Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-05T12:43:30.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fipa cattle in the southwestern highlands of Tanzania: socio-economic roles, traditional management practices and production constraints

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2012

P.L. Mwambene ,
A.M. Katule ,
S.W. Chenyambuga  and
P.A.A. Mwakilembe
P.L. Mwambene*
Affiliation:
Livestock Research Centre Uyole, Directorate of Research, Training and Extension, Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, PO Box 6191, Mbeya, Tanzania
A.M. Katule
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Production, Faculty of Agriculture, Sokoine University of Agriculture, PO Box 3004, Morogoro, Tanzania
S.W. Chenyambuga
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Production, Faculty of Agriculture, Sokoine University of Agriculture, PO Box 3004, Morogoro, Tanzania
P.A.A. Mwakilembe
Affiliation:
Livestock Research Centre Uyole, Directorate of Research, Training and Extension, Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, PO Box 6191, Mbeya, Tanzania
*
Correspondence to: P.L. Mwambene, Livestock Research Centre Uyole, Directorate of Research, Training and Extension, Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, Mbeya, Tanzania. email: piusmwambene@yahoo.co.uk
Get access

Summary

This study aimed at determining the socio-economic roles, traditional management practices and production constraints of the Fipa cattle, was conducted in Rukwa region of South-Western Tanzania, using a structured questionnaire. The results indicate that most (90.8 percent) of the respondents depended on crop and livestock production for household income and food security. The Fipa cattle were preferred to other cattle strains by most (91.6 percent) of the farmers owing to their multiple socio-economic functions, adaptive qualities and low management requirements. The Fipa cattle were essentially kept for provision of draught power, income, manure, meat and security against uncertainties. Herded grazing on communal land was practiced by most (99.2 percent) of the farmers all the year-round without any supplementation. However, most (87.5 percent) farmers utilized crop residues in situ during the dry season, after harvesting cereal crops. Kraals made of untreated thorny bushes were the predominant shelters used for Fipa cattle by most (95.8 percent) of the respondents. The majority of respondents mentioned diseases/parasites (94.2 percent) and feed shortages (61.7 percent) during the dry season as the main production constraints. The farmers’ preference for Fipa cattle coupled with the multiple roles of the cattle and traditional management practices used by farmers should be used as the entry point for improvement and sustainable utilization of the strain.

Résumé

Cette étude visait à définir les fonctions socio-économiques, les pratiques traditionnelles de gestion et les contraintes relatives à la production des bovins Fipa. Elle a été réalisée dans la région Rukwa, située dans le sud-ouest de la Tanzanie, en utilisant un questionnaire structuré. Les résultats indiquent que la plupart (90,8 pour cent) des personnes interrogées dépendent de la production végétale et de l’élevage en ce qui concerne leurs revenus et la sécurité alimentaire de leurs ménages. La plupart (91,6 pour cent) des agriculteurs préfèrent les bovins Fipa à d'autres souches bovines en raison de leurs fonctions socio-économiques multiples, de leurs qualités d'adaptation et des faibles exigences de gestion. Les bovins Fipa sont principalement élevés pour la traction, le revenu, le fumier, la viande et en tant que sécurité contre les incertitudes. La plupart (99,2 pour cent) des agriculteurs pratiquent le pâturage surveillé en troupeau sur les terres en commun pendant toute l'année, sans aucune complémentation. Toutefois, la plupart (87,5 pour cent) des agriculteurs utilisent des résidus végétaux in situ pendant la saison sèche, après la récolte des cultures céréalières. La plupart (95,8 pour cent) des personnes interrogées utilisent des enclos construits avec des buissons épineux non traités comme abri pour les bovins Fipa. Les principales contraintes à la production mentionnées par les personnes interrogées sont les maladies/parasites (94,2 pour cent) et les pénuries d'aliments pour animaux (61,7 pour cent) au cours de la saison sèche. La préférence des agriculteurs pour les bovins Fipa, ainsi que les fonctions multiples de la race et les pratiques traditionnelles de gestion utilisées par les agriculteurs devraient constituer le point de départ pour l'amélioration et l'utilisation durable de cette souche.

