 years in rhe project area NB Pilot ircafjj ibadd Im? trialled firar.
The main implementation rondalitieii for smallholder turn arras include,
■    Formation and organising WUGs;
•       Training dr Technical support;
•       Decision on what to plant where,
•       Management of planting activity and subsequent tending; and
•       .Management of benefits communal / ind rvidua?,
The expected benefits include:
• 
Smbtiliation of terrace* enabling sustainable imgauoo.
• 
Livelihood enhancement through increiRd crop production from irrigation and
Main Benefits anil BeneficELflti
provision of fodder and fruits from itahlised bunds, and
• 
Environmental improvements through reduced sod erosion
Bencfkiaces ire communities tn the command ira and rhe commercial estate
The estimated su
Smallholder
ccrtl
m:
Red Scab                  1.837,674
Vertisols
2.508,350
^hpfuject Costs
Sub-total                  4346.024
Commercial
Red Soils
22U.0I2
Vertijuli
1.575,585
Sub-iotxJ
1,793,W
Total
6,139,622
Irn P^mrnung ‘^ncin
^ bpfDfcc'
Fhe subproject will be impicmenied br the following agencies:
•       Uereda .\RD and oLher sector offices;
•       DAj;
•       Pnvaie and GovonmEnl N unenes; md
_ • Commercial estate
The performance of subproject mil be modiored mung die following lodicarnrs
•       Pilot Tone es constructed and planted;
•       Area of grass and number of trees/shrubs planted.
•       Survival rates, growth rates, production,
•      Tetrace condition / iiahdity / signs or erosion, and
* Foe smallholder farm Area sanstoCOOfl 0-1 WUGs wttb rnaftsgegr.ietic el bunds rh«e uidudeComionenr of commerdal estate to quality / uasESintaimble terracing;
•       Effective formation and management of WL'Gs;
•      Gipaary of local niirierte* to produce required seed* ind setdtegi;
__ *   Silcces sful completion pfptlriJJcreated areal;
______ __ ________
—J
T^n (ijElh.op.in Nik im/fllion and Dninagf PW
22
VB  J.-4 M«® xnx'n (1>ANNEX G
COMMUNITY SUPPORT SUB-PROJECTS
!7-Wp-!1Ftdtra/ Dr mo erotic Papabhc of Ethiopia. Mt nutty of lFafrr and Energy Ethiopian Nih Irrigation and Dnanagf Project
UB F4 Mun Report (1)
2CD-I: Improved Accew to Pouhu
__
-^"“l^Uhoo "--------------------
The Pr«^! arM (Qt rhC UPP" KhOTt COTTOl fa
kebele’ in 6 w«ed« in Aw, Zone of ANRS and Metelce!
„^
f
------------- 7*57
SR5.   •P’C   total    net    lrn«ablc    “ and 32J62 *“ ” on thc **ft bank-
63 87
-  ’   hl-
of     Jlpno   fu   n   locuri
***
The maior concentrations of settlement, -ntkn the pru-ect lna
Fendika, I’awe “d Werk Medi Bolh fcndlkj
d
 “  Pawr « sutroundtdby .errf^/
?
7
'tJbprqcct
3id<fajnd
kebeles established under government resettlement pmgnmnies front (i) 1*>99-2D(X> 1985 early I The latter programme was pan of the ambvms Tana Beln p^,
settlement establishment was accompanied by extensive constnamon nt aO ro:*
(two) large piped potable water supply interns (now largely defunit\ tapper, rental
CIVp and livestock development, and also about 400 hi of tmganoo dertkpmmt in SDM11
The population density in the study (and project) ira is lugtur variable, vamng from cat I j persons /km  to over 200 persons/km-. The lowest population iensitr ocean m stage ueai 1- A & 1V-A. Overall, for the whole project area the population dentin a slwut 46
7
persons/km .
Bated on rhe data provided bv the wereda offices. the Land ase tn the 3’ krbda » u foflosx (i) 3 % to 43% of all land is cultivable; (n) R° • tn 35’ • of ill land a gnzxg land; d*: 12* • ?o 41* • of all land is forest; fiv) 1 % to 5% is waste land, (v) 1* • or 2% n used by houses ind roads; and Jvi) land use is not clear for 4% to 13% of al! land
Findings concerning access to clean and safe potable wafer include the foDoaw
•       4% to 65% of the surveyed households fetch water trom kxaJ stieasu in Hof the 16 surveyed kcbeles,
•       4% to 45% of rhe surveyed households in 10 of the 16 suoeud kebeles fetch wirrr from unprotected spring;
•       In 8 of rhe 16 surveyed kcbclcs, 5% to • of the surveyed households tinch potable water from open wells;
•       Quality of fetched potable water is not good in 5 of the 16 surged kebdes; 5% to 45% of the surveyed household in 5 of the 16 surveyed krbeks trpored experience water shortage;
•       Majonty of the surveyed households in 15 of the 16 vurveyed kebefa use of a toilet for last 2 to 10 years; and
Female members of surveyed households fetch water J distance of h25l m two to three times per day.
llon  of improved potable water supply and sarutaoon to ' Xpln<kd /new kcbele / wereda settlements (villages) » ®du,W m tlx
oniohd
J     <suWT'
atlon componcn( of |hc propoietl ptojea. Thu subprort »’  P
ln 7' lntC '° ,h' P001- i*ad vuinerable fee. female-headed bou«t»lds wJ •» ’•**
-ul
dcveloproen(
^(1)
f 7 Mn I
lI'tdrral DtMhruftr RtpMi of Ethiopia,  Mnuttr) of Water anH Entr^-
Ethiopian Piilt Imgation an J Drutn^f Profit
Title
CD-I: Improved Access to Potable Water >od S.~-               7---
I>oor health conditions are related to poor / limited access to potableua?                                 — improvtd (pit) toilets Abo women in many households spend a lot of
reducing time foe other activities. To improve health conditions and reduce women of collecting potable water, this subproject will address the foil
°f
Subproject
Rationale
soor quality* of fetched water, (ti) inadequate availability of improved /                      * COnirr*W fi) resources; (in) reduced access to potable water tn years with less than normal
distances (> 0.5 km) to the nearest source of potable water, and fiv) limited
mproved (pit) toilets. 
1 Ulc°f
Subproject                     To improve the access to nearby (<0.5 km) clean and safe potable
Objective (sj
..           ,          i-
. 
rural households living in or near the project area.
~~------
tcr Jnc1'»n»anonfOfl2
Subproject
Activities
The activities of the subproject include:                                                                                        “——
•       Protection of existing potable water sources, such as open wells and unpnxectd
springs, including the provision of fences to keep animals away.
•       Introduction and promotion of the use of low cost water treatment technologies ar household level, such as (sand/ceramic) filters and solar water purification using
plastic water bottles;
•        Improvement of the C McM of existing PWS schemes, including the formation and training  of  WMCs,  and  advice  /  support  for  the  construction  of  new  (gravity)  m schemes some of which may use water delivered from the canal irrigation spica.
•       Introduction and promotion of the construction of water harvesting (roof top) structures at household level;
•       Construction of “otf-line" watering structures for livestock as an integrated pin of the design of the irrigation canal system; and
•       Promotion of the construction and use of (improved pit) toilets through awareneu campaign and health extension activities.
A short (2-3 month preliminary) study to estimate rhe cost to rehabilitate the buned pip< water supply* systems installed under the Tana Bcles project (1985 to early 1990s) along*
------------------—                            r a 
O8cM arrangements is also proposed. 
_                     7       i,
------ - -----------
Subproject Implementation
The subproject will be implemented over 9 years in the 37 kcbcles (partial]v) simal ® project area. Implementation modalities will include: (i) awareness campaign*, (ii) design and construction / support for new/exisnng PVCS schemes and (houschc ) harvesting and (improved pit) toilet structures; and (lii) demonstrations and tram g will be given to the poor (landless), female-headed households and househol
fetch water a distance of more than 0.5km.. 
----—       - —
Phe expected benefits include:
•       Healthier population due to reduction ot water-borne health pro
diarrhoea, dysentery, vomiting / stomach problems and typhot                              p cbteeis.
Main Benefits and Bcncfic tanes
•       Reduction of labour days lost due to illness cause b\ water
•       Reduced child mortality rates;
•       Reduction of time spent by women collecting potable water
The main beneficiaries of the subproject will be all households ving
area. 
f
houieh°^uir
.         in and no*
------ ----- -------- "
I
I’B b’4 Mam Report (1)
2fm £^'fffl **d             Pm^f
CD-I: Impmvrd Access to Potiblc Water and Saruuuoa
Ti<k_------------ —
tcrC SrS
subp^    "
The estimated subproject cent is F.TB 9,600,000
[mplcmcnting
Agencies
The mam implementing agencies involved tn the execution of the subproject ut
•       WRD and ARD offices ar wercdl level;
•       1 Jedth offices ar wereda. level;
•       Kebclc Council;
•       DAs;
•       Health Extension Workers;
•       NGQs; and
•       Banks and or MFIs.
Subproject performance Monitoring
The performance of The subproject will be monitored according to the following indicators
•       Number of existing < pen wells and unprotected springs protected;
•       Household coverage of (gravity) polible wafer supply schemes;
•       Quality of fetched / provided waler;
•       Number of water management comminrrs formed and/or trained;
•       Chdd mortality races; and
•       Number/pruportion of rural householdt using low-cost wafer traimenr
technologies; and
•       Number/proportion of rural househokls having an (improved pH) todeL
Risks and
L'necrtsunties
•       Rural households are not interested in low cost water treatment Technologies and/ or constructing tudcis;
•       Support for (new) PWS scheme works including construcacn of new PWS schrtne*. and for existing spring and well protetnen is lacking;
•       Kebelc Councils and/or rural households do not support the funnzDOrf of waler nunigaTiffir commirrecs aimed at improved O£JeM of PU S schemes .
