Characterization of the farming and livestock production systems and the potential to enhance livestock productivity through improved feeding in Babati District, Manyara Region,
Tanzania
David Ngunga and Ben A. Lukuyu
International Livestock Research Institute
Produced by International Livestock Research Institute
Published by International Institute of Tropical Agriculture
July 2016
The Africa Research In Sustainable Intensification for the Next Generation (Africa RISING) program comprises three research-for-development projects supported by the United States Agency for International Development as part of the U.S. government’s Feed the Future initiative.
Through action research and development partnerships, Africa RISING will create opportunities for smallholder farm households to move out of hunger and poverty through sustainably intensified farming systems that improve food, nutrition, and income security, particularly for women and children, and conserve or enhance the natural resource base.
The three regional projects are led by the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (in West Africa and East and Southern Africa) and the International Livestock Research Institute (in the Ethiopian Highlands). The International Food Policy Research Institute leads the program’s monitoring, evaluation and impact assessment. http://africa-rising.net/
This document is licensed for use under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License
This document was made possible with support from the American people delivered through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) as part of the US Government’s Feed the Future Initiative. The contents are the responsibility of the producing organization and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of USAID or the U.S. Government.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all respondents (farmers) for their cooperation and openness in sharing their views and experiences during the study. The following Babati District officers are thanked for facilitating the exercise: Gilbert Mbesere, Muhidin Muberwa, David Chalamila and Lukas Makere. The Africa RISING project is acknowledged for funding the study. Dr. Ben Lukuyu (ILRI) provided leadership and technical expertise during the study. Also, we appreciate the logistic support provided by the IITA Arusha office.
It is our desire and hope that the collected data on livestock feed resources and the suggested interventions on how to improve feed availability will contribute to improving animal production and productivity. Furthermore, we hope that it will reduce perennial conflicts over land between farmers and livestock keepers, and also lead to sustainable livestock production practices.
Summary
The Feed Assessment Tool (FEAST) is a rapid and systematic way of assessing animal feed availability and was used in assessing the farming systems of Babati District, Tanzania. Three villages, Hallu, Matufa and Shaurimoyo, were involved in the study. FEAST was implemented through two sessions, a focus group discussion (FGD) and individual interviews. A total of 45 farmers participated in the focus group discussions and 27 farmers participated in the individual interviews.
The three villages were chosen as they belong to three different agro-ecological zones, marking their variation in production systems and other livestock and agriculture activities. Feeding practices are mainly carried out in two ways, open grazing and cut and carry systems. However, it was observed that open grazing systems were used more in Shaurimoyo village compared to the other two villages. The key issues identified by farmers were lack of improved dairy breeds, market (price) for both live animals and livestock products, and a shortage of livestock feeds especially during the dry seasons. This may be a potential entry point for interventions in each village.
Introduction
The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) conducted a study, through the Africa RISING project, on characterizing the livestock production systems, with particular emphasis on feed-related aspects, in Babati District, Tanzania. The Feed Assessment Tool (FEAST) developed by ILRI researchers (Duncan et al., 2012) was used during the study. Animal feed and feeding is the foundation of livestock systems as it, directly and indirectly, affects the entire livestock sector. It has an impact on animal productivity, health and welfare, product quality and safety, producer incomes, household security, land use and land use change, water pollution and greenhouse gas emissions Irrespective of species and production system, animal feed and feeding accounts for about 70% of the production cost (Makkar, 2013). Livestock feed is therefore cited as the single most important constraint to improved productivity for smallholder farmers.
1
Geographical location of the district
Babati District is one of the six districts of Manyara region, the others being Mbulu, Simanjiro, Hanang, Kiteto and Babati District Council. Babati district has a total area of 5,608.14 km2 and is divided into 4 divisions (Babati, Gorowa, Mbugwe and Bashnet), with 21 wards and 96 villages. It is located south of the equator, between 30 and 40 S and between 350 and 360 E. It is bordered by Monduli district in the north, Karatu in the northwest, Mbulu in the west, Hanang in the southwest, Kondoa in the south and Simanjiro in the east. The district headquarters is in Babati town, the capital of Manyara region, which is 167 kilometers south of Arusha region on the Arusha-Dodoma and Singida road. The landscape of Babati district is undulating, with hills and mountains.
