tea replantation in kenya tea in kenya tea replantation in kenya tea in kenya cont ’ d - 2014 -...

8/13/2019 TEA REPLANTATION IN KENYA Tea in Kenya TEA REPLANTATION IN KENYA Tea in Kenya Cont d - 2014 - Strategy, Plan

1/25

INTRODUCTION

Tea in Kenya Currently the leading cash crop in Kenya with significant

contribution to the economy

In 2009 391,006 tonnes of made tea was produced from

171,916 Ha (TBK, 2010) Contributed 4% of GDP and 28% (equiv. KShs 97.7 billion)export earnings

Is the highest export earning from a single commodity andcrop.

Tea contributes directlyto objectives of the EconomicRecovery Strategy (ERS) as a rural based enterprise

Additionally, tea continues to contribute to the overall growthof agriculture in line with the Strategy for Revitalization ofAgriculture (SRA)-2004-2014 as stipulated in the MediumTerm Plan (MTP)-2008-2012

TEA REPLANTATION IN KENYA

TEA RESEARCH FOUNDATION OF KENYA IS ISO 9001:2008 CERTIFIED


2/25

Tea in Kenya Contd

About 3 million Kenyans(about 10% of totalpopulation) derive livelihoodsfrom tea industry.

Tea also contributessignificantly to the development ofrural infrastructure

Contributesto environmental conservationthrough

enhanced water infiltration, reduced surface erosion, andmitigation of global warming through carbonsequestration.

Small holder sub-sector(SHSS) average holdingsrange from


3/25

Tea in Kenya Contd

Adoption of researched technologies on CIM has seenproductivity rise from 1500 Kg MT/Ha to 3300 Kg MT/Ha inEstate sub sector (ESS)& from 600 Kg MT/Ha to 2300 KgMT/Ha in SHSSover a period of about 40 years (TBK; TRFK,2010)

Average productivity in SHSSis therefore 70% that of ESS.

By 1944 tea covered 6356 Ha, all in the ESS(Laycock, 1978)

By 1986this was considered old(Obaga and Othieno, 1986)

SHSS teawas first plantedaround 1954 or later (Obaga andOthieno, 1986)

History of planting in SHSS: In 1955, only 55 Ha (Laycock,1978), 1965, 5429 Ha, 1975, 37,205 Ha, 1985, 56,505 Ha and2005, 92, 682 Ha under tea in the (TBK, 2010)




4/25

Tea in Kenya Contd

Earliest plantation in SHSSare about 50 years (est. late1960s)

Majorityhowever, were establishedin the 1970s and 1980swhich saw rapid expansion in the small scale tea sector

ESStherefore, has some of the oldest tea plantations(comprising teas of 70 years and more)

Declining productivity & moribundcyhas been reported inmany of these fields with many of the proprietors opting touproot and replant in order to optimize yields

Although small holder tea farmsmay be consideredyounger, management practicesmay renderthemmoribund much earlier than normal as compared to wellmanaged estates tea (Mwakha, 1983)




5/25

Moribund state in tea

Moribund tea plantat ions Where productionhas stagnatedor shows a declinedespite optimum

cultural practices

Tea stands aged >50 yearswith >25% vacanciesare usuallymoribund and therefore require drastic action to bring the field back

to full production (Anon, 2002)

Causes of m or ibund s tate in tea(Anon , 2002):Yield stagnationdueto weakened bushesand gapsdue to deaths

Major causes of plant deaths:pests(e.g. Mosquito bug or Helopeltisspp., Spider mites, nematodes and moles) and diseases(e.g.Armillaria mellea, Phomopsis theae and Hypoxylon serpens)

Non-pathological causesof tea bush weakening& death:lightning,removal of prunings, soil mineral deficiencies, drought, weedcompetition and inter-row cultivation (damages feeder roots)




6/25

Moribund state in tea contd

In India, it was reported:

after prolonged periodof monocultureunder tea, physico-chemicaland biological properties of soil deteriorateconsiderably

old tea fieldsdue for uprooting have many vacancies

death & debility of bushesare caused by: diseases, pests, faultyagronomic practices, soil physical condition and fertilitydeterioration due to inadequate fertilization, erosion, poor drainagecompaction, etc.

