Pastoralists’ Adaptive Strategies

i. Mobility and opportunistic tracking. The key strategy of pastoralists is the movement of their herds in response to seasonal and annual changes in pastures and water availability.

Mobility allows pastoralists to avoid overgrazing and to evade disease, conflict or drought conditions (Hesse and MacGregor, 2006:7). The productivity of African rangelands is heterogeneous in space and variable over time. Flexible movement is, therefore, critical to pastoralists (Scoones, 1996:2). This pastoral strategy may involve tracking rainfall by moving

herds, movement between different agro-ecological zones and to key resource areas (Scoones, 1996:2). Mobility allows herders for tracking fodder across landscapes and making use of patchy grass production caused by uneven rainfall or variations in landscape (Scoones, 1996:16; Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996). Furthermore, animals depend on relatively small patches within a wider dryland landscape during dry seasons or drought periods. Therefore, strategic movements are usually pursued by herders to such key resource sites that could sustain animals (Scoones, 1996:11).

In arid and semi-arid areas variation in soil type and topography can also result in very patchy pasture production, containing key sites for pastoral production such as dry season and drought reserves, swamps, water points, lakes, salt licks, and micro patches for fodder production, or cereal cultivation (Swallow, 1994 cited in Rass, 2006:32). Therefore, efficient tracking requires movement over different scales depending on the temporal and spatial pattern of primary production variability (Scoones, 1996).

Various pastoral groups also pursue variable patterns of movement. Pastoral systems “differ by degree of movement from highly nomadic through transhumance to sedentary” (Rass, 2006:32). Thus regularity of movements differs between the systems and involves some degree of flexibility. In elation to this Rass (2006:32) noted that “nomadic pastoralists prefer to certain established migration routes which they have developed balancing knowledge of pasture, rainfall, disease, political insecurity, national boundaries with access to infrastructures”. However, in very arid areas with high variability in quantity and distribution of rainfall, it requires certain flexibility and enforces irregularities in the movement. In contrasts, in semi-arid areas with less variability in rainfall transhumant pastoralists pursue regular movements of herds between fixed areas (Rass, 2006).

Many pastoralists face various constraints while pursuing their tracking strategies. These include among others, administrative arrangements (borders and boundaries); land use changes (conversion of pastoral lands into non-pastoral uses); lack of tenure security; conflict with agriculturalists over key resource areas; livestock disease risks; infestation of areas;

denudation of transit zones by preceding herds; prolonged drought and long distance movement, etc (Scoones, 1996; Ahmed et al., 2002). Costs are imposed on herders by regulations and restrict their movement. Most administrative arrangements (movement permits, veterinary regulation) assume also stable environment, and discourage movements (Scoones, 1996).

Pastoralists also face difficulties while leading their herds through agricultural areas before harvests are completed. Pastoralists may also be forced to move to areas infested with tsetse fly and other parasites, and where grasses may be unfamiliar to animals (Ahmed et al., 2002).

Consequently, tracking resources through movement has become increasingly difficult for many pastoral groups in East Africa.

ii. Diversification of Species. Pastoralists strategically diversify the species, and breeds within species in their herds taking into account that species and breeds are affected differently by most animal diseases and adapt to different environment. Therefore, different species are bred for their resilience to drought and diseases. Different animals have also different niche specializations (Rass, 2006; Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996).

Diversity is crucial to pastoral survival in highly variable environments like the dryland Africa where risks are high and multiple. In this region pastoralists keep a diverse mix of livestock to match herds with different components of vegetation and to reduce risks (drought impacts, diseases, grazing scarcity). Viable herd can be maintained in a given area, if the herd includes several species which eat different components of the vegetation (Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996:60). A mixed herd (cattle, camels, sheep and goats) can make full use of a ‘larger spectrum of the vegetation’ and ‘different niches in the environment’. Therefore, managing a variety of species helps take optimal advantage of the ‘heterogeneous nature of ecosystems’

(Perrier, 1996; Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996; Ahmed et al., 2002).

Keeping several species also permits faster restocking after drought, as feeding habits and physiology of camels and goats allow them to survive droughts better than cattle or sheep and, afterwards, small ruminants recover in number more quickly than cattle and camel (Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996). In general diversification of species composition within the family herd is one of the risk reduction and adaptive strategies of pastoralists. Therefore, herders can reduce risks they face from a particular event by maintaining several species.

iii. Herd splitting and distribution. In order to reduce the effects of localized drought, and risks of animal raiding and disease, pastoralists employ herd splitting and distributing stock through loans and exchanges with other herders (Hesse and MacGregor, 2006; Ahmed et al., 2002). Animals may be kept in several different areas which reduce the effects of localized droughts, and disease outbreak. Herders divide their livestock into small herds grazed separately; and prioritize into other categories (e.g. milking animal, dry animal, young animal). Animals may also be distributed through loans and exchanges with other herders in order to reduce risks of drought and disease. This strategy also enables herders to create and reinforce social ties between households thereby maintaining social networks for future risk management (Ahmed et al., 2002:34).