Agricultual status
More than 90% of Babati district inhabitants live in rural areas and depend primarily on agriculture for their livelihoods. The agricultural activities consist of both crop production and livestock keeping. Babati district has 134,187 hectares of arable land with 120,000 hectares currently under cultivation. Various food and cash crops are cultivated, with the main ones being cereals, legumes and oil crops.
The land used for livestock production is approximately 212,100 hectares. The livestock kept include indigenous cattle, sheep, goats and chickens and are mainly used for beef, milk, draught power, production of farmyard manure, a source of income and for cultural functions.
Methodology
The FEAST study was undertaken by researchers from ILRI with the assistance of four livestock officers from Babati district. The assessment was carried out through a farmer-centred-diagnosis research methodology, which involves holding focus group discussions and one-on-one interviews. The aim is to systematically analyse farmers’ knowledge of the local farming system, feed-related problems and potential solutions.
The exercise was carried out in three villages in Babati district: Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu. A total of 47 participants (30 males and 17 females) who practise both livestock and crop farming took part in the focus group discussions with nine from each site selected for the one-on-one interviews (Table 1). The criterion used to select the nine farmers was to have three participants from each of the three landholding categories: small, medium and large. These farmers were then individually interviewed to collect information on feed resources and feeding practices. The average time taken at each site was about 3 hours 20 minutes.
Table 1: Number of participants per site for FEAST exercise
Village Number of participants Males Females Shaurimoyo 17 10 (5) 7 (4) Matufa 16 12 (7) 4 (2) Hallu 14 8 (5) 6 (4) (Numbers in brackets are farmers (individuals) interviewed with a questionnaire)
2
Results and discussions Study area The average farm and household sizes in the three villages are 1.6 hectares and 7 persons respectively (Table 2).
Table 2: Average farm and household sizes in Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu villages, Babati district Village Average farm size (hectare) Household size (persons) Shaurimoyo 2 7 Matufa 1.2 5 Hallu 2 10
Landholding categories The landholding categories of the three surveyed villages are shown in Table 3. The majority of the households in Shaurimoyo have small to medium landholdings, while Matufa and Hallu have farmers with medium to large landholdings.
Table 3: The different landholding categories in Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu villages, Babati district Shaurimoyo Matufa Hallu Range of HH falling Range of HH falling Range of HH falling Category of land size into the land size into the land size into the farmer (ha) category (ha) category (ha) category (%) (%) (%) Small 0.2 – 0.4 40 0.2 – 0.8 15 0.4 – 0.8 20 Medium 0.8 – 2 50 1.2 – 2 45 >0.8 - 2 36 Large >2.4 10 >2 – 4 40 >2 - 6 44
Contribution of livelihood activities Agriculture and livestock production contribute to the livelihoods of the farmers in all three locations. Agriculture is predominant in Shaurimoyo and Hallu while livestock production is the main source of income in Matufa. Farmers also reported that business (11-24 %) and labour (6-14) contribute to their household income.
Labour is available throughout the year and is in high demand during the cropping season. The average cost of labour per day is TSH 5,000 (USD 2.2) and cultivating 0.4 hectares of land costs TSH 35,000 (USD 15.2).
3
Contribution of livelihood activities to household income (%) in Shaurimoyo 3% 2%
6% Agriculture
Livestock 11% Business
51% Labour Remittance 27% Remmitance
Others
Contribution of livelihood activities to household income (%) in Matufa
1%
6% Livestock
12% Agriculture
39% Labour
13% Business
Others
RemittanceRemmitance 29%
Contribution of livelihood activities to household income (%) in Hallu
11%
Agriculture 40% 24% Livestock
Business
Labour
25%
Figure 1: Contribution of livelihood activities to household income
4
Crops and cropping seasons There are three main cropping seasons in the area (Table 4), namely masika (long rains), vuli (short rains), kiangazi (dry period), each with its own particular activity. The perception of seasons was quite different between the three villages, e.g. the core season for the long rains seems to vary from village to village. This shows high variability in this particular area that could be ascribed to the varied relief of highlands and lowlands.
