JIGJIGA UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF DRY LAND AGRICULTURE
DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL AND RANGE SCIENCE
ASSESSMENT OF CAMEL MILK PRODUCTION PRACTICES IN FIK
WOREDA
A Senior Research Proposal Submitted to the Department of Animal and
Range Science. In Partial Fulfillment of Requirement for the Degree of BSc
in Animal and Range Science
BY:
Name
ID.No.
1. Nasteho Idle Roble
R/2734/10
2. Istahil Abdi Abdilahi
R/1895/10
3. Niman Abdi Ahmed
R/5599/10
Advisor: Mr. Aden Omer (M.Sc.)
MARCH, 2020
JIGJIGA, ETHIOPIA
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and for most all praise is due to ALLAH the almightily, who give us the ability,
willingness and opportunity to complete this research proposal successfully. Second, we
would like to express our heart gratitude to our respected advisor Mr. Aden Omer (M.Sc.)
for his kindly advice and effort in the course of our research proposal at the beginning to the
end. Third, we would like express our deepest gratitude to Jigjiga University especially, the
College of Dryland Agriculture, Department of Animal and Range Science for designing
this research proposal through which students develop their knowledge. Finally we would like
to thank all our friends for their supporting us all aspects of doing this final research proposal.
ii
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT…………………………………………………………………… ii
LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………………….. v
List of Abbreviations………………………………………………………………………… vi
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………..vii
1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………. 1
1.1 Background of the Study .................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 2
1.4. Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 3
1.4.1. General Objectives ..................................................................................................... 3
1.4.2. Specific Objectives ..................................................................................................... 3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………………………… 4
2.1. Definition of Significant Terms ......................................................................................... 4
2.2. Camel Milk production systems ........................................................................................ 4
2.2.1. Types of camel breeds in Ethiopia ............................................................................. 5
2.3. Husbandry practices of Camel ......................................................................................... 6
2.3.1. Camel holding ............................................................................................................ 6
2.3.2. Feeding management.................................................................................................. 6
2.3.4. Watering practices ...................................................................................................... 8
2.3.3. Housing ...................................................................................................................... 8
2.3.5. Camel breeding .......................................................................................................... 9
2.3.6. Camel Milking.......................................................................................................... 10
2.3.7. Lactation length ........................................................................................................ 11
2.3.8. Importance of camel milk ........................................................................................ 11
2.4. Camel Milk marketing .................................................................................................... 12
2.5. Constraints of Camel Milk Production ........................................................................... 12
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS………………………………………………………… 14
3.1. Description of the Study Area ......................................................................................... 14
3.2. Sample Size and Sampling Technique ............................................................................ 14
3.3. Method of Data Collection ............................................................................................. 14
3.4. Method of Data Analysis................................................................................................. 15
4. RESULT AND DISCUSSIONS………………………………………………………….. 16
iii
4.1. Result of the Study........................................................................................................... 16
4.1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 16
4.1.2. Social-economic characteristics. .............................................................................. 16
4.1.3 Camel feeds and Camel Watering Practices ............................................................. 18
4.1.4 Camel milk marketing ............................................................................................... 21
4.1.5 Camel milk production performance......................................................................... 25
4.1.6 Camel breeds. ............................................................................................................ 28
4.2. Discussion of the results ................................................................................................. 29
4.2.1. Camel feeds and watering ........................................................................................ 29
4.2.2. Camel milk marketing .............................................................................................. 29
4.2.3. Camel breeds ............................................................................................................ 30
4.3 Challenges and Opportunities toward camel milk production and marketing ................ 30
4.3.1. Challenges ................................................................................................................ 30
4.3.2. Opportunity .............................................................................................................. 31
