Livestock Research for Rural Development 18 (12) 2006 Guidelines to authors LRRD News

Citation of this paper

On farm characterization of Butana and Kenana cattle breed production systems in Sudan

L M-A Musa*, K J Peters and M-K A Ahmed*

Department of Animal Breeding in the Tropics and Sub-Tropics, Humboldt University of Berlin,
Phillipstraat 13, Haus 9, 10115 Berlin,Germany
 lutfimusa@hotmail.com
*Department of Genetics and Animal Production, Faculty of Animal Production,
University of Khartoum, P. O. Box 13314 Shambat, Sudan

Abstract

This study aims at understanding the cattle production system and production constraints and identifying cattle breeding goals of breeders in Butana and Kenana cattle areas in central Sudan as the first step towards developing a sustainable breed improvement programme. A set of detailed structured questionnaires were used to collect information from Butana and Kenana cattle owners in one-visit-interviews. Butana and Kenana cattle are kept in a mixed crop-livestock production system and are the dominant livestock species.

The majority of Butana cattle owners indicated livestock to be their main activity while for the majority of Kenana owners both livestock and crop farming are important activities. Cattle have multi-functional roles in both production systems. Milk production is important for obtaining regular cash income and home-consumption needs. The unfavorable production conditions determine the rather low milk yield of Butana and Kenana herds in their habitats. Measures overcoming production constraints are given clear priority by cattle owners. However, the realization options are insecure unless a stronger market orientation can be developed. Breeding policies targeting Butana and Kenana cattle smallholder need to incorporate the multi-functional roles of cattle in these systems and should be focused to those areas where market oriented milk production is possible.

Keywords: Butana, cattle, farming system, Kenana


Introduction

The cattle population in Sudan was estimated to be 38.3 millions head (Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) 2002). They are well adapted to the local environmental conditions (e.g. tolerance to heat stress and they are able to survive long periods of feed and water shortage but show correspondingly low performance level demonstrated by a low juvenile growth rate, late sexual maturity, low milk yield and long calving interval. Among the cattle population Kenana and Butana are promising indigenous milk breeds, which under improved feeding and management in research stations yield more than 1500 kg milk per lactation (Saeed et al 1987, El-Habeeb 1991 and Musa et al 2005).

Through experience, many herdsmen have come to understand that the best results are obtained by crossing the best local cattle (usually Butana and Kenana) with exotic breeds (usually Friesian) (Musa et al 2005). This process of fast upgrading aims at increasing local milk production in response to the raising demand in urban areas. This has raised concern over the fate of Butana and Kenana types and efforts for their conservation for both present and future use. This concern is motivated by the fact that the genotypes of the improved indigenous breeds may be required to upgrade or replace low producing cattle in harsh nomadic environments where exotic cattle cannot survive. Another cause for concern is the fact that the directions of future demand cannot be predicted with any certainty.

Recognizing the need to ensure that livestock production become more efficient, sustainable and responding to economic pressures, the FAO initiated the Global Programme and Strategy for Animal Genetic Resources. The programme aims to overcome the erosion of animal genetic resources through better development and use. Active and sustainable utilization' (i.e. in-situ conservation) , together with improving the production levels of adaptive breeds as central to the better management/ conservation of AnGR (FAO 1997). Therefore, improvement programmes are necessary to increase and sustain the productivity of these cattle breeds to meet the demands of the human population.

There are tendencies for genetic improvement programs to focus on single market driven traits such as milk or meat production in isolation from environmental constraints and broader livestock system functions which cattle perform in developing countries (Ouma et al 2004). It is extremely important that farmers get involved early in the process of breed improvement, in order to ensure that their breeding perceptions are taken into account and that they provide the support needed for the programme to work (Zumbach and Peters 2002). In addition, the development of genetic improvement programmes for cattle will only be successful when accompanied by a good understanding of the production systems and when simultaneously addressing several constrains - e.g.; feeding, health control and management (Baker and Gray 2003). This study was carried out in Butana and Kenana cattle areas in central Sudan with the objectives to understand the conditions of production systems and to identify breeding objectives, husbandry practices and production constrains as a first step toward development of a sustainable breed improvement programme.


Materials and methods

The distribution and population size of Butana and Kenana cattle

Butana cattle are found in the Butana plain of central Sudan (figure 1) (between the River Nile, Atbara River and Blue Nile), a typical semi-arid ecological zone (300 mm rainfall, 8 months dry period).