Table 4: Cropping seasons in three villages of Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu Shaurimoyo village Season Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Long rains (Masika) Dry period (Kiangazi) Kipupwe Short rains (Vuli)
Matufa village Season Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Long rains (Masika) Dry period (Kiangazi) Short rains (Vuli)
Hallu village Season Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Long rains (Masika) Dry period (Kiangazi) Short rains (Vuli)
Crops grown in Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu villages
Mixed or multiple cropping is a common practice in all three villages, with at least four crops intercropped per season. Farmers reported that the demand for more land is increasing, mainly due to an increase in the population. This has caused many farmers to resort to multiple cropping. The main crops that are grown in this area during the cropping season are maize, rice, pigeon pea, beans
5 and sunflower (Figure 2). Other crops include sweet potato, pumpkin, cowpea, sorghum and wheat. Crops are used both as a source of food and for income generation.
2a) Crops grown in Shaurimoyo village 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Maize (Zea Rice (Oryza Pigeon Pea Groundnut Common Cowpea Sunflower mays) sativa) (Cajanus (Arachis Beans (Vigna (Helianthus cajan) hypogaea) (Phaseolus unguiculata) annuus) Average Average area per household(hectares) vulgaris)
12.00 2b) Crops grown in Matufa village 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00
2.00 (hectares) 0.00 Maize (Zea Cowpea (Vigna Rice (Oryza Pigeon Pea Groundnut Common Beans mays) unguiculata) sativa) (Cajanus cajan) (Arachis (Phaseolus Average Average area per household hypogaea) vulgaris)
2c) Crops grown in Hallu village 25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00 (hectares) 5.00
0.00
Average Average area per household Maize (Zea mays) Pigeon Pea (Cajanus Sunflower (Helianthus Common Beans cajan) annuus) (Phaseolus vulgaris)
Figure 2a, 2b and 2c: Crops grown in Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu villages (total of 9 participants)
6
Livestock production systems Shaurimoyo has more livestock per household than the other two villages, mainly of the local breeds. This might be due to the type of production system practised in the area. The village is home to many pastoralists who keep local breeds of cattle far from the main roads, which makes it difficult for development partners to introduce improved cattle breeds. Matufa and Hallu villages are easily accessible by road and have a higher presence of improved cattle breeds. Development partners (governmental and non-governmental) have taken advantage of the improved infrastructure by introducing improved breeds via sponsored programmes and projects. Dairy production is common in both Matufa and Hallu villages.
Other livestock types raised in the district include sheep, goats and poultry (Figure 3), but also pigs, donkeys and draught cattle. The main functions of the livestock are as a source of food and income, manure, draught, transport and for payment of dowry. Table 5 shows the major livestock species owned per household, their uses, the proportion of households that own each kind; the average number of animals owned is shown in Figure 3.