Uh  H M
Kt^pun (i)
3
17 Mir 1 rF rdf nd Dtfoo^vafic R/pubbc of Efbtopta, Mhtufn of Wattr and Enrr^j/ Ethiopian Nib Irrigation and Dnanc^r Pry til
UH F4 Main Report (1)
4-
Sib I’’#""
tff                A *f U *-#r
fi/w" ‘ _______________________________________________
CI>2: Improved Health Condition* __________________
The project for the Upper Bda scheme covered 138.157 ha and euended over 57 kebdrs
m 6 weredM in Awi Zone of AN RS arid Mtakd Zone of ReturnBangui Gumuz NRS. The total net irrigable area is 63.671 hi* of which 31.509 lu is looted on the nght bank ind 32362 ha u
cxi the left bank,
The major enneentranons of senkmenft within the Study area ire around the towns of Fendakj, Piwr and U'crk Mcdi. Both Fcndika arid Pawe ire surrounded br ictilemeni krbclei established under government resettlement programmes from. (i) 1999 2000; and (bi) 19€5 earhr 1990s. The latter programme was part of the ambit>ous Tan* Bela project ■a+icre settlement establishment wras accompanied by extensive construction of iU-weather roads, (two) large piped potable water supply systems (now largely defunct), support foe nmfed crop and tnmtDck development, and also about 400 ha of trngahon development in SDA Ill.
The popuhnnn density in the Study (and project) area is highly vunblr. varying from just 15 persons/ km- co over 200 peoons/krrr The lowest population densitv occurs in stage areas 1-A & IV-A Overall, for the whole project area the population density u aixxu 46 pervinsf km
Rased on the data provided by she wereds offices, the land use in the 37 kcbelrs h u folkm_ (fl 37% to 43* ■ of all land is cultivable; (u) 8% to 35% of xJ land is grazing Land, (ui) 12% to 41% of ail land J5 forest; fiv) 1% to 5% is waste Jatld; (v) 1% or 2% is used bv houses and roads, and (vi) land use h not clear for 4*«to 13% of all land.
Subproject
Background
The main health problems in the study area include mahm. typhoid, diarrhoea and/or internal parasites and skin diseases. Malma is caused by mcrsquttoci breeding in standing water as weD as the lack of malaria centred and use of preventive measures, inch U led nets Typhoid, diarrhoea and Lntenud pans tn are pemarily due to lack of access to dean potable water and saniMon.
Health problems are also caused by? (i) poor air quality inside The house due to use of open fires for cooking; (u) kerping livestock inside the house during the night; and (Hi) lack of knowledge on basic health issue*
There are five health centres and 26 health posts in Jawi XXereda. but no hospital- In Lhogur 'X'ereda, there is one health centre and 11 health posts and. In Pawc there b one hospital ‘,f>f health centre: and 12 health posts..
According In the pamopanti of the thematic focus group meetings, essential drags and medicines are available in ooh' one of the 16 surveyed krbria.
Provision of improved health facilities to large numbers of households and for the expanded /new kebele / waeda settlements (villages) is beyond the scope of the proposed irrigation development project. This subproject will primarily target assistance to rhe poor (Lc- landless and households with %w small land bolding*/ and vulnerable (for example wximein haded households or households with disabilities) and is justified foe ali inclusive social development.
qirwi (1)
5
t7-Mrr-ll,. tdtrui Dtanxrunc
‘J Etlnopia. MMr) »f ft'alrr and E »"&
Etbtopian XiJt Imfanc and Dnan^t Prvfr.1
Title                             ’
30-2: Improved Health Conditions
1 W health affects the productivity of households and their ability to 
livelihoods. Poor health of individuals from poor and vulnerable household! wh^ resources to seek and pay for treatment is of particular concern and measures lo conditions will therefore be targeted at these groups Improved health will     **
J population activity and productivity as well as improved quality of life
- ---------
Subproject
Rationale
reiu
Lncrease
Subproject Objective's^
To improve the health conditions caused by water-borne diseases and standmgwj--------------------------
households in and around the project area. 
* r ^Or 01
Subproject
Activities
The proposed activities of the sub-project include:
•     Raising awareness and knowledge among the rural population about appropmt                           5 prevent  and  control  malaria,  including  the  promotion  of  the  use  of  (impregnated)  bcr/ as well as of typhoid, diarrhoea and/or internal parasites and skin diseases
•       Prevention  of  standing  water  by  ensuring  effective  drainage  and  flood  protectee  in  *b project area;
•       Improvement  of  access  to  clean  and  safe  potable  water  through  the  protection  of  exm open  potable  water  sources,  such  as  shallow  wells  and  unprotected  springs  (see  tubpro
CD 1);
•       Promotion  of  construction  and  use  of  (pit)  toilets  to  improve  sanitation  around  the  hoi and inside the villages (sec subproject CD 1);
•        Introduction   and   promotion   of   improved,   energy-efficient   stoves   with   exhausts   snd/o use of cleaner energy sources, such as (bio)gas (see subproicct CD 3);
•     Promotion of the use of sheds to keep livestock outside the house during the night.
•       Provision  of  regular  in-service  training  for  the  I  lealth  Assistants  and  Health  Extcnuoc Workers  at  kebele  level  in  order  to  enhance  and  update  their  technical  and  extension  si
and
•     Implementation of comprehensive health extension programme to enhance the knowi of men and women about the prevennon and treatment of common health problems-
Subproject Implementation
The sub-project will be implemented over 9  years in rhe project area.  The nwn impletner.
modalities include: (1) awareness campaigns,  and (ii) demonstrations and training  Priority
support will be given to the poor (landless; and female headed households.----------------------------------
Main Benefits and
Beneficiaries
The expected benefits include:
•        Healthier   population   due   to   reduction   in   malaria,   typhoid   and   other   water problems as well as improved hygiene and air quality inside houses, and
•     Reduction of lost labour days caused by (water-borne) health problems
The  main   beneficiaries  of   the  sub-project  will  be  poor  and  vulnerable  household
project area 
_ —— '           _
Subproject Costs
The estimated subproject cost is ETB 3,300,000
Implementing
Agencies
I*he main implementing agencies involved in the execution of the subpr
•      Health offices at wereda level;
•      ARD offices at wereda level;
•     Kebele Councils;
• 
• 
DAs;
Health Assistants and Health Extension Workers; and
---- -------- —
UH P4 Main Report (1)
6*** l>n™* P***!
CD-2: Improved Health CoodrtkMM
Jfi*———"
« NGCh.
Subprof€cr
pEftnrfnartCX Monitoring
The following indicators will be used to monitor the performance of the lubproiect
intervention!:
•     Number/proportion of households using ' iinprrgna!ed; bed nets.
r
•     Prevalence rates of maJaru. rvphotd ind other after home diseases;
•     Numbcr/proportion of household! using improved stoves with eihaust and/or iltermiive, ekaner source* of energy.
•     Number/proper:ion of household* having ccxutrocicd a shed for keeping fotitoc* ourode rhe house during the night,
« Number of Health Assistant! and HEAXs having received learning;
•     Number/proportion of households having attended health extension meetings; and
•     Child moriatiry rates.
Rjjki arid Unccrrainurs
•     Households are not interested to use impregnated bed nets, improved i fares, cleaner source! of energy and/of sheds lor their livestock; and
•  Improved stoves with exhaust and/or dcancr energy source! arc not available and/or too
expensive
s
lJH i < Main Report)
17 Mav 11rrdfru; Dnnthrufu RspvM, of Ethiopia, Mioutrt of ITatrr and Entrgy Ethiopian Ntk ImgUton and Drainage Pnyrrf
UB F4 Main Report (1)
8Tdtfj'
of&h0/*4' Miwtry
liatr#
CO-3: Improved Acceas to Energy Sources
The project for the Upper Bd« ,theme covered 138.15^ h» W<J CXJcnded .jrerT fcbelo
» 6 wrrcdai in Aw, Zone of ANUS and MefcW Zone of Beninahinpil Gwituz NRS. The toral net imgablr ira n 63.871 hi. of which 31,509 hi is located on the tight (Mak and 31362
ha is on the left bank.
The major concentrations of settlements within the Study area are artsund the towns of
FendJu. Pa we and Vt crk Mcda. Both Fendika and Pawr arc surrounded by scitlerrmi kebeki established under government reserdemenr programme* from: (?) 1999-2000; and Hr 1985 early 1990s. The la tier programme was part of the amhiriout Tara-Bries project where settlement establishment was accompanied br nteouve construcriun of all weather roadf, (two) large piped poubie water *uppk systems (now largely defunct). support for oinicd crop and livestock development, and also about -100 ha of irnganon development in SDA III.
The population density in the study (and project) area is highly vanabk, varymg Iran jixit 15 persons/km  to over 200 persons/ km  The tawesr nopuhtson density occurs in stage irrat I-
7
A & IV-A. (h’crafl, for the whole project xrn the population dcnsirr is about 46 persons/ km .
Based on the data provided bv the wcreda offices, the land use in the 3" kebeles is as foDcwv (j.i V® k to 43" • of all Land lb cultivable, (ii) 8% to 35% of all land n grazing Land: (id) 12% ro 41 * o of all land is foresr. (Tv) 1% ro 5% u waste land, (v) !“■ or 2% is used by houses and roads; and (vi) land use is nor clear for 4% to 13% of all Lind.
7
2
SubprojecT
Background                      VC 'mdn information indicates rhar only 12 of the 37 krbetev ire connected to die electricity god, including the towns of Fendika, Pawe and Weik Medx