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
33
5.1. Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 33
5.2. Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 33
APPENDEX: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR RESPONDENTS………………………………. 35
7. REFERENCE…………………………………………………………………………….. 42
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
Table 1. Activity of the schedule .......................................................................................... ….14
Table 3. Stationary cost ............................................................................................................. 15
Table 4. Personal cost categories ............................................................................................... 15
Table 5. Budget summary.......................................................................................................... 15
v
List of Abbreviations
AEZ--------------------------------- Agro-Ecological Zone
BO------------------------------------Breeding Objectives
CSA----------------------------------Central Statistical Authority
FAO----------------------------------Food and Agricultural Organization
FGD----------------------------------Focus Group Discussion
IPS-----------------------------------International Project Service
Masl----------------------------------Meters above Sea Level
MoARD-----------------------------Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
vi
ABSTRACT
This study was conducted in Fik woreda, Erer Zone, Somali Regional State of Ethiopia. The
objectives of the study were to assess camel milk production systems, to assess marketing
systems of camel milk production in the study area, and challenges and opportunities of camel
milk production in Fik woreda. The study was undertaken in the four purposively selected
kebeles and these were Mugwayn, Fikwayn, Hodanwayn and Jeerinka. The target population
of the study was 40 members of the four kebeles. Census method was used to collect primary
data from the four kebeles. Census sampling technique was used for the study and all the 40
members of the four kebeles were sampled for the study. The study was limited to Fik woreda
and to the four kebeles. The study adopted a descriptive survey design and data was collected
using structured questionnaires. The data was also collected from the four kebeles by focus
group discussions and personal interviews. The results of the study show that all of the camel
milk producers used full grazing and browsing as their main grazing system. The most
common feed for feeding camels were native browses (Trees and shrubs). It was also revealed
that most of the farmers don’t grow fodder because of insufficient information and insufficient
rains. For few who grow fodder, the mostly grown fodder forage was grass. The study found
that there is no feed supplement that camel herders bought for their camel feeding. The study
revealed that the main source of water for camels was the pipelines/taps, and wells and ponds
were used sparingly. It was also found that the farmers brought camels to the watering points
and water scarcity was found to be the main water related problem in the area. It was found
that farmers kept mostly single humped camels for milk production because they produce
higher volumes of milk. It was also shown that farmers used natural mating breeding
technique because they have no access to artificial insemination. The findings also show there
is also high demand for camel milk by consumers and there is lack of cooling facilities in the
area. The generated data from the study will be useful to the camel farmers, Government
officers and other stake holders.
Key Words: Camel, Milk Production
vii
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
The one-humped camel (Camelus dromedarius) is an important livestock species uniquely
adapted to hot and arid environments. The global population of domesticated large camelids
(dromedaries and Bactrian) is estimated to be about 28 million (Faye 2015). This number is
probably underestimated particularly in the Sahelian countries (Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad
and Sudan) and Ethiopia. More than 80% of the camel population inhabits Africa with 60% in
the Eastern African countries (Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia and Kenya) which are important
exporters of dromedary camels to the Arabian Peninsula and Egypt ) (Faye, 2015). The camel
population in Ethiopia is estimated at 4.8 million ((Faye 2015). Camels are used as multipurpose
animals in pastoral production systems of East Africa with the general aim of producing; milk,
meat, blood, hides and skins, provision of transport, barter trade (sale and exchange) and social
and cultural functions (Lemma et al., 2005).
Somalia (with over 6 million camels) has the largest camel population in the world, perhaps
representing one-third of all dromedary camels (Faye, 2010). They are found mainly in arid and
semi-arid areas where the average rainfall is less than 350 mm per year. The four neighboring
countries; Somalia, Sudan, Ethiopia and Kenya have a combined camel population comprising
99% of the camels in the Greater Horn of Africa, 97% of all camels in Africa and 75% of all
camels in the world (Farah, 2007).
Consumption of processed dairy products was observed even less frequently among the rural
low-income households, indicating that the majority of the populations
do not consume
processed products (butter) to any substantial degree (Jabbar, 2009). This consumption of milk
and milk products varies between the urban and the rural areas and the level of urbanization
(Faye, 2010). In the urban areas, all segment of the population consumes dairy products while in
the rural areas the major consumers are primarily, children and some vulnerable groups such as
the elderly and women (Kaufman, 2003). In Fik, Camel fresh milk is distributed through both the
informal and formal marketing systems. The informal market involves direct delivery of fresh
milk by producers to consumers in the immediate neighborhood and sales to nomadic traders or
individuals in nearby towns (Ahmed et al, 2003).