old ageis the cause of low yieldof fields due for uprooting

Proper rehabilitation of the uprooted soil is a pre-condition forsuccess of any replanted operation

The old teafields, after uprooting, are put under rehabilitationcrops for 18-24 months

The rehabilitation cropsused in Northeast India are Guatemalagrass (Tripsacum laxum), Pusa Giant Hybrid NapierPennisetumpurpureum), Citronella grass (Cymbopogon wintarianus) (Tocklai,

2012).




7/25

Tea replanting in India

In India it takes at least 5-6 yearsfor a tea sapling to growinto a full-fledged tea bush

Generally, estatesgardens uproot & replant 2.5%of the tea estateevery 5-6 years

Replantation(replanting)costs estimated to range between Rs 3.03lakhs (KShs 454,500) to Rs 5 lakhs (KShs 750,000) per Hain North

and South Indian estates respectively (Ghosal, 2009) However, that the financial health of the industry in the last decade

was not robust enough to undertake replantation

Except for a few big companies, most have for long been unwilling toinvest in their gardens

In 2009 Indian Tea Association (ITA)reported that due to improvingfinances, most Indian tea companies, big and small, were goingin formassive replantationto upgradethe qualityof their tea (Ghosal,2009) (Companies included McLeod Russel, Goodricke, Warren Tea,Dhunseri Tea, Rossell Tea, Gillanders Arbuthnot & Co andAmalgamated Plantations, among others)


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/mcleod-russel-india-ltd/stocks/companyid-13438.cmshttp://economictimes.indiatimes.com/warren-tea-ltd/stocks/companyid-12837.cmshttp://economictimes.indiatimes.com/rossell-tea-ltd/stocks/companyid-4800.cmshttp://economictimes.indiatimes.com/rossell-tea-ltd/stocks/companyid-4800.cmshttp://economictimes.indiatimes.com/warren-tea-ltd/stocks/companyid-12837.cmshttp://economictimes.indiatimes.com/mcleod-russel-india-ltd/stocks/companyid-13438.cms


8/25

Tea replanting in Kenya

In Kenya, uprooting and replanting of tea has beengoing on for sometime now in the estates

However, information as to the procedure and costs isscarce

Unpublished sourceshowever, estimate the costs/Haat between KShs 582,641 (collar pruning stumps &ploughing out roots)and KShs 903,023 (Bulldozing toclear bushes & uprooting or winching out the stumps)

Use of heavy equipmentis unaffordableto the smallholder farmer& impracticablefor use in the terrain&scaleof farms prevalent in the small holder sector.




9/25

PAST STUDIES ON REPLANTING

Tea yields peak in 21-30 yearsafter which yields decline (Gazi, 1978) Bulldozer uprootingcaused highest soil compactiongiving

mechanical impedance to penetration, heavy destruction of soilstructure and significantly reducing water infiltration rate compared towinching and hand uprooting-TRFK (Obaga and Othieno, 1986)

Ellis, (1976) and Feng, (1979) described a system of replanting teawith minimum cultivationwhereby old tea frames are pruned atground level, and without uprootingthe stumps the inter rowsareinterplantedwith clonal transplants

Effect of rehabilitationcrops on soil properties (Tocklai):- roots ofGuatemala grass proliferated to depth of 120cm, reducing

compaction (2.8-7.7%), increasing water stable aggregates(24.4-162.5%), hydraulic conductivity(16.0-81.0%), porosity(0.0-15.4%) &organic matterstatus (5.4-119.6%)

Conclusion:rehabilitation with Guatemala grass improved the soilhealth(Tocklai 2012)




10/25

PAST STUDIES ON REPLANTING contd.