a) Average livestock holdings per household - dominant species (TLU) in Shaurimoyo 12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00 Local Dairy Cattle Fattening and draught Goats Improved Dairy cattle Sheep cattle
7
b) Average livestock holdings per household - dominant species (TLU) in Matufa 2.00
1.80
1.60
1.40
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00 Improved Dairy cattle Goats Local Dairy Cattle Poultry - village conditions
c ) Average livestock holdings per household - dominant species (TLU) in Hallu 4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00 Improved Dairy cattle Goats Fattening and draught cattle Poultry - village conditions
Figure 3a, 3b and 3c: Average livestock holding per household of major types (TLU) in Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu villages
8
Table 5: Types, uses and ownership of livestock in Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu villages Shaurimoyo village Livestock type Use Proportion of households owning (%) Local dairy cows Meat, milk, income, manure, 60 dowry, hides Draught cattle Land cultivation, carrying goods, 45 income, manure Sheep Meat, income, manure, dowry, 20 hides Goats Meat, milk, income, manure, 70 dowry, hides Poultry-village condition Meat, income, eggs, manure 90
Matufa village Livestock type Use Proportion of households owning (%) Local dairy cows Milk, meat, income, manure, hides 45 Improved dairy cows Milk, income 18 Draught cattle Land cultivation, income 40 Sheep Meat, income, manure 20 Goats Meat, income, manure 10 Pigs Income, meat, manure 5 Poultry-village condition Meat, income, eggs 90 Donkey Carrying goods 1
Hallu village Livestock type Use Proportion of households owning (%) Local dairy cows Milk, meat, income, manure, 60 hides Improved dairy cows Milk, income, manure 10 Draught cattle Land cultivation, income 70 Sheep Meat, income, manure, dowry, 30 hides Goats Meat, income, manure, hides 80 Poultry-village condition Meat, income, eggs, manure, 90 taboos Donkey Cultivation, carrying goods, 10 income, manure
Feed availability
9
Figure 4 below shows the availability of different feed resources and rainfall in Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu villages over an average year. Rainfall was estimated by farmers on a scale of 1-10 where 10 is abundant and 1 is very scarce. Similarly feed availability was estimated by farmers on a scale of 10-100 where 100 corresponds to abundant feed available and 10 denotes very little feed. Pasture is the dominant feed for ruminant livestock in all three villages. The quality of natural pasture varies with the season and stage of growth: large quantity and good quality pasture are available during the long rain (Masika) of March, April and May and during the short rain (Vuli) of October to February. After these months, the quantity and quality of planted forages decline during the dry seasons, affecting livestock production and productivity. Crop residues contribute to the feed resource base of livestock in Shaurimoyo and Hallu during the dry season months of May to August. The most common crop residues are maize stover and legume crop residues such as pigeon pea, sunflower and common bean haulms. Rice straw is not commonly used despite paddy production because farmers have realized it has a low feeding value compared to other crop residues.
In Matufa and Hallu villages, many farmers practise stall feeding and natural grasses and legumes are the major sources of feed. A cut and carry system of forage feeding is commonly practised by farmers. Fodder is usually collected from the roadside, riverbanks and uncultivated land. Crop residues, mainly maize stover, pigeon pea, sunflower chaff, groundnuts and common bean haulms are collected after crop harvest and stored and fed during the dry season.
Livestock farmers reported challenges of proper storage facilities for the collected crop residues. Vermin and pests readily attack the stored crop, which also gets soaked by the rains when not protected properly. Concentrates are provided to lactating animals and to calves, but many farmers do not give their animals a balanced feed ratio due to lack of knowledge. This adversely affects the health and productivity of animals in various ways and reduces the net daily income of milk producers (Blummel et al., 2018). Hay or silage making and chemical or biological treatment of crop residues to improve their feed value is not common.
a) Shaurimoyo village
100 6 90 5 80 70 4 60 50 3
Availablity 40 2 30 20 1 10 0 0
Concentrates Crop residues Grazing Green forage Legume residues Rainfall Pattern
10
b) Matufa village
100 6 90 5 80 70 4 60 50 3
Availablity 40 2 30 20 1 10 0 0
Concentrates Crop residues Grazing Green forage Legume residues Rainfall Pattern
c) Hallu village 140 6
120 5
100 4 80 3
60 Availablity 2 40
20 1
0 0
Concentrates Crop residues Grazing Green forage Legume residues Rainfall Pattern Figure 4: Availability of feed resources in the villages a) Shaurimoyo b) Matufa c) Hallu
11
Feed types
Table 6 provides a summary of the main feed types and sources in the three villages; these differ depending on the production system (including livestock system and type of livestock species kept) and the agro-ecological conditions of the village. Forage cultivation is practised in all three villages.