1
Major camel-keeping societies in Ethiopia include Afar, Somali, Oromo (Karayu, Gabra, Boran
and Guji groups), Kunama and Irob peoples, among others. The Afar and the Somali peoples are
known for their camel-keeping traditions for centuries; the Boran and Guji pastoralists, on the
other hand, started camel production recently. Gabra and Somali, who have been keeping camels
for centuries, are believed to play instrumental roles in introducing camels to the Borana Plateau
(Field, 2005).
1.2 Statement of the Problem
In Fik district for many decades the pastoralists have depended on camel milk for food and
social- economic needs. In the recent years the arid regions of Ethiopia including that of Fik
District like much of north east Africa has been hit with less predictable and more intense and
frequent droughts hindering camel milk production. (Faye, 2015).
There is a little published information about the camel milk production practices in Fik. There is
lack of information concerning about camel milk production practices in the study area, so that
this study will provide information related to the camel milk production practices and its role in
live standard of nomadic pastoralists.
1.3 Significance of the Study
The findings of this study will be used by different stakeholders in different ways. The findings
will be used by Somali Region State and the Federal Government to determine whether camel
keeping can economically empower the distract residents who hither to have solely depended on
pastoral farming of cattle and goats. The findings will enable the governments to examine ways
and means of improving camel milk production, develop policies and programs which will
enhance the living standards of the pastoralists and achieve the goal of empowering them as
vehicles of attaining high levels of development in their areas. It will be used by the nomadic
tribes across the country to embrace nomadic participation in productive activities so as to
improve per capita income and create employment opportunities which will enhance the general
development of the people found in arid areas and or pre-urban areas like Fik.
2
1.4. Objectives
1.4.1. General Objectives
 To assess camel milk production practices in Fik.
1.4.2. Specific Objectives
 To assess the camel milk production systems in the study area.
 To assess challenges and opportunities of camel milk production in the study area.
3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Definition of Significant Terms
The following terms are used prominently in the study.
Agricultural extension: Is a general term meaning the application of scientific research and new
knowledge to agricultural practices through farmer education. The field of 'extension' now
encompasses a wider range of communication and learning activities organized for rural people
by educators from different disciplines, including agriculture, agricultural marketing, health, and
business studies.
Camel Breed: Refers to different species of camels. A breeding branch of animal husbandry
concerned with the raising and use of camels developed in desert, semi-desert, and arid steppe
zones.
Camel Feed: Refers to feed for camels essential for growth maintenance or operation. Food
especially for farm animals used for nourishment. The diet of a camel includes grass, grains,
wheat and oats. When they are in the desert, they usually feed on dried leaves, seeds, and thorny
twigs. If these diets are not available, these animals can eat anything including bones, fish, meat,
leather, and even their owner's tent.
Milk Marketing: It is the process of communicating the value of a product or service to
customers. It is a critical business function for attracting customers. From a societal point of
view, marketing is the link between a society’s material requirements and its economic patterns
of response. Marketing satisfies these needs and wants through.
Milk Production: Refers to secretion of milk by the mammary epithelium. The fluid secretion
of the mammary gland forming the natural food of young mammals.
2.2. Camel Milk production systems
Livestock production systems in Ethiopia can be broadly classified into two as the traditional
production systems (pastoral nomadic, pastoral transhumant, agro-pastoral and smallholder
mixed crop-livestock) and the modern production systems (ranching, intensive/semi-intensive
per-urban/urban, feedlot and commercial production). Camels are predominantly kept in the
4
pastoral and agro-pastoral production systems. Only few male camels are to be found in the
mixed crop-livestock system (Kaufmann, 2002).
Pastoralists keep indigenous breeds/types and obtain more than 50% of household income from
livestock and livestock products. The system is much simpler than the mixed crop-livestock
systems of the highlands. There are few inputs other than labour. Herd and flock composition is
regulated to some extent (only few breeding males are maintained). Grazing management and
herd movement are determined by the seasonal patterns of rainfall and availability of water.
There is little to no interaction with crop agriculture, and although a range of livestock species is
managed to reduce risk, one or two species dominate (Desta, 2006).