In eight uf the 16 surveyed kebeles, 4* • to 80*J• of surveyed households reported having access tn electricity to light their houses, oil lamps are used by 10% to %% of surveyed households, and trancry powered lights provide light in 7% to H0% of surveyed house holds.
IX ood is the main umree of energy for cooking, ind u UMiiDy fetched it dimnee, of I Io 8 km from rhe hom«t«d Only 5% of sunned household, in twn of the 16 surveyed krbelei (bod:
tn P»we Werodi) marled u,.ng dung „ , UHlrcf of mcJJp. 
fuel wood. A bm,rcd number nf su(Te>rd hoo«ho)dl aJi<) cmp rnjdife3 f„ c<xj|anR
Itc „l/sh„^ of
. , , p.
neo. . liW_. e
CTcd bcjuicholdi m the dure survevrd
kebcla  in  Darwur.  ^u)  65%  to  IU0%  oi  surveyed  k,„,  i_  .  .
j™ WOTd. .nd by 5% ro  - . „f d“ ,1‘
W                           15
”
kcbelu m P.« Weredi. Eucl-uvwg     „     „          °     “       °        “
i[ov    irr    t>[
U5C   W5      rhnx   f thc fn
Achefa Were*) <md U^foct 1 \Hhge 4 Krbclc fp.  “     “’“      ^          (S™*
a
Ant         Mun   r KrbcIr
i *«c werrda).
'[■he fad-5.VM^ vow» wm introduced p         .
n>mrX( d
hLWj
b |-4 My  litpuiTT (1}
9
n
l7Mar.l1afEthvpu. Muir*) <rf Water an/i Haag,
Ethiopian Nik lmfiatio* and Draa^ Pryprf
Tide
CD-3: Improved Access to Energy Sources
XX'ith the proposed protect the population of the Upper Bclcs vallcT^Ui                              —— Though fuel wood is currently available and fetched from distances of 1 to R k
homestead, anv future shortages will increase the tunc taken to collect A. i
r<Xn
w  nic] wood and m .
' ,ead
Subprefect
Rationale
to environmental degradation as remaining natural wood lands are chopped d increased demand for energy for lighting and cooking would lx- provided either b electrification and / or by fire wood. Tn the short term rural clectnfication u significantly alleviate local demand of wood for cooking and therefore imn
access to sustainable nearby sources of firewood and more efficient use of wood This will avoid land degradation and use of dung as a fuel (and thcrrfnr^ «n
ro
cceu
tlurc ri°n-a\,ailabiliry
an organic fertiliser), as well as time taken by household mrmlxrs to rnlU-» c
Subproicct
Objccnvc(s)
To  improve  household  access  to  nearby  and  sustainable,  non  dung  sources  ofc and also the use of energy efficient wood stoves.
Subproicct
Activities
The proposed activities of the subproicct are: ~ -
•     Promotion of rhe dev elopment of community managed tree plantation with fat growing
species as well as the planting of trees in homestead areas as well as along the gullm
streams and over* in the protect area (sec also land A watershed management subprojects
•       Introduction  of  promotion  of  the  use  of  fuel  saving/energy-efficient  Moves  nude  ofkxil materials, including the training of local manufacturers;
•      Introduction and promotion of alternative energy sources, such as biogas, solar and wind energy as appropriate;
•      Support  for  micro  credit  allowing  households  to  procure  fuel  saving  stoves  and'or  to invest in alternative energy sources; and
•     Support for dung to lx used as an organic fertiliser rather than a source of fuel.
Subproject
I mplcmeni ation
The sub-protect will be implemented over 9 years in the project area The maw implementation modalities include: (i) awareness campaigns; and (ii) trials, demons trioons ifld training. Priority for project support will be given to the poor (landless) households and
female-headed households. 
------------- ■
Main Benefits and Beneficiaries
The expected benefits are:
•      Production  of  sufficient  fuel  wood  at  reasonably  distances  to  meet  the  rvqmremcr. households resident in the project area;
•     Less time spent by household members collecting fuel wood;
•     Avoiding / minimising the use of dung and crop residues as fuel for cooking;
•     More efficient use of available energy sources, especially fuel wcmkI. and
•     Increased use of sustainable, cleaner energy sources by households.
rhe main beneficiaries of the subproject will be all households living in of n
area. 
Subproject Costs
The nnmated subproicct cost is ETB 3..WO.OOO                                          _____________________
Implementing
Agencies
The implementing agencies involved in the execution of the subproK^1
•     ARD wereda offices;
•     Kcbclc Councils;
•     OAs;
•     NGOs;and
---------—
UB F4 Main Report (!)NJf Imgafiiu anti !)*,* 
®
CD’3: Improved Accca* to Energy Source*
Ji*—-——“
• Bin ks and/or A IFL
r
Subpw’l^ pCfffHnTLUKC
KfonJtonng
The performance of [he subproject mrenmoons will be monitored by usmg rhe following
indicator
» Area of communjrv managed (stop) plantations;
•     Extent of homestead plajirannns:                                                                                                             1
•     Number of households adopting energy efficient stoves (with eihausrl and / w altematnc «
sources of energy. 
1
fb<ks uid
Uncertainties
« Communities/households are not interested m doTloptng tree planrarimj ind/or phnting |
trees;
« Household* are nor interested in using improved, energy effiacnr Haves;
•     Alternative energy sources, such hiogu. solar and wind energy. arc nor ivaibbk and/or roo | expensive for most households; and
f
•     Ijck of access to micro-credit. 
i
^1ain Hrpjrr , 1
!7 Mn-.rrPtdtmi  Dt*ncrxifn  RrpMc  ofEthiopia.  MiftUtty  of  Water  and  finery, Ethiopian Niir Irrigation and Drat Mgr Prwr.i
UB F4 Main Report (1)
12A^LQ^L^"J?COff<^J^eGc«^^¥itie 4od_t^^^-------------------------- ,
;V prcwt «« for the Upper Bd« uhrme TTd 138.1 57 fo ^<1 rvrnded mcr 37 kcW/
m 6 werwfas in A« Zo« of ANUS «d Merrkrl Z«™  f Ben.r^gul Gumm XRS 1^
n
total net irrtgable trta is 63,871 hi. of which 3l ^09 ha ij Itxated on the t^it bank ind 31J62
hi is on rhe left bank-
r ]>ic major conccntraliom of settlements within rhe Study area are tround the towns of prndika. Pa we and \X efk Medl Both Fendika and Piwe ire niernunded by settlement krhelri
,r
established under goverumenr resettlement programmes from: fi) 1979-2OOU; and (ii) J9&>- carlv IWOs The latter programme was part of the ambinous Tina-Beles project where settlement establishmenl was accompanied by extensive cansiructwiaf ill-weather mifat (two; large piped putable water supply sestons (now largely drfuncT), support for runted crop ±nd livestock development, and also- about 400 ha ofirnganno dcvrlopmcni in SDA 111 The population dentin' tn the study {and project) area ii highh* variable, varying from jusi 15
persons/km to  over 200  persons/km - The
:z
lowest  population  density  ex  cun  tn  stage ami I
Subproject Background
A & IV A - Overall, for the whole project area the population denriry rs lhout 46 persons /km2
Based on the data provided by- the wcreda offices, the land use tn the 37 kebdcs is as follows Q 37% rn 43% of all land is cultivable; (ii) B% to 35% of Ji land is grazing hod; (ci) 12% to 41 % of all land as forest; (tv) 1% to 5% is waste Land; (v) 1% or 3% is used by houses anti roads; and (vj) land use is not clear for 4% to 13% of all land.
Rain fed crop production is the main economic activity for HG% to 1 LXJ% of households, followed by livestock rearing. Less important are daily wage labour, handlerafts, small businesses, iransponanon and government employment.
Additional cash uKCxnci are obtained foxnl fi) brewing failn/anth(1“» Id P% of house holds in 15 of the 16 surveyed krbeJes); (n) weaving (1% to 25% of households in fi kebdes); (m) tailoring (<1% to 21 % of household}! in ft kebclra); (iv) pnrtery (<1  • to 32% of household* m 7 krbeles); (v) basket making (3% and 11%  f households in rwu kebekj); (vi) retail / shop
o
owoenhip C<1%to 5%ofhoweltolds in 8 krbdrij. (vzi) tnnspumtioo (<t'A to 12’ .of h ou«hokh in 6 k^bciol: (nil) BDVcmm™, employment (<1% to 5% of bmuehokk in 6 kebdes).
B
Average unnml cash income* from 5i[c o* 
m MM . m»                 XX"""’'"'"“8" 2.,»l n,„ M. *. X. ■ “
z
™
™b income,. n™ »re fmm the ,de of Jnx5
vulOuJ off-farm activities. Nun-cmp
Sft e
|  income* 
<"*« «*Jc of«□(». for
*™*c products, handicrafts and
small laftdouTung households- The proportion of in                        fofoarh iniponani for landless and
sales), varies hum 9% to 56% 
( HF-farm and Lrvrstock inenme generating activity small landholding households and support for Jlcie
,n <^mc fojm other activities (le, non crop
Hr?3vula j  impr
r v              irTant for landless and I
M E=* Mun
Rcpnri (1)
7 \f y 11
al-ttigral Dff**rutic HaftMc of Etbtopa. Aim fry nf Wafrr and Enffp Ethiopian .\7Xr Irrigation and Dratnagr Pry ret
Title
I; Development of Off-farm Income Generating Activities an<j Crc(j- p .
ics of those with little or no access to land for crop production?^ -------------------------- 5*jion
ension activities / programmes tailored for both men and women , role women play tn both crop and livestock production, including i .
:ding, storage and marketing. 
cn  are required
*“H5>cea selection nkn-
’1
Subproject
Rationale
Suliproject
Ob|ectivc(i)
15 of the 16 surveyed kcbeles. 15% to 85% of surveyed households reported obtain^ u
st one loan over the List 10 years, mainly from a saving? & credit association (which have
en formed in 8 of the 37 kebelcs) The short-term loans were mainly used for © purchase o en and cows; (ii) procurement of agricultural inputs; (iii) trade; and/or (iv) renting land inual interest rates vaned from 12% to 19%.
or ding to the female participants of the thematic focus group meetings on gender lssgc* m
16 surveyed keltcles. women do not have access to credit tn three of the 16 surveyed
►rtedly, indebtedness is a problem tn five of the 16 surv eyed kcbcles, particularly m Piwe
’oor are characterised by households with no or restricted access to arable land (i.c. lets than
