October 6, 1999
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...............................................................................................................................5
1.1 DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES FOR THE EVALUATION TEAM ...............................................................................5
1.2 FOCUS AREAS AND TOPICS................................................................................................................................6
1.3 MITIGATION MEASURES ....................................................................................................................................7
1.4 REGULATORY AND INSTITUTIONAL SETTING ....................................................................................................8
2
ENVIRONMENTAL SITUATION ANALYSIS ..............................................................................................9
2.1 LAND USE AND POPULATION PRESSURES..........................................................................................................9
2.2 CLIMATE ......................................................................................................................................................... 10
2.3 GEOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................ 10
3
ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................................................. 12
3.1 BASELINE STUDY ............................................................................................................................................ 12
3.2 LAND VALUATION .......................................................................................................................................... 13
3.3 ANALYZING THE ALTERNATIVE OF DEVELOPING LARGER SITES .................................................................... 13
3.4 WETLAND USES FOREGONE ............................................................................................................................ 13
3.5 UPLAND IMPACTS FOREGONE ......................................................................................................................... 13
4
WATER MANAGEMENT .............................................................................................................................. 15
4.1 LAND DRAINAGE ............................................................................................................................................. 17
4.2 WATER DIVERSION ......................................................................................................................................... 18
4.3 EXPOSURE TO FLOOD RISK.............................................................................................................................. 19
4.3.1
On-Site Flooding Issues ......................................................................................................................... 19
4.3.2
Downstream Flooding Issues ................................................................................................................. 20
4.3.3
Flood Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................................... 21
4.4 WATER CONSERVATION IMPACT ..................................................................................................................... 21
5
LAND DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................................. 23
5.1 LAND TENURE AND OTHER SOCIAL ISSUES ..................................................................................................... 23
5.2 LAND CLEARING AND LEVELING..................................................................................................................... 24
5.3 EROSION .......................................................................................................................................................... 25
5.4 SOIL AND RICE PRODUCTIVITY LOSS FACTORS ............................................................................................... 26
6
5.4.1
Poor Water Control ............................................................................................................................... 27
5.4.2
Poor Weed Control ................................................................................................................................ 28
5.4.3
Excessive Turnaround Time ................................................................................................................... 29
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH ...................................................................................................................... 30
6.1 MALARIA ........................................................................................................................................................ 31
6.2 SCHISTOSOMIASIS ........................................................................................................................................... 31
6.3 NUISANCES ..................................................................................................................................................... 32
6.4 HAZARDOUS WASTE ....................................................................................................................................... 32
7
BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY ................................................................................................................ 33
7.1 DISRUPTION OF NATIVE FLORA AND FAUNA ................................................................................................... 34
7.2 INTEGRATED NATURAL SYSTEMS ................................................................................................................... 34
7.3 FERTILIZER USE .............................................................................................................................................. 35
7.4 PESTICIDE USE ................................................................................................................................................ 35
7.5 PEST MANAGEMENT........................................................................................................................................ 36
7.6 ENCROACHING ON PROTECTED AREAS............................................................................................................ 38
8
MONITORING AND EVALUATING ........................................................................................................... 39
APPENDIX 1. EVALUATION TEAM MEMBERS AND KEY CONTACTS .................................................... 41
APPENDIX 2. REFERENCE SOURCES ............................................................................................................... 42
APPENDIX 3. ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED ................................................................................................ 43
APPENDIX 4. MITIGATION MEASURES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF WETLAND
DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................................................................................... 44
APPENDIX 5. WETLAND ENVIRONMENT CHECKLIST ............................................................................... 47
APPENDIX 6. SAMPLE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ................................................................ 51
APPENDIX 7. LIST OF PROTECTED SPECIES AND AREAS IN LIBERIA.................................................. 53
APPENDIX 8. MONITORING PLAN FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES OF WETLAND
DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................................................................................... 57
1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
These guidelines are part of an effort by the participating organizations to improve their project
planning related to wetland development activities. The purpose of these guidelines is to ensure
that environmental factors and conditions are considered in the project proposal phase. The
material contained herein serves as a resource for agencies planning agricultural programs that
may include wetland environments. It covers the potential environmental effects from wetland
development activities. Both beneficial and detrimental effects are discussed. The environmental
consequences of project activities can now be considered prior to approval and appropriate
mitigation activities can be clarified.
The three organizations that contributed logistical support and funding for these guidelines are:

Catholic Relief Services (CRS)

World Vision (WV)

Lutheran World Federation / World Service (LWF/WS).
The environmental issues discussed in this report are often encountered in wetland development
projects, and were of significant concern for the projects visited. Attention is drawn to what
should have been done in addition to – and at times contrary to – what has been done.
Recommended practices are given to address common negative impacts.
It is intended that this document will provide guidance in developing agricultural programs for
wetlands in an environmentally friendly manner. NGOs generally must comply with donor
environmental guidelines and procedures in planning, design, implementing and monitoring of
all activities proposed herein except where standards set by the Government of Liberia would be
more stringent.
1.1 Description of Activities for the Evaluation Team
The study commenced on 13 September and was completed by 7 October, 1999. The team of
experts (see Appendix 1) assembled for this evaluation performed the following tasks:

Reading and review of relevant documentation (see Appendix 2).

Interviews with key persons/institutions in Liberia (see Appendix 3).

Field visits and information gathering at representative sites in the NGO’s project areas.

Preparation of these guidelines.

Debriefing with NGO technicians and project managers.
Public consultation was an integral part of this evaluation process. The team carried out
consultations with national NGOs (for example, for nature protection), scientific experts, and
government agencies. This consultation process helped ensure public support for - and input to the final sector program. Finally, a workshop was conducted to debrief other interested
organizations and individuals. The list of organizations and contact person consulted during the
D:\533566517.doc
5
evaluation process is given in Appendix 3. After the field-visit phase of the evaluation, the
consultant team met with the project managers from each NGO to summarize the findings and
recommendations, and to present this report.
This team also examined the Liberia Forest Development Authority’s recommendation that the
best way to prevent forest degradation by slash and burn practices is to encourage the use of
wetlands for permanent farming. Natural resource values have not been overlooked in this
analysis.
1.2 Focus Areas and Topics
The areas examined during this review team visit to Liberia are given in Table 1. A national map
indicating the sites visited is attached to this document.
Table 1. Counties of Liberia in which the NGOs are actively promoting wetland
development. The number of sites visited by the review team in each county is given in
parentheses.
Organization
Catholic Relief
Services
World Vision
Liberia
County
1999
Total
Population
[1000s]
1998
Developed
Wetland
Area [1000s
ha]
Montserrado
844
Margibi
Developed Wetlands
Proposed
Area
[ha]
# Sites
5
11
3
180
219
8
24
8
480
Sinoe
79
5
36
10
600
Bong (3)
300
37
10
3
180
Grand Bassa (4)
215
19
30
10
600
Rivercess (3)
38
4.5
18
6
360
Lofa
351
25
190
7
45*
Bong (3)
300
37
32
2
22*
Cape Mount (4)
120
6
21
1
351
25
20
4
80
114
4
15
3
60
339
36
10
2
40
Lutheran
(Lower) Lofa
World
Bomi (7)
Federation /
World Services Nimba (1)
# Participants
* Only the number of communities is known.
Wetland development activities related to environmental issues and discussed in these guidelines
consist of the following:

Site selection
D:\533566517.doc
6

Distribution of plots to community members

Hydrologic assessment for water management

Field-level irrigation design, construction and scheduling norms

Clearing and leveling of fields

Plant variety selection

Environmental health management

Pest management
1.3 Mitigation Measures
Useful mitigation measures noted throughout the text are summarized in Appendix 4. Additional
information such as site selection can be found implicitly in these guidelines, but the reader is
also encouraged to review the general wetland development guidelines of Brewer (1984).
Training Considerations:
Training in methods to improve the overall understanding of wetland cultivation is suggested. It
should be stressed that extension agents are the most appropriate targets for this level of training,
and that they should be transferring environmental awareness to the farmer communities. The
technological level of the interventions should not surpass the level of comprehension of farmers
for unsupervised replication.
The West African Rice Development Association (WARDA) and the Central Agricultural
Research Institute (CARI) are institutes for rice cultivation and training. Training courses can be
arranged for extension staff of the three projects jointly to cover the following areas:

Technical (existing development technologies and transfer in packages that are
interpretable and practical)

LNGO and CBO staff – organization and management training

Farmers participation training through demonstrations

Community education and sensitization training (women and youths)

Micro-enterprise development and marketing (women groups and youths).
This intervention should be done in collaboration with the Department of Regional, Research and
Extension, Ministry of Agriculture with facilitation from CARI, UNDP/FAO and the
Environmental Foundation for Africa (EFA) cognizant of the comparative advantages.
The Environmental Foundation for Africa (EFA) conducts environmental awareness training.
FAO is also planning to conduct technical workshops for environmental issues related to
agricultural projects.
A general consideration is the eventual transfer of responsibility of the wetland and surrounding
watershed. Local farmers must be trained in the use of simple monitoring, accounting, and
D:\533566517.doc
7
irrigation system operation tools. Also, the work of canal maintenance, crop scheduling,
agricultural training, and other functions require local expertise.
1.4 Regulatory And Institutional Setting
The government of Liberia has yet to develop substantial legal and policy guidelines for
development activities related to the environment. The Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for
providing follow-up extension advice to farmers for crop rotation, green manure, water
management, and soil fertility. The Liberian Forest Development Agency is responsible for
environmental monitoring. But in fact, few extension agents or materials are available at the
present time.
The National Environment Committee (NEC) will be working this year with a technical advisory
committee to develop a plan of action for environmental issues. This effort is in response to
Agenda 21, which the country is in the process of ratifying.
D:\533566517.doc
8
2 ENVIRONMENTAL SITUATION
ANALYSIS
Wetlands are the most physically and chemically heterogeneous of all the major aquatic
ecosystems in Liberia. They act as sinks for silt particles and soluble inorganic nutrients but
sources for dissolved and particulate organic matter. The wetlands are typically environmentally
fragile, requiring some intervention to maintain an ecological balance and sustainable
agricultural production.
Wetlands referred to as “inland valley swamps” are the subject of the majority of lowland
agricultural development activities being promoted in Liberia. These valleys are formed on the
uppermost part of the watershed base relief and extend up to 25 km downstream. The watershed
areas above them are generally greater than 2 km2. Widths vary from 10 m to 250 m in lower
stretches. Stream-wise slopes are generally 2-5%.
FAO is planning to develop an agricultural database as a national repository of data, but that
level of information is not presently available. No climate data is being collected by anyone in
Liberia, although the European Commission plans to begin next year by installing 24 climate
stations around the country.
A checklist used to develop an environmental situation analysis is given in Appendix 5. The
sections indicate the types of data that should be collected when evaluating potential sites for
agricultural development. Below are several general remarks on the wetland environmental
situation.
2.1 Land Use and Population Pressures
Of the small valleys in West Africa, those in the humid Tropical Forest Zone (within which the
entirety of Liberia lies) are most suitable for rice cultivation. Of the 2.2 million km2 within this
zone and the Guinea Savanna Zone, about 10% consist of small valleys (Oosterbaan et al. 1988).
Thus, there are approximately 0.2 million km2 of wetland area in this zone. Present (1998
estimates) rice paddy yields totaled 210,000 tonnes on 162,000 ha, indicating an average yield of
1.3 tonnes/ha.
For the 1995 estimated total population of 2.4 million and a total land area of 97,750 km 2,
estimates and assumptions are that*:

Approximately 200,000 farming families (~6 members per family) are currently active.

Approximately 30% of land area is considered arable (=29,325 km2).

Less than 20% of the potential lowland area for rice cultivation are presently being exploited
(=19,550 km2).