Resumen

El objetivo de este trabajo ha estado centrado en la determinación del papel socio-económico, las prácticas tradicionales de manejo y las limitaciones de producción del ganado Fipa, llevado a cabo en la región Rukwa, en el suroeste de Tanzania, por medio de encuestas. Los resultados indican que la mayoría de los encuestados (90,8%) dependían de la producción agrícola y ganadera para sus ingresos familiares y la seguridad alimentaria. La mayor parte de los ganaderos (91,6%) prefiere el ganado Fipa a otras razas de vacuno debido a sus múltiples funciones socioeconómicas, a sus características de adaptación y pocos cuidados en su manejo. El ganado Fipa se ha mantenido fundamentalmente como animal de tiro o trabajo y para proporcionar ingresos, estiércol, carne y disponer de seguridad de cara al futuro. La mayor parte de los ganaderos (99,2%) llevan a cabo el pastoreo conjunto en pastos comunales, a lo largo de todo el año y sin realizar ningún tipo de suplementación. Sin embargo, la mayoría de los ganaderos (87,5%) utilizan residuos de los cultivos in situ durante la estación seca, después de cosechar los cereales. La mayoría de los encuestados (95,8%) respondió que los corrales utilizados como refugio para el ganado Fipa están hechos de arbustos espinosos no tratados. La mayor parte de los encuestados mencionó las enfermedades y los parásitos (94,2%) y la escasez de alimentos (61,7%) durante la estación seca como las limitaciones principales en la producción. Las preferencias de los ganaderos por el ganado Fipa, junto con las múltiples funciones de estos animales, además de las prácticas tradicionales de manejo llevadas a cabo, deben ser utilizadas como punto de partida para la mejora y la utilización sostenible de esta población.

