CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This study explored the constraints and opportunities faced by

Tongogara Dairy Cooperative, both at farm level and at the milk

collection centre. Chapter one gives an overview of the study,

providing background information, statement of the problem,

justification of the study, research questions, and objectives,

definition of terms, delimitations and limitations. It also gives

the purpose for carrying out the study.

1.2 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Agriculture is the main human activity in Sub-Saharan Africa,

where more than 80% of the population relies on it. (Ministry of

Lands and Agriculture, 1999) In Zimbabwe, Agriculture is the

mainstay of the economy, as both a major employer and foreign

currency earner. In Zimbabwe milk production at household level

has been practiced for thousands of years.

1

Milk preservation techniques include boiling and fermentation to

produce cultured milk and curd. The main purpose being

preservation of this highly perishable food and thus provide

family food security (Ebing , 1996). Milk production has

increased by 40% over the last 30 years and account for 33% of

world output, FAO (2004).

It is only recently that small scale dairy cooperatives have

been set up in rural areas of Zimbabwe. In Shurugwi district,

Midlands province, some farmers pooled their resources to venture

into small scale dairy production and processing. The venture

into dairy farming than the traditional production of cereal

crops brings with it benefits and challenges. Milk processing is

used to create employment, generate extra income, and ultimately

uplift members economically.

Tongogara Dairy Cooperative is a government initiative through

ARDA Dairy Development Programme (DDP). It aims to uplift

community livelihoods, through the establishment of small scale

dairy processing units in communal areas. To this end ARDA DDP,

contributed 75% 0f the total costs of erecting the

2

superstructure, and cooperative members providing locally

available building materials and labour. Swedish Cooperative

Centre (SCC) donated all the dairy equipment inclusive of

internal installations and 61 cows and heifers, (Tongogara Dairy

Cooperative Archives.) Tongogara Dairy Cooperative Society.

Tongogara Dairy Farmers Cooperative Society was established on

the 2nd August 2001, with the mission to be a major producer of

milk and reduce poverty through income generation from the sale

of milk. The Coop is based in the Shurugwi district, Tongogara

Growth Point, in the Midlands Province of Zimbabwe about, 80 km

south east, from the provincial capital, Gweru. The community at

Tongogara area is mainly communal farmers engaged in crop and

livestock production. Most of the produce is for household

consumption and as a source of income.

The objectives of the cooperative are to:

• Produce milk of nutritional and commercial value

• Encourage smallholder farmers to participate in dairy farming

3

• Improve the quality of dairy animals and thereby increase milk

production

• Integrate crop conservation farming with livestock farming

• Build capacity of members to manage and practice good animal

husbandry through training

• Venture into profitable and sustainable agribusiness as may be

identified by members. (Coop archives).

Currently the cooperative sells their milk to retail shops at

Tongogara growth point, Shurugwi town, Gweru, and Kwekwe urban.

Despite initial challenges, they now own a building with

electricity and running water, which serves as a collection

centre, milk processing, office and training centre. They own a

truck which is used to transport milk from collection points and

delivery of processed products to the market. This has resulted

in improved livelihoods of most households in the study area.

The smallholder dairy sector in Zimbabwe, has been on the rise,

since its inception in 1983, (Mandibaya et..al, 1999).Currently

there are 20 smallholder dairy projects operating in five

4

provinces within Zimbabwe. The thrust behind these projects being

to enhance rural development and improvement of rural

livelihoods, (Musimwa, 1999; DDP, 1992).

The smallholder dairy sector is beset with operational problems.

The sector owns the largest number of cattle and 60 % of dairy

farmers are in this sector, yet it contributes about 2 % of

total national milk production (Dairy Services, 1999).The vision

is to vigorously support them as they hold the key to sustainable

milk production, (Hanyani - Mlambo et..al, 1998). This vision is

echoed by (FAO, 2004),”…rural dairy production, is a catalyst for

varied development initiatives that could increase the volume by

smallholder dairy farmers”.

The improvement of livestock production will be particularly

important in the coming years, in view of the future financial

constraints in Zimbabwe's public sector. There will be an

increased need to use limited resources effectively. Economic

structural adjustment programmes have resulted in farmers having

cuts in subsidies, extension, and veterinary services. For

instance, Zimbabwe has undergone economic structural adjustment

5

programmes over the last decade including agrarian reforms. These

have caused macro-economic changes in inflation rates, pricing,

and interest rates, directly affecting livestock production. Data

collection should therefore be considered not as an event, but an

on-going process, which has to be carried out and reviewed all

the time (Chawatama, et al, 2005).

1.3 Study Area

Tongogara Dairy Cooperative is found in Shurugwi Communal Lands,

centrally located in the Midlands Province of Zimbabwe. The

district lies in Agro-ecological region III which receives an

average annual rainfall of between 650-800mm. Rainfall is

received between November and April of each year (CSO, 2002). The

mean altitude is 1 260 metres. Granite is the dominant parent

rock. Soils derived from granite rock range from sandy to loamy

textures. There is slight to severe erosion. Severity of erosion

is more pronounced in grazing areas. The main rivers, which drain

the area, are Tugwi, Muteveki and their sub-systems which include

among others Chuni, Nyamakupfu, Gurudze and Zhovoringo. These

rivers drain from the north west to the south east. The

6

vegetation type is bush savannah grassland with hyperrania, hypothelia

and digitaria as the major grass types dotted with brachystegia,

terminalia and julbernadia tree species (Surveyor General, 2002).

Major human activities are subsistence to intensive cropping

livestock farming. Cattle and goats form the backbone of the

community’s wealth (Ministry of Agriculture and lands, 2004).

1.4 Households

In 1992, Shurugwi district had a population of 79,763, which grew

significantly to 86,820 in 2002 (CSO, 1992; CSO, 2002). The

district is experiencing significant changes in land-use and

land-cover due to the increasing demand for land intended for

food and industrial production associated with the mining of

gold, platinum, and chrome (Ministry of Agriculture, 2004).

1.4 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The problem is the slow take off and low milk delivery to

Tongogara Dairy Cooperative milk collection centre.

1.5 JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY

7

Research undertaken into the smallholder dairy sector has largely

been biased towards the economic analysis and viability. Though

information on the characteristics of communal livestock

production systems exists, some of it is out-dated and is

specific and applicable to certain areas only. The study provides

information on the current status of communal livestock

production systems thereby forming a basis for planning livestock

development programmes in the area. In order to fully appreciate,

the problems faced, a case study was used so as to fully

appreciate problems specific to Tongogara Dairy Cooperative and

proffer solutions or interventions tailor made for this

institution.

The research, may contribute to the board of knowledge in

relation to the problems faced by smallholder dairy cooperatives,

which distinguish them from the majority of other enterprises.

The dairy cooperative farmers may benefit by improving on milk

quality at farm level, its preservation, cow management,

collection or delivery, processing and distribution to consumers.

The non-governmental organisations engaged within Shurugwi may

benefit from progress reporting and be able to evaluate their8

capacity to manage development projects of a similar nature.

Extension staff would be able to monitor project implementation

and evaluation through improved planning and control. The study

would generate valuable information on dairy development that

would assist government in designing appropriate policies for

intervention specifically for Tongogara Dairy Cooperative.

1.6 PURPOSE OF STUDY/ SIGNIFICANCE.

Dairy cooperatives are faced with a variety of challenges. These

range from quality of milk delivered by members to poor road

infrastructure. This cold chain stretches from the producers to

the consumer. Zimbabwean dairy cooperatives, inclusive of

Tongogara dairy cooperative are not immune to such chains either,

Ebing, (1996).Tongogara Dairy Cooperative was established in 2001

with a membership of 350 prospective dairy farmers. It however,

started operating in August 2011.This low take off is attributed

to the economic hardships faced ,but only 60 members are

delivering milk to the milk processing centre. The researcher

looked into the problems affecting the active members at farm

9

level, milk collection centre and possible solutions in an effort

to boost viability.

1.7 RESEARCH QUESTION

The research was guided by the question:

1) What are the constraints and opportunities faced by

Tongogara Dairy Cooperative?

SUB- QUESTIONS

i. What constraints do cooperative members face in milk

production at farm level?

ii. What are the constraints associated with the slow-off-

take of the cooperative’s milk collection centre?

iii. What recommendations and or opportunities exist in

solving these constraints?

1.8 DELIMITATIONS

10

The research was confined to the 60 active Tongogara Dairy

Cooperative members both, in communal and resettlement areas, in

Shurugwi district, Midlands province. Sixteen cooperative members

were selected randomly according to stratification of members in

the communal and resettlement areas. This study was confined to

this cooperative because of its proximity and accessibility by

the researcher. It was also a different venture that

distinguishes it from the other normal cooperatives associated

with farmers. The focus was on the constraints faced by farmers

and possible interventions and or opportunities in resolving

them.

1.9 LIMITATIONS

The study was restricted to only sixteen cooperative members. Key

informants included ,two management committee members, one centre

staff official, one dairy development extension officer, four

local retail shops, one veterinary extension officer and one

officer from Arda –dairy development officer. This was limited by

financial constraints and limited time, because data had to be

collected within a specified time period. The results obtained

11

cannot be generalized to other dairy cooperatives in other

districts due to geographical, socio-economic and technical

differences, but may be relatable to other cooperatives

1.10 DEFINITION OF TERMS

Cold chain A system that maintains a food at the correct

temperature from production to

consumption.