Less than 4% of utilized wetland cultivation utilizes some form of water control (<800 km2).
*
source: Ministry of Agriculture
D:\533566517.doc
9
Assuming that only 5% of the land can be characterized as a wetland-type environment, almost
5,000 km2 of wetland is available for development. Based on the estimate that a family of six
would need to cultivate 0.22 ha of wetland for adequate nutrition in an entire year (based on a
double crop yielding 2.5 tons/ha), just 430 km2 would be adequate. Thus, potentially ten times
the existing population could be fed from lowland production in Liberia if fully exploited. Even
the currently exploited area (800 km2) would be sufficient. Yet with the ~0.1 acre plots typically
programmed, farmers will likely not abandon upland crops for subsistence food, cash crops, and
other uses.
Utilizing the same estimate of 200,000 farming families along with the estimate of 1.5 ha of
upland exploited annually by a subsistence farming family, an estimated 300,000 ha are slashed
and burned annually. However, as the traditional fallow period of 4-5 years per upland area is
reduced, with the concomitant reduction in soil fertility, many more families will come to depend
on alternative sources of food production such as wetland cultivation.
2.2 Climate
The tropical atmosphere holds large amounts of moisture. Annual rainfall in the project areas
ranges from 1700-4600 mm/yr. Rainstorms in Liberia are generally intense, producing even up
to 75 mm during a single event lasting 1-2 hours. Evapotranspiration rates are also high owing to
intense solar radiation throughout the year although no data has been found. Average rainfall can
be expected to exceed average potential evapotranspiration during at least six months of the year.
Rainfall patterns are bimodal in the southeastern region of Liberia, with a major peak in
September/October and a minor peak in May/June. Elsewhere a unimodal pattern with a peak in
August/September is normal.
The information on local climate conditions is useful for many aspects of wetland development
including assessing hydrologic conditions (Chapter 4) and land development (Chapter 5).
2.3 Geology
The most important geological formation in most of Liberia is the basement complex comprising
granites and associated metamorphic rocks. The weathering of these rocks containing silicate
minerals releases nutrients. These soils have medium fertility and texture. Due to the general
climate conditions, weathering processes have been intense and have caused deep soils, except in
sloped areas which have been depleted.
On the valley bottoms, alluvium is the parent material of the soils (that is, the soil was dislodged
by water, transported in streams, and deposited in the valley). The soils therefore vary widely in
characteristics – locally and regionally – sharing only the sign of being hydromorphic (periodic
wetness). Hydromorphic processes include the dissolution and absorption of iron. This process
causes a characteristic neutral gray color, and possibly formation of iron concretions. Mobilized
iron is toxic to rice, while the concretion phase is unmanageable for tilling. Nonetheless, the
superior hydrologic conditions in these valleys typically override these constraints. Soil pH in the
wetlands is generally slightly acidic. Acid conditions are suitable for rice production, as the pH
D:\533566517.doc
10
tends towards neutral following wetting and drying cycles. Most plant nutrients are also most
available for uptake by plant roots in the slightly acidic range of water conditions.
Geological information such as is described here is valuable in assessing hydrologic conditions
and land suitability, as described in Chapters 4 and 5, respectively.
D:\533566517.doc
11
3 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
A major purpose of these guidelines is to analyze alternative design options and strategies in
terms of environmental costs and benefits. If a proposed agricultural program emphasizes
conversion of wetlands to rice production, alternative approaches could be intensification of
production in existing fields, conversion of other land types, crop rotation, etc. This comparative
analysis of alternative programs applies indicators of environmental and social impacts and
methods to evaluate and compare the indicators and, ultimately, the alternative options.
Government claims that people will leave the upland slash and burn practices in favor of wetland
cultivation are, however logical, not documented. Although overall human nutritional status will
be improved, it will not necessarily be done to the exclusion of other destructive practices.
Therefore, if not countered, slash and burn practices will continue until all of the available
upland areas have been fully exploited and degraded. Wetland agricultural programs need to be
introduced successfully, with the ancillary considerations related to environmental sustainability
included in project activities.
Fortunately, the environmental effects of agriculture activity in wetland are generally reversible,
as evidenced in areas that were developed prior to the war but since then abandoned. The land
returned to a quasi-natural condition after 10 years of limited use. Natural vegetation can
germinate from the soil’s seed bank and proliferates within only weeks of neglect, even after 20
years of suppression. This observation indicates that the wetland development programs, if
abandoned, will not have caused permanent damage to the environment.
3.1 Baseline Study
Owing to the transition from emergency operations to longer-term development programs,
adequate baseline studies are often overlooked. Liberia is especially difficult for planning and
evaluation of projects since “all data was lost during the war.” Therefore, it is imperative that an
organization intending to develop long-term development programs improves its own evaluation
of activities. Collecting baseline data is the only reliable means of comparing project results to
prior conditions. The monitoring program described in Chapter 8 would be more useful were
appropriate baseline data available.
A water budget is typically employed in hydrologic analyses of watersheds. The conceptual
model of a water budget can be stated as inflow minus outflow equals the change in stored water
(ground water). The difficulty in Liberia is that so little data is available to quantify the
individual terms of this relationship – climate data (rainfall, evaporation), watershed conditions
(area, ground cover, slope, infiltration rate), and ground water conditions (water table depth,
volume stored, transmission rate). Furthermore, project schedules are typically laid out with
insufficient planning time. Collecting baseline data for hydrologic conditions takes at least one
full year. Therefore, only general, rule-of-thumb considerations can realistically be addressed.
D:\533566517.doc
12
3.2 Land Valuation
The value of wetland land can be quantified in several categories and compared between before
and after development. The wetland environment can be valued for the following categories,
discussed in this report:

Flood mitigation (decreased flooding downstream)

Reduced erosion and soil deposition

Aquifer recharge/discharge

Water quality maintenance (natural degradation of contaminants)

Habitat for flora and fauna (especially if endangered).
3.3 Analyzing the Alternative of Developing Larger Sites
According to EU recommendations, the minimum total acreage to be developed should be
greater than 6 ha (~15 acres) to justify clearance and construction work. In terms of
environmental degradation, however, the size of the site is directly proportional to many of the
potential negative impacts. Furthermore, many sites are limited in size by physical constraints.
In some areas, it is anticipated that larger tracts will eventually be developed after starting on a
more manageable scale. Note that larger contiguous areas developed are more serious and may
require a complete environmental assessment before approval.
Cultivation effort requirements are approximately equal over the same area of uplands and
lowlands. A reasonably healthy family, then, could cultivate 1 ha of wetland. To manage a paddy
system of 6 ha would therefore require at least 6 families. The additional logistics and
community cohesion required increases the risk of failure of these larger systems.
3.4 Wetland Uses Foregone
Alternative uses of wetlands may be important, such as palm oil harvesting, water quality
improvement, flood control, pastureland, fish and wildlife enhancement, peat harvesting (for heat
energy), and indigenous plant production. Local farmers are expected to make their own
decisions as to the relative value of uses foregone such as palm oil harvesting, pastureland, and
indigenous plant production compare to paddy rice and vegetable cultivation opportunities.
Development of these inland valley swamps will remove stagnant ponds, improve water
movement to prevent flooding, bring under utilization land previously of no productive use to the
farming community. Other potential uses are discussed throughout these guidelines.
3.5 Upland Impacts Foregone
No intervention implies that farmers will continue their traditional slash and burn practices for
cultivating in upland areas. With an estimated 300,000 ha of land cultivated annually among
D:\533566517.doc
13
880,000 ha of arable upland available (estimated as 30% arable land on 97,750 km2 of total land
area [United Nations, 1999]), average fallow periods are now less than three years.
Even if farmers spend only two days per week in wetlands, that will be two days fewer in the
uplands. Taken as a direct proportion (3 days in upland fields instead of 5), the annual reduction
in cultivated upland could be approximately 120,000 ha. This potential reduction in slash and
burn would be foregone with no action. Work effort should also be considered, in that reduced
effort towards food production could go towards other household endeavors. Table 2 indicates
the relative benefit-to-work ratio for upland and wetland agriculture. The wetland figures assume
a double crop is practiced (2.5 tons/ha/crop). The cost-benefit ratio indicates that over double the
effort is required in producing an equivalent weight of upland rice compared to lowland rice.
Given another way, the benefits foregone by continuing to work in uplands, or the extra work for
a given crop yield, is 97 worker days per ton of crop.
Table 2. Comparison of work benefits in uplands and lowlands.
Upland
Lowland
Average work effort required
[Worker days/year/ha]
165
342
Average yield [tons/year/ha]
1
5
Cost:Benefit Ratio
165
68.4
[Worker days/ton]
D:\533566517.doc
14
4 WATER MANAGEMENT
Hydrology is the most important determinant of the establishment and maintenance of specific
types of wetlands and wetland processes. Liberia is blessed with abundant rainfall throughout the
country. With or without groundwater flow, rice cultivation will be possible during the wet
season, although a second crop may require some groundwater. The seasonal wetlands are
hydrologically complex, where runoff and seepage in upland areas are replaced by river valleys
further downstream. The water tables are near or above the lowest ground surface during the wet
season. They do not have large floodplains (generally less than 100 m wide), great lengths
(generally shorter than 10 km) like large rivers, or salinity problems like drier regions. All of the
streamflow eventually drains into the Atlantic Ocean.
Controlling the water resources available is the dominant factor necessary for successful
management of wetland crops. Water control in wetlands has three major objectives:
1) Drain off excess floodwaters effectively
2) Allow rice paddies to be filled and drained at will
3) Ensure that dry season flows are fully utilized for irrigation.
Apart from the plant requirement, water is needed for:

Effective and thorough land preparation and puddling

Weed control by submergence

Rodent control by providing an undesirable environment (standing water)

Supply of dissolved oxygen

Reduction of plant nutrients into available forms

Enhanced control of caseworms

Reduction of concentrations of carbon dioxide, iron and other reduced chemical species.
A pattern of seasonally fluctuating water levels is the rule, rather than the exception, in most
wetlands. It would be useful to determine a wetland’s hydroperiod, defined as the period of water
availability. By way of graphical representation (Figure 1), the hydroperiod can aid in training
farmers how to schedule activities, select crops, and decide on cultivation techniques as
explained in Chapter 5.
D:\533566517.doc
15
Excess
water
Fe
br
ua
ry
be
r
D
ec
em
cto
be
r
O
ug
us
t
A
Ju
ne
pr
il
A
a)
Limited
water
b)
Excess
water
Limited
water
No
flow
Figure 1. Examples of hydroperiod schedules for wetlands, indicating levels of available
water in a) wetter areas and b) drier areas.
Insufficient water control has been noted in many developed sites, evidenced by dryness, low
grain formation, pest infestation, high weed infestation and flood damage. Construction work
should begin with water control structures, allowing the managed water to be used, even before
rice seedling transplanting, for weed suppression and land leveling. Unfortunately, water
management is often avoided until later in the work schedule.
Controlling the hydrologic processes that played part in the development of the wetland
ecosystems has its environmental consequences. There are both positive and negative
environmental impacts of water management, including:

Ensures good response to fertilizers

Encourages nutrient availability and organic matter formation by anaerobic decomposition

Ensures that water is not the limiting growth condition

Suppresses weed growth

Suppresses vermin infestation

Improves potential for multiple crops in one year, reducing need for upland farming

Increases wet season flooding downstream

Decreases hydroperiod downstream.
Hydrologic impact of water management on the downstream environment should be considered.
Early rains that historically flooded uncultivated areas will still flood the area, only in a regulated
manner. Throughout the remainder of the wet season, some increased flooding downstream can
be expected (see section 4.3) as the drainage canal conducts water more efficiently that the
natural channel, particularly during floods. After the wet season, additional water for rice is
diverted from the stream. Fortunately, the majority of the diverted water returns to the stream
through the drainage channel.
D:\533566517.doc
16
Rice paddies should be inundated during the entire growth period. For a small valley, therefore,
the minimum dry season flow is a potential constraint. The minimum flow rate is primarily a
function of the amount of rainfall and the size of the watershed area. In Liberia’s zone, the ratio
of watershed area to cultivated area needs to be at least 1 km2 for every 2-5 ha.
General Water Management Mitigation Measures:

Observe the ratio of watershed area to cultivated area of at least 1 km2 for every 2-5 ha.