      Figure 1.
  Locations of the study areas in Sudan.


This breed is also found in the Gezira between the Blue Nile and the White Nile and along the River Nile in the northern region. The population size as reported by Rege (1999) was one million head and thus, the breed is not at risk. However, the population shows a decreasing trend due to extensive crossbreeding with European cattle (since 1956) and due to effects of recurrent droughts in 1972/73, 1983/84 and 1989/90.

The Kenana cattle breed is mainly kept by the Kenana tribe in the southern central plain of the country (figure 1), between the Blue Nile and White Nile. Rege (1999) reported that the Kenana cattle population size was 1.5 million head and that the status of the population was not at risk. He also mentioned that the breed has been extensively crossed with other breeds during the past 20 years. The Kenana cattle habitat is a low rainfall savanna region (300 - 800 mm) with a dry season from November to April. This zone hosts some large scale irrigated agricultural schemes such as Gezira scheme which extends south into this zone, El-Suki, El-Rahad and Blue Nile Agricultural Corporation. Large scale commercial rain-fed cultivation is practised, particularly towards the southern part of the zone. In general, the northern parts are utilized by herders as wet season grazing areas and during the dry season they move towards the southern parts, where water and pasture are available.

Sampling and questionnaire methodology

The survey was conducted through questionnaire guided interviews with cattle owners (household survey) in selected districts in Butana and Kenana cattle habitats. One district for each breed was selected according to the distribution of breed population (figure 1). Five villages were selected according to the clustering of villages within the district and to accessibility and nine cattle owners were selected from each village (table 1). Due to the limited number of bull keepers in these villages (usually ranging from 1 - 4 bull keepers), all bull keepers were interviewed, while dairy cow owners were selected at random.


Table 1.  The villages selected for the survey in Butana and Kenana cattle areas

No.

Butana area

Kenana area

1

Banat

Ganofa

2

Wad-Godat

Um-Benein

3

Wad-Adam

Elamara-Rwag

4

Wad-Alfadul

Um-Biaga

5

Alawaida - East

Alsabonabi


A set of detailed structured questionnaires were prepared and used to collect information from a total of 90 cattle owners in both Butana and Kenana areas (45 interviews for each area) in one visit interviews (table 2).


Table 2.   Number of dairy cow owners and bull owners included in the study

Study area

Number of dairy cow owners

Number of breeding bull owners

Total

Butana area

31

14

45

Kenana area

32

13

45

Total

63

27

90


The questionnaires were pre-tested to check clarity and appropriateness of the questions. Some of the information collected during interviews were supported by observation. The questionnaires were designed to obtain information on general household characteristics, livestock and herd structure, herd management, breeding practices, disease prevalence, production objectives, feeding management and production constraints.

Data analysis

The SPSS statistical computer software (SPSS for windows, release 13.0, 2004) was used to analyze the data. The analysis was implemented separately for Butana cattle owners and Kenana cattle owners. Results are presented mainly in the form of descriptive tabular summaries. Chi-square (c2) or t tests were carried out as appropriate to assess the statistical significance or otherwise of particular comparisons. An index was calculated to provide overall ranking of the reasons of keeping cattle according to the formula:

Index = of (7 for rank 1 + 6 for rank 2 + 5 for rank 3 + 4 for rank 4 + 3 for rank 5 + 2 for rank 6 + 1 for rank 7) given for an individual reason divided by the sum of (7 for rank 1 + 6 for rank 2 + 5 for rank 3 + 4 for rank 4 + 3 for rank 5 + 2 for rank 6 + 1 for rank 7) summed over all reasons. A similar index was calculated for ranking importance of livestock by species.

Results

General household information

Of the ninety cattle owners (63 dairy cow owners and 27 breeding bull owners) interviewed 18 (29% and 11% of the corresponding totals for Butana and Kenana cattle owners, respectively) owned only cattle, 11 (7% and 18%) owned cattle and sheep, 22 (29% and 20%) owned cattle and goats and 39 (35% and 51%) owned cattle, sheep and goats.

The questionnaire survey showed that, 97.8 % and 93.3 % of Butana and Kenana cattle owners grow crops (mainly Sorghum, Sesame and Ground nut), respectively. However, only 22.2 % of Butana owners reported sales of crops within 12 months preceding the interview, which was significantly lower (c2 = 10.76, P < 0.001) than the corresponding percentage of 68.9% for Kenana owners. The majority of Butana cattle owners (64.4%) indicated livestock to be their main activity (table 3). The corresponding percentage of 6.7% for Kenana owners was significantly lower (c2 = 21.13, P < 0.0001).