Coop- Cooperative

Shelf life The time that a product is fit to eat.

Investigate To enquire into or examine carefully

12

Respondent A person who provides data for analysis by

responding to survey questions

Sample A group of respondents

Cooperative Group of farmers coming together for mutual

benefit.

1.11 ACRONYMS

ARDA. Agricultural Rural Development

Authority.

CSO. Central Statistical Office

13

DDP. Dairy Development Programme.

DMB. Dairy Marketing Board.

DZL. Dairiboard Zimbabwe Limited.

FAO. Food and Agriculture Organisation

(under the United Nations).

IDF. International Dairy Federation.

IFCN International Farm Comparison Network

KCC. Kenyan Creameries Cooperative

MC Management Committee

MCC. Milk Collection Centre

NADF. National Association of Dairy Farmers

SHP. Small Holder Programme

LITERATURE REVIEW14

2.0 Introduction

Chapter two focuses on literature review and serves to give a

frame of the study of the current scenario as regards Tongogara

dairy cooperative. There is no research and documentation

regarding the small scale dairy sector in Shurugwi, in

particular, Tongogara Dairy Cooperative. This chapter looks at

the background information on the biophysical features, and the

livestock production systems in Shurugwi communal area. This is

to enlighten the reader on the conditions in which Tongogara

Cooperative operates in. The history of the dairy development

programme which gave birth to smallholder dairy farming in

Zimbabwe is presented. The other factors discussed include, the

Kenyan success story, the cooperative and its benefits, specific

features of the dairy industry. The last of part of the chapter

looked at the management of dairy centres properties of milk and

milk processing, the status and future prospects for smallholder

dairy and donor input for small scale dairying.

2.1 History of dairying in Zimbabwe

15

It was until the early 1920’s, that commercial dairying was a

small scale enterprise, behind tobacco and maize production. Milk

produced was for household use including farm employees and any

surplus offered for sale in nearby towns. The first commercial

dairy farm was established then, in Plumtree, (NADF, 2010).

Titterton, (2000:2) noted that “there were many reasons which

forced dairying to remain a subsistence operation. Among them

were breeds, feeds, diseases, genetics, labour transport,

technology and marketing”.

It was established that indigenous cow breeds such as Mashona and

Nkone were low milk yielders. This resulted in the importation of

exotic dairy breeds such as Friesland, Jersey and Shorthorn.

However; these imports could not adapt to the local environment

and succumbed to diseases. Crossbreeding with the hardy

indigenous cows realised crossbreds which were resistant to local

diseases and high milk yielding.

The veld provided forage of poor quality for dairy cattle

throughout the year coupled with low nutritive value of crop

residues. Resultantly, there was a milk glut in the summer when

16

natural veld is abundant and of high digestibility, (Dairy

Handbook, 1987).

Milk is a highly perishable product and must be chilled whilst in

storage. There were no refrigerated trucks, but only river water.

There was no legislation to ensure that milk is produced under

standard hygienic conditions. (Titterton, 2000) As a result milk

spoilage was high. Transport to the market was by scotch cart and

which was slow and carried small quantities. Therefore the size

of dairy was constrained by transport and long distances to the

market. .

2.2 The birth of dairy cooperatives and commercial dairying

By 1930’s, farmers formed cooperatives to market their milk.

These were set up in Harare, Bulawayo, Gweru, Mutare and

Kadoma.They sold mainly fresh bottled milk cream and butter

(Titterton, 2000).In the late 1940’s legislation was enacted to

protect the consumer .The set standards on milk quality, meant

farmers had to improve on cleaning milking utensils and milk

storage. This resulted in the birth of DZL (DMB) a government

parastatal, which replaced the cooperatives. The DZL regulated in

17

1994 after repealing the Dairy Produce Marketing and Levy Act.

(Dairy Services, 1998).

2.3 History of smallholder dairy

On the attainment of independence in 1980, the government enacted

a policy of encouraging farmers in the communal, resettlement and

small scale to venture and engage in the dairy sector. As a

result, in 1983, the Peasant Sector Development Programme, run by

Dairiboard Zimbabwe was tasked with the implementation of dairy

development programmes in the small scale sector in (Hanyani

et..al ,undated). This responsibility was later taken over by

Arda-DDP, who currently run 20 dairy schemes, located in five

provinces of Zimbabwe. Of the 20 schemes, 17 are involved in milk

processing at their respective milk collection centres, while 3

sell their raw milk to Dairibord Holdings and Keffaloes,

(Munangi, 2010).

2.4 Overall Goal of Smallholder Dairy Development Programme.

18

The goal is to reduce poverty levels among rural communities,

through increased incomes from dairying, processing and

marketing. Ultimately the target is improved livelihoods for

households and communities, (DDP, 1995).This initiative is meant

to be used as a springboard for developmental activities for

which interventions on dairying are meant to respond to any

opportunity to improve incomes and households standards, or

develop livestock. The experience gained in decision making,

managing grazing schemes and marketing cooperatively has

important developmental benefits for the other spheres of rural

activities (Munangi, 2010).

2.5 Production functions of domestic animals in the service of

people

19

According to Wilson (2009), the uses of livestock in communal

areas in the tropics can be summarised as shown in Table 2.1

below:

Table 2. 1: Production functions of domestic animals

Major

category

Actual contribution Livestock species

Meat Fresh, dried, salted All (but minor in

equines)

Milk Fresh, fermented, skimmed All ruminants

Eggs Fresh All poultry

Fibres Wool Sheep, alpaca

Hair Goat, sheep

Skins Hides Large ruminantsSkins Small ruminants, pig

Pelts and fur Sheep, rabbit, minorContainers Ruminants

Feathers Fashion domestic fowl

Down Duck, goose

20

Power Ploughing, weeding, and

other field operations

Equines, cattle

Transport(cart, pack,

riding)

Equines, cattle

Agricultural support (water

lifting, threshing, etc.)

Equines, cattle

Faeces/

urine

Fertilizer All

Fuel (direct) Cattle

Building material Cattle

Pest

control

Weeds in crops All

Others Security All

Source (Wilson, 2009)

2.6 Smallholder Dairy Production Systems

This is a specialised form of livestock production in the

communal areas. It deserves special mention in that its advent

21

has brought about the introduction and the adoption of new

technologies in the animal production systems of communal area

farmers. Currently there are twenty dairy projects dotted

throughout the country (DDP, 2010). In these projects, hand

feeding of dairy animals using either commercial feeds or home-

grown feeds is taken as a standard procedure. Calf rearing

systems have been developed to meet both the farmers' resource

base and management capabilities. Calves are allowed access to

their dams to suckle for only 40–60 minutes after each milking

session until weaned, usually between 60 and 90 days. Further,

management programmes in this sector include fodder production

and conservation systems on arable lands. Under conservation,

silage and hay making together with crop residue collection and

storage are a common feature. Of late quality enhancement of

roughages through the use of urea has been widely adopted by the

small holder farmers. Animal health programme and breeding

systems through the use of farmer established and managed bull

centres, milk marketing and processing at milk centres to widen

the product range have become an integral part of dairy (Munangi,

2010).

22

In Zimbabwe, the structure of milk production is characterised

by small farms with not more than three animals.

(Ngongoni ,2006). Dairying is part of a mixed farming system. The

dairy cattle are often used as draught animals.(Bhebe,2007).

Livestock are fed on crop residues and waste, and grazed on the

veld. Cattle production and milk production is largely supported

on the by-products of agriculture. In this way, a nutritionally

superior product is produced in an ecologically and

environmentally favourable way (IDF, 1997).

2.7 Specific features of the dairy industry.

The specifics of the dairy industry are four, interrelated

factors. The first being, the unique properties of milk as a raw

material. Milk is basically a liquid consisting of 90 per cent

water, which means that it is a bulky and heavy commodity; also,

milk is produced on a daily basis (Dairy Farmers Handbook, 1987).

As a result, milk requires high-cost transportation and there is

a cost limit on the range over which it can be sold. Furthermore,

milk will only keep for a few days, which places a time limit on

the period during which it must be used or processed and

23

transformed into a more stable, longer keeping form. Added to

that, milk is highly perishable and subject to adulteration,

whilst the quality of the raw material is highly dependent on

farm management. Strict and comprehensive quality regulations are

therefore necessary, and they are much more far-reaching and

comprehensive than in other agricultural sectors (Dairy Services,

2002).

The second factor distinguishing the dairy industry within

agriculture is the socio-economic position of dairy farmers. The

majority are small-scale producers, with a weak and vulnerable

position on the market; the nature of the business means that

they are unable to influence market modus operandi. In addition,

milk is produced daily and generates income. Conversely, milk

production is a highly labour-intensive production and therefore

provides varied employment opportunities, not only in the dairy

farming business itself but also in the transport and milk

processing.

The third factor highlighting the unique position of the dairy

industry is the influence held by the co-operatives in milk

24

processing. According to a survey by the International Dairy

Federation (IDF) in 1984, in 21 countries, together accounting

for 55 per cent of the world's milk supply, producer co-

operatives marketed 86 per cent of the total sales of milk from

farms.