Plot the local hydroperiod for planning purposes.
4.1 Land Drainage
With rice being a semi-aquatic plant, poorer drained soils are best suited for lowland rice
cultivation. Conversely, continuously saturated soils are also unsuitable as some alternating
oxidation and reduction cycling is required for good rice growth. Excessively drained soils pose
a drought risk unless the drainage can be overcome by appropriate water management such as
leveling, water retention structures (bunds and dykes), or increased water diversion into the plots.
The high organic content of many wetland soils will decay with wetting-drying irrigation cycles,
thereby altering the hydraulic conductivity of the subsoil and bunds.
It is possible that straightening the main canals to increase water velocity will scour and
subsequently destabilize the bank, leading to soil loss and flooding of adjacent land. Subsidence
of the canal walls will be difficult to repair, especially where it was built up above the natural
land level. Irrigation canals and the main drain can also be damaged by:

Sloughing (subsidence) of saturated soil into the canals and drain

Excessive flow into the canals from the tributaries following high intensity rainfall events

Failure to clean and maintain the canals.
Though drainage canals provide more effective drainage during the wet season (mid-April to
mid-October), there is a perceived risk that this will result in over-drainage during the dry season
causing a drop in groundwater levels. But replenishment from groundwater and irrigation rapidly
equilibrate with the high rainfall conditions found in Liberia. As an example, if 30 cm of surface
water is drained over 6 ha with soil porosity of 50%, the resulting volume is 9000 m 3. For
comparison, a typical 3-m high earth-filled reservoir would contain ~80,000 m3. The drained
water would also be accomplished over several weeks, not instantaneously. Interestingly, the
volume of water retained in a flooded rice paddy would also be 9000 m3 assuming 15 cm of
standing water is desired over the same 6 ha site.
Salinity, often associated with irrigation projects, will generally not be important in Liberia. In
such humid conditions, salts accumulating during the dry season (from capillary rise of
groundwater and subsequent evaporation) will be leached with the first rains of the subsequent
wet season before cultivation begins.
The groundwater table fluctuation has been found to be adequately small in most lowlands of
Liberia. It should be stated only that the water table must fluctuate around ground level,
providing periods of submersion as well as periods of dryness. Trees in natural wetlands literally
D:\533566517.doc
17
act as pumps, extracting soil moisture in the root zone and transpiring it into the atmosphere. The
alteration to shallower rooted crops will tend to reduce evapotranspiration and deepening of the
water table.
The canal design proposed by the EU consists of a composite cross section with dry season flows
passed in a lower drainage canal. Being centrally located, further from the paddies, the hydraulic
gradient is minimized with this arrangement.
The drainage canal should roughly follow the line of lowest elevation (the “thalwag”) to
facilitate drainage following natural land surface gradients. Construction activity should proceed
from the upstream area downstream. In fact, the ideal schedule would work only in the uplands
and tributaries initially, and within the main wetland area only afterwards.
Land Drainage Mitigation Measures:

Work from the upstream area downstream.

Design drainage canals with a composite cross-section following the thalwag.
4.2 Water Diversion
M
ca ai n
na dr
l
ain
M
irr ain
ig
at
io
n
ag
ca
e
na
l
Earthen head dykes constructed at the upstream end of a wetland send water laterally and then
parallel to the wetland at an elevation higher than the paddies. From that vantage, the water can
flow laterally through the paddies and back down into the central drain (Figure 2). There is little
storage available in the canal system, such that an inconsequential amount of water is detained
from progressing downstream. If the watershed upstream of this structure is large (see section on
flooding, below), the dyke risks overtopping and destruction of the structure.
Rice paddy
Rice paddy
Figure 2. Cross-section of a typical developed paddy.
Given that the lowlands are traditionally communal plots, work is often devoted to them only
two days per week. During the wet season, however, hydrologic impacts occur over shorter
periods. If a bund or head dyke fails during a storm and repairs are delayed for 3 days, then the
entire cropping season could be compromised.
For convenient access, wetlands located adjacent to roads are often selected for development.
The blockage can be an impediment, however, limiting a farmer’s ability to manage the flow of
water. Head dykes should be placed 5-10 m downstream of any road to avoid traffic, to allow for
plot adjustments, and to store water.
D:\533566517.doc
18
Water control becomes more problematic when plots are laid out in a downstream position, with
development progressing to upstream areas in later years. Activities upstream will alter
conditions downstream, but the converse (downstream activities affecting conditions upstream)
is substantially less. Head dykes may have to be reconstructed or removed to account for the
variation upstream, but only one head dyke would be required if starting upstream and
continuing downstream. Single head dykes, under appropriate conditions, can serve several
hectares of irrigated land. Note that digging of drainage canals typically initiated at the
downstream end of a plot is helpful for initiating field drainage and that this process is not
contrary to the above described recommendation of developing upstream areas first.
Water Diversion Mitigation Measures:

The canal lines and general plot layout should be traced with the assistance of trained
personnel.

Begin with development of most upstream areas.

Place head dykes 5-10 m downstream of any road to avoid traffic, to allow for plot
adjustments, and to store water.

The responsibility for maintaining the dykes should be clearly indicated. Field staff should
include scheduling a maintenance workday in follow up visits.

The dyke and bund material should be of clay brought from outside the wetland area to
stabilize the structure.
4.3 Exposure to Flood Risk
Rainstorms of 75 mm/hr occur almost every year in Liberia, representing over 750 m 3 of water
per hectare in the watershed. Approximately 10% of this water will enter the streams as direct
runoff, depending on ground cover and soil conditions. A larger watershed above the wetland
will obviously produce a proportionally larger volume of flood runoff. For typical conditions, a
very rough approximation gives a maximum runoff rate of 0.06 m3/s from a 1-ha watershed.
Local farmers are not always reliable sources for hydrologic information, and this estimate
should be considered over casual comments.
Uncontrolled flooding can cause crop failure if crops get completely submerge for long periods.
Overtopping bunds, eroding canals, and depositing sediment are other undesired impacts.
Without relying on computational models, one can only say that a watershed area of 70 km 2 is a
preferred maximum.
Some technicians prefer starting downstream to drain the most waterlogged areas first. If starting
upstream, the lower areas, without drainage canals, tend to be subjected to more flooding by the
evacuated flows above. The risk of starting lower in the stream, however, is having less control
over larger potential volumes of water (floods) during the wet season.
4.3.1
On-Site Flooding Issues
The permanently and seasonally flooded zones’ boundaries will be altered with water
management. Formerly, flooding in these areas would be intermittent, and some poorly drained
D:\533566517.doc
19
areas inundated well into the dry season. Within the rice paddy, flooding will be continuous
during growth periods and dry otherwise.
Many damages of wetland plots result from insufficient water control. Much of the neglect is tied
to the common schedule of working only two days per week in the community field. By not
observing and adjusting to hydrologic conditions (floods, bund breaks, etc.), greater effort must
later go into reparations.
Flows in the main drainage canal can be controlled somewhat. Recognize that not all of the peak
flows will arrive at the outlet concurrently. However, the improved drainage system will increase
peak flows. The main drainage canal must be large enough to handle extreme flow conditions. A
typical drain cross-section (see section 4.1) on a 3% slope can pass approximately 0.8 m3/s of
water. Then the maximum watershed area that this could accommodate is only 13 ha, based on
the estimated potential flood flow noted above of 0.06 m3/s per hectare.
The main irrigation canals located on either edge of the wetland serve two hydrologic purposes:
sending irrigation water to the secondary canals in the dry season and draining lateral inflows
during the wet season. Flows in the main irrigation canal should be adequate to transport flow
from a 10-year storm event.
Effects of potential alterations in upstream land use should be considered when designing
drainage structures. The most common example in Liberia is a rubber plantation or other forest
cover is harvested. The reduced ground cover will increase runoff volume and sediment loads
that could easily damage a small irrigation system.
4.3.2
Downstream Flooding Issues
The flood attenuation capacity of these swamps is limited, and therefore less valuable than, say,
riverine wetlands which are often protected for that purpose.
The change in flooding magnitudes downstream owing to development is difficult to predict
given the many (and often counter-acting) influences. It can only be clarified what is increasing
the potential for flooding and what is decreasing it (Table 3). If each of the activities could be
definitively quantified, then the flood hazard downstream could be predicted. However, the
complexity of the system requires that we instead monitor the cumulative impact. The maximum
depth of flow during a flood can be estimated based on evidence of wetness, scaring, or debris
snags.
Table 3. Downstream flooding impacts from various wetland development activities.
Increases Flood Potential
Decreases Flood Potential

Replacing natural vegetation with
rice reduces infiltration.

Reduced land slopes increase
infiltration.

Digging drainage ditches rapidly
channels runoff downstream.


Clearing vegetation in canals
increases flow velocity.
Canals, especially the outer irrigation
canals, and the head dyke temporarily
store water.

Rice paddies temporarily store water.
D:\533566517.doc
20
As a general rule, deeper water and water more open to large rivers support a greater variety and
abundance of fish. With generally increased flooding downstream, those areas will improve as
fish habitat. The natural vegetation will adapt to altered conditions as more hydromorphic plants
populate the area.
4.3.3
Flood Mitigation Measures

Restrict site selections to a maximum watershed area of 70 km2.

Development should include the head of the wetland to facilitate complete water control.

Instructed farmers that the main drainage canal would require periodic clearance of
vegetation and side slope maintenance.

Assign more permanent tenants of the areas, at least inspecting and making minor
adjustments daily.

Use sandbags or other sturdy material (logs) for the diversion structure’s spillway.
4.4 Water Conservation Impact
There is little need for soil conservation work in the watersheds of most of Liberia’s upland
valley wetlands, as erosion is low throughout much of Liberia*. Water extracted from the inlet
streams is used locally and will largely return to the wetland to progress downstream.
In areas with insufficient dry season flow, head dykes can serve in a limited capacity to increase
infiltration rates and store water for dry season use. Less than 20% of the water impounded in a
wetland enters the groundwater supply.
A typical head dyke (50 cm deep on a land slope of 2%) can store only 100 m3 of water. With
such limited water volume stored, the reservoir is generally used to simply extend the period of
available surface water, after which time shallow wells are dug for bucket irrigation on plots of
vegetables.
Soils throughout most of West Africa are composed of the Basement Complex, granite and
associated metamorphic rocks. The presence of high transmissivity soils is rare. Therefore,
infiltration from the dykes can not be expected to be a significant component of the water
budget. Additionally, the dykes have these potential disadvantages:

Loss of agricultural land

Negligible attenuation of floods

Increased water-related disease habitat

Increased operation and maintenance requirements

Decreased storage volume from sedimentation
*
Clearly, large-scale tree harvesting is not included in this statement.
D:\533566517.doc
21

Entrapment of nutrients with sediments.
Typically, farmers will alter their cultivation pattern to adapt to local hydrologic conditions
rather than attempt to adjust them. If dry season flows are unreliable, farmers will choose to do a
crop of vegetables irrigated with water from shallow hand-dug wells. Somewhat reliable flow
conditions would encourage a ratoon crop of rice that grows adequately on soil moisture.
Perennial flows could be utilized for up to three rice crops. Other mitigation measures for these
impacts are noted elsewhere in these guidelines.
D:\533566517.doc
22
5 LAND DEVELOPMENT
Although much of Liberia’s wetland area is viable for rice cultivation based solely on water
availability, it is important initially to develop only the very best sites available as a means of
both maximizing benefits and demonstrating the best potential benefits under favorable
circumstances. The publications on swamp development by Brewer (1984) and Weedor (1997)
are recommended. Information given in those sources is at times highlighted in this report, but
the reader is encouraged to obtain copies for full instructions.
The average plot size per worker should be considered. Under conditions of average crop yields,
the average family would need approximately 0.22 ha to fulfill nutritional requirements. Given
that typical plot sizes allocated (or averaged, as for communal sites) are often smaller (on the
order of 0.1 ha), it must be assumed that farmers will still practice upland cultivation.
Land improvement techniques use manual labor and local materials such as leveling boards.
Some development will bring under utilization land that was previously unproductive to the
farming community. Rehabilitation of wetland sites will increase rice yields, and provide at least
one extra crop (rice or vegetables) during the dry season. Soil fertility in some areas could
increase as a result of the application of appropriate inter-cropping and crop rotation. Soil
aeration, augmented by water level fluctuations associated with irrigation, will also increase
agricultural production.
5.1 Land Tenure and Other Social Issues
Land tenure is not often an issue given the abundant amount of unused land owned by the
government. The population density of Liberia is roughly estimated to be less than 22 people/mi 2
(United Nations 1999), markedly low compared to countries such as Rwanda with over 300
people/km2. Notwithstanding, land tenure could be an issue where absentee farmers return to
find their land being cultivated by the community. Individually owned lands were often the first
to be cultivated in the 1980s and are now the most amenable for rehabilitation. The value of
these neglected lands is often only realized once others exploit them. Also, taboos exist in some
areas whereby people will not use the wetlands for any purposes.
Families will generally organize themselves in irrigation plots of a few families. Swamp
cultivation holds less credibility for a man, being looked upon as women’s work. Consequently,
men typically do only 15-20% of the manual labor required to work a rice paddy, otherwise still
doing slash and burn in the uplands.
Land usually fallow (but that can be cultivated hereafter with irrigation water) will become less
available for grazing. Livestock used to be a more important part of the culture in Liberia,
serving as food security, dietary supplement, and manure. But today, animal husbandry is not
widely practiced in Liberia.
Community-based management of labor and land rights can develop effective limitations to
overuse of wetland areas. A key element will be to develop along with farmers an understanding
D:\533566517.doc
23
of how to maintain and enhance water and soil resources, so that the qualities of wetland are
increased in order to allow, and as part of, intensification strategies.
The responsibilities and expectations of both the NGO and the farmers should be adequately
discussed. A clearly written and understood Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has proven
useful in resolving disputes related to these issues. The MOU will be a recognized
documentation of land ownership and relinquishment thereof for community work. An example
MOU is given in Appendix 6.
Land Tenure and other Social Issues Mitigation Measures:

Clearly establish land tenure.