Moreover, herders use the strategy of herd splitting to enhance livestock productivity in relation to labour, forage and water. By dividing herd, labour for instance can be used more efficiently. Children and women frequently tend small stocks; and nursing animals are intensively cared by women. Lactating animals are kept near homestead, usually herded by men and milked by women (Perrier, 1996). Dry animals are often herded by young men far away from homestead. In so doing, herders enhance efficient use of labour and grazing (Oba, 1993; Perrier, 1988 cited in Perrier, 1996).

Concerning labour efficiency of watering, during dry season many herders adopt alternate-day or every-third day watering thereby saving labour to be spent in lifting water and in using grazing sites distant to water points. The level of feed intake also can be managed by controlling access to water. Reduced water intake reduces forage intake helping to conserve dry season grazing resources (Perrier, 1996; Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996:60).

iv. Livestock accumulation and changing herd/species composition. Pastoralists are constantly exposed to risk of losing livestock. Thus, as opportunistic stocking strategy, they accumulate livestock numbers that exceed the subsistence demands during good years so as to

still have reproductive females for rebuilding herds after a crisis (Rass, 2006:32; Hesse and MacGregor, 2006:7).

It is argued that “pastoralists’ attempts to maximize herd size are rational in a highly variable environment” (Sandford, 1983 cited in Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996:59). Herd-owners endeavor to maximize their herd size during favorable periods, so that animal losses during drought do not reduce the herd size below a viable size. They attempt to “protect themselves against the worst ravages of droughts and epidemics by expanding their livestock holding on the principle that quantity provides the best defense against heavy losses” (Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996; Ahmed et al., 2002:34).

In pastoral systems wealth⁷¹ in livestock provides a buffer against crisis. Households with high number of livestock can absorb high drought-related livestock mortality, and obtain sufficient milk to meet household needs during dry period (Coppock, 1994 cited in Perrier, 1996:55). Therefore, pastoralists are motivated to maintain large herds in order to survive the risk of dry period and impacts of drought (Hesse and MacGregor, 2006:7).

Feed habit or requirements differ among herds depending, among others, on species, age, and lactation. In times of feed shortage herd owners attempt to adjust their herd composition to reduce feed requirements. “Dry females and adult males require less feed than lactating females or young stock and can therefore survive periods of shortage. A herd’s forage demands can be reduced seasonally by disposing of young stock not needed to replace breeders and by drying off milk animals to keep only a reproductive herd. Mating can be timed so that lactation does not coincide with dry seasons” (Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1997:60).

Pastoralists also change the species composition of their herd as a long-term strategy for coping with drought and change in vegetation and rangelands. This takes place among species that have a different reproductive rate, mobility style and feed habit (Ahmed et al., 2002). For instance the Afar pastoral groups in Ethiopia have changed their livestock composition from more grazers and less browser into more browsers and less grazers due to drought impacts, range deterioration, diminishing of annual grass and bush encroachment into rangelands (Ali, 1996:204-205). In relation to this some studies (e.g. Assefa, 1996; Ali 1996) indicated that changing the species composition of herds has some limitations, if pastoral communities need to generate cash from time to time. For instance the market for camels is often much less developed than the market for cattle or sheep in Ethiopia.

71 With regard to wealth accumulation of herds more explanations are given by researchers. One explanation is that “because pastoralists do not maximize a profit function, livestock are used by pastoralists as their principal store of wealth rather than as income generating capital (Goldschmidt, 1975; Doran, Low and Kemp, 1979 cited in Rass, 2006:32-33). The store of wealth concept has been advanced to the “target income” concept (Dahl and Hjort, 1976 cited in Rass, 2006:33), which argues that in anticipation of livestock losses due to recurrent risks (epidemics or drought) pastoralists follow a risk reduction strategy and sell the minimum number of animals necessary to get the “target income” for some identified needs”. Another explanation given by asset model explains that “income from livestock assets in pastoral areas is in the form of products produced from livestock themselves rather than in cash obtained from the sale of livestock. Accordingly livestock owners regard their animals as capital assets which produce a stream of valuable products while held and have a capital value when sold and slaughtered. Stock owners determine the optimal age of sale or for slaughtering by comparing the expected net capital value of animals if slaughtered or sold” (Rass, 2006:33).

v. Dispersal of resources and assistance from relatives. According to Sommer (1998:11) these strategies include herd and family splitting, temporary migration, transfer of animals within social networks (i.e. on basis of kinship, stock associates) on which individuals have legitimate claims, resource sharing (e.g. circulation of milking animals). Pastoralists adopt various resource (herd, labour, forage, manure) use arrangements among themselves or with their neighbouring farmers.