The fourth factor is that milk is a very valuable and expensive

raw material. Milk can be used to make a wide range of products

which are palatable, nutritious and of high quality. It therefore

calls for efficiency in processing of dairy products by the

smallholder sector through technical and economic efficiency,

(Devendra, 2000).

2.8 Properties of milk

Milk is a whole sum food, which is secreted from the mammary

glands of all mammals after parturition. It is an excellent

source of proteins, fats, minerals and vitamins. The proteins are

of high biological value, containing essential amino acids,

including leucine, methionine, lysine and tryptophan. Milk contains 57 %

saturated fatty acids, 40% monounsaturated and 3 %

polyunsaturated fatty acids. This composition is beneficial for

25

the children and the sick that have high energy needs and

restricted digestive capacity, (Titterton, 2000).Lactose, a sugar

contained in milk is known to promote intestinal flora of

lactobacilli and supports the reabsorption of calcium by the

intestine. Milk is a source of minerals, calcium, phosphorus, and

magnesium required for mineralisation of teeth and bones. Minor

elements present are iodine, selenium and vitamins: A, B 1, B 2,

and B 12 (Dairy Handbook, 1987).

2.9 Processing of milk

Milk undergoes stringent processing before being passed fit for

human consumption.

Pasteurisation-is whereby the milk is heated in a pasteuriser for

15 seconds at temperatures between 720 C and 850 C and then

rapidly cooled. It is done to kill harmful bacteria and to

inactivate the enzymes that turn fat rancid.

Sterilisation-milk is subjected to ultra-high temperatures at 145

C for 5 seconds, filling and then cooling. This treatment

preserves the taste and most of the nutritional, vitamin, and

protein value of fresh product.UHT and sterimilk have long shelf

26

life and are usually sold in rural communities where there is no

electricity for refrigeration (Titterton, 2000).

2.10 DRIVERS FOR DAIRY DEVELOPMENT

The abundance of livestock and its impact in uplifting

livelihoods of rural people have made governments and

institutions consider implementing smallholder dairy production.

Populations are rapidly increasing, creating demand for milk

products, due to increased per capita incomes in sub-Sahara

Africa (Birthal et al., 2005; Bennett et al., 2006). This offers

greater opportunities for the development of milk production and

processing industry (Redda, 2001).

The increase in food prices and stock feeds has forced

governments, to promote utilisation locally available food

resources. Increased self-sufficiency and food security are

economic drivers in central governments to increase milk

production by smallholder dairy development (Ngongoni, 2006).

Smallholder dairy farming has become popular in most developing

countries (Ngongoni et al., 2006). It is estimated that over 80%

of milk consumed in developing countries, about 200 billion

27

litres annually are processed by informal dairy sector. (Bennett

et al., 2006). This is the bedrock, on which governments

advocated for promotion of smallholder dairies in, Kenya,

Tanzania, Ethiopia, and Zimbabwe. (Moyo, 1996).

2.11 DAIRY COOPERATIVE EMPRICAL STUDIES

Small-scale dairy processing is growing in importance in

countries the world over. If governments in eastern and southern

Africa provide conducive policy environments, there are good

opportunities for smallholders to benefit from marketed dairy

production (Thorpe, 2000). Small-scale processing schemes are

those that process from under 500 to 5000 litres per day (Nongoma

et al., 2006).

Kenya’s dairy industry, is one of the largest in Africa, and is

supported by over 1.8 million mostly small-scale cattle producers

who at the time of implementing the smallholder dairy project

(SHP) supplied over 86 per cent of the country’s milk through

direct milk sales from producers to consumers and from dairy

farmer groups and over 40,000 small-scale farmers (Thorpe, 2000).

28

Previously the dairy industry was dominated by Kenya Cooperative

Creameries, a state owned parastatal (Thorpe, 2000). Reduced

government activities in providing livestock services, milk

marketing and repealing of the dairy policy change in 1992 has

led to the formation of dairy cooperative societies (FAO and IDF,

1998). Since then, a growing number of small and medium scale

entrepreneurs have entered the processed milk market. Producer

welfare was improved through higher milk prices and timeliness of

payments. Consumers benefited from a wider range of more

competitively priced dairy products. It is estimated that over

200 dairy co-ops and self-help groups are currently engaged in

active milk marketing. Most are small scale enterprises

processing between 1,000-10,000 litres per day and mostly process

and sell pasteurized milk, with a small proportion of throughput

devoted to yoghurt and cheese, either as wholesalers and/or

retailers (FAO, 2004). Amounts that cannot be sold fresh are

often sold to private milk traders and KCC or processed into mala

(FAO, 2004). Many had little or no experience in handling and

processing milk into the safe, longer shelf life, now demanded by

the Kenyan market. The Government sought project assistance from

29

FAO’s Technical Cooperation Programme for training to meet the

dairy industry’s legislation (FAO, 2004).

Research findings in Kenya and India give credence that coops the

drivers in smallholder farmers retaining viability in the wake of

the many constraints they face (Birthal, Joshi and Gulati,

2005).Collective effort by farmers is viewed as the way in

sustaining viability, growth and development, asserts (Romney and

Omore 2006).These studies verify that collective action by

farmers results in more merits accruing in comparison to

individual effort. Benefits include inter alia; improved market

information, reduced utility costs and social networking through

sharing of ideas .Rural development strategies should therefore,

aim improving output of the smallholder farmers by critically

addressing their constraints.

In India, Mohamed (2004) noted that the major challenges of

cooperatives involve undercapitalisation, lack of trust, lack of

professional management, lack of market information and expensive

agricultural inputs.

30

These studies recommend that smaller coops should merge to form

larger coops, so as to improve on the requisite capital outlay,

in pursuit of sustainable rural development.

2.12 Management of the dairy centres:

A management committee (MC) through subcommittees oversees the

operational efficiency of the dairy centre and projects. The MC

is elected annually and it consists of a chairperson, vice

chairman, secretary, vice-secretary, treasurer and 2 committee

members of which two are women. Members of the centres organize

themselves to form an Association which is governed by a

constitution. The marketing committee has five members, a

chairman, vice-chairman, secretary, vice-secretary and one

committee member. The marketing committee monitors the production

process, product quality, market research, product delivery to

markets and supervision of centre staff (DDP informants,

2012).These committees are accountable to the cooperative society

and give monthly reports to members.

2.13 Constraints in smallholder livestock production

31

Despite the contribution made by livestock to communal people’s

livelihoods, the productivity of these animals tends to be well

below their potential due to a variety of problems that

smallholders and their animals face (Conroy, 2005). Constraints

can limit the number of livestock that a family can keep or limit

the productivity of the animals kept (Bhebe, 2007).

Constraints to livestock farming include shortage of feeds as a

result of high stocking densities in areas with poor rangelands

and generally poor feed bases. This has disastrous effects and

tends to limit livestock numbers in an area. Seasonality of

rainfall also results in feed being insufficient and of varied

nutritional value quality during particular seasons. Worsening

the feed related challenges is the fact that the available feed

is sometimes inefficiently utilised as a result of lack of know-

how in deriving maximum benefits from available feed resources

(Conroy, 2005).

Life-threatening diseases and productivity reducing diseases are

also a major challenge to livestock farming. These affect numbers

and productivity of livestock respectively. Predation (especially

32

of small stock) affects livestock numbers. Theft also affects

livestock numbers and is common in communal areas where

individuals are unemployed, but still need some income for

meeting day to day expenses (Wilson, 2009).

Poor management is also a challenge and results in low

productivity and numbers of livestock. Poor management is a

result of a number of contributing factors such as ignorance of

good management practices and shortage of labour (Ngongoni,

2006).

Poor access to markets also disadvantages communal livestock

farmers as they do not realise the real value of their produce.

If these constraints could be overcome the benefits accruing to

resource-poor farmers would increase significantly.

Unfortunately, the contribution of animal research to develop

effective ways of addressing these constraints has been

disappointing (Waters-Bayer and Bayer, 2002).

2.13 Possible interventions to increase productivity of communal

livestock

33

Strategies such as provision of special credit facilities to

communal farmers for livestock purchase can help increase

livestock productivity. Establishing effective disease and

parasite control programmes could also help increase productivity

in communal livestock production systems. Breeding programmes to

come up with adapted, productive genotypes is also of great

importance. Extension work is also a valuable way to impart

knowledge on sustainable ways of rearing livestock in communal

areas.

2.14 The status and prospects of smallholder milk production

A joint study published by FAO and IFCN (2010) notes that, making

smallholder dairy production more competitive could be a powerful

tool for reducing poverty, raising nutrition levels and improving

the livelihoods of rural people in many developing countries. The

study notes that rising milk demand, which is growing by about 15

million tonnes per year in developing countries, provides a

chance for small-scale dairy farmers to raise their milk

production, which would create jobs and help establish

sustainable dairy chains to meet local consumer and world market

34

demands. Growing consumer demand for dairy products in developing

countries, spurred by population growth and improved incomes,

offers important market opportunities for smallholders.