Require land owner to be a member of the participating farming community.

Write and sign an MOU with the participating community farmers.
5.2 Land Clearing and Leveling
Organic matter serves as storage for plant nutrients, provides nitrogen and other nutrients for
later plant growth, increases the soil’s water holding capacity, and improves the soil structure for
cultivation. Initial land clearing often invites burning, since that is the popular practice in the
uplands. Weeds pulled during the rice-growing phase should be submerged into the soil in the
plot, rather than removed from the plot as these will decompose and restore soil fertility. Rice
stalks are often left on the fields, although some farmers effectively till them into the soil as
compost. This process enhances pest control (burns larvae) and adds nitrogen.
Weeds grow rapidly during the dry season fallow period, so land exposed to surface runoff is
typically not denuded before planting. Rather, fields are weeded only after being inundated.
In areas with extensive peat (partially decomposed plant material) deposits, large (up to 10m
diameter) zones could become pools. The peat decomposes more rapidly from water
management effects, producing methane and sulfur gases that literally lift it up to float away.
Leveling performed by manual labor with no surveying equipment is commonly not adequate.
The consequences are rat and groundhog entry, high/dry spots, and waterlogging. The
recommended technique is to flood the plots after initial clearing and leveling, to use the water
level as a guide to further refinement. Where leveling is not done adequately, it is important that
extension workers advise farmers and schedule maintenance after harvesting.
Land slopes within the wetland vary significantly. Recommended maximum slopes of the canals
depend on the soil conditions as well as the flow velocity but generally vary from 2-5%. Where
wetlands are gently sloped and have a cover of clay, erosion from irrigation runoff would
generally be insignificant. Greater slopes will require more effort for leveling and providing drop
structures. Land leveling within blocks should be accomplished by the landowners with advice
from irrigation specialists. Poor leveling could cause excessive pooling of stagnant water and soil
erosion.
Construction work should commence after the December harvesting period, and continue
through May when early rains will moisten the soil. Final smoothing and leveling can then be
D:\533566517.doc
24
conducted with less haste. Land leveling need not be rushed and may take 2-3 years depending
on the farmer’s interest.
The most labor-intensive activity in developing wetlands is the initial clearing. Large trees and
sturdy shrubs able to withstand the arduous environmental conditions are difficult to remove.
Consequently, and in conjunction with the fact that many suitable wetland sites have already
been minimally cleared for traditional rice cultivation (broadcasting seeds), clearing of virgin
forest is only reluctantly carried out. Where debris and stumps must be removed, selective
burning is common.
Land Clearing and Leveling Mitigation Measures:

Commence construction work after the December harvesting period.

Encourage only selective burning.

Leave the residue from land clearing on (or tilled into) the fields to decompose.

Where large depressions or unsuitable soil conditions are encountered, import soil from
outside the swamp.

Do not extensively excavate bund material from the paddies.

Encourage progressive improvements in field leveling.

Use termite mound clay, where available, for sealing porous bunds.

Practice minimum tillage of the brushed perimeter vegetation.
5.3 Erosion
Where plots are gently sloped (2-5%) and have a cover of clay, erosion from irrigation runoff is
typically minimal. Canals and bunds containing them can erode excessively, causing
undermining that ultimately leads to failure of the bunds and draining of the wetland. Care must
be taken to ensure that curves are as gentle as possible to avoid erosion and even overtopping.
Erosion could be enhanced if the natural thalwag is underlain by sand deposits (see section 4.1).
Vegetable crops can be planted along the fringes of inundated rice paddies and canals to reduce
soil erosion, with the additional benefit of utilizing available soil moisture. Trees can be planted
on steep slopes along the perimeter of wetlands to minimize erosion there.
Erosion Mitigation Measures:

Decrease standard plot sizes in areas of steeper slopes.

Plant vegetable crops along the fringes of inundated rice paddies and canals to reduce soil
erosion and utilize available soil moisture.

Design gentle curves in drainage canals.

Irrigate plots individually from the canal and through plots.

Practice minimum tillage of the brushed perimeter vegetation.

Encourage tree planting on the slopes of wetland perimeters.
D:\533566517.doc
25
5.4 Soil and Rice Productivity Loss Factors
Generally, the lowland valleys are soil deposition zones for alluvium, material eroded from the
watershed. As the land slope decreases and floodplain widens, stream flow velocities decrease.
The decreased turbulence can not maintain the high sediment load and deposits it there. This soil
is relatively fertile, having been topsoil upstream.
Soil fertility in some areas could increase as a result of the application of appropriate intercropping and appropriate crop rotation. Soil aeration, augmented by water level fluctuations
associated with irrigation, will also increase agricultural production. Decomposition in wetlands
is slower in the anaerobic standing water than it is under dry conditions. Nutrient cycling is
enhanced by hydrology-mediated inputs, and nutrients are often more bioavailable with reduced
conditions in the wetland substrates.
Productivity could be negatively impacted by these factors:

Iron toxicity

Excess denitrification

Poor soil zones

Neglect of overly ambitious plot sizes.
Iron toxicity is often problematic in Liberia. Iron oxide can coat plant roots, immobilize
phosphorus, and be excessively absorbed by the plants. Iron toxicity shows a characteristic
brown discoloration of the leaves starting with the older leaves. Flushing iron from soils would
take ~15 years, so it is generally recommended to use iron-tolerant rice varieties and reduce Fe
through better water movement.
Nitrogen is often the limiting nutrient in flooded soils. Nitrate-nitrogen is the first soil nutrient to
be reduced. The denitrification reaction produces nitrogen gas, which escapes and is lost from
the soil. The reaction is particularly enhanced by altering oxidizing and reducing conditions
associated with wetting and drying (respectively) cycles. But if intense reduction occurs (i.e.
maintained stagnant water), hydrogen sulfide can be produced. The formation of this compound
also releases ferrous iron. Both compounds are toxic to rice. The optimal water condition thus
maintains water levels in the paddies with low flow periodically or continuously drained off.
Very sandy soils have high percolation rates. The increased rate of water movement through the
root zone will tend to leach nutrients from the soil. An additional problem with sand is its poor
stability, restricting its use as bund material. The coarse soil matrix makes it more troublesome to
bury weeds and stubble that would add nutrients.
Over-extending plot sizes can reduce the potential value of work effort if cultural practices such
as de-weeding and maintenance are neglected. The situation develops when too much land is
initially developed or when farmer participation decreases.
Soils can be sampled with augers to examine the subsurface soil profile. A visual inspection of
the topsoil and vegetative cover can even yield some meaningful information. CRS catalogues
soil profiles from auger samples and puts the information on a map overlay of the developed
area. Rather than cultivating even poor soil zones within a site’s boundary, the unsuitable areas
could be segregated by bunds and used for refuse dumping (composting) or material for bunds.
D:\533566517.doc
26
Alternatively, planting of short duration upland rice varieties, gardening or fruit trees can be
attempted in these zones.
It is also suggested to use reliable seed varieties initially and then adjust in subsequent years
based on the observed problems.
Soil Productivity Loss Mitigation Measures:

Use iron-resistant rice varieties where necessary.

Encourage soil amendment practices.

Control water stagnation period.

Take soil samples before making final site decisions.

Instruct farmers in proper water management in paddies.

Encourage local fertilizer (manure, compost) production and use where necessary.

Restrict individual plot size with planned extensions later.

Use reliable seed varieties initially.
Other factors reducing crop yields discussed next are:

Poor water control

Poor weed control

Excessive turnaround time.
5.4.1
Poor Water Control
Rice evolved as a wetland species, and although varieties suited to upland conditions have
developed, it remains more sensitive to water deficiency than most other crops. Critical factors in
rice productivity are the supply of water to the soil from rain, reservoir or ground water, and the
ability of the soil to retain water. Landscape position largely determines the way in which water
can be supplied to the soil, and soil texture and drainage characteristics, the extent to which it is
retained.
Although rice will grow as an upland crop, yields are almost always considerably less than when
it is grown under flooded conditions. Most experimental studies have shown that it makes little
difference to rice yields whether the soil is flooded 1 cm or 10 cm deep, but even a few days
when the soil is not covered by water can cause a significant loss of yield (Wielchman and Sen,
1978). Excessive water can also be a serious problem as it can damage bunds and canals (see
section 4.3). Thus, control of water deficits and excess is a major biophysical factor in sustaining
rice yields.
Water use and moisture stress effects vary at different growth stages of rice. Moisture stress
reduces crop yields most when it occurs during the critical growth stages. Water is most required
during the reproductive stage – 20 days before heading to 10 days after heading. Lack of
sufficient water during this period causes high sterility. Water requirement at transplanting to
early vegetative phase is low but the field should be kept saturated to a few centimeters of
D:\533566517.doc
27
standing water to enhance tillering. The field is kept flooded 5-10 cm during the late vegetative
phase (from panicle primordia development) through heading. The level of water is reduced to
saturation after heading to promote rapid ripening and to facilitate harvesting.
5.4.2
Poor Weed Control
Weeds are often called “plants out of place”. Crops and weeds compete for the same resources –
nutrients, water, space and light. Competition begins when crop and weeds grow in close
proximity and the supply of any necessary growth factor falls below the demands of both.
Competition from weeds is dependent on such factors as the environment, the crop/variety grown
and its density, the stages of the crop, weed density, and stage of weed growth.
Flooded or moist soils favor an abundant supply of viable weed seeds in rice fields. Rice yield
losses caused by weeds in flooded paddies vary with the time of weed infestation, soil fertility,
rice varietal type and planting method. Competition from weeds during the early growth stages
(first 30 days after planting) of the rice crop is more serious than no competition in the early
growth stages followed by competition during the later growth stages. Short stature and low
tillering varieties are more prone to high yield loss than tall and high tillering varieties. Weed
competition is less in closely planted plots than where rice is planted at wide spacing. Flooded
the fields after crop establishment gives significant control over the weeds.
Weed interference causes:

Reduction in rice yield and quality

Intensification of the problem of pests and diseases by harboring and serving as habitat

Reduction of efficiency of certain cultural practices

Reduction of efficiency of irrigation.
The primary objective of all weed control practices is to reduce the undesirable effect of weeds
to a minimum such that their presence will not cause any adverse effect on the crop with which
they are growing in association. No single method has been found to be totally effective, but a
combination of two or more methods. These include:

Proper and thorough land preparation

Planting of weed-free seeds

Clearing of bunds and canals by slashing

Proper plant spacing (close) and density

Use of high tillering tall rice varieties

Maintenance of flood levels 5-15 cm after transplanting for most parts of the crop cycle

Observing crop rotation by planting vegetables after two successive rice crops.
More information on weed management is provided in Chapter 7.
D:\533566517.doc
28
5.4.3
Excessive Turnaround Time
The turnaround time, which is the time interval between harvesting of one crop and planting of
the next in a cropping sequence, is important in all two-crop rice cultures. A delay in the
turnaround time can be a serious impediment to intensification in the rice-based cropping system.
Long turnaround time results in crops being planted too late into the season of dependable water
supply. Turnaround time ranges from 5 to 37 days, but 21 days was found to be most suitable
(Roxas et al., 1978).
The turnaround time can be influenced by the method of second crop establishment. This method
was found to average 16 days for wet-seeded rice and 26 days for transplanted fields. Any
increase in the intensity of tillage causes more total tillage time for establishing a second crop.
Turnaround time mitigation measures:

Plant short duration varieties.