Keywords

Fipa cattleFipa plateaumanagement practicesproduction challengesrolesbovins Fipaplateau des Fipapratiques de gestiondéfis de productionfonctionsganado vacuno Fipameseta Fipaprácticas de manejodesafíos de la producciónrol
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Genetic Resources/Resources génétiques animales/Recursos genéticos animales , Volume 51 , December 2012 , pp. 1 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bebe, B.O., Udo, H.M.J., Rowlands, G.J. & Thorpe, W. 2003. Smallholder dairy systems in the Kenya highlands: breed preferences and breeding practices. Livestock Prod. Sci. 82: 117–127.Google Scholar
Chenyambuga, S.W., Ngowi, E.E., Gwakisa, P.S. & Mbaga, S.H. 2008. Phenotypic description and productive performance of Tarime Zebu cattle in Tanzania. Tanzania Vet. J. 25(1): 60–74.Google Scholar
Dinucci, A., Fre, Z. & Case, S. 2003. Understanding the indigenous knowledge and information systems of pastoralists in Eritrea. FAO, Rome.Google Scholar
Fratkin, E. & Smith, K. 1994. Labor, livestock, and land: the organization of pastoral production. In Fratkin, E., Galvin, K.A. & Roth, E.A., eds. African Pastoralist Systems. Lynne Rienner Publishers Inc., London.Google Scholar
Köhler-Rollefson, I. 2005. Indigenous breeds, local communities. Documenting animal breeds and breeding from a community perspective, Rajasthan, India.Google Scholar
Maeda-Machang'u, A.D., Mutayoba, S.K., Laswai, G.H., Mwaseba, D., Kimambo, A.E. & Lazaro, E. 2000. Local knowledge and gender roles in different livestock production systems in Tanzania. In Matovelo, J.A. ed., Proceedings of the 1st University-wide Scientific Conference, 5–7 April 2000, Morogoro, Tanzania, 657–674.Google Scholar
MLDF. 2011. Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development. Budget speech. Dodoma, Tanzania (Available at http://www.mifugo.go.tz).Google Scholar
Msalale, A.L. 2007. Pastoralists and agro-pastoralists in Mbeya District of Tanzania and their perception of the national livestock policy. Wageningen University, The Netherlands, pp 44. (M.Sc. dissertation).Google Scholar
Msanga, Y.N., Mbaga, S.H. & Msechu, J.K. 2001. Farm animal breeds and strains of Tanzania. Proceedings of SUA-MU-ENRECA Project Workshop on Farm Animal Genetic Resources, 6th August 2001, Morogoro, Tanzania, 36–49.Google Scholar
Msechu, J.K.K. 2001. Institutional framework for animal genetic resources management in Tanzania. In Proceedings of SUA-MU-ENRECA Project Workshop on Farm Animal Genetic Resources, 6th August 2001, Morogoro, Tanzania, 27–34.Google Scholar
Mukasa-Mugerwa, E. 1981. A review of reproductive performance of female Bos indicus (Zebu) cattle. ILCA Monograph no. 6, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 134pp.Google Scholar
Mussei, A.N., Mbwile, R.P., Kamasho, J.K., Mayona, C.M., Ley, G.J. & Mghogho, R.M. 1999. Agro-ecological zones and farming systems of the Southern Highlands of Tanzania, A report submitted to the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development, Department of Research and Training, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, 49pp.Google Scholar
Mwacharo, J.M. & Rege, J.E.O. 2002. On-farm characterization of the indigenous Small East African Shorthorn Zebu cattle (SEAZ) in the Southeast rangelands of Kenya. Anim. Genet. Resour. Inf. 32: 73–86.Google Scholar
Mwacharo, J.M. & Drucker, A.G. 2005. Production objectives and management strategies of livestock-keepers in Southeast Kenya: implications for a breeding programme. Trop. Anim. Health Product. 37: 1–32.Google Scholar
Mwakilembe, P.A., Mbwile, R.P., Sendalo, D.C., Msanga, Y.N., Murro, J.K., Mwambene, P.L. & Temu, A.A. 2007. On-farm appraisal of Fipa cattle in Rukwa region in the Southern Highlands of Tanzania. A report submitted to the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development, Tanzania, 68 pp.Google Scholar
Njombe, A.P. & Msanga, Y.N. 2008. Efforts to increase improved dairy cattle in Tanzania. In Proceeding of 8th National Dairy Exhibitions conference on 30 May–5 June 2008, Sumbawanga, Tanzania, 21–27.Google Scholar
Oluka, J., Owoyesigire, B., Esenu, B. & Sssewannyana, E. 2008. Small stock and women in livestock production in the Teso Farming System region of Uganda. Serere Agricultural and Animal Production Research Institute (SAARI) and African Women Policy Network (AWEPON), Soroti, Uganda.Google Scholar
Oumam, E., Abdulai, A. & Drucker, A. 2005. Assessment of farmer preferences for cattle traits in cattle production systems of Kenya. A Paper Presented at the 11th Congress of the EAAE (European Association of Agricultural Economists), Copenhagen, Denmark, 24–27 August, 2005.Google Scholar
Rass, N. 2006. Policies and strategies to address the vulnerability of pastoralists in Sub-Saharan Africa, Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative Working Paper No. 37.Google Scholar
Rege, J.E.O. & Gibson, J.P. 2003. Animal genetic resources and economic development: issues in relation to economic valuation. Ecol. Econ., 45: 319–330.Google Scholar
Rege, J.E.O. & Tawah, C.L. 1999. The state of African cattle genetic resources II. Geographical distribution, characteristics and uses of present-day breeds and strains. Anim. Genet. Resour. Inf., 26: 1–25.Google Scholar
Rwambo, P., Grootenhuis, J., Demartini, J. & Mkumbo, S. 1998. Results on the preliminary survey on major livestock diseases in the NCA. Report by SUA-NCAA, Norwegian Agency for International Development (NORAD) and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Arusha Tanzania. 19 pp.Google Scholar
Scarpa, R., Ruto, E.R.K., Kristjanson, P., Radeny, M., Drucker, A.G. & Rege, J.E.O. 2003. Valuing indigenous cattle breeds in Kenya: an empirical comparison of stated and revealed preference value estimates. Ecol. Econ., 45: 409–426.Google Scholar
SPSS. 2008. Statistical Package for Social Sciences, Version 16.0. Users manual. Chicago SPSS Inc., Chicago.Google Scholar
Sungael, N.M. 2005. Phenotypic characterization and slaughter characteristics of Iringa red cattle. Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania, 140 pp. (M.Sc. dissertation).Google Scholar
URT. 2006. The United Republic of Tanzania. National Livestock Policy, Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development. 99pp. (Available at http://www.mifugo.go.tz).Google Scholar
URT. 2010. The United Republic of Tanzania. Rukwa Region Livestock Profile, Dar es Salaam Tanzania. 20 pp.Google Scholar