J.5 ha), owning less than two cattle, and frequently women headed households. The poor predominantly cam incomes as sharecroppers / tenants and through manual labour, supplemented by livestock, various handicrafts, brewing talla / amki and / or trade based livelihoods. Increased cropping intensities and livestock production will improve on fanr. and
off-farm livelihood opportunities for poor and not-so poor alike. Allocation of a minimal
firngated) land holding to all farmers wall address extreme poverty, but it is expected dul the
poor will continue to rely on off farm income generating activities. This subproject will
support training, micro credit, demonstrations and provision of equipment and faobnes io individuals and groups who wish to take up off farm income-generating activities.
1  o  provide  alternative  livelihood  opportunities  for  (poor)  households  /  groups  through  b< development of off-farm income-generation activities including their access co micro <rr<h
eratmg activities
“""X‘ "“l“d' *'
households of available protect support for off fanr. income
*    Ti
female headed) hou hold^^ ^nC^U<^ ^ ^
*
n
cmonstrations) to poor (landless and /or
* f° ^'clop viable and sustainable off farm income
Subproject
Activities
activities; anj
•  SuPP°rt for micro-c redit f
■ ,p“'
to invest in off farm economic actmoe1
K « credit association.
Off-farm acnviocs supported under the sub-project could include,                 orc weaving, pottery’), brewing; small business fl c. shops, trading). |ran$P equipment;snimal fattening, apiculture; kitchen gardening; production—
example han^ri:n
an
d / or
UB F4 Main Report (1
14yyf ■
<ilr
J’"i
MtMitrv rflVaftr zwd* fctfij **“
iw*—— —-
CD-4' Development of Off-farm Income Generating Anjvitici ud Credit Provitioa implement (Le. blacksmith* i, ind crop proceuing.
Subpfol ^
11
Unplnnrn^u^
'ITie sub-project will be implemented over □ yean tn the project area. The main implerncncanon modalities include {■) iwamxti campaigns. (11) vocational training and usets; (iii) technical support; (iv) support fnt macro credit for poor / vulnerable groups from saving
& credit associations.
Main Benefits and RencficianES
The expected benefits include:
•        Reduction   in   extreme   poverty   and   unproved   livelihood*   due   tn   new   opportunities   for   pcxw (landless    and/    or    female    headed)    households    to    cam    iddiDOcal    income    from    □    tf-rarm. economic activities;
•         Improved    supply    of    services    (Le    shops,    repair    of    farm    implement*,    transport)    tn    -he kcbelet
The   main   beneficiaries   will   be   the   poor   landless   and   /of   female-beaded)   hcwebddi   in   die project ajra
Subproject Coats
The   estimated   sub   project   cost   u   ETB   9,000.000   including   ETB   'JJOO.OCO   of   crrdrr   ptuvUMii for “poor" households
Implementing
Agpndrt
The sub-project *i]J be implemented by the fodowing agencies:
•      Trade and industry office at zone level;
•  Social and women*! affairs offices at regional, zone and wereda level;
■ ARD offices ar wereda level;
•      DAs;
•      Banks and/or MFIs (Le. ACSl and It G MFC);
•     NGOi;
•      Saving & credit associations; and
•      C\*op£rartswr
^bprojtcT
1 Crfofmanj f
Monitoring
The performance of tub^projeaT interventions will be monitored using rhe following lndicators-
•         Penetration    (awareness)    of    subprojecr    oppomirutics    among    project    area    househrJds    a* deicrmined by surveys;
•      Number of saving & credit as5uciariKjin& in peojeec area krbetes;
•          Number/proportioti     of     “poor"     household*     having     (success     falhr)     sorted     up     ofifarm incomr-gmeranng actmty; and
•     Average annual incomes generated by off-farm economic actroiDet
^■ks and
^certainties
_____________
'• Poor households ire not intcircatrd. in the devefopmenr of off firm economic aim'incs;
•  lack of support trueiMl from MFIi (j. ACST and R.Q MFC) in format™  of saving  A
t
credit oasLiCiant'wii and in lending in rhern;
■ Lack of access to micro-credit for the “pour*’.
,J H p4
Main RcpmrfJ)
i? Mm-!Ftdrrn! Dtmomith R/puirh. of Ethiopia, Minirhy of IF'atrr and Enrrp Ethiopian Nik lmfption and Drutnggt Pnycrf
UH F4 Main Report (1)
16i
fif'Erfaf** Mtttffry
Ewrj;
- £>***“* ’ '
7
Subpr^ect
Bickground
CD-^: Indigenoua People* Support
The project area tor the Upper Beks scheme covered 138 J S  ha and extended over 57
kebrirt in 6 wrredas in Awi Zone of AN'RS ind Mrrekd Zone of Bcdnihangul Gumuz NRS The total net irrigable area ii 63.871 ha. of which 31,509 ha ia locaicd on the nght bank and
32,362 ha is on the left bank.
The major concentrauoos of irldements within the Study area ate around the tawtu of
pendiU. Pawe and Werk Mcdx Both Fendika and Pawe arc surrounded by settlement kcheJei established under government resettlement programmes from. ® 1999 2000; and (u) 1985
carlv 1990s. The Latter programme wu pm of the ambitious Tana-Beln project u-herr settlement establishment was accomparucd by extensive conifroctjon of ill weather roads, (two; Large piped potable water supply systems (now large! i defunct), support forrainfed crop jnd livestock development, and also about400 ha of Lrngario<i devdopmoitia SDA ill.
The population densitv in the study (and protect) area a highly vxmblc. viraig from just 15 persons/ km- to over 200 pen on y/km’ The lowest population density occurs in stage areu 1
A & rV A t Kcrall, for the whole project area rhe population densify u about -»6 per>oni/km]-
ttosed on The data provided by the wcreda offices, the land use in lhe 37 kebeks u as follows (i) 3"* n ro 43% of all land is cultivable: (u) 8% to 35% of aT land is grazing hnd, (iii) 12% to 41% of al] bnd is forest; (iv) 1 % to 5% if wwire land; (v) It * or 2% rt used by houses and roads; and (m) land use is nerf clear for 4% to 13% of ail Itund
The population in the Upper Beles area falls into nvn main groups- (1) kwig-estahhshrd efhrut groups (Le. Gumuz and Agew), who are engaged in shifting agriculture With limited herding l* Well a* hunting and gaihering; and (ii) settlers from Other regions of Ethiopia whose pnncrpaJ activity is small-scale rain fed  fa rming and herding u sing largely the same [radinCtraL rocCHods lhat I hey employed before migration. Irt large pan due to the irscnlemcnt into the area the great majority of the population arc n<iw AmhaUc (30 100% by kebele).
The zone of Mefekel. comprising Pawr and Dangur and other weicdas Lirgch to the west □! the project area tn Beninjhangu’-Gumuz national regional llale, u±rd to be largtlv populated by the agm-pastoralm Ciumuz people whoitr LraditioiiaS sand tenure sys tem combmed tndrvidud possession with group ownership ensuring equal access to land
1
Gurnuz livelihood. tr.d.uonally b.««f on pnmlITVl. 
Jn: Ertlm r
, Jv low productive
□gdeidTUflr, prvducmg foe home coruumphoo. >nd on hio, png. wiki honey. «a. end frxut.
Birins .nd ctwremJ production. Culm™     „ , 
Bon         lhifling hoc
ilHWl M
tubbi ind fcxnch, , when- different iren ice mlbvared each year. Thrv keep rclitirch' t™
(large rummant) livestock
The Cm muz, faced with renkmenis in Pawr and lL1PWu, . 
,. 
.       ,
1  ’umxjnding areas under rhe Tana-Belts
project  gradually  retrealrd  ntto  remote  areas  when-  th—  .
. 
, 
™ ™>t have iceess tn sMcTiicrs ind
they Tcnnatn relatively isauted. Currently the Gur^ur n
.        . 
. 
‘
kebdc (p«rtaJly) Bi.the prOf^r where they ,,.jkr
lou ' "»nn a minority in ihc Three Dangur
— — _T_A~ 20*- n csf^hjs £^£itilaL’inn  Their 'oral
.
!
T-4           r<T4WX £|,
17
l7.Mar-lllrdtrai
fapMr ofElbtopia, Ministry of W'afcr and l./tfrg,
Ethiopuin Nik Irrigation and Drjtu^f Prvjrrt
r
ride
CO-5: Indigenous Peoples Support
population in / near the study area is probably about 570 household
’Hie   Tana-Relcs   had   a   rather   negative   effect   on   rhe   lives   of   the   G access to traditional hunting grounds and fishing. Deforestation also took
between groups led sometimes to loss of life and property. 
—_____
’—
thcrn *
° U lnd Conl^ct»
The Agew peoples are the other long established ethnic Rroun in th- integrated reasonably and Ixnefit from government development protects lnd
ui ni  area bqj thevk
c
The Agew practice livestock cropping fanning practices smular to those practi^T^'1 Amhara peoples. The Agew reman, reasonably numerous m the Jaw, and
As they are indigenous to the area some of the Agew and Gumua people soil -OWn ... relatively large tracts of land, and a recently some have starred leasing /
nearby settlers. 
\X omen arc responsible for all domestic tasks and most agricultural field work. Transports of agricultural produce from field to the homestead as well as to market places is afco the responsibility of women.
recr'>Ppmg land *
Subproject Rationale
Under the proposed project those households with relative large land holdings widun designated irrigable areas will have them (substantially) reduced. .Klso delineation of land use within the project area to, for example, (communally managed) grazing, to preserve environmental habitats and natural flora and fauna, for tree plantations, etc, as well as for irrigated agriculture by both smallholders and commercial farms, will adversely affect the Gumuz peoples traditional way of earning livelihoods, particularly hunting and foodgathenng The Agew will be less affected as they already practice livestock - cropping agriculture, similar to the Amhara peoples. I’o assist the Gumuz make the transition from relatively pnminvc, unproductive agnculture (o a livelihood predominantly based on irrigated agriculture will require supportive measures.
Subproject
Objective^)