With global prices for dairy products expected to rise in coming

years, the report notes that small-scale milk producers have very

competitive production costs and that gives them the competitive

edge to compete with large-scale, capital-intensive, high-tech

dairy farming systems. Better farm management practices,

expanding dairy herd sizes and increasing milk yields could

easily improve smallholder labour productivity, making dairy

sector development a potent tool for poverty reduction, FAO,

(2010).

Dairy sectors in developing countries also face the challenge of

competing with massive policy interventions (price support, milk

quotas, direct payments, investment support programmes, export

subsidies) in developed countries, which create a competitive

advantage for dairy production in developed countries and

penalize dairy farmers in developing countries, (FAO,2010)..

35

There is need to improve viability and to build the capacity of

the smallholder dairy farmer to increase output. Lack of private

sector participation in development policies coupled with lack of

information on agricultural developments in other countries have

been the missing link in efforts to resuscitate Zimbabwe's

productive sector which is export driven(Ngongoni,2006).

Participation by the private sector and non-governmental

organisations would allow the country to grow the small-scale

dairy farmer which is important in increasing milk production.

Production by smallholder dairy farmers has been held back by

shortages of resources, distance from milk collection points and

poor quality of milk delivered, (Mapiye et... al 2006). This has

left the country to rely heavily on large-scale milk producers

who have their own problems, but analysts say Zimbabwe cannot

succeed in growing its dairy industry without embracing the

small-scale and emerging dairy farmer. Synergies between both the

public and private sector, to drive the resuscitation programme,

will make a great impact in the viability of the small scale

dairy. Policies should be based on realistic strategies that take

36

into consideration the constraints and opportunities of the sub

sector, (Jingura, 2000).

Zimbabwe will need a viable smallholder farmer to develop because

the country has had a viable large-scale and commercial dairy

sector. The changes that are currently taking place in the

country are reflective of the developments elsewhere, (All

Africa.com.2007).

2.15 THE COOPERATIVE AND ITS BENEFITS:

A true cooperative is “an autonomous association of persons

united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social, and

cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly owned and

democratically controlled enterprise” (International Cooperative

Alliance, 2008).Co-operatives are:

User-owned—members finance the cooperative.

User-controlled—an elected board of directors serves as the

link between the membership and the manager.

37

User-benefitting—patronage refunds are returned to members

based on the amount of business conducted with the

cooperative. (FAO, 2004).

They aim at lowering costs of production through economical use

of resources. Through cooperatives; farmers can mobilize capital,

pool knowledge, achieve economies of scale and foster rural

development. They can create greater leverage in the marketplace

and policy arena, form linkages with the private sector and

efficiently link to urban and export markets. Such groups not

only catalyse local economic growth, but often also serve as the

“glue” for social initiative and effective, equitable community

planning. (ICA, 2008). Co-ops develop human capital by

encouraging the participation of women and youth. Effects are

often widespread since job training, health initiatives and

recreation programs can provide more prosperous and vibrant

communities and even help deter urban migration (ACDI/VOCA,

2012).

38

CHAPTER THREE- RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

This section presents the research methodology used to answer key

study questions. It covers the following parameters; research

philosophy, research design, population, sampling, research

instruments, data collection and data analysis. It seeks to

qualify the methodology applied in this study.

Research Philosophy

The research method combined qualitative and quantitative

approach. This helped to identify and describe productivity

traits and the problems at farm level by the sampled population.

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

A case study was used as it enabled the researcher to cover

such issues as, farmers’ views, lived experiences, emotions and

feelings during interviews, on benefits of smallholder dairy

39

sector. The design used to select subjects in the study area and

data collection procedures in solving a problem. Production

problems at farm level, socio-demographic data, water

availability, breeds of dairy, draught animals, reproductive

performance, bull ownership and breeds, and beef cattle and

breeding policies, cropping pattern, forage production, livestock

health, and problems affecting the milk collection centre. A

comparative analysis of farmers’ views against key informants was

undertaken. Through use of qualitative design .it enabled probing

to understand the lived experience. This paradigm realised data

that was easy to comprehend compared to descriptive statistics.

3.2 POPULATION

The target population was all 60 registered cooperative members,

who are currently delivering milk to the milk collection centre

(MCC) from August 2011 to 31 st, October, 2012.

3.3 SAMPLING METHOD/INSTRUMENTS

A stratified random sampling was applied using Tongogara dairy

cooperative members. There are 160 registered coop dairy farmers

40

but only 60 are currently active, by delivering milk to the

coop’s milk collection centre for processing.

A proportional sampling method was used to identify the sample of

farmers from both the communal and resettlement areas. The target

population of 60 coop farmers was divided into two strata:

communal and resettlement coop farmers. Farmers were then

randomly selected from the master membership register lodged at

MCC offices. The sample was made up of 16 farmers, whose size is

representative of the total population of the coop farmers.

Stratified random sampling has many advantages. It provided the

simplicity of simple random sampling. In many cases there are

gains in reliability over that of a simple random sample. It also

provides a convenient technique to obtain separate estimates for

population parameters for each sub domain in which the sample

size is fixed and not a random variable (Macmillan and

Schumacher,1989). Finally it provides a method to ensure the

sample is representative of the population.

A stratified random sampling method was used to select sample of

farmers for data collection from the communal and resettlement

41

areas. It was used to counteract effects of the heterogeneous

nature of the location of farmers within the cooperative.

Each stratum was based on the nature of tenure rights, that is

communal and resettlement. This was to ensure that all different

geographical locations were catered for in the research.

3.4 DATA COLLECTION

Semi-structured questionnaires (pilot-tested) through interviews

were used for data collection. The questionnaires were used to

collect data on aspects like: socio-demographic characteristics

(age, sex, marital status, household size, employment and

educational background), landholding sizes (arable and fallow

land, cropping patterns, yields of crops and forage production),

and cattle breeds (cattle for milk, meat and draught power,

reproductive performance of cows, types and number of bulls used,

feeding systems during the wet season and during milking,

availability of water, cattle management- all husbandry

practices, animal health- disease problems and their

incidences).. The questionnaire is advantageous in that they are

relatively economical and assure anonymity (Mcmillan and

42

Schumacher, 1989) .Closed ended questions will be used and are

advantageous in that questions are objective and data

categorization is easy.

Secondary data was retrieved from the cooperative milk centre

records, monthly reports and archives.

Farmers were visited individually on appointment at their

convenience. Key informants interviews were based on interaction

and knowledge of Tongogara Dairy Cooperative and the performance

of the smallholder dairy sector in Zimbabwe. These included three

shop owners, one local Livestock Development Extension officer,

and one Arda-Dairy Development Programme officer, two management

committee members and one centre staff. A review of literature

was also used to collect data relevant to the study.

3.5 ETHICAL CONSIDERATION

The researcher was initially cleared by the Department of

Technical Education at the University of Zimbabwe that was

utilised in carrying out the study. Before collecting data, the

researcher sought for permission from the Management Committee of

the dairy cooperative, which was granted. In addition, the

43

research also asked for informed consent from all the respondents

and allowed them to ask questions about the research before

interviewing them. It was also made clear to the respondents that

voluntary withdrawal at any stage of the interview was within

their rights. The research did not disclose the names of

respondents. The questionnaire sought participation by Tongogara

dairy cooperative members. The research instrument was

administered personally by the researcher in order to ensure a

high response rate. Farmers were visited individually on

appointment at their convenience. (Sarantako, 2005).

3.6 DATA ANALYSIS

On completion of data collection, descriptive analysis was

employed .Data was recorded in the Statistical package for Social

Sciences (SPSS version 16.0) for ease of analysis. Tables, pie

charts and figures were generated to aid illustration of

performance indicators, such as age, gender, and household size,

land holding sizes cropping patterns, fodder production, cattle

breeds and reproductive performance of cows feeding systems,

water sources and animal health. Further descriptive analysis

44

centred on the problems and or constraints, benefits of

cooperative farming and constraints at the cooperative’s

MCC.Possible interventions and opportunities are discussed for

each parameter.

3.7 Summary

The chapter dwelt with the research design which is a case

study. An attempt to justify the use of the design has been

made. Simple random stratification was used to sample 16

households from a population of 60 farmers. Stratification

according land tenure was done before sampling. Data analysis

procedures have been spelt out.

CHAPTER FOUR

Data Analysis, Presentation and Discussion

4.0 Introduction.

The chapter dwells on data presentation, analysis and discussion

of data collected in this case study. This section discusses the

results in line with the research questions of this study.

45

4.1 Socio-demographic characteristics

This section discusses the results in line with the socio-

demographic data collected focusing on the respondents’ age,

marital status, gender, education and household size. These

characteristics are discussed as they are key determinants in

dairy production in general.

Sixty two and half per cent of the interviewed households were

male-headed. The findings agree with Ngongoni et al (2006), who

reported 63% male-headed households in Gwayi. Thirty seven and

half per cent constituted female headed households, who were

widows. Table 4.1 summarises the age of the respondents. The age

of respondents reported in this study are similar to those noted

by Ndebele et al (2007). The mean household size was >5 implying

that there is enough labour available for milking and

transportation of milk to the milk collection centre.Mendelson,

(2006), also articulated that the herd boys are mainly family

members and therefore contribute to family labour. This view is

supported by Somano (2008) who noted that dairy production in

46

general is a function of labour and that large households tend to

have more labour which in turn increases milk production.

