The project aims at improving rangeland management through the creation of community-based GMUs, which are based on traditional 'tent groups' of 8-10 households using a particular area of grassland. The overall mandate of the GMUs, at appraisal, was to implement destocking policies.

Up until 1949, communities in the project area maintained only sufficient animals to guarantee subsistence. Such a system allowed for productive grasslands with a high regenerating capacity. Since 1949, however, these traditional systems have been disrupted by government policies that measure achievements on the basis of increases in livestock products to meet the demands of increasing human population pressure. Subsequently, in the latter half of the 1950s — the ‘Great Leap Forward’ years — intensive grain production seriously damaged part of the rangeland. In commune-run China, there was no community-based management of range resources. In the privatization years, grasslands were subjected to the classic problems of the ‘tragedy of the commons’. The project therefore tried to reinstate some form of community grassland management through the formation of GMUs.

According to the MTR, the fact that the fencing off of winter pastures and responsibility for pasture management has been passed down to individual households has contributed to reducing the importance of GMUs. However, the MTR report suggests that the GMUs will continue to play an important role in group fencing and summer pasture (which is still largely unfenced and is likely to remain so for the project's lifetime).

Planned

Achieved

Set up a system of community management based on traditional grazing practices. This system will also be responsible (with technical support from the project) for establishing more sustainable stocking rates and thus improving both the productivity of the rangeland and livestock off-take.

By the time of the MTR in 1997, 1 290 GMUs, consisting of 3 870 households organized into ‘tent groups’, had been formed. These units allocated winter pasturelands to households and initiated the allocation of summer pasturelands. There is little information available on GMU implementation mechanisms.

Among other things, the project encouraged herders to engage in sheep and yak fattening as alternative income-generating activities.

Planned

Achieved

Provide 8 400 herding households with loans, including loans for sheep and yak fattening, averaging USD 495 each.

The 1999 supervision report states that 8 240 households had received loans. The average amount of the loans and the activities undertaken are not reported.

According to the appraisal report, the general condition of the ranges in the project area was very poor, mainly as a result of overstocking. One of the main project aims is to improve the condition of rangeland in the project area.

In order to obtain a full picture of the potential environmental impact of the project activities, IFAD commissioned an environmental assessment mission in 1992. The main findings of this mission were that:

• due to overstocking, the productivity of grasslands in the project area was at about 50% of previous levels;
• all grasslands were overstocked, but serious degradation was limited to areas which had been cropped for some years in the past or which were along the stock routes between the winter and summer grazing lands; and
• most grassland still had the capacity for self-generation under proper stocking, but the 1992 stocking rate of 80-90% needed to be reduced to 60-70% to halt further decline and allow for regeneration.

The mission proposed that destocking should take place over a period of five years and that legislative measures to provide direction and continuity to development should be taken. This applied especially to the allocation of grasslands to individual households or small groups, and to the development and application of sustainable stocking rates.

A survey undertaken in 1996 reported that 28% of the land was degraded, mainly as a result of overstocking. The survey stressed the general overgrazing of summer grasslands, which are overstocked by 52%. Winter land is overstocked by 36%. It is important to note that the problem of summer overgrazing was ‘discovered’ by project staff only after much of the basic design had been done. At the early stages of project appraisal, emphasis was placed on the degradation of winter lands and it was decided that such lands would be allocated to households. No measures were planned to address the degradation of summer grasslands. The survey showed a feed supply rate of 3.7 million stock units (SU), while actual animal numbers were 4.9 million SU. This indicates an excess of 1.2 million SU (about 33% over the sustainable level). The PMU drew up a plan for reducing the animals by 600 000 SU by the year 2000, together with a strategy to provide additional forage for 600 000 SU. The additional forage required was calculated on a daily intake of 1.2 kg DM/ha/SU. However, this level of intake is not necessarily the optimum for live-weight gain. It should also be noted that current feed production would not meet the animals’ needs in the drier-than-average years.

During the course of the project, the Government gave consideration to introducing a system of differential charges for grassland usage, which was meant to protect poorer households with fewer animals and at the same time make it financially unattractive for wealthier households to maintain excessive numbers of livestock. In 1999, a further reduction in livestock numbers became necessary to halt the continuing degradation of rangeland.

Planned

Achieved

Carry out a survey of project area grasslands to determine both the extent of degradation and the degree of degradation to be used as a baseline.

Expand the area under oat hay production from 12 000 ha to 24 250 ha to increase winter fodder for animals.

Repair and improve existing fencing in preparation for the introduction of a more appropriate rangeland-use strategy to encourage destocking in the project area.

Rehabilitate and reseed (for hay production) grassland around agricultural villages, where severe overgrazing has taken place. After five years of rest, the rehabilitated areas were to be allocated to individual households for grazing and fuel wood collection.

Apply fertilizer to fenced-off pastures to increase dry matter production. The grassland is reported to be deficient in phosphate and nitrogen and the application of fertilizer is intended to improve productivity.

Stabilize sand dunes and reduce the formation of new dunes in Guinan County, which, at the time of project appraisal, comprised 750 km² of sand dunes.

A detailed survey of grassland and livestock in the project area carried out in 1996 reported that 28% (about 890 000 ha) of the land was degraded. Annual assessments of the herbaceous biomass production have been undertaken and provide the grounds on which GMUs and individual farmers adjust animal numbers according to the pasture available.

According to the MTR, the expansion of oat hay production encountered problems due to poor seed quality and low fertilizer inputs. Expected yields of the seven crops planted by the time of the MTR were very low and were not expected to match the appraisal estimates of 300-350 DM/mu. By 1999, 218 200 mu of oats had been planted. (1 mu = 0.07 ha.)

Support was provided to 370 households for fence repairs and 90 loans were disbursed for fencing construction. One of the major risks associated with fencing is that poor herders — who are usually more dependent on range resources — might be adversely affected. This was not discussed in the MTR report.

By the time of the MTR, progress in the rehabilitation of grassland around villages was significantly behind schedule. The strategy consisted primarily of fencing off overgrazed areas and preventing stock from grazing on them for 5-6 years. Pastures were reseeded with a grass/legume seed mixture. Various legumes and grass species were selected according to the altitude involved. Shrubs and trees have been also introduced as a village activity, with a village committee (comprising the town leader, village head and three herders elected by the 123 households) responsible for management of the rehabilitation area. Rehabilitation activities have been generally well accepted by herders.

The programme for applying fertilizer on fenced-off grassland was 35% complete at the time of the MTR.

Only a small part of the budget allocated for the stabilization of sand dunes had been disbursed by the time of the MTR.

Planned

Achieved

Provide credit (in livestock survival and fattening packages) to 8 400 herders organized into traditional ‘tent groups’ of 8-12 households, partly for the purpose of increasing fodder supply (by planting about 1.3ha of oat hay).

Oat hay cultivation has been halted in locations at high altitudes, where low harvests were achieved. The package has been modified in some townships. Instead of oats, Elymus sibericus (wild rye), a perennial grass, has been planted with limited fertilizer application. Reported advantages include reduced erosion, reduced risk of harvest failure and no need for annual cultivation.

Planned

Achieved

Improve the livestock support service.

The so-called ‘barefoot’ veterinary assistants now provide veterinary services at the grass-roots level. They are able to reach very remote areas and carry out disease-control measures, vaccinations and anti-parasite treatments as well as providing technical advice. In order to support improved animal disease control, additional dips have been built and veterinarians and technicians have been trained. Particular attention is being paid to the control of internal/external parasites, as these are a major cause of production losses. Credit is being provided to herders for the purchase of veterinary medicines.