Use pre-germinated seeds in direct-seed rice.

Minimize tillage in the establishment of a second crop.
D:\533566517.doc
29
6 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Swamps are generally recognized by Liberians as an unhealthy place to work. As is the case in
with most rivers and streams, surface waters throughout Liberia are not potable. The only potable
water sources available in most rural settings are open, hand-dug wells. However, it is common
for people to make use of whatever water is available when needed.
Wetlands, being often in close proximity to housing and previously undeveloped, have often
been used as the de facto trash dump. Indeed, even discarded, buried medical waste has been
found by children working barefoot to develop some wetlands in Liberia. Additionally, urban
runoff carrying human excrement poses other obvious health hazards.
In many areas, farmers working in wetlands will defecate “in the bush” adjacent to their plots.
Communal latrines have not been effective in Liberia since it is culturally improper to be seen
entering one and few individuals would ever take personal responsibility for maintaining its
proper sanitary conditions.
Most rural communities in Liberia are not served by any health centers. Consequently, traditional
medicines are still popular treatments for illness.
Prolonged flooding and cleared lowland areas associated with the cultivation of paddy rice could
increase incidences of water-related diseases. Disease transmission could become more prevalent
if people are in greater contact with and drinking from these surface water resources. Head
dykes, for example, may be a source of disease as people bathe in the reservoirs and children
flush out fish by walking through them. Common diarrhea diseases are associated with
consumption of stream, canal, and drainage water. Few households have toilet facilities.
The Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MOH&SW) stated that wetland-related illnesses in
Liberia included Schistosomiasis, malaria, and river blindness. Leeches and red ants (stinging)
were noted to be major nuisances. The major illnesses noted by the Institute of Biomedical
Research were Schistosomiasis and malaria, although no data is available for supporting either of
these statements. No cases of river blindness were mentioned by any farmers during site visits by
the evaluation team.
Disease transmission through domesticated animal vectors is not noteworthy in Liberia owing to
both limited numbers of animals and sound mitigation practices of containment in pens.
Most methods to avoid negative effects of irrigation on human health involve changing human
behavior. Most development programs can readily incorporate a health and sanitation component
for complimentary activities. Most farmers, for example, simply do not know that irrigation
water may be a contaminated reservoir for transmittable diseases. Encouraging proper methods
to dispose of sewage can also reduce the spread of disease.
General Environmental Health Mitigation Measures:

Contract LIBR to do baseline and impact surveys of illnesses related to wetland
development.

Incorporate health education in training programs.
D:\533566517.doc
30

Avoid development of sites known to be waste dumps or immediately downstream of
housing.

Encourage use of protective clothing where contact transmitted diseases/nuisances are
prevalent.

Conduct research on the natural enemies of snails and mosquitoes to identify potential
predators such as ducks and geese.

Utilize health guidelines by Tiffen (1991) and Birley (1991) throughout the project cycle.
6.1 Malaria
Malaria cases are reported throughout the year in Liberia. Yet mosquito breeding in swamps was
not positively correlated with increased incidences of malaria in a recent study conducted in
conjunction with the MOA. Furthermore, interviewees during the field visits indicated a
perception of reduced mosquito populations since development of their wetlands. Increased
water velocities, managed weed growth and fish populations should serve to reduce habitat for
mosquitoes (the vector for malaria) which prefers confined, stagnant waters.
Malaria Mitigation Measures:

Raise fish in the rice paddies that will eat mosquito larvae.

Promote de-weeding and brushing of perimeter vegetation.

Reduce stagnant water zones in managed area.
6.2 Schistosomiasis
Schistosomiasis is endemic throughout Liberia since the regional environment is a favorable
habitat for aquatic snails. Its prevalence is found to increase with swamp rice production. Both
urine and feces transmit Schistosomiasis parasites in Liberia.
Modern treatment (Praziquantel) is very effective and inexpensive. Education programs have
also been effective in Liberia. However, preventing contraction does not prevent contamination
if the snails carrying Schistosomiasis parasites are removed from plots but inflow water is still
contaminated upstream.
The life cycle of the parasite depends on human hosts, such that it could be eliminated from an
area if contamination ceased.
Boots could be provided to each worker, although project workers could not enforce their use
and maintenance. Boots are also troublesome after transplanting owing to conditions of deep,
sucking mud. Upper body protection would also be required to reduce transmission through
exposed arms and hands. The cost of boots would also be considerable.
Schistosomiasis Mitigation Measures:

Include health education in farmer training programs.

Encourage latrine construction (and use) near developed swamps.
D:\533566517.doc
31

Conduct mass distribution of the curative treatment (Praziquantel).
6.3 Nuisances
Leeches and red ants (stinging) were noted as worrisome for farmers in many areas. Leeches are
annelids, in the same the group of animals as earthworms. They are parasites of fish. The bucal
cavity consists of suckers used to suck the blood of its host. A single blood meal taken in by a
leech can last for a long period of time (1-2 months). Although they are not major vectors of
diseases to humans, by their blood-sucking habit they impose serious problems as a nuisance to
farmers in the paddy fields of rice-based ecosystems. Depending on the level of population
build-up, farmers are sometimes tempted to abandon their rice paddies. Lindane and carbofuran
(furadan) are effective chemical control reageants. But their subsistence within the soil lattice
and the environment poses serious residual problems.
Stinging ants exist on the fringes of paddy fields. They belong to a group of social insects of the
family formicidae. Some species contain high levels of formic acid in a sac located in their
abdomen. When they bite the abdomen is raised and a significant content of the sac is oozed into
the wound inflicted, thereby leading to an acute burning sensation. These bites are quite irritating
to their victims.
Groups of these insects are found on the bunds or periphery of the paddy fields in burrows.
Whenever these burrows are opened or otherwise disturbed the agitated ants come out en masse
to defend their nest. In most instances when such situations arise, the cultivators are stung,
thereby causing acute and irritating pains on the feet or wherever the bite occurs. Even though
there is no evidence to prove that they are vectors for any known diseases, their potent sting is
uncomfortable or even unbearable. Depending upon how allergic or sensitive the victim is, a
repeated stinging exacerbates the situation much further, which in some cases leads to a rise in
body temperature and chill. The ants are not adapted to water, and scattering the burrow dirt into
the water will eliminate them. As noted in section 6.2, the use of boots may be problematic.
Nuisance Mitigation Measures:

Remove un-submerged debris and dirt bounds from paddy areas.

Encourage the prevention of access to skin – wearing jeans, hip boots, or plastic sheets;
smearing exposed skin with lime.

Use controlled heat therapy (burn plant debris) to kill off ants in their burrows.

Control water appropriately by draining to immobilize leeches or eliminate ants.
6.4 Hazardous Waste
Chemical waste (by-product) dumped in valleys as a result of iron ore mining is a potential
source of chemical waste to which farmers could be exposed in wetlands. This is particularly
prevalent in Bong County’s Bong Mines area. Chemicals including limestone, ammonium nitrate
and bentamone cause blisters. Suggested mitigation measures for projects in such contaminated
areas is to provide skin protection (boots) or abandon the site.
D:\533566517.doc
32
7 BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY
Wetlands are a major feature of the landscape in almost all parts of the world. They are unique
because of their hydrologic conditions and their role as ecotones between terrestrial and aquatic
systems. Wetlands are sometimes described as “the kidneys of the landscape” because of the
function that they perform in hydrologic and chemical cycles and because they function as
downstream receivers of wastes from natural and human sources. They cleanse polluted waters,
prevent flood, protect shorelines, and recharge groundwater aquifers.
Wetlands have also been called “biological supermarkets” for the extensive food chain and rich
biodiversity they support. They provide unique habitats for a wide variety of flora and fauna.
Now that we have become concerned about the health of our entire planet, wetlands are being
discribed by some as carbon dioxide sinks and the stabilizers of the climate on a global scale.
Wetlands are an enigma to scientists. They are difficult to precisely define. Not only because of
their great geographical extent, but also because of the wide variety of hydrologic conditions in
which they are found. They are found at the interface of terrestrial ecosystems, such as upland
forests and grasslands, and aquatic systems such as deep lakes and oceans making them different
from each other. Because of their nature in combining attributes of both aquatic and terrestrial
ecosystems, but are neither, they fall between the cracks of the scientific disciplines of terrestrial
and aquatic ecology. These unique characteristics of wetlands provide a common ground for
study that is neither terrestrial nor aquatic ecology. They provide opportunities for testing
“universal” ecological theories and principles involving succession and energy flow, as well as
an excellent laboratory for study of principles related to transition zones, ecological interfaces
and ecotones. This niche in the landscape leads to high biodiversity in wetlands which “borrow”
species from both terrestrial and aquatic systems.
Rehabilitation of the wetland creates an opportunity to produce high value vegetables for the
fresh market. These crops encourage pest control that may result in unsafe use of pesticides and
contamination of surface and groundwater. Although no pesticides and no inorganic fertilizers
are being considered in project activities, it must still be considered if their use will be
encouraged by the increased agricultural activity. The independent use of fertilizers and
pesticides will prejudice certain aquatic animals and their predators.
Present rates of fertilizer and pesticide use in Liberia do not appear to have significantly
impacted native wildlife and plants. Given the generally conservative use of chemical
applications, small-scale development activities are expected to have little further impact on the
wild animal and plant populations.
Environmental impacts could include a potential increase in local biodiversity. Biodiversity of
certain animal families such as insects could increase, and reports of increased dragonflies and
fish are common.
D:\533566517.doc
33
7.1 Disruption of Native Flora and Fauna
With the flora and fauna of the Liberian wetlands, there is a range of vegetation from primary
(untouched) to secondary and tertiary (previously cultivated), consisting of rafia palms, oil
palms, aboreal plants, ferns, hard and soft wood, herbaceous plants, sedges, grasses, aquatic
grasses and algae. The fauna is abundant in a wide range of wildlife species: duiker, elk,
baboons, monkeys, squirrels, rodents, birds, bats, snakes, crabs, catfish, crayfish, toads, spring
frogs, annelids (earthworms), insects, nematodes, and others.
The wetland fauna serve as a food source; herbs serve as medication; trees provide timber and
building materials and valuable products. More significantly, the interaction of the plant, animal
and fish species in that habitat provides an ecological balance which is of local, national, and
global importance. Therefore, any modification, disturbance, or degradation creating an
imbalance may lead to extinction of some species. Therefore, environmental factors leading to a
vulnerable ecosystem must be examined to provide mitigation measures ensuring sustainability
and an ecological balance between production and nature conservation.
There will likely be an increase in bird populations and species diversity resulting from wetland
agricultural. Birds often obtain nesting material from wetland grasses. The loss of suitable
material in rice paddies is inconsequential given the distances that birds can travel for collecting
nesting material compared to the scale of the developed areas. Furthermore, rice is a preferred
food for birds, as farmers can attest, and does not usually replace a unique food source.
Irrigation activities could disturb fish-breeding habitats in mangroves. Irrigation can reduce the
inflow of fresh water that is necessary to ensure a sufficient supply of nutrients and stability of
the substrate into mangrove areas. Drainage of coastal wetlands for irrigation has also reduced
considerably the number of avian species in some African countries. But given the limited scale
of the rural development-level irrigation schemes compared to mangrove and bird nesting area
needs, the potential effects on these areas are of no measurable consequence.
Disruption of native flora and fauna mitigation measures:
Given the complex nature of the rainforest environment, and the wetland environment in
particular, a baseline study of the flora and fauna should be conducted in each area. Particular
emphasis should be placed on animals that depend on large tracts of undeveloped wetlands
(larger herbivores, baboons, etc.), aquatic life needing migratory passages (fish), and any
protected species (see Appendix 7).
Trap setting should be discouraged. Instead, fencing of farm periphery should be encouraged to
keep away animals feeding on farm crops (see section 7.5).
7.2 Integrated Natural Systems
Fish ponds upstream can be used conjunctively such that drained detritus-rich water from the
ponds is directed into the paddies as fertilizer. The contained fish can be fed termites, cassava
leaves, and other kitchen compost.
Pigs have been integrated into farming systems in Buchanan. The pigs are fed kitchen and farm
compost. Contained in pens, their excrement is converted into fertilizer for crops.
D:\533566517.doc
34
Crayfish production has been combined with some rice farmers elsewhere in the world. The
crawfish can be collected when they emerge from their burrows after fields are drained and
harvested, foraging on the remaining vegetation.
7.3 Fertilizer Use
Farmers do not depend on fertilizer and pesticides due to high costs and lack of transport. The
fact that farmers typically apply less fertilizer than recommended leads to the assumption that
increased nutrient fluxes into drainage water will be minimal.
To argue against growth of fertilizer use in developing countries by pointing to its direct adverse
environmental impacts in developed countries is both hasty and shortsighted. In fact, some of the
considerations suggest that the positive contributions of chemical fertilizer in arresting
environmental degradation could be greater than its direct negative effects. Fertilizer could also
be an important tool in combating soil erosion, a dominant elements in environmental
degradation.
In areas where the applied fertilizers do dissolve in rainfall runoff, plants and organisms in the
downstream water bodies may proliferate. This process of nutrient enrichment leading to higher
productivity, called eutrophication, has both positive and negative impacts. Increased weed
growth leads to stagnant water but also increases organism growth. Fisheries may benefit from
the eroded, fertilized soils. Also, many common weeds can be harvested as animal feed.
Fertilizer Use Mitigation Measures:

Develop guidelines and farmer training for proper fertilizer uses where applicable.