To enable rhe Gumuz make the transition from relatively primitive, unproductive agriculture 1 to a livelihood predominantly based on lrngatrd agriculture.
Subproject Activities
Subproject activities will include:
•        Firming up of the numbers of affected indigenous pcoplei (Gumuz) and thetr c livelihood practices, and joint identification of supportive measures,
•        Ensuring that Gumuz arc allocated suitable plots of imgable land as P * resettlement programme(s),
•        Awareness and training of indigenous peoples to assist in their adoption and irrigation practices, as well as support for alternative income generating (such as modem apiculture); and
1   1 ol
__
— *          Support for measures to alleviate women’s disproportion a re hard u
-
Subproject
Implementation
 _ The sub-project will be implemented over 9 years in the project area rhc
----- implementation modalities include: (i awareness and consultations^Ji_l£!S^
CH F4 Main Report (1)
1HMtt. a"1
t/'Erfaftr* Mwrfr) rffFattr mJ F.wp
tt* ^rfw* Ml1 IJn,,'^r
CD-5; Indqgeoou> Peoples Support
and budgeting; fa) technical training and wppora bluing
The expected benefits include.
. Induwve iochJ development whereby tfatgeno.,,
agriculture development project;
•    Few    conflicts    between    tenlen    and    mdtgenoiu    Pf      tlp,„    rotated    t0       iJnd       bounJjrici    etc The estimated sub-project cost u ETB 4*000,000.
Subfxoicc< Co,tt
Imp kmcntJPg
Agencies
Subprofrct
The sub-project will be implemented by the following agencies
•      BoWRD* BoARD. EPLAUA, CPA it regional level;
•       ARD offices it wereda level;
•      DAs;
•      Kebele cuunul and Lind admimsmtion convmnees it kebdr leveL
The performance of sub project interventions will be monitored using the following indicators:
Performance
•      Allocation of irrigable tend to indigenous peoples,
Monitoring
•      Adoption of irrigated agoculrurc bv indigenous peoples, and
•      Conflicts between indigenous peoples and settlers / commercial fauns
Risk* and
•      ljck of interest by indigenous peoples; and
Vnccruinties
•      Lack of support from government insnninons.
M Mun Rcpjo (1)
19
17-iFederal Deantraht RapnbA. ojEtbeopta, Mnufrf of Water anti Enregf Ethiopian Fiiit imgitioa and Drutntge Project
L B F4 Main Report (1)
20of Etbtopu. Miuty oj Fatr ati !iwp
and Dwqt Pro*f
CtM: Support for Load Intocgtiooi_ ________ ________________ ____■ The project iru for the Upper Bela scheme covered 138,157 h and mended over 37
kcbcla tn 6 weredis m Awi Zone of ANRS and Mefekel Zone of Benmdungul <lUnxn NR5
The total net irrigable lrea is 63.F1 ha, of which 31,509 ha a located on the nght back and
32,362 ha is on the left bank.
The tnapf concentrations of settlements within the Study area art around the Towns of
fendika. Pawc and Wcrk Meda. Both Fendika and Pawe ire surrounded by settlement kebrles established under government resettlement programmes from.- (i) 1999-2000; and (u) 1985
earlv 1990s. The latter programme was pan of the ambitious Tana-Beies project where settlement establishment was accompanied by extensive construction of all weather roads, (two) large piped potable water supply systems (now Largely defunct), support for raxnfed crop and livestock development, and also about 400 ha or irrigation development io SDA III
The population density in the study (and project) area is highly variable, varying from |ust 15 persons/km  to over 200 persons/km-'. The lowest population density occurs in stage areas I ■
A & rV-A. Overall. for the whole proiect area the populanon density a about 46 persons
Based on the data provided by rhe wereda offices, the land use tn the 37 kebelcs is is follows: (i) 37% to 43% of all land is cultivable; fn) 8% to 35% of all land is grazing land; ftfl) 12% to 41% of all land is forest; (iy) 1% to 5* o is waste land; (v) 1% or 2% is used by bouses and roads; and (vi) land use is nor clear for 4% to 13* o of all land
The WRD wereda office in Jawi Werrda is seoously understaffed and is short of vehicles and budgetary  funding  io  faction effectively.  Further there are no  sepante URD werrda  offices in other Pa we or Dangur weredas.
In    the    P>«     Dangur    weed,    ARD    office,    crop,    fivotock    and    COOpmBve development.««« and tutural resources mtntgmen,
core  season.  The  num  const™,  to  etfeenve  firncnootng  of  these  office,  tncJudc  (i)  A Shoeuge ofseh.de, -vd equtpnent ■"cJsxfmg con^rc
vacancie*  and  htRh  staff  tunwc  (w)  insuf  6afnr   opera  ring  budprrx-  r  \  i
2
,
-          . v.. c
,
improved fethnolopa; (*) hLk of access mads ro many
service mining
35 of the 37 krbelcs have two or more DAi. bin only jo of ?
K KrTS’ W umitcd access to
z
“• •u,d fa) bek of reguhr tn-
°
)
Training   Centre   (FTQ.   The   extension   delivery   effa   tIvcnc5s    f     kcbciet     have   l   Firmen   ’ access to reference books and hsuffiaenr budget, roots, eq                 ’ ** COn^mined by non
of the 3 • krbele* do not have vciennasy iafF
Communal gnnng land i» poorly managed by rhe Kebcle r surveyed kebdes. and community fnmrs are poodr
kebrles.
I and admmntrtcna, water management, forest protreu^ lnJ committees base been formed in about kilt ix more of u.
-------------------------------------------------------- nj*-rnm'
r *nt timing miteruls 12
ar ^r 6 of fhc J6
1  the 16 surs'ei edM
li
~v
M !^r^‘
/'*—<' ,Vw''
Title
CLMv Support for Local Institution*
-- —
Service    cooperative!    h*«     '        formed    in    16    of    the    37    kcliclei    and
, ccn
associations existing in 10 of the 37 kclielcs. 
fCtir
Constraints to functioning and establishment of effective service ___________________ ___
^’'operarrves txM. i .
facilities (i.C- warehouses) and equipment, skilled operatives, start up caom! u
* *
r pi ai and bustnen
plans.
Subproject
Rationale
.Ml local institutions concerned with implementation of the projectand achi^Z^' •— expected benefits will need strengthening to have well equipped and motivated staff adequate budgets at wereda. kcbele and scheme level. Support for institutions b
the various crop, livestock. land & watershed management, resettlement / landconscfah and irrigation system O&M components of the project. This subproject is pnnunh caecal with providing generic support for institutions, particularly of Service Cooperatives *o improve their effectiveness in achieving all-inclusive social development.
Subproject
Objcctive(s)
To    improve    effectiveness    of    wereda.    kcbele    and    scheme    level    institutions,    and    pancuhrlt service cooperatives
Subproject
Activities
Crop, livestock and various off-farm production activities will largely be facilitated / cirrrd out by the service cooperatives established at kcbele level. Service cooperatives ircrypcdy particularly concerned with: (i) provision of agricultural inputs and farm equipment; (a) marketing of agricultural produce including provision of pnee information to farmers; fa) processing of agricultural produce, such as flour mills or bagging / packing facilities, and fa) provision of micro-credit. Currently I  of the 37 kebclcs in the project am haw aobfabed service cooperatives. Constraints to functioning and establishment of effective coopcntnxs
include:
•        lack of facilities (i.c. warehouses) and equipment;
•        lack of skilled operatives / managers;
•        inadequate capital;
•        poor or no business plans for cooperative functioning.
7
rhis subproject will address these constraints to cooperative pertomw support formacon of effective cooperatives in all 37 kcbeles.
Subproject
Implementation
The sub-project will be implemented over 9 years in the project area- implementation modalities include: (i) business and vocational training ^^fof development of business plans; (ii) technical support; and (in) (credit) p
and facilities. 
5U pport **
_
Main    Benefits    and Beneficiaries
The expected benefits include:
• Improved functioning of local (kcbele) government insult
organisations, and of service cooperatives in particular, 
——Improved / increased participation of rhe "poot^ in crggU?---------------------------------------
and
UH 1*4 Mam Rcp<m (|)
22CH-6: Support for Local Imtnmirm
jrbk___________-—
generating activities
The estimated lub-proiecr cost is ETB                                       mduding FT0                           of   *thf
cr
1 improve / provide fatdines and equipment for cncperurvn
Co ’rt
lrnplcn»     ^
cnnn
.\jenue*
'Hie sub-project aiH be implemented by the foDrrwing igmcier
•      ARD offices at wereds level,
•      DAs;
•      Banks and/or MF1«
•       NGOsjaod
•      Service cooperatives.
Subpro|ect
Performance
MnftlhXlrtg
The performance of sub- project irrt erven non i anil he monitored -wing  the foOcrrag
mdicaron:
•      Cooperative membership;
•      Cooperative activities and performance ij.e member ufiafac'xx^ etc}.
Raki and
L'nceiwnnes
*     1 jek of interest by bousrhohh m becoming members of servoed ctxiomnrn;
•          Diffictilrv     in     forming     linkages     with     development     partner*,     rach     «i     NGCH     and     sikzo- Etniricc institutions
l K  H
(I)
IT AfnEtacru/ Dtanaafic tyM cf Ethiopia, Mhurtry oJW j' terand Entr# Ethiopian Nik Irrigation and Dnau# Project. 
Mmitry j ITa/rma Eiinp
/J  * V* Irtt'"’” r‘nu’’^' Prvtff
ANNEX H
environmental enhancement sub-projects
^ ■' H m Mam Report 41)
1Pnifrd D***r*ti(
Mnuff) if AT *m*4 /:«wp
Z'/tapM* Nafr fr^jnot **4 Dfia^f PyM
UB F4 Main Report (|)
|7-M>
2FJf^^ *"           "4 nrjt^ r™1
Title
EE-1: Rnerrmf nd Dntuft Corrida Moottrxw-- -4 E-h , ■
Sub- P mire*
ftackgmund
■rbe nvcnrw                     rvtrpr*, 
U                       ind famd TOmJt
rhr                    Wei CTef                             n
tnburw®- Mirw rrre .peoo th., 
rjnj    frjff
^,