Table 4. 1: Summary of Age of respondents.

Age (in years) Frequency Percentage %

20 – 29 1 6.2

30 – 39 4 25

40 -49 2 12.5

50 – 59 4 25

60 -69 2 12.5

70 and above 3 18.8

All the farmers had secondary education and 31.2 % have post-

secondary formal training, and informal agricultural education.

The level of educational background reported in this study are

comparable to those documented by Ndebele et al (2007) for Gwayi

smallholder areas. The high levels of literacy can provide scope

for an informative interface between farmers, extension staff,

researchers and development agents. This implies a 100 % literacy

rate and translates into trainable people in dairy production

47

parameters. Therefore, the level of education is related to the

ability to process more complex information and make decisions.

4.2.0 SECTION B-TECHNICAL AND PRODUCTION

This section discusses the results in line with the interviewees’

technical and production parameters, as obtaining at household

level, as they impact constraints at farm level.

4.2.1 Arable and fallow land

Data on the land use, cropping pattern, herd structure,

reproductive performance of cows, bull types and ownership,

feeding systems, water sources, animal handling facilities,

animal health practises, milk delivery and distance to the MCC

are presented and discussed.

Land is the limiting resource as respondents’ livelihoods are

based on farm activites.The average land holding of 4 hectares

compares favourably with the national average of 3 hectares per

household (CSO, 2005). Four hectares presents constraints to

farmers as it has negative effects on dairy expansion.

48

31.2 % of the respondents had no farrow land, 31.2% had 1

hectare, 25 % had 2 hectares and 12.5 % had 3 hectares. The mean

farrow land holding was 1.19 hectares for the study site. Farmers

with no fallow land explained that this situation presents

challenges in dairy expansion and feed sources. The option is to

adopt the more capital intensive dairying, which the resource

poor farmers cannot sustain.Ngongoni (2006), supports this view,

that fodder production is limited by the size of land available.

4.2.2 Cropping pattern

The study revealed that, crops grown were, maize, groundnuts,

sunflower, field beans, sweet potatoes and rapoko. Other crops

grown, velvet beans, cow peas and round nuts. Maize is grown by

all respondents unlike other crops as it is a staple food and

used as livestock feed.

4.2.3 Yields of cropsThere were varied yields for the grown

crops. The mean yield per hectare, for the grown crops was as

follows: maize - 1.5 tonnes, 0.25 tonnes for groundnuts, rapoko-

0, 3 tonnes, sunflower – 0.15 tonnes, field beans- 0.2 tonnes and

0.15 tonnes for cow peas.

49

4.2.4 Fodder Production

Respondents revealed that maize crop residue is an important

source of livestock feed mainly in the dry season. Other crop

residues used as animal feeds include bean haulms, sunflower

heads, rapoko, velvet beans, cow peas and groundnuts. Land was a

limiting factor in the establishment of fodder crops. This is due

to the crop – livestock integration competition in producing food

crops and milk production. Most of the respondents relied on

natural veld as a feed source. The species composition of the

unimproved pasture is composed of grass mixtures like, Star, Kikuyu,

Couch and Thatching grass. Bana grass, velvet beans and Siratro are

the most common fodder planted on small plots by the farmers.

4.2.5 Cattle breeds for milk, meat and draught

The herd size ranged between 3-15 cattle among the interviewees.

Herd size is a function of capital outlay farmers. Hanyani –

Mlambo, (1998).noted that financial muscle complemented farmers’

capacities to engage in viable dairy farming. The respondents on

average, own one dairy animal, the rest being Mashona and beef

crossbreds.

50

The cattle in the study site were dominated by Mashona (90%) of

the respondents) The dominant dairy breeds used included,

Friesian-Holstein crossbreds and Friesian donated to 60 coop

members ,by the Swedish Cooperation Centre in July,2011.There are

no pure breeds dairy breeds, due to limited feed

challenges ,particularly in the dry season and poor farmer

husbandry skills. In the study site, farmers used Mashona and

Brahman strains for draught, beef and milk production despite the

dominance of indigenous breeds in the smallholder dairy sector,

there have been few attempts to assess their milk production, and

no selection for this trait has been undertaken. Although on-

station research shows advantages in the use of crossbred dairy

cattle for resource poor farmers crossbreeding of indigenous

cattle with exotics to increase production is not a recommended

option, especially in the semiarid areas. (Smith et al 1996;

Muchenje et al 2007), This is because of the relationship between

breed, level of inputs and the environment, and the consequent

loss of control of the composition of a communally managed herd (

Garwe et al 2001). Indigenous breeds should be subjected to

51

selection for specific production traits and an explanation of

adaptation is needed (Garwe et al 2001).

4.2.6 Reproductive performance of cows

The calving rate averaged 2 years among the respondents. Calving

intervals averaged between 400 days to 700 days. It was noted

that cows calved down during the dry season when feed challenges

are greatest, thereby increasing calf mortality. The poor plane

of nutrition of breeding cows is one of the factors inducing this

phenomenon, because under -nutrition impairs ovarian function.

4.2.7 Bull ownership and type.

The majority of the farmers (60%) used communal bulls whilst 25%

and 15% used own bred, respectively. About 70 % of the farmers

practiced uncontrolled breeding. The fact that few farmers owned

a bull implies that these bulls may be used to mate close

relatives, potentially increasing the inbreeding levels in the

population. Furthermore, most of the bulls would be of unknown

pedigree, although generally of known genotype, implying that

systematic selective breeding is lacking. Increased inbreeding

and the use of unproven bulls and limited Artificial Insemination

52

(AI) services may have unfavourable long-term effects on

productivity through the degradation of the herd genotype (Bhebe

et al 2003). The organisation by farmers’ co-operatives of

village bull schemes using bulls of proven genetic merit may be

an attractive alternative to expensive AI and reduce inbreeding.

4.2.8 Feeding Systems

The extensive grazing system was the most common feeding system

where respondents allowed animals their dairy cattle to graze

after milking. This may be due to smaller landholding sizes and

absence of fenced paddocks and limited stocks of fodder. In the

study site supplementary feeding after milking and in the dry

season is mainly the use of crop residues. However, the crop

residues were fed whole and it limits dry matter intake. This is

because crop residues are of low nutritive value, containing

metabolizable energy, 5-7 MJ, ME/kg dry matter and CP values of

2-5 % (Smith, 2012). Most of the feed sources are on- farm in the

study area. Some farmers purchased dairy concentrates to maintain

milk production and animal body condition. Innovative members

mixed their own home made feed using local feed sources such as

53

monkey bread tree pods .Supplementary concentrates are readily

available at the MCC at subsidised cost. Some farmers are

utilizing molasses which they mix with chopped maize stover and

fed to all dairy animals. This practise improves palatability,

digestibility and enhances microbial rumen flora. These findings

are similar to those obtained by Titterton (2000) on the use of

molasses in improving energy feed intake in dairy cattle.

4.2.9 Sources of water

Dams (40 % of the interviewees), protected boreholes (25%) and

rivers (35 %) were the main sources of water for the dairy

cattle. Water is one of the important nutrients in animal feeding

as it forms 86% of milk.( Titterton,2000).It is imperative that

animals are given free access to god quality water.

4.2.10 Dairy herd health management

Respondents enjoy the local veterinary extension services, where

they buy worm remedies, drugs and training offered on herd health

management. Local retailers also stock acaricides for spray dips

and dairy concentrate feeds at affordable prices. Diseases

prevalent in the area include heart water, black leg and

54

mastitis. Most of farmers (90%) de-wormed and use spray dips on

their animals to control internal worms and ticks. All

respondents have knowledge on control of mastitis, and can strip

test milk to detect it before milking.

Table 4.2 Mode of milk delivery to milk

collection centre.

Frequen

cy

Per

cent

Valid

Per cent

Cumulativ

e Per

cent

Foot 10 62.5 62.5 62.5

Bicycle 4 25.0 25.0 87.5

motor

vehicle2 12.5 12.5 100.0

Total 16 100.0 100.0

55

4.2.11 Mode of milk delivery to MCC

The results in Table 4.2 show that the majority of farmers

delivered their milk on foot (62.5%), bicycle (25%) and motor

vehicle (12, 5%).The mode of transport are highly correlated to

distance and spoilage of milk. Milk spoilage is higher if

distance is >10 km and delivery is by foot. The reverse is true.

4.2.12 Distance

to MCC

Distance to the

market refers

to the location

of the farmer’s

56

Table 4.3

Distance to M.C.C

Frequen

cy

Per

cent

Valid Per

cent

Cumulat

ive Per

cent

<1km 7 43.8 43.8 43.8

<5km 6 37.5 37.5 81.2

>10

km3 18.8 18.8 100.0

Total 16 100.0 100.0

household from the MCC and influences market accessibility. The

nearer the farm, the lower the transport costs, reduced milk

spoilage and accessibility to facilities. The reverse is true.

Table 4.3 shows that 43.8%, 37.5%and 18.8% are located <1 km, < 5

km and > 10 km respectively.

4.3 Constraints at farm production level

This presentation and analysis is an attempt to answer the sub

question 1: What is the nature of constraints cooperative members

face in the production of milk at farm level?