Indigenous breeds/types are reared and livestock contribute between 10 and 50% of household
incomes. Mixed crop- livestock production systems prevail in sub-humid and humid central
highland parts of Ethiopia. The system is sedentary and livestock is secondary to crop
production. It is characterized by smallholdings of about 1 to 3 ha of land and two to four heads
of cattle (MoARD 2007)
2.2.1. Types of camel breeds in Ethiopia
Camel breed characterization studies are scanty as only few researchers attempted to
phenotypically describe Ethiopian camel populations and classify them into distinct ecotypes.
Molecular characterization is completely lacking. As with other livestock species, names
ascribed to camel populations in Ethiopia usually reflect the area where they are kept or the
tribe/clan who keeps them rather than their distinct attributes in terms of phenotype, genetic
makeup and/or performance potential. A breed is defined as a population or group of animals
having common origin and similar identifying characteristics that distinguish them from another
population of the same species. It refers to a race of animals within a species that tend to transmit
those identifying characteristics with reasonable consistency. (Kaufmann, 2002)
Tezera and Belay (2002) identified two types of camels, the Agoweyn and Ayuune, reared by the
Somali pastoralists based on physical attributes (body size, coat color), production performance
(milk, lactation length, loading and speed, breeding), physiology and behaviour (ability to
withstand water deprivation, disease tolerance, feeding behaviour) and geographic distribution.
Tefera and Abebe (2012) classify camels generally into four groups identified by their coat
5
colour, conformation and production performance as milk, meat, and dual purpose and baggage
camels.
More recently, Tadesse et al. (2014a, 2015a, and b) classified camels in Afar and Somali into
seven subpopulations. The authors indicated that Jigjiga and Hoor camel populations are milk
types whereas Liben and Gelleb camel populations are meat type as evidenced by some
quantitative and qualitative descriptors.
2.3. Husbandry practices of Camel
2.3.1. Camel holding
There seems to be inconsistency regarding reports on trends of camel herd size per household.
Increasing trends in ownership of camels by Borana herders (Kaufmann and Binder 2004) and
the Issa-Somali in Shinile zone (Kassahun et al. 2008) were previously reported, and they
attributed the increases to drought resistance qualities of camels, changing vegetation and other
factors. However, comparing the number of camels per household estimated in 1989 (Tezera and
Belay 2002) and some 15 years later (Tadesse et al. 2014a) for Jigjiga and Shinille zones of
Somali region, one can see a decline, on average, by about 13.2 and 5.9 heads, respectively.
Similarly, there is a difference between herd sizes reported for Borana area in 2008 and 2015 (a
decline by 6.27). The inconsistency may be attributed to differences in sampling the study targets
or actual decline in holding per household. It can also be due to the recent boom in camel off
take from pastoralist areas which might deplete animals, though pastoralists reportedly attempt to
shift their herd compositions to produce more camels for the market (Aklilu and Catley 2010).
2.3.2. Feeding management
Traditional pastoral livestock production in Ethiopia is characterized by individual stock
ownership, communal use of pastures and seasonal migrations of herds and households. The
frequency of migrations might range from once to as much as six times per year, and migration
distances might be very short or extend over 200 km (Schwartz and Walsh 1992).
In the semi-arid or arid lowlands with a very sparse vegetation growth composed of bushes,
trees, shrubs and grasses, camels are subjected daily to travel 14 to 20 km away from their
6
village in search of feed (Ahmed Sheik et al. 2005a, b; Wolde 2010). Camels feed mainly by
browsing on trees or bushes, but they also graze grasses when these are not available.
Camels may be watered every 10 to 15 days if the water source is nearby (Wernery, 2010) but
only once in 30 days if the source is far away. However, Ahmed Sheik et al. (2005a, b) recorded
shorter mean watering intervals of 6.7 to 7.2 days during the dry season in Afder zone, Somali
region. During the rainy season, camels may not drink water for one to two months and depend
only on the moisture content of the plants browsed. The amount of water camels can consume at
a time has been estimated inconsistently: as much as 200 l (Wolde 2010); 90 l in a very short
time following severe dehydration amounting to 30% of initial body weight (Wilson 1989); 126
to 140 l at first pause; and 49 to 55 l at the second pause (Ahmed Sheik et al. 2005a, b).
Mobility is an inherent strategy of the pastoralists to efficiently utilize the spatially and
temporally distributed grazing and water resources. Camels and cattle usually trek over long
distances in search of feed and water. The herd may be subdivided in to what is known as ‘wet
herd’ and ‘dry herd’. The wet herd is composed of milking cows (of both cattle and camels) and
their calves that are kept around homesteads (Wolde 2010).