pnurrtur.    Rjij    jfnrnwrj    and    F«w    lya^m    The    -jin    nrrn    hiTT    fergrir    mdrd    ifrjwtt    ?«I
r«k. bur hive gpreJ - pebble Mid hint                             d* ratunj
prrcnr twfl
[hoc   bank.   Thr   irm   prwkJr   hrufruj   ind   Wittig   <m   for   run,   bwnJ   rpror.   md   Jmj    provxf* natural Ifjits CGfiSidem! impnfTan; bv local communnw’i, EipemUT dUnrsg drotrg^rr peri* <'<
Sub-Protect
RlriDAgle
Prejervarion and enhancement of flora ind inuni ji the r>r» «:on<e rt*rrrntr. at well is in the riverine idmmgr: corridors ihmg stream iod mtn 0 nrcrswr (i) for wn’ainabJe
development ot fishenes in rhr rewn’eur in) to iQcw Tuvrainahh* jw of thr drainage ccrrndor* far limited truing icd Fuel wwd coHectxxi. (id) Io ensure rtatwubk water quaiirr of stream and over warer scarce? tor livestock and wuhirfic and (hr} tp ivmd idherwr trnywr? on doumstrearn aicer ukh due 10 deter*j-tanon in w*[rt qinhry md qtanrirr.
SulvProiccf
Objectivcfs)
The objectives of the lubpfojrcl are:
•  To  ensure that rhe required erntfonmentil ffcwj are rrlewd downitrrzjn of the nghf !’*ni
.Main canal diversion 'aeir.
■       To  monitor  reservoir  wi  ter  leveh  and  depth*  throughout  the  rear.  and  ptrncuhrh   tn  rhe
dr; tea ton.
■      To monitor flows and 'Jraler quality of damage waler ind water in trrranw and rrverv.
evaluate changes in uircr quality and identify wy poDutxjn wurr« (i.r. from a((rn-
EhemicaK uagar cine protesting and Jurncinc vraite);
•       To CCHttfum lUiialiilitY of Haier for jmscatidn and other purposes,. starling from 1 jke Ta.ru and along the Enat Belcs nsner, by monitoring water qwijirr as well as Enaf Beks river
flaws;
■      To implement and momior mmum to enhance / improve water qualify including
pLanilrtg of wet land vegetation within drainage comdocs and within reserve txjffcr zone;
and
■        To  promote  communin'  awarencM  if  cnnronmcntal  nturi  and  management  of  the ruervotf (buffer /one) and drainage corridori
■       The  water  quality  monitoring  earned  out  under  rhe  pro>ecr  would  tuppon  data  alrradv bring collected for Lake Tana by ihc BaWRD
1
Sub-Pro|wt
4cu.Mtiei
The main •etwihes of the wb-pcof«t will include"
■        Monitoring  of  warer  flows  &  water  quafafy  jnnmg  fawn  l-akc  Tam  and  ac  ickcmi locaboos along the Eftlt Ekiti mrr,
■      Period recording of re*nv<jif water level and  warer quality;
■ Monitoring  of flow md witor qualiTY of selected dmra  {for agru chemical runoff.  and f
1
o
ureams into which (tttaied) mduitful effluent and / w wore n doc barged.
• Momtonng of gruurJ aaier U wlrcicd location^
■        Purchase  of  dd  site  wit^  quahrr  mcuurrmenr  fat  with  auocnted  rcagen:  ic  mrxiurr peumnen such u tcfiy. EC, DO. pH on««, and also flow fewreni) me lea.
■      1Fanning, o f ita fl
■      Bwldtng cownuftiT                         of ■>>= unper^cr of .radmg mv-joomcnuj JcKndjnnr, of rrsen™ 4Mi nv« / iin-un ww s^ty,
. Support to pr^c
.o^runrrv 
of lh<. fc
»«              the                  eomdon, i«rr^h coo,rolled
" 1-4 M4n Rtphn (1)
I-AUt-hI nt^-run. 
M^urn 'jWat'rand
Efbtopuin Kite ImffUiM and Dratn^t Prytct
Title
I EE-1: Reservoir and Drain age Corridor Monitoring and Preaervatino
collection/ nmher felcliolnlg, good ection/ u tisme of be agr r felo- lincg, good hemical ms ane ofd ae  prreo- vecnhteionmi of cal? - s and Drove ntirtn
,K buffer .nd
—--------
""WlS-nfe
Establishment     of     small     physical     structures     and     biological     measures     for     “effluent” of agricultural runoff at selected locations. 
Water and flow monitoring at about 24 sites is proposed Parameters to be monk
n Pp*ng
slightly for the lake, over and reservoir but will generally include temoeraturf. ^u°FC cations._________________________________________________________  na
r vluc, pn, aruoru
Sub-Project Implementation
The sub project will lie implemented over a period of 6 years in the reservoir area and
command area. The main implementation modalities include*, (i) physical monitoring of
wat
flows, water quality’, reservoir water levels and groundwater levels/quality, (ii) proviuon
 of M |
Main
Benefits
training; and fiiij community awareness and community support. The expected benefits include:
and Benefici
•      Safeguarding    of    environmental    flows
to    conser
ve    flora 
and
fauna 
in    the
nverine    en
mdon
aries
downstream of diversion weir;
Facilitating     sustainable     development
reservoir
fisheries
by 
ensure
adequate
reservoir
water
levels and good water quality;
Ensuring good water quality' for livestock
and domestic
use.
Mitigate potential adverse impacts with re
spect to waler
 supply and
 wate
r quality o
n
down stream water users
SubProject
Costs
Implementing
Agencies
SubProject
Performance
Monitoring
Risks and
Uncertainties
_________
All    households    in    the    reservoir    and    project    command    area    will    be    the    bencficiancs    of    the    sub project activities
The estimated sub project cost is ETB 1,500.000.
The main implementing agencies involved in the implementation of the sub protect include:
•      WRD offices at regional, zonal and wereda level;
•      LA EP offices at regional, zonal and wereda level;
•      DAs and kcbelc councils; and
•      NG Os. 
’l*he    performance    of    the    sub    project    will    be    monitored    in    accordance    with    the    following
indicators:
Number    of    water    monitoring    sites    and    completion    of    data    collection    records    in    >cc       m
with guidelines;
Number of staff trained in water monitoring procedures;
Comm     units'     awareness     with     respect     to     adverse     environmental     impacts     and     <jstaina land and water resources;
Number of physical structures and biological measures for ’ effluent stripping
chemical runoff._____________________________________________________________________ pp^fficc
•       Lack of co-operadon between implementing agencies - WRI) offices an ~
•      Lack of interest among local communities tn the conservation of the rcsrrv
and the drainage corridors. 
______________________ —--------------------
I?
UB F4 Main Report (1)
2g./grfMf N/A IniJpfc* and Drvirqp P^f
EE-2; Support for Reservoir Fisheries Development
Tnie __ ___—— Sub-Pcoiw' Background
The Abbsv Rrver Bisin including the Like Tina and the vinous rrvrr tnhun>rj-  n kntran fax m '
t
fiih diversity with over 100 species, The Emt Beier b a small tnbutur 'nihin the Abbiy t»un and rhe baseline survey indicated prrrencr of fah & some traditional fish catch from the irrer. ' Introduction of fuh species was reported it the old weir near Pawe town under the Tana Beks project, and fishing i< practiced by the indigenous Gumuz. With increased suiijuned fkrar following the const rue Don of ihc Tn» Beles power station, along with project irrigation infrastructure (reservoirs, etc) the potential for fubraes is enhanced.
Artificial lakes that have been constructed tn the Abtay rsvrr basin hove shown potential far reservoir fisheir Examples include the Roiarr reservoir m the lower part of the Abbey Basin and the Kogo reservoir m the upper parr
Fish production from the storage reservoir wall depend on the size of darn adopted, bur a yield of about 50 kg/hs/yr may fc)e adopted. For rhe Enar Bdei river a. higher yield of 120 kg/ha/yr may be adopted based on the {tow flow) am, giving an annual yield of about 30 40 tonnes/year for the 100 km linat Bclcs river within the project area.
Currently there jppean to be little interest in fish in the project area, which is generally only practiced by the indigenous Gumuz using traditional (*e using chtrtucaij) fishing methods These traditional methods art illegal and cause environmental damage.
Suh-Ptnj,ecr Radrmal*
Fnherv development would provide in alternative / .Jdiucmal livelihood ro rural households wnh little accts* to land, and for rhe indigenous Gumuz. Promoting of su* tunable fisherr development and catch methods wxxtld oueuc fish production and reduce adverse mpaci on
the mvirwimeni,
Sub-Project < Objective (t)
rhe num objectives of :his subproject are.
.    Akcw     the    vubrhty    and    modahry    of    fishery    dnyJopmenr    for    rhe    rraervore    and    Enar    Bd„ over created by the new Bow regime, and
*     FadtaU     smWAabk     Jesdopment     of     a     ^ervnu     *     ovenne     fishery     wmh                   |
KnbhvTn|u          Blh
catch methods.
^b-PtOfect
Achvitaeii
!"he num acthndes of rhe subproject will be to-
•  Cany out a study on the vubUitv and modalrlv of fi.bery development for fi
------------- ----------
rc
ovwrK fishery as edl » interesl of the local community, and pamcuLar the
•  Support fijheer development whether managed by the < uramunj.t or / ' '
•     I f i large dam was conrxnxted then leasing rcservw fisherv ntrfit s
&
GlirT1UZ
* '-<"°me   Ld concern
TC
may allow more effective and suiraimihle development nf ikt. 
' to * Commercial concern
Sub- Project ^pigmentation
The sub-D-roircr will be implemented over a nm™( j .. 
- ~ . ~                       -------
s
unplementarjon raodJitiej include: (i) conduct a feaaihibty srudv of fi. fc
faciLtirc and suppon fisheries developrocrir. 
"The main
drsxdopmcnf; (o)
^Ein Benefits
iiid
^e&Ciaiies
The expected benc fin include
• Development nf waler rtsouitcs for fith production;
■ Provision of xheroatrre Itvthhtxxi for communincs
■--------- ------------ __
Houschckli in thc reservoir area will be thc beneficiaries of                                           Hper Befai area.
^ub-Prcqccn
Thc csnrruird sub-project rotr is EfB 800,000 
TC
- ■— — ^S'jyitin.
L£$*h
[Jn^CrneriTtruk
Thc num impJrtnrnnng ah*erKJ« involved in the
<——Ffdrru/