Develop guidelines and training for farmers in the practice of composting.

Conduct training programs on the production of green manure crops as a source of plant
nutrients (for example, Azolla).
7.4 Pesticide Use
Pesticide use has numerous potential negative environmental impacts, including poisoning,
destruction of non-target organisms, disruption of natural control, and development of resistant
organisms. Poisoning of pest animals is a further detriment when the carcasses are consumed.
In spite of the many hazards of pesticide use, the Government of Liberia has yet to develop
legislation related to the importation, distribution, or use of such chemicals.
Training in irrigation cultivation should include lessons on appropriate pesticide use in wetland
environments. Integrated pest management (IPM) could be considered as a possible alternative
(see section 7.5), perhaps researched in collaboration with CARI. Successful IPM programs have
been developed for various pests of food crops in several developing countries, such as for rice
pests in Indonesia.
Pesticide Use Mitigation Measures:

Develop guidelines and farmer training for proper pesticide uses where applicable.
D:\533566517.doc
35

Study opportunities for IPM where potentially applicable.

Study biotypes of pest population.

Breed crops for resistance.

Promote pest scouting.

Determine epidemiology of pests/diseases.

Identify species and possible biocontrol.

Understand density-dependent and density-independent factors in pest ecology.
7.5 Pest Management
The environmental implications associated with the use of agro-chemicals has led to the
development of a sound and safe approach which takes into account a balance of compatibility
among all measures involved in pest control. This is a scheme that uses a variety of technologies
compatible in a single pest management system. In an integrated management system, realistic
economic injury levels are used to determine the need for control actions. Pesticides are used
when they can be justified based on economics and ecology. All precautions are taken to
preserve natural enemies of the pests. The ultimate objective involved is to produce optimum
crop yield at minimum cost, taking into consideration ecological and socioeconomic constraints
under a given agro-ecosystem. The principles are the same for insects, diseases, weeds, and other
crop pests.
The principles involved include:

Identifying pests

Defining the agro-economic system – knowledge of interrelationships between pests and
crops gives understanding of mobility of key pests in the agro-ecosystem

Developing the management strategy – coordinated use of multiple tactics in a single
integrated system aimed at holding pest numbers and damages to tolerable levels

Establishing economic injury thresholds – crop loss determination based upon pest intensity
in terms of quantity and quality of crop and its value

Monitoring and using predictive techniques – monitoring pest incidences and weather
conditions helps to reduce costs of control

Developing a descriptive and predictive model

Overcoming the socio-economic constraints to the establishment of the IPM

Selecting mechanisms that assure group planning and action by all farmers within project
areas

Implementing training and extension programs in IPM at all levels (TA, extension agents and
farmers)

Creating an import delivery system – for timely execution of plans.
D:\533566517.doc
36
Indications seem to suggest that with the establishment of developed wetland paddies with good
soil and water management schemes there could be an upsurge in the number of dragonflies,
frogs, bats, and birds. Considering that the habitats of these organisms were disrupted, their
return into a semi-homogeneous ecosystem is a clear indication of biodiversity. These organisms
will occupy special niches within the agro-ecosystem.
Appropriate pest management measures:

The establishment of IPM approaches allows for the tolerance of certain pest numbers as
prey for natural predators/parasites.

Brushing vegetation on bunds will discourage rats and groundhogs from entering rice
paddies.

Good water management in paddy fields controls pests such as caseworms, rats, and weeds.
Alternatives to agro-chemical use in rice-based agro-ecosystems:
Rice grows in diverse soils and climates but it is best adapted to a warm, humid environment. In
that environment where continuous cropping is practiced, there are overlapping generations of a
complex population of pests and disease vectors. Pesticides are toxic; if not, their use in pest
management would not be possible in the control of pest numbers. The non-judicious use of such
chemicals have far-reaching negative repercussions in the environment. To ameliorate their
effects in the environment, alternative practices and principles are herein advanced for adoption
in permanent wetland cultivation to ensure environmental stability and enhance biodiversity:

Accurate assessment of biotype variability – biotypes vary not only in their ability to attack
different varieties in their susceptibility to control by pesticides. It is therefore important to
study races, strains, and biotypes of rice insect pests and vectors of rice diseases.

Biological control of rice pests and diseases – this is a natural control device which depends
on parasites, predators and pathogens that kill pest species and vectors of rice diseases.
Conservation of existing natural enemies, if not their manipulation, is called for in rice pest
management.

In the tropics breeding for resistant rice varieties is perhaps the only realistic solution to the
fungus, virus and bacteria disease problems. By accumulating genes with a broad spectrum
of resistance into a variety, more stable resistant varieties may be developed. Optimum
management of rice diseases requires knowledge of the epidemiology of the disease. Rice
diseases, irrespective of cause are controlled by appropriate measures taken before the
disease develops, not after an outbreak.

Cultural control – cultural practices such as management of fertility, weeds, water, crop
residue, plant spacing and cropping pattern greatly affect pests and disease occurrence in
rice. These measures have no deleterious environmental effects.

Integrated pest management (IPM) – uses a variety of technologies compatible in a single
pest management system.

Rodent control in rice – keeping the bunds free from weeds, fencing and making fields,
flooding fields, and making farm house and storage areas rat-proof.
D:\533566517.doc
37

Bird control – various sound-making devices are used (pebbles in tin cans attached to ropes,
gas-operated cannons).

Snails in rice fields – control measures include hand-picking, and knowing which stage of the
rice the attack is mounted and accurate assessment of population dynamics.
7.6 Encroaching on Protected Areas
Sapo National Park is the only place yet listed as a UN Protected Area. However, there are other
areas (three parks and four nature reserves) identified (Government of Liberia 1983).
A national Ramsar Site (ecologically important wetland designate for protection) has not been
designated. The internationally acclaimed recommendation is intended, as with the IEE, to get
leaders thinking about setting aside land for other things besides human exploitation. Yet
wetland policy, in spite of the overwhelming ecological importance of these systems throughout
Liberia, has not been developed.
Encroaching on Protected Areas Mitigation Measures:

Project activities should avoid protected areas and land that drains into them.

Authorities should enforce legislation to curb encroachment.

Monitor protected areas to ensure that no trespassing is allowed.

A framework of guidelines should be put into place and a number of national awareness
workshops should be conducted to sensitize the public. (To be done by the Environmental
Commission.)
D:\533566517.doc
38
8 MONITORING AND EVALUATING
Projects are monitored to confirm that a project investment is resulting in the anticipated benefits
and to decide whether there are other unintended effects. In evaluating a project, managers must
have data reflecting the conditions at the start of the project and on changes, anticipated and
unanticipated, that have resulted from project activities. The overall rationale for monitoring and
evaluation is to assure that performance data is collected and used to monitor regularly, analyze,
review, and assess performance to:

Inform management decisions aimed at achieving intermediate results and strategic
objectives, and overall objectives.

Meet reporting and accountability requirements at all levels.

Enhance organizational learning

Evaluate whether the farmers are properly managing water themselves or are in need of more
extension services.
The World Wildlife Fund suggests the following guidelines for developing a participatory
monitoring and evaluation system:

Activities should be implemented by a team of people, including project staff and
representatives of interest groups who are involved in the activity.

Information should be gathered that is used directly for testing the project’s hypotheses and
achieving its objectives.

Information should be gathered routinely as part of project implementation.

Community members (e.g., extension workers, guides, and scouts) should be trained and
compensated to collect and analyze data.
The suggested monitoring program is given in Appendix 8. The program sections are divided
into the same categories as have been used in chapters 4-7 of these guidelines. The monitoring
should be conducted annually, most appropriately at the end of the wet season. Environmental
trends can be evaluated by comparing data collected in consecutive years.
This program is for monitoring the development of both individually owned and managed
wetlands. Since the chosen monitors would generally be the same people who conducted the
work, it is not suggested to monitor more frequently indicators that show whether the work was
done correctly. Rather, the monitoring program should provide information to address the
impacts of the activities and their mitigation measures.
8.1 Baseline Data
The following information should be collected for each site to be developed:
-
outstanding land tenure disputes
-
water management practices
D:\533566517.doc
39
-
community participation in other development activities
-
present land use on project site (both wet and dry season)
-
crop yields on project site, if presently used
-
vegetation density in project site (scale of 1-10 with 1 for cleared land and 10 for dense forest
cover)
-
flow characteristics of streams on site (month when stream dries, maximum flood depth/areal
extent/frequency)
-
dry season water table depth
-
downstream flooding frequency
-
upstream land use
-
% farmers using protective clothing (jeans, boots, etc.)
-
Prevalence of malaria, Schistosomiasis, and other water-related diseases
-
Existence of nuisances (leeches, stinging ants)
-
Presence and species composition of fish in natural stream (upstream and downstream of
project site)
-
Pest problems (pest type and extent of land coverage)
-
Lowland crop diseases
-
Indicated use of pesticides
8.2 Equipment Needs
No highly technical equipment is necessary in this monitoring program. But rather data collected
will be based on interviews and visual observations. From this information, a formative
evaluation of the project can take place annually, with a view to improve the program on the
basis of lessons learned.
The equipment suggested for purchase and use with the monitoring program are the following:
1. Rain gauge – one per field office, cost ~US$10 ea., to measure total daily rainfall.
2. Thermometer – one per field office, cost ~US$5 ea., to measure average daily air
temperature.
3. Tape measurer – one per field office, cost ~US$60 ea., to measure fixed structures and
lengths of degradation.
4. Auger – one per field office, cost ~$200 ea., for sampling subsoil conditions (Note that if
several are needed, one could be purchased and others replicated locally.)
D:\533566517.doc
40
APPENDIX 1. EVALUATION TEAM MEMBERS AND KEY
CONTACTS
The evaluation team of environmental experts involved with this report was comprised of the
following individuals:
Frank Brockman – Agricultural Technical Advisor, CRS Southern Africa Region office, email:
fbrockm@catholicrelief.org
Stephen McCord – Hydrology Consultant, CRS-Malawi, email: sam@malawi.net
Essa Drammeh – Rice Agronomist, National Agricultural Research Institute, The Gambia, email:
nari@qanet.gm
Andrew Paye – Director, Central Agricultural Research Institute, Liberia (contact through
UNDP/FAO office fax 231-226-104)
With environmental assessment assistance from: William Draper, Environmentalist/
Conservationist, Society for the Conservation of Nature of Liberia, Monrovia.
The key contacts for the organizations that funded this evaluation are the following:
CRS: Mulbah Jackollie and Augustine S. Lavelleh
WVL: Dr. Sizi Morris and David D. Wounuah
LWF/WS: James Yarsiah and Jarsiah Weedor
D:\533566517.doc
41
APPENDIX 2. REFERENCE SOURCES
Altieri, Miguel. 1988. Environmentally Sound Small-Scale Agricultural Projects. Revised
edition. Arlington, Virginia: CODEL and VITA.
Birley, M. H. (1991). “Guidelines for forecasting the vector-borne disease implications of water
resources development.” PEEM Guidelines Series 2. Available from Tom Remington
(CRS East Africa Region).
Brewer, B. (1984). Appendix 1. Swamp Development Manual for IEADP. Available at the
European Commission in Liberia, Monrovia office.
De Datta, S. K. (1981). Principles and Practices of Rice Production. John Wiley and sons, NY,
Chichester, Brisbane, Toronto, Singapore. 618 pp.
Republic of Liberia (1983). Planning and Development Atlas. By the Ministry of Planning and
Economic Affairs in conjunction with GTZ, 67 pp.
Greenland, D.J. (1997). The Sustainability of Rice Farming. CAB International, Wellingford,
Oxon, Ox108DE. Uk. 273 pp.
Hekstra, P., and W. Andriesse (19??). Phase I: The Inventory, Volume II: The Physical Aspects.
Wetland Utilization Research Project, West Africa.
Ingram, K.T. (1995). Rainfed Lowland Rice Agricultural Research for High Risk Environents.
International Rice Research Institute, P.O.Box 933, Manila 1099, Philippines.
Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Gosselink (1993). Wetlands, Second Edition. Van Norstrand Reinhold,
New York. 722 pp.
Oosterbaan, R.J., H.A. Gunneweg, and A. Huizing (198). “Water control for rice cultivation in
small valleys of West Africa.” Annual Report of the ILRI.
Tiffen, M. (1991). “Guidelines for the incorporation of health safeguards into irrigation projects
through intersectoral cooperation.” PEEM Guidelines Series 1. Available from Tom
Remington (CRS East Africa Region).
United Nations (1999). Liberia UN System Common Country Assessment, Volume 1. 102 pp.
Weedor, R.J. (1997). Swamp Development and Rice Cultivation. N’zerekole, Guinee. 14 pp.
(Available at LWF/WS).
World Bank (1991). “Environmental Assessment Sourcebook. Volume II Sectoral Guidelines.”
WB Technical Paper No. 140. Available at the CRS-Kigali office in the Internal
Environmental Review binder or from the World Bank.
D:\533566517.doc
42
APPENDIX 3. ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT

Ministry of Agriculture (MOA); contacted Roland Massaquoi, Minister; Joseph Musah,
Agric. Economist; Dr. James Kazolu, Deputy Minister for Extension, Rural Development
and Research.

Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs (MPEA); contacted Mr Melville Harris, Assistant
Minister; Francis Edwin, Project Analyst.

Liberia Forest Development Authority (LFDA); contacted Mr Theopholus Freeman.

Ministry of Rural Development (MRD); contacted Mr Sam Mann, Deputy Minister of
Planning and Programming and Mr. George Yarngo, Director, National Rural water
Program.

Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MOH&SW); contacted Dr. Omarley Yeabah and Dr.
Moses Duopo

Liberian Institute of Biomedical Research (LIBR); contacted Dr. Nuahn T. Marbiah,
Director.
FOREIGN GOVERNMENT

UNOPS; contacted Mr. Tuah, Senior Agronomist and J. Gbieh-bo, Sr. Program Assistant.

FAO; contacted Mr. Kasa Kimoto, Resident Representative and Mr. William Massaquoi,
Agric. Officer.

USAID; contacted Mrs Minnie Wright and Mr MacArthur Paye-Bayee

European Commission (EC); contacted Mr Brewer

GTZ; contacted Alan Gobeh, Project Supervisor, Ferdinard Takatsch, Program Manager and
Angela Schwat, Program Assistant.
NGOs

Society for the Conservation of Nature in Liberia (SCNL); contacted Mr. William Draper,
Project Officer