The dry herd travels long distances. In Borana, for instance, the grazing lands are thus subdivided into dry- and wet-season grazing, accordingly (Coppock 2009). However, among the
Borana and Guji who were primarily cattle herders and who used to highly value cattle more
than camels, utilization of rangelands by camels is restricted, i.e. cattle herders restrict camels
from passing or browsing grazing lands before cattle. In addition, the hierarchy for camels to get
access to water is after cattle (Megersa et al. 2008).
In the Somali region, 95% of the pastoralists practice traditional nomadic and transhumance
management systems whereas only 5% of them are sedentary pastoralists. The mobility pattern
involves taking camels to mountain areas during wet season to avoid tick infestation and flies
(hence to prevent tick-borne diseases and foot wounds) and to valleys during dry season in
search of cactus (Opuntia ficus indica) and water for their camels (Keskes et al. 2013). It is a
common practice for Somali camel keepers to cross national and international boundaries in
search of feed and water particularly during drought years. In Jijiga, many households (58%)
practise agro-pastoralism while the other 42% practice pastoralism (Keskes et al. 2013).
7
2.3.4. Watering practices
Camel watering in Fik Woreda is a laborious activity usually conducted jointly by a number of
herders, especially when using well water. Intermittent rivers and riverbeds are the most
important sources of water. Watering frequency depends on the availability of water sources,
season and the capacity of the herders to pay money to the privately owned wells or ponds.
Camels are watered every 10-15 days if a water source is nearby, however they can survive up to
30 days without being watered if no water source is nearby. During the rainy season camels may
not drink water for 1-2 months because the moisture of the plants is sufficient to meet their water
requirement. Pastoral (nomadic) camel production system is characterized by herd mobility and
seasonal migration in communal rangelands in search of better quality resources (pastures, water
and mineral licks) (Ahmed, 2003).
Camels may be watered every 10 to 15 days if the water source is nearby (Bekele and Kibebew
2002; Wolde 2010) but only once in 30 days if the source is far away. However, Ahmed Sheik et
al. (2005a, b) recorded shorter mean watering intervals of 6.7 to 7.2 days during the dry season
in Afder zone, Somali region. During the rainy season, camels may not drink water for one to
two months and depend only on the moisture content of the plants browsed. The amount of water
camels can consume at a time has been estimated inconsistently: as much as 200 l (Wolde 2010);
90 l in a very short time following severe dehydration amounting to 30% of initial body weight
(Wilson 1989); 126 to 140 l at first pause; and 49 to 55 l at the second pause (Ahmed Sheik et al.
2005a, b).
2.3.3. Housing
Camels are usually herded during the daytime on communal grazing lands and kept during night
in traditional kraals made of thorny bushes and tree branches around homesteads or settlements
as protection from predators and thieves/raiders. It is not a common practice to keep camels with
other species in a single kraal. In some areas, camels may also be left to roam around during
night time. (Farid. 1995).
8
2.3.5. Camel breeding
Definition of breeding objectives (BO) for specific production systems is extremely important.
BOs are clear and concise statements of high-level goals or targets that are production system
specific. They may include all relevant attributes of an animal with defined and tangible
economic values (e.g. production, reproduction, fitness and health characteristics) and intangible
values such as aesthetic virtues of an animal. (Farid, 1995)
Studies on definition of BO traits of camel keepers in Ethiopia are too scanty. Limited available
literature indicates that pastoralists highly value and consider milk production potential of camels
as evidenced by their trait preferences (Tadesse et al. 2014b), proportion of female camels they
keep in the herd (Megersa et al. 2008; Ahmed Sheik et al. 2005a, b) and their bull selection
practices (Wolde 1991; Tezera and Belay 2002). It is a common practice for pastoralists to keep
higher number of female camels than males at all age categories, i.e. calves, growing young ones
and adults (Tezera and Belay 2002; Bekele and Kibebew 2002), indicating the importance of
reproduction and milk production in arid areas.