Table 3.  The importance of livestock and crop farming in Butana and Kenana cattle areas

 

Butana cattle owners, %

Kenana cattle owners, %

Livestock only

64.4

6.7

Crop farming only

0

11.1

Livestock and farming

35.6

82.2


Also the results showed that, the majority of Kenana cattle owners (82.2%) indicated both livestock and farming to be their main activity. 11.1 % of Kenana cattle owners put crop farming first, while none of the Butana cattle owners indicated crop farming to be a main activity.

In general, the ranking of livestock was comparable in Butana and Kenana cattle areas (table 4).


Table 4.   Importance of livestock species in surveyed areas

Livestock species

Butana cattle area

Kenana cattle area

householdsa

Rankingb

householdsa

Rankingb

Cattle, sheep and goats

(n = 16)

 

(n = 23)

 

                        Cattle

9

0.43

17

0.46

                        Sheep

7

0.40

5

0.36

                        Goats

-

0.17

-

0.18

Cattle and sheep

(n = 3)

 

(n = 8)

 

                        Cattle

3

0.67

4

0.50

                        Sheep

-

0.33

4

0.50

Cattle and goats

(n = 13)

 

(n = 9)

 

                        Cattle

13

0.67

9

0.67

                        Goats

-

0.33

-

0.33

aHouseholds ranking livestock species first.

bIndex = sum of (3 for rank 1 + 2 for rank 2 + 1 for rank 3) divided by sum (3 for rank 1 + 2 for rank 2 + 1 for rank 3) for all species for a breed surveyed area


In both areas cattle received a higher ranking in cases when both sheep and goats were kept alongside cattle and in cases where just one of them was kept. The only exception was in Kenana area when just cattle and sheep were kept and both received a similar ranking. Where both sheep and goats were kept sheep were ranked directly after cattle.

Livestock and cattle herd composition

Cattle comprised more than 70% of all livestock TLU kept by Butana and Kenana farmers. The average cattle herd size in Kenana area (13.82 ± 3.54 TLU) was significantly higher than that in Butana area (9.52 ± 1.37 TLU) (P < 0.05), Sheep flocks are similar and mean goat flocks size kept by Kenana breeders was significantly lower than that for Butana breeders (P < 0.05) (table 5).


Table 5.   Livestock herd size in Butana and Kenana cattle habitats

Livestock species

Butana cattle area Herd size (TLU)

Kenana cattle area Herd size (TLU)

n

Mean (SE)

%

n

Mean (SE)

%

Cattle

45

9.52 ± 1.37

71

45

13.82 ± 3.54

70.4

Sheep

19

7.23 ± 1.71

22.1

31

7.17 ± 2.19

25.2

Goat

29

1.03 ± 0.17

5

32

0.74 ± 0.10

2.7

Donkey

21

0.45 ± 0.05

1.6

32

0.44 ± 0.03

1.6

Horse

 

-

-

1

0.80 ± 0.00

0.1

Camel

2

1.20 ± 0.00

0.3

 

 

 

TLU= Tropical livestock unit, 1 TLU= 250 kg, adopted from Gryseels (1988) and Abdinasir (2000)

SE= Standard error


Donkeys, which are mainly kept in the household for transportation and packing, also comprised a significant proportion of the livestock holding in both areas (1.6%).

The cattle herd composition in Butana and Kenana (table 6) was dominated by cows with a higher proportion cows kept in Kenana cattle herds. While the proportion of heifers was higher in Butana than in Kenana.


Table 6.  Cattle herd composition in Butana and Kenana cattle areas

Variable

Butana cattle area

Kenana cattle area

Mean ± S.E

%

Mean ± S.E

%

Herd size

17.42 ± 2.42

100%

23.13 ± 5.73

100%

Cows

7.07 ± 1.00

40.3

11.67 ± 3.11

48.7

          Indigenous

 

(95.6)

 

(100)

          Crosses*

 

(04.4)

 

 

Heifers

5.32 ± 0.85

27.6

6.68 ± 1.63

22.9

Bulls

1.14 ± 0.10

2.0

1.46 ± 0.22

1.8

          Indigenous bull

 

(86.0)

 

(89.5)

          Crossbred bull*

 

(07.0)

 

 

          Other indigenous bull**

 

(07.0)

 

(10.5)

Calves

5.53 ± 1.49

30.1

6.52 ± 1.49

26.6

*   = Butana x Friesian              ** = Baggara breed


The survey also found a small proportion of crossbred cows (Butana x Friesian) in the Butana area, and some indigenous breed bulls such as Baggara breed in Kenana.