Table 6. Main feed type and sources found in Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu villages in Babati district
Site/Village Type Source Feed processing Shaurimoyo Natural grass Grazing None Crop residues: maize stover, Grazing and purchased Use of chopper machine rice straw, pigeon pea, bean and cowpea haulms Concentrates: maize bran Purchased feed from Use of miller/mixing milling machine Fodder crop: Napier grass and Cultivated fodder Use of chopper machine lablab Matufa Naturally occurring collected Collected grass from the None grasses and legumes roadside, own farms, riverbanks and uncultivated land Crop residues: maize stover, Collected on own farm Use of forage chopper rice straw, pigeon pea, bean, and purchased from cowpea and groundnut neighbour’s farm haulms Concentrate ingredients: Purchased feeds from Mixed locally by farmers maize bran, sunflower seed milling and input cake, minerals, molasses suppliers Fodder crop: Napier grass and Cultivated fodder Chopper machine lablab Hallu Naturally occurring collected Collected grass from the None grasses and legumes roadside, own farms, riverbanks and uncultivated land Crop residues: maize stover, Collected on own farm Chopper machine rice straw, pigeon pea, bean, and purchased from cowpea and groundnut neighbour’s farm haulms Concentrate ingredients: Purchased feeds from Mixed locally by farmers maize bran, sunflower seed milling and input cake, minerals suppliers Fodder crop: Napier grass and Cultivated fodder None lablab
12
5a) Forage chopper 5b) Chopped maize stover 5c) Cultivated forages (Napier)
Figure 5a, 5b and 5c: Forage/crop residue chopper used to process crop residues, chopped maize stover and cultivated forage
Dietary compositions
Figure 6 describes the nutrient contribution of the various diets available in the villages. In Shaurimoyo village, grazing contributes 79% of the dry matter (DM), 65% of the crude protein (CP) and 72% of the metabolisable energy (ME) intake. Although cultivated fodder contributes only 5% of the DM, it accounts for 11% of the CP intake of the ruminant’s diet, indicating it has high feed value content. Similarly, purchased feed contributes 6% of the total DM, and 13% of the total CP content.
In Matufa village, naturally occurring collected grasses and legumes contribute 59% of the total DM content, 60% of CP and 54% of ME in the diet. The purchased feeds have a contribution of 17% DM, 20% CP and 33% ME in the total diet. This indicates that the purchased feeds are mainly an energy rather than a protein source.
In Hallu village, grazing contributes 65% of the total DM, 59% of CP and 72% of ME. The purchased feeds contribute 4% of DM, 22% of CP and 8% of ME in the total diet. This indicates that the purchased feeds are a high protein rather than an energy source.
In all three villages, cultivated fodder mixed with legumes improves the CP content of the diets, while for those farmers who practise stall-feeding, inclusion of purchased feed ingredients that have a high CP content would further improve the protein content of the diets.
13
Shaurimoyo, DM content
6% 9% 1%
5%
79%
Naturally occuring and collected Purchased Crop residues Cultivated fodder Grazing
Matufa, DM content
16% 5%
3% 59% 17%
Naturally occuring and collected Purchased Crop residues Cultivated fodder Grazing
Hallu, DM content
11% 4%
13% 66% 6%
Naturally occuring and collected Purchased Crop residues Cultivated fodder
14
Shaurimoyo, ME content
10% 1% 8% 4%
77%
Naturally occuring and collected Purchased Crop residues Cultivated fodder Grazing
Matufa, ME content
13%
54% 33%
Naturally occuring and collected Purchased Grazing
Hallu, ME content
12% 8% 1%
7%
72%
Naturally occuring and collected Purchased Crop residues Cultivated fodder Grazing
15
Shaurimoyo, CP content
10%
13% 1% 11% 65%
Naturally occuring and collected Purchased
Crop residues Cultivated fodder
Grazing
Matufa, CP content
5% 13%
2%
20% 60%
Naturally occuring and collected Purchased Crop residues Cultivated fodder Grazing
Hallu, CP content
15%
22% 59%
1% 3%
Naturally occuring and collected Purchased Crop residues Cultivated fodder Grazing
Figure 6: Contributions of feeds to dietary requirements in Shaurimoyo, Matufa and Hallu villages
16
Agriculture and livestock inputs and services
The supply and availability of agricultural and livestock inputs and services vary between the three villages. In Shaurimoyo, due to distance and poor infrastructure, it is difficult for many input suppliers to provide services in the village. This has resulted in service inputs in Shaurimonyo being offered at a higher price compared to the other two villages. In Matufa and Hallu villages the supply of agricultural inputs is better due to improved infrastructure and the villages have access to extension services. There are no formal credit facilities in the area, however the traditional recognition of livestock as a guarantee for obtaining credits is commonly used.