The respondents noted that a wide range of constraints limiting

their smallholder dairy enterprise as tabulated in (Table 4 .4)

below.

Table 4.4. Proportion of respondents who faced a particular

constraint

Constraint

% of farmers

Fodder production challenges 50

Animal breeding challenges 75

57

Animal handling facilities challenges 18.75

Labour challenges 18.75

Paddocks 18.75

Record keeping 18.75

Milk collection point challenges 6.25

Low milk yielding cows 62.5

Land shortages 31.25

Shortage of feed and supplements 87.5

Shortage of transport for milk delivery

12.75

Lack of capital 87.5

Water shortage and quality 18.75

Shortage of appropriate dairy breeds 62.5

Animal health challenges 68.75

Feed Shortages, Low milk yields, Fodder production, Nutrition and

Supplements.

58

Nutritional factors are a major constraint in increased milk

production .They override the animals’ genetic potential for milk

production or yield (Walshe et…al, 1992).Milk production can

increase or is sustained if the quantity of the feed and its

quality are improved on. Natural forage cannot sustain milk

production because grasses grow quickly and become fibrous with

high lignin content decreasing digestibility and therefore dry

matter feed intake(Walshe,et…al,1992).Inadequate nutrition is

also compounded by the decline in grazing areas due to arable

cropping encroachment. Seasonality in smallholder dairy

production can be effectively addressed by zero zero-grazing and

improved fodder management regimes

Feed supply in the natural veld can be improved by establishment

of improved pasture grasses, legumes and browsers in farmer group

schemes and managed collectively. Examples include quality

grasses and legumes such as Fox tail grass, Star grass, Napier grass shrubby

stylo and Siratro. (Mapiye et al 2006).Alternative for feed resources

for smallholder dairy cattle could be improved fodder production

for use in winter, hay and silage being the options in light of

limiting land shortages (Jingura, 2000). Introductions could be59

effected in fallow or feed supplementation during the dry season

is important for increased milk yield and meeting the energy

needs for body maintenance of the animals. Feed energy and crude

protein (CP) availability have been singled out as critical

nutrients in livestock production in the tropics especially in

the dry seasons (Van Soest,1982).The nutritional quality of

forage and crop residues is of poor quality to sustain growth and

milk production, thereby justifying energy and protein

supplementation. Supplementation using local locally available

feed resources is the only viable option in light of prohibitive

costs of concentrates. Leguminous trees could provide forage and

browse of high quality during the dry season. Examples of legume

fodder and browse forage include Luecanea leucophala, Sesbania sesban

and Gliricidia. Grasses such as Chloris Guyana, Cynodon dactylon Eragrotis,

Bana and Panicum Maximum. Pigeon pea leaves and sweet potato vines

should be utilised as sources of low non-protein nitrogen to

sustain rumen flora in the dry season. (Van Soest, 1982)

Opportunities to increase feed output lies in developing

sustainable year round feeding systems. This can be achieved

through intercropping, leasing extra land from neighbours for

60

fodder production. Alternatively farmers should purchase residues

from non-members.

Breeding and shortage of appropriate breeds.

All the respondents cited shortage of appropriate dairy breeds

adaptable to the local environment. Farmers with exotic breeds;

the Friesian-Holstein crossbreds lack adequate technical

managerial skills. Whilst the exotic breeds have high potential

for milk yield, the shortage of feeds and endemic diseases impede

this. The coop members face challenges in bull services,

resulting in low reproductive rate (low calving rates and long

calving intervals).This is mainly caused by silent heat and poor

artificial insemination delivery services. This view is supported

by Ngigi, (2005) which noted poor breeds and adaptability in

study carried out in the Kenyan highlands smallholder dairy

sector. High calf mortality rates also hinder viability of

replacement heifers. The cooperative members aim to upgrade

Mashona cows through cross breeding with exotic bulls of proven

semen using AI or natural mating. This view is supported by

Venge, (2010), who noted that AI requires that farmers need to

61

keep cows under close observation in order to detect heat. The

opportunities lie in the cooperative members establishing bull

centres, so as to service their cows Bull servicing fees for

individual cows would be raised and the proceeds used in bull

maintenance. However, bull centre schemes could pose management

challenges.

Water Shortages and Quality

It was noted that some of the respondents face water challenges

during the dry season, resulting in animals moving long distances

to and fro watering points such as dams and boreholes. This

stresses the animals resulting in reduced milk production,

parasitic infestation by consuming dirty water from polluted dams

and rivers. A lactating cow needs five litres of water to produce

1 litre of milk. Unreliable and dirty water sources lower milk

yield. (Ouma and Soner, 2007). Instead the coop members are

encouraged to sink protected wells and boreholes on farms .The

availability of water would also greatly enhance fodder

production (CTA, 1997).The limiting constraint in clean water

sources on the farm is lack of capital, but some farmers are

62

sinking boreholes to alleviate perennial water shortages

experienced in the dry season.

Fig 4. 1 Pie chart showing source of water

63

Milking procedure and frequency of milking

In the study area the researcher observed that cows are hand

milked twice daily. Calves are allowed to suckle before and after

milking as it stimulates milk let down. The majority of the

respondents do not practise hygiene milking.Some milkers were

observed dipping their fingers into milking cans to moisten the

cows’ teats. This is a potential threat to contaminating the

milk. Farmers need to be trained on clean milking and basic milk

hygiene. The environment in and around the milking premises

determine to a great extend the level of contamination of the

milk. If milking is done inside a shed, as is usually the case

with smallholder farmers, there is a high risk of contamination

through the air and by insects, in particular flies. The shed

should provide protection against wind, rain and excessive heat,

but at the same time have sufficient light and ventilation

(Titterton, 2000). The milking area of the shed needs special

hygienic attention. The floor of the milking place should be made

of concrete so that mud, urine, faeces and feed residues can be

removed. It should be swept with clean water before and after

each milking. For that reason the shed should be located on a64

higher place to facilitate proper drainage (Devendra, 2000).

Facilities should be created for an adequate and sufficient

supply of safe and portable water. In case all these conditions

cannot be met, milking in the pasture or a clean open field is

preferable to milking in a dirty and or muddy stable or kraal.

Lack of capital

A dairy enterprise is initially capital intensive. Funds are

required for the purchase of improved dairy breeds, inputs and

the requisite infrastructure.(Hanyani-Mlambo, 2000). Respondents

lack collateral security in the form of title deeds, required for

loans access by banks. Farmers have to content with incomes

raised from milk sales. Therefore, farmer organizations,

government and other stakeholders are recommended to provide

credit to smallholder dairy farmers. However, given more time and

support, specialisation, intensification and increased income

will enable increased operations by innovative farmers. Thus

sustainable smallholder dairy production must exhibit efficiency

65

in management of natural resources, promotion of indigenous

resource utilisation, self-sustenance and self-reliance.

(Devendra, 2000).

Record Keeping

The interviewees had challenges in that they do not keep records

of farm activities so as make informed decisions on the viability

of the dairy business. Records availed by the respondents were on

milk production. Other input records were non-existent implying

farmers’ reliance on estimates. Record keeping is an integral

part of farm business as it is an aid in animal selection for

desirable traits in dairy breeding programmes (Titterton,2000)

Farmers must therefore keep records of their farm enterprises so

as to increase cow productivity and improve operation efficiency.

Labour Shortages

The results of the study show that household size averaged > 5

per farmer. Resultantly the farmers relied on family labour.

Respondents with household sizes < 5 reported labour shortages

during peak periods. This is due to rural- urban migration by

children and adults in search of employment. In the study site it

66

was noted that this is further compounded by the gold panning

activities which offer quick cash compared to farm income which

is seasonally based. Hired casual labour is thus expensive and

increases overheads resulting in very small profit margins and or

losses. The shortage of labour is echoed by Masama (2003), who

reported that hired labour is a major constraint on most

smallholder farms, due to rural –urban migration by able bodied

persons in search of employment.

Animal health management

Improved health management ranks with nutrition and feed

resources in dairy production. The coop members experience a

variety of diseases such as, heart water, mastitis and blackleg.

These affect the lactating cows and calves. The situation is made

worse by finance handicaps so as to purchase the requisite drugs

and acaricides to drench and spray dip the animals against

internal parasites and ticks. Farmers are encouraged to maintain

hygiene in holding stalls, calf pens through improved manure and

urine disposal. (Devendra, 2000).

Transport challenges

67

The farmers noted transport shortages by the cooperative in

collection of milk from collection points, led to milk spoilage,

with farmers losing income. Transport is also a problem during

the rainy season as road network is not accessible .The

government through DDF, should avail funds for rehabilitation of

feeder roads, especially in areas that contribute to rural

development.

Constraints at milk collection and processing centre

Sub research question 2 sought to find out constraints facing the

milk collection centre, as its low take off was a result of low

milk intake from cooperative members.

The cooperative processes milk delivered by members into

fermented milk (lacto) and yoghurt. These are then packaged into

500 ml sachets and marketed (coop archives). This unit of

production faces constraints in its operation. Below is a summary

of the said constraints and possible interventions in trying to

contain these.