Traditional method of replanting tea in Darjeeling hills bymanual uprootingof old tea bushes is expensive& promotessoil erosion

Studies at Darjeeling Tea Research Centre used minimumtillage replantingafterchoppingoff the stemsof tea andkilling the chopped stumpsof tea with 2,4-D at 0.8 kg a.i. in75 litres of water (10g/ltr H2O) or ureaat 250 g/stump

Survival%age & yieldof young plants were highin 2,4-Dtreated plots

Chopped treatmentseffectively controlled soil erosionand noprimary root diseasewas observed on the roots of choppedstumps or roots of young plants (Kabir et al. 1993)




11/25

PAST STUDIES ON REPLANTING contd.

Study on economic and ecological benefitsof teareplantation by interplanting new tea between old tea plants(old tea uprooted after new tea plants came into production)showed that the system was feasible

Both the new and old tea plants in the interplanting grewwell

New tea came into production in the third year and yielded6979kg GL/Ha

The system produced better effects on soil conservation,

field micro-climate, growth of newly interplanted tea plants,soil fertility and tea yields compared to traditional replanting(uprooting and replanting) method

The system also realized better economic benefit& shorterperiod of return to investment(Shen and Tong, 1994).




12/25

CHALLENGES

Experience from ESS sub sector foretells of declinein productivity in the small scale sector in the next10 to 20 years

Decline in yield in the small holder sub sector is yetto be significantly felt

Most small holder tea plantations in Kenya average30 50 years, the age at which the tea bush startsshowing a decline in production

The rate of establishment of new plantings cannotforestall the expected decline nor maintain thecurrent production levels




13/25

CHALLENGES Contd.

It is also necessary to create room for food crops to ensurefood security among small holder tea farmers by replacinglow to medium yielding clones with high yielding clones

Replacement of the old tea plants with new improved

varieties will be necessary if economic production levels andproductivity is to be maintained, particularly in the smallholder sub sector so as not to expose the farmers toeconomic vulnerability

This has been going on in the Estates sub sector which hassome of the oldest tea plantings

The development of a proper scientifically sound tea bushreplacement plan is necessary.




14/25

TEA FARM REHABILITATION SYSTEMS

To establish the need for rehabilitation of moribund

tea areas, monitoring yield levels and percentage of

gaps in individual fields is necessary Under optimal practices, yields 50 years & gaps constituting at least 25%

of filed may serve as a guide to initiate rehabilitation

programme (2002) Three rehabilitation methods previously applied in

Kenya and other tea growing countries are:




15/25

TEA FARM REHABILITATION SYSTEMS Contd.

1. Rejuvenation pruning

Cutting back tea bushes to 10-15 cm above the ground (toremove old, diseased, gnarled and knotted branches lowdown)

Enables new growth leading to vigorous new framework ofbush

Interplanting with high yielding, good quality clonal plantswithin the rows (originally wide-spaced) & infilling gaps may

increase field productivity (Increased population) Method only applicable in very widely spaced tea; often

results in mixed materials & uneven spacing makingsubsequent field operations difficult




16/25

TEA FARM REHABILITATION SYSTEMS Contd.

2. Replanting

Replantation becomes imperative when yields are very lowdespite optimal cultural practices

2.1 Uprooting

1. Uprooting and removal of the moribund tea stumps

2. Followed by construction of terraces, cut-off drains andwaterways as soil conservation measures, Cover cropping withsoil conditioning crops (e.g. Guatemala grass oats) for up to 2years in order to rehabilitate the soil

3. Replanting with suitable high yielding, good quality clonal plants Method has been used successfullyin both the small holder

and estate sub sectors

Is expensive, (whether carried out by hand or by machinery)relative to the other methods.




17/25


18/25



Collar pruning and replanting


19/25

2.3 Side/lung pruning

Similar to collar pruning except that bushes are rim-lung pruned for

continued plucking Replanting in the pruned inter rows

When replants have established rims are pruned, stumps collar prunedand inter-row lined and planted

Stumps may be treated as described above or left to decay for a fewmonths then removed by hand

Method may also result in uneven plant spacing and high mortality rateof interplants due to disturbance, injury and destruction during otheroperations before the rims are removed or during collar pruning orremoval of the stumps

System has also been successfully employed at KTDA (KTDA) farm,Kangaita, Kirinyaga under advice of TRFK.