Rfpttbhc yEfhtoptj. Mimrtg ofW'atrr and Enrr^r
Edncpian NiJf Jm/afran and Prai^ Pnytil
Title
Agencies
Sub Project
Performance
EE-2: Support for Reacrvoir Fisheries Development
WRJD offices at regional, zonal and wereda level;
1-AEP    offices    at    regional,    zonal    and    wereda    level;
DAs and kcbelc councils;
Service co-operatives; and
NGOs.
The performance of the sub-project will be monitored in accordance with the followm
indicators:
Monitoring
Risks and Unccrtainnes
• 
Number of households engaged in reservoir fisheries;
• 
Establishment of a fishery co operative and / or commercial fisheries entctpriac*
• 
Fish yield and prinkicTion from the reservoir.
• 
Development of reservoir fisheries is not viable (especially for Dam ( )pdon D)~~
• 
Lack of interest among local communities to establish a fishery co operative
•      Lack of interest in rhe establishment of a commercial fisheries enterpme
UB F4 Mam Rep<>n
17-
4?                      V,i & tnr^‘y ■
Dn»^
ANNEX[
COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS IN ETB 2010 FINANCIAL PRICES (OPTION 2, WHOLE PROJECT)1‘fdfnd  DmmtW  R/pttMc  0/  E/httpa.  Stiaufry  of  Wafer  and  Ener^ Efhiafaan Kiit Im&aticn and Drtdn^t Prvffil
UB IM Man Report (1)
2Zfc*** *•*?.
<■
,1/>jrjAT */ *'•***
/ Ti-r^r
Er^erjv j\rA> Jrrigjfm ZXwjr.jp- Ay*»r
1NCRHMENTAI. COSTS
U4M ofMaia
Suf*/ P*CtQf> htnrMmcnl
Secondary mm! Tertiary O4M
ImgariMm
Caiuulratcy
Support Caita
S*|t*r E alate
Miiupiw*
CORI {tuullgt
*ai ul*wi|
Sugar lr*cn>ry
ProecM*** Coua
Ijmc- Arp)
S«bp*ofC<o
Tuuli lb
urTouJ
s.ii|vri
»Y2 I
ail
Yi % 1
2014
Vt<
1 .WJ *
IJW I
am
Yi 5 1
UVf.1 S3-ill
M*^J yu-vjl
1 JDU
Yr 6 1
ai
Yi7 1
am
Yr 1
Y# ’1
X3
’ll 10
ant
Yf 11
Sir
Yr 13
da
¥i IV .
SZ4lYr 14 3025 m' 14
gnSi 4V2 24n 5 IM
|72| 71 A 42112/11
3plpr3l yuajYi 2J
jMWIfrl4 I JDlsfrrJJ
- i4K-R^j T6J
111 IM
u»?r *i«
>1
I 2u)7pi n|
inwkr ji
la.;, :*■'
i'jS 2 :mi*.
\2v 71
^*'4-
JM4IYr M
d-itl Vr 1*
71 ■ HI
Tll[ MJ
711| Tft 4
Ti n ?7l
THU IIlJ
UB F4 M*ln Report (1)
1
I lMm Hfederal
tfEthitpta. 
ofJPaftr and Enrr#
Ethiopia* \t!f Initio* and Dwmaqt Ihyed
WITHOUT-PROJECT BENEFITS
&
Stock Benefit
Crop Benefit
Sugarcane Benefit
Groce Value of Sugar,
EiHanoi and Power Salea
LB
Trb
Tory
LB          RB
Total
LB
[RB
Total
LB
RB
Total
LB
RB
Tou
LB
RB
Total
1*7
2] 63.
25ii7
1172       | 635
25<»7
26* 5
451
I r
62o
2)21
80 3
5127
199 6? Ml
-A* 5
1996          MN
46 5
ri
61*
246
Vi.
3125
212 HI 74 2
2M2
Mil 1*7
49 4] IK 1
2120         74 2          2862
4R -I
1*7
65"
2/*><
91
5519
94.,
224 S         795          5040
49 4
1* 1
6’5
273 •
97 f
571 4
216 9j *4.8
521 ’
249.4
| 901
119$
2V.o            M.         5217 2494         S0.||
509
144
693
<2
02
Z87i
lol'
1912
521
144
"11
9R 1
251 4
M9’
04
4
4«i.i
1 160
760"
261 fij 95 4
1572
261 8
95 4
15'2
53 f
192
"29
l%6
511 *
116
I' 6
512.
450 <
■1626
2742| inOB
57$ ||
552
24 6
81 R
2950
i M5:
419
’11 '
09
09
624?
5M
1212’
,    201/
Yr  9
286 7
IK. 1
1727
567
r9
946
1933
>12*
8%1
11
0.9
20
7.17
’25
1.4636
1 202* < Yr Hl
2791
1114
410$
•20
47 1
119 3
49! 6
5*66
I.07R2
-2
69
31
<R1'
R6J
1,747.4
| 2021
1 ‘
Yr 11
111 5
116 7
42*1
5M9 9
670.4
1^613
11
09
42
1.029
Z.OOI
2,1151 1
.22.,
4461.
1U2 6      66)       164’
—ftl
-541
I3*i$
1264
1.IWI
2.4010
124
156 41
1274
461 R
4122
3622
774 4
11’ 9
7R66
•RJl 5
1.64’9
1.121
1359’
X«-'9
54**;
in?
2I'2iTy» 15
~2t»24jYr      l<|
yi2SIYf      IS
2026!  Yt  16
2O27|Vr   17                                                                         221
441.5
M’6,
406'
8502
1112
755 1914
*4 9 2)81
7866
901 1
1/.R79
1367’
1.59)'
2761 4
VI 1
IV
479 3
475 o’ 4066
RR1 ,
144 5
911
242* 254 1
7866
991J
1.687 9
44 f
1
4 4 (J
■> 5 2
52
1.521
!,40l«
23175
161 1
I3MO
479 1
306 41 4(Yi6
913.(1
1614     94 J
7866
To! 1
1.6879;
1 4612
: .40)
2.464 2
r rajYt IN
2>'29jYt    19
2   v   Yr   y>
20111 Yr 21
2052  Yr  22
^<111   Yr   21
ZOUiYr     24
»15IYr25
2vV   lYt   26
>vlYr27
_
I yUlYt 28
20591 Ye 291
2040 Yr~VH
! 2l»*UYtSll
V.1 1
HR 6
479 1
5)7 a 406 6
•>44 4
179 '      >41
I" 14
766 6
AJl 1
13*7.9
I3<»7’)
r.405.1
2,910 9
VI 1
HMO
4'M 1
537 kI 40f.f-
•>44 4
7R66
•All J
1387.9
44 1
44 r
1,5212
! 401'
2.926 2
561 1
URO
499 1
557 RI 406 6
wJ
7866
901 1'
1.687 9
4.4
9 52
9 52
J 52
13232
1.40.1 '
2.9262
V.11
BRO
499 5
557r' 406ft
>44 4
7R66|
•All 1
1,687 9
44(0
9 52
132)2
1.40H
2,9262
161 5
IMO
499 5
537*1 406 6
AM 4
7166]
•Alt 1
I/JT9
1,1144
1.4022
2,921 "
161.5.
15*6
479J
5.1"*'
7M4
1944    >4 1  1 284’
1.5IRR
537 r’ 406 6
'M4 4
901 1j 1.6879
•Mil 1 1 7n,
1.4022
2,921
VI. 1
!UM
4993
1.518 *
! 402 7
2,9210
Vil v
IV"
499 1
$r •'
406 6
AM 4
1944
194 4
941 288’
94 1 2M’
*V6
901 ij !687
r
•
L—
131*4
1.4022
2921
361 1
IVO
499 5
221
557 8
406 6
9M4
1944
941     28*7
’866
90! V 1.6879
I 1318R
1.4022
2,921 0
V.1 5
HRU
4791
557#
4966
>44 4
194 4
94 1     2RR7
*866
•Mil 1] 1 6879
1 13184
: 4022
2.921 0
V.1 3
i HR-
499 1
557 gj 406 6
944 4
1944    >4 1
2887
’V.6
•Mil 1 1 (.479
I ’3l»*|
1.4022
2,321 "
V.1 3
| 1116
4991
517»| 4066
U4 4
IM 4
943
2M.7 1
IM”)
1 131**1
1.4022
2.921
.161J
1 1MJJ
499 1
5)7 J 4OA6
•M4 4
5574 40tC
9444
1944
194 4
288 7
2M7 j
1.68*9
1 ; 51RR
14(122
2 921 ol
W,t
1 !V<
499 31
1 131*8
1.4022
7.921 1
VI
M IV'
<091
5)7 al 406 6
'AM 4
194 4
'M 1
94 1
'>4"l|
131*4
1.4022
2.'>21 nJ
L
\
VI
5| !»'
499 '
537 a 4oa r.
•AM 4
194 4 >1)1 24*'
[ ’*66
901 3
f ,M7 9]
MIR*
1.4022
.921 I
vl
v.i na
.    4991
SV?ft| 406 6
iM 4
!*4 4| 94 1 2M ’
7BA4
Wil 1
1 ,g*7 91
1314*
.4C122
.921 • '/
\ h>uht m
( %M 3] 13*
400 A
sr a
1«M4| M 4 2M *
’HZ, A
901 )]
I.M7 9J
1314 4       1
4O2’f 3'2ioj/
r/Xuaft'jjr JYflfrJT.'J 1'
'
i1/-Mr-7y Jfjfrr Apvflf
u I.',t Maili rtrinwl (1}r
r
t
At
Z
I
X UJ, -Vj?“bie
-' D«* w
ANNEX)
COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TN ETB 2010 ECONOMIC PRICES
(OPTION 2, WHOLE PROJECT)
I
1 H F4 Main Rcpuff (I)
1 /..Mm 31Federal   Dmoautic   RfpMc   of   Ethiopia.   .Mnujfr)   of   Water   and   Energy Ethiopian Nik Irrijptron and Drainage Proferf
UB F4 Main Report (1)
21
wtvz .
.Itjw.Ay a-
./mZ/-*ip
A'Z* /rr^uafrw -rW Drwf.,j$r
INCREMENTAL COSTS
>ta<ar Factory
ImmiwW tali
OkNiIMm
frrMtW
Secondary  ind Tertian OltM
M *«<<«*■ * <?«•• (haulatfr
U I Hi hx J
rrvcvaaanf €p*i
Totil
292.UI
ail  VYr  1
aiupT*
JjlMYr ■>
ijidvt 6
990 (,
1,1 i> L.
J 159 <■
TC-ir
LJ.BI t'A.l
ICli'.Vr V'
aj W.2 ml        tZ.
5* *1    a C ■ ■
I T9 4
M* M
*11 r
j<-'. 'I
2‘I.Up i 21
WVr 25
Y« 2*
Jillpr VI
|7 May-11
I P 1‘’4 Mun Jlqwxt
IMrj/
Krptbiic 9jEr^pu. Minty ajVrtr and Enti#
Efhr^ptaft Ar/r                       and Dnnnagr Pftyttf
WITHOUT-PROJECT BENEFITS
Crvp Benefit
Slock Benefit
Crop Benefit
Grow Vahae of S«<v ,
Eihwil and Power Stlri
Comnraauty
it
Commercial Forcatry
Total With project benefit
LB
1
Total
LB
RB
Total
LB
KB
| Total
LB
RB
| Total
LB
KB
ro<*j
LB            RB
Total
3D|||Yr 1
20121 Yr 2
WlYr         3
IDWYr      4
2fll5lYr 5
190
0 AL
7 251 6
29
I1.t
1 40 4
190
'i 67.
61
7       251 i
219.5            727
292v
WJ
6      67
2706
30.
11
415
201.
2*1.6
215 8            7|4
1121
217
1      72.
289"
111
II
427
21"
71
289"
244 3          84.U
152.1
110
7      77*
.106"
121
11.7
418
230'
77'
308.7
262i           89.7
1525
244
83 4j .127 7
IV
1L9
450
244’
]     8.14
327 7
02
112
277 3
915
3719
257.5
884
t Ki’
| 119
• * *
46:
25*9
I MJ
M67
io*) 2
2792
MBS
04
(14
4U! 1
MU 6
781"
271 5
942
J 1658
(34.9
124
47 1
2715
94 J
3658
218 4
3723
WIB
of.
06
5241
479 6
1,1.04 4
20iap r ft
2019 Yr 9
2851
99 7
184.8
15
126
484
2851
[ 141.9
4270
127.7
465 4
mi
09
09
644 6
627.6
1.2 "62
298?
105 2
4018
167
t28
496
2987
189 5
488.2
436 9
558 5
9953
11
09
2<
7754
7755] 1.548 8
1121
376
13.1
507
1108
2372
568 <1
5461
6516
1,197.6
2.2
0.9
11
92’6
9211
1.85” 9
2021
Yr 11
5259
1160
441.9
386
!M
519
M2 9
2848
647’
6553
744 6
1,199. )
11
09
42
1.0818
1 ,”’1 1
2,1529
1 2022
1YH2I
339 5
121 4
460 9
.195
115
510
395.0
1124
727 5
1624
•17.7
l."noi
44
09
52
1,1119
1,2189        23521
| 2O2lh’rlV
3531
1268
4 "9 /
404
137
542
42*1
VW!
8072
•717
1JU012
1.174
44
0.9
52
13*9 2
1.437.l| 2,826 1
2024
Yr 14
1667
1322
498'i
41 1
140
553
459 2
427.7
887.0
•7.1*
1/4112
13749
44
09
52
1,4511
1 491 9
2,924 9
2)015
Yr 15
VIU J
117.7
5179
415
142
545
491 1
42" 7
9191
875 7
1,I«I12
1,474 9
44
09
52
1. 5*6.6
14990
2,9’5J
B726
Yr 16
Wl 1
157.7
5179
421
142
563
5215
427 7
9512
8’17
1.0012
1,874 9
44
09
52
1520 9
1,409 0
1.IU9.8
202’
Yf|7
3803
117 7
5179
421
142
56.5
555*
427.7
981 1
•~i.7
1.0012
I.H74 9
4.4
09
52
1,564 •
1.4990
3.0617
20
3*1 IB'
MU1
1177
517 9
421
142
565
555.6
42" 7
981 1
57.17
l.iM'12
1374 9
44
09
52
13766
1.4990
1 75 5
2029
It 19
3803
1177
517 9
421
142
MS
5556
4277
-Mil
•71"
l.<» 12
1374 9
09
52
t.5’66
1.4990
1"’5.5
2010
Yr 20
M01
1177
517.9
42.1
142
565
5556
427.7
9811
•717[
1/HL2
1.8749
1.0’$3
2011
Yr 21
MOI
L
44
09
—
52
1.5"66l 1.499”
1377
517.9
423
142
565
5556
4277
9811
t3-22| 1498 1
3 ii’OI
2012
Yc22
MU 3
1177
4277
r—
517.9
423
!42
565
5556
9811
13722        1.4781
3,070.3
1 >33
Yr 23
VW1
117.7
517.9
423
142
MS
5516
427,7
983J
u»u
£•"4 9
1J7<
137221 1.4981
3JD7U3
2DM
Yr 24|
00)1
1577
5179
42 3
142
565
555 6
427 7
981.3
i.nrn 2    1,874 9
vr- i
201$
Yr 25
M03
1377
517.9
423
142
565
555 6
4277
983 3
£0012
IM'12
1/"49
1,8’4 9
1.4'W I
3A6
Yt 26
MOS
1.17 7
517 9
421
142
565
5556
427 7
983 1
1
1037
Y.2<
MOI
1177
517”
411
142
565
5556
427 7
98 M
r sf
f |.(M*I2
—   — 1 •'4.”J
BlMIYi 28
2019 Yr 29
20401Yt
2041 it V.
MU3
117.7
517.9
413
142
565
5556
427 7
9813
•717
1.1 an 2
1174 91
180 1
1177
$17.9
421
14.2
56 S
5516
4273
981.1
•’17
r
1 R'4 9/
Mft 3
157.7
517 9
421
142
565
5556
4277
9811
•71 71  1»l 2
1 jT4'J
I VwJ
Vff 7
M7 9
423
142
565
5516
42’7
98' 1
•73.7]    LODI 2
1 «74'J
f Mill
117.7
1 517 9
421
142
56 5
M5.6
4277
983.3
JI      1X74 J
1
___
r ..J
• - -
... -1
Mt t
■7171    1 *w»uT
l»749l
1,970-1 1,1 'TO 1 KJTCLl
.1070 1
l(' L'J
IL-'' »
unuj
l.i‘Y». jjm i
t.llTn 1
/Ijtffvrhu/ f/.\f
tlwzf far-wrjf A ti/w/|‘