Low milk supply

68

The respondents ( 90 % ) noted that milk supply to the MCC was

low in the dry season, thereby affecting project viability

through high running costs .This was particularly evident from

the months of July – October when supply plunge from 2 261 litres

to all time low of 405 litres. This downward trend is premised on

the feed challenges experienced during the said period. This

observation is supported by (Njarui, et... al,2010) who noted

that milk supply in the dry season is dependent on quantity and

quality of feed available .Opportunities exist in that the coop

should purchase milk from non-members, improved milk collection

from outlying collection points. This will aid the society in

achieving economies of scale (Ngongoni, 2006).

Value addition / Economies of scale.

The MCC processes milk into one brand fermented milk (lacto), and

when there is a glut yoghurt is produced (Coop archives).The

respondents were of the opinion that product diversification,

such as cheese and butter and product branding ,would generate

more income. There would be need for improving coop capacity,

69

through improved collection, storage, and transport for high

volume processing.

Lack of Capital

80 % of the respondents cited undercapitalisation of the coop as

a constraint affecting the efficient running of the MCC.This is a

result of reliance on subscriptions by members to cater for

utility bills and fixed costs.

Biosecurity

The interviewees raised the issue of biosecurity at the MCC,

which is a threat to milk contamination by stray livestock and

unauthorised persons as the security fence is incomplete.

Footbaths are not operational due to financial handicaps. It is

of paramount importance that the premises be adequately secured.

(FAO, 2004). Possible interventions include the following:

Physical barriers (Fences, lockable gates. security

guards).Restricted entry: Only authorised employees and visitors

should be allowed to visit the milk processing plant.Bird

proofing: Wild birds can carry diseases for example Avian

Influenza, and Newcastle disease. Bird proofing using wire mesh

70

helps prevent entry of birds into.milk processing plant. The

centre staffs have inadequate protective clothing as noted by

researcher and 62, 5% of the interviewees’ clean protective

clothing for the centre staff including food handling health

certificates are a must and any non-compliance will compromise

consumer safety.Vehicles driving in and out have to be sprayed

using wheel dips and with disinfectant.Flies are a public health

problem transmitting diseases like cholera,tuberculosis and other

diseases to humans and can be controlled by fly traps (Thorpe,

Muriuki, Omore, Owango and Staal. 2000).

Low uptake of processed products by local institutions.

The farmers observed that there was low uptake of lacto and

yoghurt by local boarding schools, and retailers. This was viewed

as market threat as consumers preferred dairy brands from

established processors. Surprisingly it was noted that their

lacto was in great demand by local consumers who purchased direct

from the coop. The demand trend transcends into Gweru and Kwekwe

were high volumes are demanded. This demand could be a result of

the high butter fat content in their product which is not

71

removed. Opportunities that can be exploited are through improved

packaging product identification (Titterton, 2000).Equally

though, it could be taken as a revolt against withdrawal of

credit facilities that some retailers enjoyed but suspended due

to poor payment.

Cooling Tank

The MCC has no milk cooling tank, which holds and cools milk

before processing. The milk coolers will provide scope for value

addition and prolong keeping quality. Value addition at community

level, provides opportunities of higher income for the coop

(Devendra, 2005).

Inadequate equipment for platform tests

Key informants and researcher observation noted that the

cooperative has no mastitis check kit, lactometer and

tuberculosis test kit. These essential kits are a must for dairy

processing plants as they affect milk quality and ultimately

consumer health. The lactometer tests for adulteration and fat

content of milk. The mastitis test is important in detecting

mastitis in delivered milk, and any contamination will lead to

72

disposal of milk and concerned farmers denied payment. (Dairy

Services). Tuberculosis is a zoonotic disease, and milk must be

tested to ensure purity. The impact of these is that milk quality

is compromised and reduces consumer confidence. The coop must

urgently replace the non-functional lactometer and purchase mas

and TB kits .Farmers must be trained in the use of mas kits and

use the results to manipulate the feeding of lactating cows. The

use of lactometers will allow payment for high, butter fat

content .This will encourage farmers to improve on feeding and

general management of their dairy herds. ( Hanyani-Mlambo,

Sibanda, .and Ostergaard, (1998). ) Further opportunities lie in

introduction of documentation which shows the producer name, milk

weight for lactometer, mas and organoleptic tests. This will

enhance traceability and quality control of delivered milk and

non-payment for reject.

Cooperative Benefits

Respondents were asked to state the benefits of being a coop

member compared to individual operation. It is evident from

results in Table 4.5 that multiple gains accrue. Cooperatives not

73

only facilitate economic gains but help improve social networking

among farmers. Benefits derived from dairy coop membership showed

that all the respondents ranked income generation as the most

important.Income earned according to respondents is used for

health clinic fees, education, clothing and household amenities,

purchase of crop and dairy animal feeds, servicing heifer and cow

loans, Smallholder dairying has other merits such as manure

production, store of wealth, risk mitigation, and display of

social status. Cooperatives differ from other enterprises in that

profit is realised as benefits, dependent on the type and

structure of the cooperative (Suber, 2005).

Table 4.5 Benefits of being a cooperative member.

Benefits Frequen

cy

n=16

Percentage

(%)

Manure production 14 88

Loan repayment 15 94

Acquisition of skills 14 88

Income generation 16 100

Improved milk handling 9 56

74

Social status 8 50

Provision of inputs for crops

and dairy feeds

10 62.5

Education fees 12 75

Health fees 15 94

Food security 12 75

Improved household nutrition

and community

14 88

Risk mitigation 5 31

Sustainable farming 8 50

Social networking 2 13

5.0 Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations

5.1 Introduction

75

The research was initiated so as to assess the constraints facing

Tongogara Dairy Cooperative at farm level and at the milk

collection centre respectively. Consequently, the study was to

identify opportunities and, make possible recommendations that

could improve the cooperative and the smallholder dairy sector in

Zimbabwe. This was a case study, where a sample size of 16

farmers was drawn randomly from two stratums (8 communal and 8

resettlement) and interviewed using a semi structured interview

guide .Data on the constraints faced at farm level and at the MCC

was collected and analysed using SPSS 16.0 in addition to

observations and secondary data sources from the cooperative

records office.

5.2 Summary

The main problems facing the cooperative, include, inter-alia:

low milk yields, feed shortages in the dry season, fodder

preparation, low reproductive efficiency of dairy cows, failure

of artificial insemination and finance. Possible interventions at

the household level, farmers need to improve herd productivity

76

through use of bulls of proven genetic worth and or artificial

insemination. .

The milk collection centre is handicapped by low volumes of milk

delivered by members, undercapitalisation, inadequate platform

testing equipment, bio security and value addition of raw milk.

The MCC has the capacity to become viable through value addition

and product branding. Diversification into cheese and yoghurt

processing could improve income levels for the cooperative

members and the centre’s liquidity. Alternatively the purchase of

raw milk from non-members is an option worth considering in

maintaining production and economic operational efficiency.

5.3 Conclusion

The study showed that the major constraint is to increase milk

yield and intake at household level and at the MCC respectively.

This can be achieved by improving cow nutrition and milking

routines and by improving production traits of local breeds

through crossbreeding with exotic breeds that are adapted to the

local environment. Milk production could be increased through

higher crossbred cows, sufficient quantity and quality of

77

roughage and provision of protein concentrates like cotton seed

cake and molasses for lactating cows at all times. Milking

techniques need to be assessed to identify the most efficient

hand milking technique, since many farmers will be unable to

acquire milking machines due to lack of electricity, technical

skills and funds for investment.

Furthermore, the cooperative’s dairy processing unit seems to be

an important factor in the development of an improved local milk

production system (Mutukumira et al., 1996; Osotimehin et al,

2006). The study established that there are no cooling tanks for

bulk milk storage at the MCC; therefore ensuring milk cooling

and preventing bacterial growth is important in ensuring food

safety.

5.4 Recommendations:

This section is based on sub-question, what are the opportunities

in counteracting constraints at both farm and milk collection

centre respectively. Based on the research findings highlighted,

below are some strategic interventions and or opportunities

78

suggested in improving the production at farm level and at the

milk collection centre for Tongogara Dairy Cooperative.

(a) The development and viability of Tongogara dairy

cooperative depends on complementary elements. Increased

herd productivity is a function of improved dairy breeds,

improved nutrition, and improved animal health management

through quality and

quantity of feeds.

(b)There is need to increase milk production, reduce age at

first calving, early weaning and increase the lactation cycle.

Improvement is through access to improved breeding systems. There

is need for government and donor support in allocation of high

yielding dairy cows or heifers to productive poor farmers through

a pass on revolving loan scheme.

(c) Focus should be on fodder production, conservation and

utilisation, breeding efficiency and value addition through

milk processing and marketing. It is important that Tongogara

dairy cooperative adopt this strategy for it to be a success.

Forage legumes are an affordable alternative for dairy livestock

79

for the cash constrained smallholder farmer. This is the only

viable option through improving paddocks with protein rich forage

legumes. The dairy cooperative members stand to increase their

daily milk output, getting firewood from tree forages as well as

nitrogen fixation of soils.

(d) Improving milk hygiene at household level and at the milk

collection centre to ensure safety and quality of dairy product

which boost consumers and customer confidence in products

processed by the cooperative. This can be sustained by regular

staff development of MCC personnel on milk testing and hygiene

handling.