Pastoralists also disperse animals in herds of allied households (Rass, 2006:33). Animals are exchanged between pastoral households to reduce the risk of losses, or loaned to other pastoral group members who suffer misfortune (Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996:66). In the first case, if one herd is affected by disease or drought in one location, other herds in other location may survive and a household will lose some but not all of its assets. In the second case, animals are transferred through social networks (kinship, bond relationships and stock association) in order to support those members who face crisis or to solicit care or feed for stock (Hesse and MacGregor, 2006:7). The creation of such stock alliance and patronage also creates social bonds; disperses the risk of animal loss during drought; and decreases the workload of households (Rass, 2006:33).

Tending large stock of animals requires much labour, and thus rich households either give animals on loan to poor families, or employ poor herders (Rass, 2006:33). Young herders from pastoral families may also migrate and work for farmers, traders and richer pastoralists for some years in order to rebuild their own herds. Pastoralists, with few animals, or who lost their stock, may also enter into herding contracts whereby, depending on their agreement, they receive milking rights as well as some of the offspring of ‘contract animals’. This has been practiced for instance by Wodaabe herders, in Niger (Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996:66).

Forage and manure use arrangements are made between herders and farmers depending on their relations. Arrangements for forage use between herders and farmers range from open access to stubble fields, to the sale of grazing rights or crop residues to particular herder (Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996:66). According to Bayer and Waters-Bayer, “arrangement between herders and farmers for stubble grazing is common throughout West Africa”. And in

“central Nigeria, where stock density is low, few formal arrangements for the use of crop residues are made, and in the more densely settled zone in Northern Nigeria, herders gain rights to stubble grazing by paying cash or in kind or by helping farmers with harvest”

(Perrier, 1983, cited in Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996). The same source states that similar trends are witnessed in eastern Sudan, and herders buy rights to use crop residues.

Securing manure is crucial for cropping in many parts of sub-Saharan Africa, as forage arrangement is crucial for animal keeping. The expansion of cropping and decline in fallowing calls for measures other than long-term fallowing to maintain soil fertility. Manure is removed from pastoralists’ kraal and sold to farmers, and arrangements are made for keeping herds overnight on fields to deposit manure (Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996:67). For instance, farmers in central Nigeria pay Fulani herders in cash or kind to camp on their fields during dry season (Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996:67). In the millet zone of Mali, where farmers have private wells dug for attracting herders, manuring contracts are also arranged via access to water (Toulmin, 1992a cited in Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996:68).

Forage and manure use arrangements between herders and farmers, and herding contracts have considerable implications. Manuring contracts have importance for good herder-farmer relations and for creating close links between manuring and forage arrangements. Thus external interventions must understand these links and relations not to weaken them. Every opportunity should be sought to find ways to strengthen them (Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996:66-68). The implication of contract herding is that there may be extensive milking and thus leaving less milk for calves. This may lead to higher calf mortality. Contract arrangements also limit the extent of herd movement since herd-owners want to “keep an eye”

on the herds and are thus unwilling to allow long migration, in turn contract herders are less inclined to invest more labour (Toulmin, 1992b, cited in Bayer and Waters-Bayer, 1996).

vi. Forage supplementation. This includes hay-making, lopping of trees (leaves, fruits, branches), supply of commercial forage supplements, etc. (Scoones 1996; Sommer 1998).

Many studies showed that coppiced trees and shrubs in dryland areas are critical to the nutrition of livestock in times of drought. Tree pods in particular may be important protein supplement for maintenance of animals during periods of stress (Bayer and Water-Bayer, 1996). Depending on the herd species and availability of coppiced trees and shrubs, pastoralists thus collect and feed their stock with pods, fruits and leaves during periods of stress. Pastoralists track also woodlands and use them as refuge during prolonged dry seasons or drought period to survive feed shortage.

Some writers stated that “hay-making is not widely reported from sub-Saharan Africa; and

“crop residues may be stored and sold particularly near towns” (Bayer and Waters-Bayer 1996:74). In Ethiopia, the Borana women traditionally collect grass in dry season for calf feeding. Hence hay-making during wet season was encouraged among the Borana. Though the amounts collected were small (i.e. up to 300 kg per household), it facilitated calf feeding in the following dry season (Coppock, 1991 cited in Bayer and Waters-Bayer 1996:74). In Burkina Faso, the Fulani men make hay in years with good or average rainfall. But, they can collect little or no hay in drought years (Bayer and Waters-Bayer 1996:74). In general, whether hay-making is a viable option in years of extreme droughts is doubtful, since hay yield suffers the same fluctuations as range yield in areas with high rainfall variability.