Purposes of keeping cattle

Most Butana and Kenana breeders consider that the primary reason for keeping cattle to generate income from the sale of milk and animals, milk for home-consumption or as insurance against financial problems. Traction (animal for work) received a lower ranking among both Butana and Kenana cattle breeders (table 7).


Table 7.   Production objectives of keeping cattle and the ranking of the importance of these objectives by breeders

Production objectives

Butana area

Kenana area

householdsa

Ranking

householdsa

Ranking

Income from sale of milk

16

0.22

14

0.21

Milk for home-consumption

17

0.21

13

0.20

Income from sale of animal

2

0.16

1

0.16

Traction (animal for work)

 

0.04

 

0.04

Manure

 

0.07

 

0.07

Insurance against financial problems

10

0.18

14

0.18

Investment (like a bank)

0

0.12

3

0.14

aHouseholds ranking reason of keeping cattle  first


58% and 73% of Butana and Kenana cattle owners, respectively reported cattle sales within the 12 months preceding the interview (table 8).


Table 8.   Reported cattle sales within 12 months (preceding the interview).

Items

Butana cattle area, %

Kenana cattle area, %

Farmers reported cattle sales

58.0

73.3

Reasons of cattle sales:

 

 

          Purchase of animal feed

30.0

27.4

          Financial problems

48.0

25.0

          Finance agriculture

18.0

40.0

          Age

04.0

 

          Social activities

 

03.8

          Investment

 

03.8

   Period preceding the interview = 2004


In the Butana area the major portion of income was spent to solve financial problems (48%), while Kenana cattle breeders spent the major part of their income to finance agricultural operations (40%).

Breeding practices

Bull owners in Butana and Kenana selected villages provide mating service to cattle owners (1 - 4 bull owners/ village). The existence of few breeding bull keepers was explained by the high cost of keeping a bull in small herds (51.5% for Butana breeders and 70% for Kenana breeders) and the need to sell bull calves to solve recurrent financial problems (17% for Butana breeders and 12.5% for Kenana breeders). The indigenous bulls were generally selected from the own herd, but the crossbred bulls were bought mostly from markets or commercial farms. Most of the breeding bulls were of the Butana (86%) and Kenana (89%). Friesian-crossbred bulls were kept in Butana for crossbreeding purposes in the respective area (table 6).

All Butana and Kenana bull owners were planning to replace their breeding bull through its offspring. Breeding bulls were kept on average 6.5 years for service (productive period) in both areas (maximum of 12 and 14 years in Kenana and butane, respectively). Cows were kept for production in both areas on average about 10 years and up to a maximum of 13 and 15 years. Dam reproduction and milk performance, health and vigour were the most important characteristics for Butana and Kenana bull owners when selecting a breeding bull (table 9).


Table 9.  Characteristics used to select breeding bull in Butana and Kenana cattle areas

Characteristics

Butana cattle area, %

Kenana cattle area, %

% of bull owners

% of bull owners

     Dam performance

93

100

     Sire performance

14.3

84.6

     Health

64.3

77

     Colour

57.1

46.2

     Activity

35.7

77

     Vigour

57.1

54

     Body size

35.7

23.1

     Shape (similarity to dam or sire)

7.1

7.7


The sire performance was more important for Kenana cattle bull owners (84.6%) than for Butana cattle bull owners (14.3%), the difference being highly significant (p < 0.001). Other characteristics such as body size and the shape of selected animal ranked relatively low in importance. In both areas, animals were herded on communal grazing areas, and most of matings took place within the herds. However, only 42% and 53% of Butana and Kenana dairy cow owners mentioned that they know the bull serving their cows, respectively. On average 44 cows in Butana area and 48 cows in Kenana area were served by one bull per year. Options for improving milk production were identified by 86.7% of interviewed Butana cattle farmers and 69% of interviewed Kenana cattle farmers through feed improvement (74.4% Butana keepers and 80.6% Kenana keepers), selection of bulls (20.5% of Butana and 45.1% of Kenana) or crossbreeding with Friesian (23.1% of Butana and 9.7% of Kenana).

Animal health