(e) Improving cooperative capacity, through improved collection,

storage, transport and high volume processing. Diversification

can be achieved by intensification of product range through value

addition branding.

(f) Vigorous promotion of market driven smallholder

production practises, which yield higher household income.

This could be achieved through attachments with established

dairy farmers so as to refine skills in herd improvement,

80

feed preparation and farm business. Linkages with

established coops through field trips could be considered.

5.5 Areas for further research

This research was undertaken in the dry season when milk

production declines. It is recommended that studies be

undertaken in summer to quantify the potential milk surpluses and

or deficits. Economic viability assessment of the cooperative’s

milk collection centre is an area worth pursuing.

81

REFERENCES

Auldist, M.J, Brien, G.O., Cole. D., Macmillan, K.L. and

Grainger, C. (2007). Effect of varying lactation length on milk production

capacity of cows in pasture-based dairying systems. Journal Dairy Sci. 90:

3224-3241.

Africa Now, (.2000). Technical manual for establishing a small-scale dairy

centre and cultured milk production. Africa Now (Zimbabwe). Zimbabwe .

Bhebe ( 2003).

Berglund. I., Pettersson, G., Östensson, K. and Svennersten-

Sjaunja K (2007).Quarter milking for Improved Detection of Increased SCC.

Reprod.Domest. Anim. 42: 427-432.

Bennett, A., Lhotse, F., Crook, J. and J. Phelan. (2006). The

Future of small scale dairying. in FAO, Livestock Report: p 45-55. Rome,

Italy.

Birthal, P., Joshi, P.K. and. Gulati,.A,( 2005). Vertical coordination

in high-value food commodities: Implications for smallholders. Washington D.C.,

International Food Policy Research Institute.

82

Chen, S. and Ravallion, M. (2008): The Developing World Is Poorer Than

We Thought, But No Less Successful in the Fight against Poverty. Washington,

D.C.: World Bank (Policy Research Working Paper 4703).

Convoy, C. (2005). Participatory Livestock Research: A Guide, North

Yorkshire, England

CSO. (1992). Zimbabwe. Census of Population. 1992. Government Printers,

Harare.

CSO. (2002). Zimbabwe. Census of Population. 2002. Government Printers,

Harare

CTA,( 1997).Livestock Development Policies in the Humid and sub Humid Zones of

Sub-Saharan Africa.Abijan,Cote d’Ivoire,5-9 February. pg 155-162.

Dairy Services report (unpublished).

DDP (1995) Programme strategy document: phase II, 1996-2001.September

1995.

DDP, (1999).Annual Report 1998/1999 (unpublished).

Department of the Surveyor General, (2002). Ordinance Survey Maps,

Surveyor General: Harare.

Department of Veterinary Services, (2004).Harare.

Ebing,P. (1996).Preparation of dairy Products.CTA,Wagenigen.

83

FAO, and IDF. (1998). Dairy Development Newsletter. Rome, Italy.

FAO. (2004). Employment generation through small-scale dairy marketing and

processing.

Experiences from Kenya, Bangladesh and Ghana.

FAO, (2005). Animal Production and Health Paper 158, Rome, Italy.

FAO, (2006). Livestock’s long shadow - Environmental issues and options, Rome,

Italy

FAO, (2010). Status and prospects for Smallholder milk production. Rome,

Italy.

Hansen, P.J. (2004). Physiological and cellular adaptations of Zebu cattle to

thermal stress. Animal. Reproduction. Sci. pp. 82-83, pp. 349-360.

Hanyani-Mlambo, T.B., Sibanda, S. and Ostergaard, V. (1998) Socio-

economic aspects of smallholder dairying in Zimbabwe. Livestock Research for

Rural Development Vol.10, No 2.

IDF (International Dairy Federation); (1996). The dairy world: Twenty-

five years of change. 1985-2010. Bulletin of the International Dairy

Federation 316.

IDF (International Dairy Federation). (1997). Major changes in the

international dairy trade.Bulletin of the International Dairy

Federation 325.

84

Garwe, E. C. (2001). The current state of dairy research and strategic dairy

research to enhance dairy production in Zimbabwe. In: Reviving the

Zimbabwean Dairy Industry; Proceedings of the National Dairy

Symposium held from 5 to 6 July 2007 in Harare, Zimbabwe. pp. 1-

20.

Kussendrager KD, van Hooijdonk AC (2000). Lactoperoxidase:

physiochemical properties, occurrence, mechanism of action and applications.

Mandibaya, W., Mutisi,C. and Hamudikuwanda,H.(1999).Calf rearing

systems in smallholder farming areas in Zimbabwe: A diagnostic study of Nharira-

Lancashire, Asian Australian Journal of Animal Science 12,68-76.

Masama,E.,Kusina,N.T. ,Sibanda,S. and Majoni,C.,

(2003).Reproduction and lactation performance of cattle in a

smallholder dairy system in Zimbabwe, Tropical Animal Health and

Production.35(2),117-129.

Ministry of Lands and Agriculture. (2004). Department of Veterinary

Services Livestock Records.

85

Munangi, W. (2010), A SWOT Analysis of the Dairy Development Programme

(DDP).Training and development International Trust, Professional

Monitoring and Evaluation Diploma (TDI-SADCCon) (unpublished).

Mupunga, E.G. (1994).The impact of the Dairy Development Programme on the

living standard of smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe (MBA dissertation),

UZ.Harare.

Mupunga, E. G. and D. M. J. Dube. (1992). Smallholder development

programme in resettled and communal areas in Zimbabwe. Proceedings of a Workshop

on the Future of livestock Industries in East and Southern Africa, ILCA, Addis

Ababa, Ethiopia: 165-172. Retrieved from

http://www.fao.org/Wairdocs/ILRI/x5485E/x5485e0q.htm Accessed

October, 19. 2012.

Musimwa, E. (1999).The impact of entry and exit of donor funding on rural

development: A case study of the Agricultural and Rural Development Authority’s DDP

(ARDA-DDP), MBA dissertation, UZ.Harare.

Mutukumira, A.N., Dube D.M.J., Mupunga E.G, Feresu S.B.

(1996).Smallholder milk production, milk handling and utilization: A case study from

the Nharira/Lancashire farming area, Zimbabwe. Livest.Res. Rural Dev. 8(1):

8

86

Ndebele, J. J, Muchenje V., Mapiye, C., Chimonyo, M., Musemwa, L.

and Ndlovu, T.

(2007).Cattle breeding management practices in the Gwayi smallholder farming

area of South-western Zimbabwe. Livestock Research for Rural

Development 19 (11)

Ngigi, M.W. (2005).The Case of Smallholder Dairying in Eastern Africa.

Environment and

Production Technology Division Working Paper No 131.

International Food Policy Research

Institute (IFPRI) Washington DC,

Ngongoni, N. T. C., Mapiye, M., Mwale,T. and Mupeta, B . (2006)

Factors affecting milk production in the smallholder dairy sector in Zimbabwe.

Livestock Research for Rural Development18 (05)

Ouma, R. and Sones, K. ( 2007). Feeding dairy : a manual for smallholder

dairy farmers and extension workers in East Africa. Smallholder dairy project,

International Livestock Research Institute

87

Osotimehin KO, Tijani AA, Olukomogbon EO (2006). An economic

analysis of small scale dairy milk processing in Kogi State, Nigeria.Livest. Res.

Rural Dev. pp. 18-11.

Thorpe, W., H. G. Muriuki, A. Omore, M. O. Owango and S. Staal.

( 2000). Dairy development in Kenya: the past, the present and the future. Paper

prepared for the Annual Symposium of the Animal Production

Society of Kenya, Kari Headquarter. Nairobi.

Redda, T. (2001). Small-scale milk marketing and processing in Ethiopia. In

Proceedings of South-South Workshop on Smallholder Dairy and Marketing Constraints

and Opportunities.

Anand,India.Retrievedfrom:http://www.ilri.org/InfoServ/Webpub/Full

docs/South_South.theme4_3.htm. Accessed, October, 16. 2012

Rémond B, Pomiès D (2005). Once-daily milking of dairy cows: a review of recent

French experiments. Anim. Res. 54: 427-442.

Suber, K. (2005).An introduction to fair trade and coops: A methodology.

Overseas Cooperative Development Council. United States of

America.

88

Van Soest, P. J. (1982) Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. O & B Books,

Corvallis, Oregon.

Walshe M.J., Grindle J., Nell A. and Bachmann M. (1991). Dairy

development in sub-Saharan Africa: A study of issues and options. World Bank

Technical Paper 135. Africa Technical Department Series.The World

Bank, Washington, DC, USA. 97 p

Waters-Bayer, A. and Bayer, W. (2002) ‘Animal science research for

poverty alleviation in the face of industrialisation of livestock production’, In:

Responding to the Increasing Global Demand for Animal Products,

Programme and Summaries of an International Conference organised

by BSAS, ASAS and MSAP, Merida, Mexico, November 2002.

Wilson, T.R. (2009). Livestock Production Systems, Macmillan,

Singapore.

Titterton, M. (2000).Dairy Production. Zimbabwe Open University,

Harare.

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96