Summery

Upper Beles Irrigation Project Feasibility Study Summary

Upper Beles Irrigation and Drainage Project Feasibility Study

Project Overview

The Upper Beles Irrigation Project is located in the Amhara and Benishangul-Gumuz Regions of Ethiopia, about 30 km southwest of Lake Tana. The project aims to develop 70,451 ha (gross) of irrigated agriculture within a 138,157 ha project area, with water supplied through the Tana-Beles tunnel and hydroelectric scheme.

Key Project Components

Irrigation development for about 63,871 ha net area
Mix of sugar estate, smallholder farms, and commercial farms
Storage dam and irrigation infrastructure development
Resettlement and land consolidation
Supporting agricultural, livestock, and community development programs

Development Options

Option	Sugar Estate Area	Smallholder Area	Commercial Farm Area	Affected Households
Option 0	0%	100%	0%	0
Option 1	34.2% (21,860 ha)	65.8%	0%	~3,015
Option 2A (Recommended)	56.7% (36,225 ha)	35.8% (22,872 ha)	7.5% (4,773 ha)	~4,200
Option 5	100%	0%	0%	~15,000

Water Resources

The project will utilize water from the Tana-Beles hydropower scheme with average releases of 77 m³/s. Key hydrological features:

Mean annual rainfall: 1,447 mm (80% dependable rainfall: 995 mm)
Reference evapotranspiration: 1,492 mm/year
Main Beles river mean flow: 56 m³/s
Design flood peaks up to 870 m³/s for 1:100 year event

Project Costs

Total project costs over 35 years for Option 2A:

Component	Cost (ETB million)	Cost (US$ million)
Irrigation investment	7,778.4	465.8
Sugar factory and estate	4,744.4	284.1
Total Project Cost	32,066.8	1,920.2

Implementation Plan

The project will be implemented in three phases:

Preparation Phase (3 years): Institutional setup, detailed design, resettlement planning
Implementation Phase (9 years): Construction of infrastructure, land development, agricultural programs
Support Phase (4 years): Capacity building, system handover, ongoing support

Expected Benefits

Economic IRR of 10.2% for recommended option
Annual sugar production of ~220,000 tonnes
Substantial increases in farm incomes
Livestock capacity increase from 51,000 to 140,000 TLU
Employment generation and rural development