17
Key challenges and suggested interventions
A few challenges were raised by the farmers in all three villages, and were ranked in order of importance:
Table 7: Pair wise ranking of identified challenges and interventions suggested by the farmers
Site Challenges in order of importance Suggested interventions Pairwise ranking results Lack of forages for feeding animals Educate farmers on pasture management, 1 during the dry season use and conservation Introduce improved drought-resistant pastures Keep an affordable number of animals Shaurimoyo according to the available land Lack of knowledge of general animal Provide training and study tours to learn 3 husbandry from more advanced livestock keepers Shortage of water for livestock Stop grazing animals around water sources 4 and cutting down trees Lack of credit facilities Inform farmers of the importance of credit 5 facilities Low genetic potential of the breeds Provision of improved bulls 2 (Government/stakeholders to assist), use of AI
Feed scarcity Provide improved planting materials and 2 drought tolerant pasture species Lack of market for livestock and Establish strong farmer groups and plan 3 livestock products for increasing prices and quality of products Low genetic potential of the breeds Provide improved bulls 1 Matufa (Government/stakeholders to assist), use of AI Shortage of water for livestock Stop grazing animals around water sources 4 and cutting down trees Lack of enough livestock extension Recruit new livestock extension staff (at 5 staff least one per village) Low genetic potential of the breeds Provide improved bulls 1 (Government/stakeholders to assist), use of AI Shortage of water for livestock Stop grazing animals around water sources 4 Hallu and cutting down trees Lack of credit facilities Inform the farmers of the importance of 5 credit facilities for enhancing the development Lack of knowledge of general animal Provide training and study tours to learn 3 husbandry from more advanced livestock keepers Feed scarcity Provide improved planting materials and 2 drought tolerant pasture species 1=Most important to 5= Least important
18
Conclusions
The study revealed that, in comparison with other sources of household income, agriculture activities including livestock production contribute greatly to household incomes. If the mentioned challenges are addressed properly, livestock production has a great potential in generating income for the society of Babati.
References
Blummel et al., 2018. Animal nutritional approaches for profitable livestock operations and sustainable rural livelihoods. In: Pattanaik, A.K. et al. 2018. Perspectives in animal nutrition 2018 - Proceedings of the Indian Animal Nutrition Association XI Biennial Conference, Patna, India, 19-21 November 2018. Izatnagar, India: Animal Nutrition Association: 1-10.
Duncan, A., York, L., Lukuyu, B., Samaddar, A. and Stür, W. (2012). Feed Assessment Tool (FEAST): A systematic method for assessing local feed resource availability and use with a view to designing intervention strategies aimed at optimizing feed utilization. Questionnaire for Facilitators (Version 5.3); updated: 2014. ILRI, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Available from: http://www.ilri.org/feast
Makkar, H.P.S. and Beever, D. (2013). Optimization of feed use efficiency in ruminant production systems. FAO animal production and health proceedings, no. 16. Rome. Proceedings of the FAO Symposium, 27 November2012, Bangkok, Thailand. (FAO and Asian-Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies.) Available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3331e/i3331e.pdf.
19
Appendix 1: The research team for the FEAST exercise
Name Gender Institution, function David Ngunga Male International Livestock Research Institute, Research Technician David Chalamila Male Babati District Livestock Office, Extension officer Lukas Makere Male Babati District Livestock Office, Extension officer Muhidin Mberwa Male Babati District Livestock Office, Extension officer Alphonce Haule Male Babati District Livestock Office, Extension officer
20