DSpace
 

KNUSTSpace >
Theses / Dissertations >
College of Agric and Natural Resources >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/3635

Title: Live fencing in the rural and urban areas of Accra, Ghana
Authors: Ochire-Boadu, Kwame
Issue Date: 19-Apr-1995
Series/Report no.: 2118;
Abstract: The use of live fences, a traditional fencing technology, is widespread in Ghana. However there is little information in the literature on the plants used. A survey was therefore conducted on live fences in the urban and rural areas of Accra. This was done between April and September 1993, to identify the multipurpose trees and shrubs used, their methods of establishment, management practices employed and their additional uses. An evaluation of the cost of establishing a live fence and the construction of a non-living fence was also done. All suburbs in Accra noted for their use of live fences were recorded, and ten (10) were randomly selected, and using ease of accessibility ten (10) surrounding rural areas were also subjectively selected for the study. Data collection was through questionnaire and photographs. The study identified seventeen (17) different species used for live fencing in the study area. Pithecellobium dulce (24%) was found to be the most predominantly used species in the urban and rural areas of Accra, followed by Barleria cristata (21%) then Thevetia peruviana (15%), Jatropha curcas (14%), Bougainvillea glabra (8%) and Caesalpinia puicherrima (4.5%) with others showing comparatively low percentage use. Moringa oleifera (0.5%) and Leucaena leucocephala (0.5) were however found to be the species least used. Species like Bougainvillea glabra, Durant plumeri, Vernonia amygdalina and Leucaena leucocephala were not found in the rural areas while Dracaena arborea, Ficus thcnningii, Markhamia lutea, Spondias mhin, Drypetes fioribunda, Moringa oleifera and Cassia siamea were not encountered in the urban areas as fences. Four different planting materials were found to be used for establishment. Stake planting (52.9%) was found to be mostly used, followed by seed (47.1), seedling (17.6%) and stem cuttings (17.6%) With regards to management practices used it was found out that 64.7% of the species are pollarded, 47.1% are pruned, 23.5% trimmed while 5.8% are coppiced. Live fences are primarily established to act as barriers or delineate land units, however some additional benefits are always derived from them. In this study 52.9% of the species were found to be sources of fuelwood, 35.3% for aesthetics, 35.3% as sources of medicine, 23.5% as fodder, 17.6% as food and 11.8% for erosion control. The non-living fences identified in the study area were block wall fence, timber, wire, stick/raphia and straw mat/coconut frond fences. Block wall fences (88%) dominated the urban areas while stick (42%) and straw mat (38%) dominated the rural areas. Also the cost of establishing a 100 meter live fence and construction of a non living fence was computed, and it was found out that the cost in establishing a 100 meter live fence with seeds or with potted stem cuttings were far less than the cost involved in the construction of the same length of block wall fence. Live fencing has a potential for solving many of the environmental problems of land users like erosion, fuelwood shortage, fencing, poles shortage, wind breaks etc. There is therefore the need to extend this study to other parts of the country with the view to finding suitable species for erosion control in our urban and rural areas.
Description: A thesis submitted to the Board of Postgraduate Studies, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the Degree of Master of Science in Agroforestry, 1995
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/3635
Appears in Collections:College of Agric and Natural Resources

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
KNUST Library.pdf7.09 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

Valid XHTML 1.0! DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2010  Duraspace - Feedback