Under collar or side pruning systems, it is highly recommendedthat ifa field due for replacement falls under the category of moribundasdescribed above, it should be rehabilitated with Guatemalla or napiergrass for at least two years.




20/25




21/25

Decision Support model

A simple decision support (DS) tool (Kamau, 2008) was developed to gain a

better understanding on how productivity and resource use of tea agro-ecosystem is influenced by factors associated with ageing

Objectives of model

To determine; (i) if replanted tea gives better returns than old seedling tea,(ii) length of time to break even (iii) if tea replants perform as well as old

seedling tea, (iv) the right age to uproot and replant.

How model works:

Calculates net economic returns to tea productionover time (up to 100yrs) using estimates of costs & yieldsfor plantations of contrastinggenotypes, e.g. low-yielding seedling tea and high-yielding clonal cultivar.

Considers the 4 phases of tea cultivation, i.e. Establishment; Frameformation; Mature/commercial; Degraded phase.

Distinguishes two levels of management(i) poor (with no replanting) (ii)good (gradual replanting with clonal tea - done after 40yrs).

Considers 2 degradation rates, 0.02/yr & 0.06/yr depending on site.




22/25



Operation or

Factor / Phase

Estab

lishm

ent

Frame

format

ion

Mature/C

mmercia

l

Degr

aded

Land (Ksh ha1) 600 - - -

Land clearance

(Ksh ha1)

80 - - 80

Planting materials(Ksh ha1)

700 - - 700

Planting (mandaysha1)

10 - - 10

Weeding (mandaysyr1)

4 4 - 4

Fertilizer costs (Ksh

yr1)

6 6 24 24

Formation prune(mandays ha1)

6 6 - -

Rent of investments(Ksh yr1)

55.2 55.2 55.2 55.2

Yield (kg MT ha1yr1)

- - 2,000(seedling),

4,000(clonal)

-

Price of tea (Kshkg1MT)

- - 0.11 0.11

Factory processing

costs(Ksh kg1MT)

- - 0.03 0.03

Plucking costs (Kshkg1GL)

- - 0.005 0.005

Pruning costs(mandays ha1yr1)

- - 3.5 3.5

Seedlingsdegradation rate

(fraction yr1)

- - - 0.02,0.06

Clonal replants

degradation rate(fraction yr1)

- - - 0.1,

0.2,0.3,0.4


23/25



(a)

-100,000

-50,000

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Age (years)

Netreturns(Ksh)

Poor management, k =0.02

Good management, k= 0.02

Poor management, k =0.06

Good management, k= 0.06

(b)

-2,000,000

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

16,000,000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Age (years)

Netreturns(Ks

h)

Poor management (k=0.02)

Good management (k=0.02)

Poor management (k=0.06)

Good management (k=0.06)

Figure 1: Simulated net annual (a) and

cumulative (b) financial returns (in Ksh

ha1) of tea plantations under poormanagement (not replanting degrading

seedling tea) and good management

(replanting degrading seedling tea

bushes by clonal tea bushes) of tea

plantations that start to degrade at

constant rates of 0.02 and 0.06 yr1 at

the age of 35 years

Net returns negative during establishment phase

Net returns +ve during mature/commercial phase

(5 to 35 years)

Annual returns start to decline due to

degradation of seedling tea bushesUnder poor management the net returns

decreased to zero at an age of 52 and 85 years

The break-even point is attained after 14 years

Under good management, max net returns of

Ksh 242,900 and Ksh 271,700 achieved by 56

and 89 years


24/25

CONCLUSIONS

1. Replanting is vital to maintaining high

productivity in ageing tea plantations

2. Replanting of seedling by clonal tea is

economically feasible & profitable

3. Farmers income can be doubled by replanting




25/25

tea replantation in kenya tea in kenya tea replantation in kenya tea in kenya cont ’ d - 2014 -...

Documents