Environmental Foundation for Africa (EFA); unable to contact
D:\533566517.doc
43
APPENDIX 4. MITIGATION MEASURES FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF WETLAND DEVELOPMENT
Project Activity
Potential Negative
Impacts
Mitigation Measures
WATER MANAGEMENT
Install drainage
canal
Canal erosion
Align canal sections with natural stream course;
trace canal with the assistance of trained
personnel
Land drying
Observe minimum watershed area of 1 km2 for
every 2-5 ha drained; use composite drain cross
section; plot site’s hydroperiod for planning
purposes
Downstream flooding
Extend drainage canal further downstream
Divert streamflow
Insufficient water
control
Site head dyke away from obstructions; begin
work in upstream reaches first; clarify
responsibility for maintenance/adjustment, use
stable materials in construction
Exposure to flood
risk
Failure of irrigation
system and crop
Consider hydrology in design of drainage
canals (maximum watershed area); clarify
responsibility for monitoring; begin work in
upstream reaches first; promote permanent
tenants; use sturdy materials for diversion
spillway
LAND DEVELOPMENT
Land distribution
and other social
issues
Inequitable allocation
of plots
Allocation of plots is responsibility of
community; require signing of MOU
Land tenure disputes
Require signing of MOU
Clear and level land
Uncontrolled burning
Encourage selective burning and composting of
residue, minimize excavations
Pool formation from
peat decomposition,
improper leveling
Commence construction work early; do not
extensively excavate bund material from the
paddies; encourage progressive improvements
to land
Soil erosion
Minimize plot sizes in sloped terrain; practice
minimum tillage; plant on bunds and perimeter
slopes; design gentle curves in drainage canals
D:\533566517.doc
44
Project Activity
Develop canal
irrigation system
Potential Negative
Impacts
Mitigation Measures
Reduced production
from iron toxicity
Distribute iron-resistant rice varieties; analyze
soil conditions before site selection
Enhanced
denitrification
Encourage soil amendment practices; control
water stagnation period
Poor crop yields of
unsuitable zones
Identify soil conditions with auger sampling;
use reliable seed varieties initially
Neglected land
development
Restrict individual plot size with planned
extensions later
Poor water control
Moisture stress,
anoxia stress, CO2 &
reduced chemical
stress
Encourage regular maintenance of entire water
control system
Poor weed control
Reduction in rice
yield and quality;
intensification of the
of pest and disease
problems; reduction
of efficiency of
certain cultural
practices & irrigation
Proper and thorough land preparation; planting
of weed-free seeds; clearing of bunds and
canals by slashing; proper plant spacing (close)
and density; use of high tillering tall rice
varieties; maintaining flood levels; observe crop
rotation by planting vegetables after two
successive rice crops
Excessive
turnaround time
Impede crop
intensification
Plant short duration varieties; use pregerminated seeds in direct-seed rice; minimize
tillage in the establishment of a second crop
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Encourage work in
wetlands
D:\533566517.doc
Increase general
health risk
Program health training and sensitization;
conduct illness surveys
Increase exposure to
hazardous materials
Avoid developing in waste dumps
Increase exposure to
remaining
mosquitoes
Stock fish in paddies, promote de-weeding and
brushing of perimeter vegetation
Increase exposure to
Schistosomiasis
Encourage latrine construction (and use); mass
distribution of Praziquantel
45
Project Activity
Potential Negative
Impacts
Increase exposure to
nuisances (leeches,
ants)
Mitigation Measures
Encourage use of protective clothing (jeans,
boots, plastic, lime); remove un-submerged
debris and dirt bounds from paddy areas;
control water appropriately; use controlled heat
therapy
BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY
Disruption of native
flora and fauna
Loss of biodiversity;
ecological health
degradation
Discourage trap setting; examine wetland
values before site selection; monitor effect of
water management
Application of
fertilizers
Eutrophication
Train proper fertilizer application techniques
Use of pesticides
Contaminate
ecological
community;
alteration of
biodiversity
Promote IPM; train proper pesticide application
techniques; study biotypes of pest population;
breed crops for resistance; promote pest
scouting; determine epidemiology of
pests/diseases; identify species and possible
biocontrol; understand density-dependent and
density-independent factors in pest ecology
Wetland
development near
protected areas
Affect habitats of
endangered species
Locate project sites relative to protected areas;
conduct baseline survey of local biodiversity
D:\533566517.doc
46
APPENDIX 5. WETLAND ENVIRONMENT CHECKLIST
This checklist covers environmental information that would be useful in evaluating potential
development sites. Following this standard format for each site would allow for a comparison of
the environmental situations. This list is more comprehensive that the necessary baseline data,
serving also to warn potential developers of the myriad issues to be addressed.
Wetland Classification
Identify any dominant landscape features and classify the site as one of these wetland types:
- Tidal/coastal flood plain (salt water)
- Coastal river plain (brackish estuary)
- Inland tidal river plain (above salt wedge yet influenced by tides)
- River flood plain (influenced by rainfall and river discharge only)
- Inland depression (regime determined by rainfall, local runoff, and evaporation)
- Small inland valleys (upper valley reaches)
Gather information on the local climate:
- Mean annual precipitation
- Mean annual potential evapotranspiration
- Mean annual temperatures
Land Uses
- Identify (quantify) lost land uses due to development (traditional medicinal plants,
pastureland)
- Identify sites or areas of religious or spiritual significance
- Identify sites or areas of special social or cultural interest
- Identify farmer groups, capacity for training and disseminating
- Characterize upstream and downstream land uses and ground cover
- Characterize livestock systems (#, care, grazing zones, uses, illnesses)
- Note dry season and wet season activities in wetlands
- Note earliest use of wetlands
- Note any water and soil conservation measures
- Note existing physical degradation of the local environment
- Note any potential gender, age bias
- Note political considerations such as land claims and historical rights
D:\533566517.doc
47
- Note access to land and rights to use
- Note legal considerations such as servitudes and access/movement patterns
- Note community cohesion
- Estimate population with no access to wetlands
- Estimate decreased slash and burn land area (#farmers not involved)
- Estimate % of land remaining under natural or derived vegetation
Hydrology
- Note sinusoidal patterns in stream bed forms
- Note any traditional/existing water management techniques
- Note changes to flood plains
- Note stream turbidity (inflow and outflow)
- Locate erosion/deposition zones
- Locate stagnant/flowing water zones
- Locate infiltration/discharge zones
- Estimate various land slopes within the watershed
- Estimate the ratio stream length : watershed area
- Estimate the ratio stream number : watershed area
- Estimate stream velocities
- Estimate stream flow rates (high, low, mean annual)
- Estimate depth and duration of flooding in different zones
- Estimate percolation rate
- Estimate water table depth, amount of seasonal fluctuation, change due to activities
- Sketch wetland width (high and low water marks) vs. Distance downstream
- Sketch wetland elevation vs. Distance downstream
- Sketch stream cross sections
- Suggest monitoring options (maximum flow rate, rainfall, groundwater depth)
Mangroves
Note and/or estimate the following characteristics particular to mangrove swamps:
- wave and tidal action
- deposition/removal of sand
D:\533566517.doc
48
- sedimentation rates and patterns
- turbidity
- salinity
- chemical processes or nutrient balances
- functioning of estuary systems
- river mouths
Environmental Health
- Note availability and adequacy of clinics/health services
- Visit health clinics for water-related disease data, program information, concerns
- Question local inhabitants about health concerns, pests, animals
- Note parasitological considerations (schistosomiasis, elephantiasis, river blindness)
- Identify sources of water pollution (animals, latrines, agricultural runoff)
- Identify drinking water sources
- Identify toilet facilities/practices
- Identify causes and quantify stagnant water areas
- Note if manure isavailable and used as a fertilizer in the project and weather it’s use could
result in the spread of disease through human contact
- Note existing use of leguminous crops to restore soil fertility
Agriculture
- Note method of irrigation (sprinkle, seepage, canal)
- Note potential pest management interventions (ipm)
- Describe agricultural calendar, crop patterns, fallow schedule
- Characterize topsoil (organic and clay content, limiting nutrient, porosity, gradation)
- List major lowland crops grown with related cultivation practices and by whom
- List major upland crops grown with related cultivation practices and by whom
- Estimate land area with potential for rice cultivation, barren (iron-ladden)
- Estimate soil productivity (kg rice/acre)
- Estimate potential for other crops (orchards, garden produce) in periphery
- Estimate land area requiring leveling or other soil disruption
- Estimate land area requiring tree/vegetation clearing
D:\533566517.doc
49
- Establish field visits and farm walks at major stages of development
- Estimate present turnaround time between succeeding crops
- Sketch typical toposequences (cross-sectional and lateral views)
- Sketch layout of parcels (plan view)
- Sketch typical soil profile (noting organic material, iron, high permeability layers)
Biodiversity
Note the survival (and needs for) and diversity of:
- Wild animals (previously and presently, large and small)
- Birds
- Fish
- Note number of different cultivated rice varieties
- Vegetation (trees, shrubs, grasses) both native and invasive
- Endangered species
- Note major diseases (blast, brown spot, RYMV)
- Note major pest problems
- Note fertilizer use
- Note any evidence of overexploitation, eutrophication, siltation, salinization
D:\533566517.doc
50
APPENDIX 6. SAMPLE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING
Entered between _____(NGO)_____ and the _____________ community,
_____________ Clan, ______________District, _____________ County
on this ______ day of ______________ 1999.
The _______________ community has been targeted by _____(NGO)_____ in good faith for
needs in the community. Activities to be undertaken include the following:
<< brief description of all project activities >>
_____(NGO)_____ will:
1. Provide in a timely manner all inputs listed in Appendix 1 of this agreement in full and
complete support of this intervention.
2. Provide technical service to the community until completion of this community project.
3. Deliver the inputs to the project community upon availability of adequate and secure storage.
4. Monitor distribution and use of all inputs provided.
5. Request and consolidate project progress and final report data from the participants.
The _______________ community will:
1. Establish a credible project management committee consisting of community members.
2. Establish and follow a project work schedule.
3. Establish full ownership for project location by providing valid documentation witnessed by
local and tribal authorities. Indicate recognition of land values to be lost by development.
4. Provide inputs listed in Appendix 2 of this agreement through the project management
committee to the project activities.
5. Provide adequate and secure storage for all inputs delivered.
6. Account fully with valid receipts for all inputs delivered and received.
7. Provide all labor required for completing the project activities.
8. Submit to _____(NGO)_____ monthly reports of project progress and problems.
D:\533566517.doc
51
Both _____(NGO)_____ and this community have agreed to cooperate and to share all risks
associated with the implementation of this project.
__________________________
Date: _____________________
Project Committee Chairman
__________________________
Date: _____________________
Project Committee Member
__________________________
Date: _____________________
Chief
__________________________
Date: _____________________
Elder or Local Authority
__________________________
Date: _____________________
_____(NGO)_____ Representative
Attached: Appendices 1 and 2 for inputs required by _____(NGO)_____ and the community,
respectively.
D:\533566517.doc
52
APPENDIX 7. LIST OF PROTECTED SPECIES AND AREAS IN
LIBERIA
A) FULLY PROTECTED (PROHIBITED) ANIMALS
Animal
Local Name
Scientific Name
PERIMATA
Chimpanzee
Baboon
Pan troglodytes
Western Black and White
Lion Monkey
Colobus polykomos
Colobus Monkey
Diana Monkey
Cercopithecus diana
SIRANIA
Manatee
Mammy water
Trichechus senegalensis
PROSCIDEA
Elephant
Loxondonta african cyclo
ARTIODACTYLA
Hippopotamus
Hippopotamus amphibius
Pygmy Hippopotamus
Water cow
Choeropsis liberiensis
Bongo
Elk
Boocerus euryceros
Buffalo
Bush cow
Jentink’s Duiker
Yanbe(k)
Royal Antelope
Zebra Duiker
Cephlophus jentinks
Neotragus pygmaens
Making Deer
Ogilby’s Duiker
Cephlophus zebra
Cephlophus ogilby
CARNIVORA
Serval
Felis serval
Leopard
Panthera pardus
Golden Cat
Felis aurata
African Civelt
Recoon
Veverra civetta
Ants Beer
Manis gigantea
PHILDOTA
Cient Pangolin
REPTILES
D:\533566517.doc
53
Animal
Nile Crocodile
Local Name
Alligator
Scientific Name
Crocodylus niloticus
Long Snouted Crocodile
“
cafaphractus
Dwarf Crocodile
“
osteolaemus tetraspis
SQUATAMA
Rock Python
Boa constructor
Python sebae
“
Ball Python
regius
CHELONIA
Green turtle
Chelonia mydas
BIRDS
All birds of prey
PICATHARTIDAE
Grey Necked Rockfowl
Picatharyes gymnocephalus
White Necked Rockfowl
Picathartes creas
PSITTACIDAE
All Parrots
ARDEIDAE
Cattle Egret
Bubulcusibis
BUCEROTIDAE
All Horn Bills
MOSCOPHAGIDAE
All Turacos
B) PARTIALLY PROTECTED ANIMALS
Animal
Local Name
Scientific Name
MAMMALS:
PRIMATA
Red Colobus Monkey
Red Monkey
Colobus badius
Olive Colobus Monkey
Green Monkey
Colobus versus
Mona Monkey
D:\533566517.doc
Cercopithecus mona
54
Animal
Local Name
Scientific Name
Greater White Nosed Monkey
Cercopithecus nictitans
Lesser White Nosed Monkey
Cercopithecus petayrista
White Collard Mamgabey
Jako
Cercocebys
Bosman’s Potto
Bush Baby or
Perodictus potto
Lesser Calago
Sofyly – Softly
Calago senegalensis
Torquatus(atys)
Dwarf Calago
Calagoides demidovi
ARTIODACTYLA
Water Chevrontain
Water Deer
Hyemosichus aquaticus
Bay Duiker
Black Deer
Cephalophus dorsalis
Maxwell Duiker
Foulintongor
Cephalophus niger
Black Duiker
Bush Goat
Cephalophus niger
Yellow Backed Duiker
Maxwelli sylvicyltor
Bush Buck
Red Deer
Targelaphus scriptus
Giant Forest Hog
Bush Hog
Hylochoerus meinert
Red River Forest Hog
Bush Pig
Potamocherus porus
CARNIVORA
Two Spotted Palm civet
Mandinia binotata
Forest Genet
Genetta pardina
African Linsang
Poiana richardsoni
Large spotted Genet
Genetta tigrina
PHOLIDOTA
Long Tailed Pangolin
Manis tetradactyal
Tree Pangolin
Manis tricuspis
REPTILES:
SQUAMATA
Nile Monitor Lizard
Verena niloticus
BIRDS:
PHASIANIDAE
D:\533566517.doc
55
C) NATIONAL PARKS
Name
County
Estimated Area [km2]
Sapo
Sinoe
1250
Cape Mount
Cape Mount
Lofa Mano
Lofa
2750
Wonegisi
Northern Lofa
175
Cavalla
Grand Gedeh
75
Nimba*
Nimba
550
Cestos Sehn kwehn
Sinoe and Grand Bassa
1500
50
* Same site as East Nimba National Forest.
#
Same site as Sapo National Forest.
D) NATIONAL FORESTS
Name
County
Estimated Area [km2]
Gola Forest (Yoma)
Bomi Hills
100
Gola
Cape Mount and Lofa
1375
North Loma
Northern Lofa
575
Kpelle
Lofa
1050
Belle
Lofa
775
Loma
Lofa
550
West Nimba
Nimba
330
East Nimba*
Nimba
550
Gio
Nimba
715
Gbee
Nimba
600
Sapo#
Sinoe
1250
Krahn-Bassa
Sinoe, Grand Bassa
9350
Grebo
Grand Gedeh
5390
* Same site as Nimba National Park.
#
Same site as Sapo National Park.
D:\533566517.doc
56
APPENDIX 8. MONITORING PLAN FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
ISSUES OF WETLAND DEVELOPMENT
NOTE: I = Input; OP = Output; OC = Outcome
Indicator
Threshold Levels
Threshold Actions
GENERAL
OC: Number and type of
grievances:
Community members
regret involvement;
significant decrease in
number of participants
Improve community sensitization
plans
OP: Grass and shrub
density in canals
Excessive clogging
reduces stream flow
Encourage brushing of grasses in
canals
OP: Degree of irrigation
engineering development:
Degree 3 or 4
Improve training methods; increase
farmer exposure to improved sites
Canals or drains
overflow
Short-term canal repairs; long-term
redesign (widening) of canal crosssection and slope
Canal dries
Convert to vegetable crops during
dry season, with irrigation water
from hand-dug wells
Flood damage results in
Increase dyke and drain sizes
-
land tenure disputes
-
poor water management
-
community
participation
WATER MANAGEMENT
I: Local rainfall
I: Local air temperature
1) Bunds and canals in
good condition
2) Bunds irregular, canals
slightly clogged
3) Bunds inefficient,
variable canal cross
sections, clogging and
crumbling
4) No engineering
development
OP: Flow rate
characteristics in major
tributary
OC: Flood frequency
D:\533566517.doc
57
Indicator
(uncontrolled flooding of
paddies)
Threshold Levels
Threshold Actions
crop damage
OC: Downstream flooding Standing water for >1
period (Identify
week; complaints of
downstream users and
flood damage
interview them as to altered
hydrology.)
Dig drainage canal further
downstream; increase water
conservation works in watershed
OC: Dry season water
table depth (if below land
surface)
Depth is great enough to
discourage gardening
Encourage water conservation
measures above head dyke; possibly
abandon site
OC: Upstream land use
changes (i.e. tree
harvesting, slash and burn
intensity)
Flooding or
sedimentation impacting
irrigation system
operation
Include training in land management
LAND DEVELOPMENT
I: New or rehabilitated site
OP: Farmer group
composition:

# males : # females

% of community
Male:female ratio > 0.5; Review group selection criteria
% of community < 20%
OP: Seed varieties being
used
No use of improved
varieties
Improve promotion and
dissemination of improved seed
varieties where useful
OP: Dry season activities
(crop type, water source)
Non-use of dry season
paddies
Distribute appropriate seeds;
encourage year-around land
cultivation
OC: Slash and burn
coverage within catchment
area (based on indication
from interviewees of
change)
Increase in upland
cultivation rather than
reduction
Improve animation of environmental
degradation from slash and burn;
increase wetland cultivation area to
include more farmers
OC: Crop yield
Yield < 1 ton/ha
Change variety selection; improve
cultural practices
OC: Effects of erosion
Failure of irrigation
system due to
sedimentation, bund
damage
Encourage cultivation of appropriate
cover crops (i.e., legumes)
D:\533566517.doc
58
Indicator
Threshold Levels
Threshold Actions
OC: Plant stress
30% of paddy
Fertilizer use may be justified
OC: Technology
replication (# farmers, total
area developed)
No farmers are
replicating demonstrated
rice cultivation
techniques
Increase availability of extension
services, increase on-site
demonstrations
OC: Bird interactions:
30% crop loss,
significant tree cutting
Reduce nesting sites; introduce rice
varieties with awns and erect flag
leaves
1) % crop lost by
scavenging
2) habitat loss by farmers
cutting trees
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
OP: Site proximity to any
pollution sources
Sewage/debris found on
site
Relocate site and/or dumps;
encourage use of protective clothing
OP: % farmers using
protective clothing (jeans,
boots, etc.)
No protection measures
Encourage use of protective clothing
where contact transmitted
diseases/nuisances are prevalent
OC: Prevalence of malaria
cases
Warning levels
determined by health
workers
Increase health training if correlated
with project activities
OC: Prevalence of
Schistosomiasis
Warning levels
determined by health
workers
Increase health training if correlated
with project activities
OC: Existence of
nuisances:
Increased prevalence in
plots
Increase health training if correlated
with project activities; encourage
mitigation measures
Warning levels
determined by health
workers
Increase health training if correlated
with project activities
1) leeches
2) stinging ants
OC: Prevalence of other
water-related diseases
BIODIVERSITY AND ECOLOGY
I: Presence and species
composition of fish in
natural stream (upstream
and downstream of project
site)
D:\533566517.doc
59
Indicator
OP: Fish farming practice:
1) type of operation (in
paddies, above head
dyke, or in canals)
Threshold Levels
Threshold Actions
Unsuccessful fish
production, decline in
fish population
Modify design of head dyke and
canals (open passages, reduce flow
velocity); provide training in
aquaculture if desired by community
Crop damage > 30% of
cultivated area
Institute appropriate pest
management practices
2) fish catch rate
3) Presence and species
composition of fish in
natural stream
OC: Pest problems (pest
type and extent of land
coverage)
OC: Rice disease problems Crop damage > 30% of
(disease type and extent of cultivated area
land coverage)
Introduce high-yielding disease
resistant rice varieties
OC: Pesticide poisoning of
farmers (# incidences
reported)
Training in proper pesticide use;
study alternatives to pesticide use
such as bio-control and biotype
manipulation
D:\533566517.doc
Any complaints of
health problems related
to pesticide use
60