Tadesse et al. (2014b) reported that pastoralists in Amibara, Mille, Shinille, Gode, Liban and
Jijiga ranked milk yield as their first trait of choice; for those in Moyale district, adaptation trait
was the primary preference. The authors further indicated growth trait was ranked second by
Mille, Gode, Liben and Jijiga pastoralists whereas adaptation trait was ranked second by
Amibara and Shinille pastoralists. Trait preference indices also revealed milk production ranked
first with adaptability, breeding efficiency, growth, ability to give birth to more female and
draught capacity traits with changes in rank across the different sites (Tadesse et al. 2014b).
Usually, a breeding bull is selected on criteria such as colour, beauty, size, physical condition
and the milk production potential of its ancestors (Wolde 1991; Tezera and Belay 2002). In
addition, preference is given to a bull that hails from more female-bearing ancestors. This type of
bull is believed to have a shiny hair coat and on the whole look like a ‘beautiful dam’. If the
selected breeding bull produces a higher proportion of male offspring for three consecutive
years, it is culled and replaced by a new bull (Coppock, 2004).
Once a bull is selected as a stud, it is not used for any purpose other than breeding until the end
of its reproductive life (Wolde 1991; Keskes et al. 2013a, b). Male camels which are not fit as
9
stud are either culled or separated from the herd and tamed for draught (Wolde 1991). On the
other hand, female camels are not usually culled except due to reasons such as diseases, old age
and poor (re) production performances (Keskes et al. 2013b). Farah et al. (2004) report similar
breeding management practiced by pastoralists in northern Kenya who also focus on the
selection of breeding bulls employing specific criteria which may include a bull’s dam (milk
production, fitness), bull’s sire (fitness) and a bull’s own performance (body confirmation,
fitness, docility and disease and drought tolerance). There is considerable divergence regarding
the practice of allocating breeding females to a breeding male (i.e. the male to female ratio)
among the Ethiopian camel breeders. For instance, those in Ogaden select only one stud bull for
a herd of 40 to 50 females (Coppock 2009).
2.3.6. Camel Milking
Milk extraction for human consumption begins three days after calving. Following stimulation of
milk let-down by a suckling calf for few seconds, milk is extracted by hand into a milking vessel,
commonly a wooden container. Only males are allowed to milk camels among the Afar, Boran
and Somali pastoralists (Tafesse et al. 2002; Eyasu 2009; Keskes et al. 2013; Sisay et al. 2015;
Tadesse et al. 2015a, b). Among the Afar and Somali pastoralists in particular, women are not
allowed to milk camels because camels are highly valued and considered as sacred animals
among both societies (Tadesse et al. 2015a, b). In addition, as camels are milked in a standing
position, the task requires enormous energy which makes it difficult for females to perform
milking camels. Besides there is a belief held by the communities that lactating camels do not
allow women to milk them or do not let down sufficient milk for women milkers (Tadesse et al.
2015a, b).
In the typical milking routine, as described by Eyasu (2009), the owners prepare a milking vessel
and call a lactating camel by name from the enclosure to a separate open milking area where the
calf is kept. Then, the calf is allowed to suckle its dam for a few seconds to around a minute to
stimulate milk ejection. After this, one man holds or chases the calf away while another man
milks the camel at a standing position with one knee raised to support the milking vessel on his
lap. It is also common for two men standing on opposite sides of the camel performing milking
simultaneously, each working on the right and left quarters of the udder (Hashi. 1984).
10
Camels produce more milk and for longer period of time than any other milk animal held under
the same harsh conditions (Farah et al. 2007). Milk is the most important camel product in arid
and semi-arid environments of Eastern Africa, and in this region, camel milk is a valuable food
source for humans.
2.3.7. Lactation length
Lactation lengths can be easily recorded or estimated under any production conditions. Camels
are known for their longer lactation periods even in the worst years. Estimates abound for all
Ethiopian camel populations. Estimates of mean lactation periods are about one year almost for
the entire populations. Values ranging from as low as six months to as high as two years have
also been reported. (Hashi, 1995).
2.3.8. Importance of camel milk
The main use of camel’s milk will of course be for drinking. However, as soon as production is
higher than consumption, other ways of preserving and marketing camel’s milk products must be
found. Soured milk products are the most common milk products of all mammals. Pasteurization
or not? One of the questions about camel’s milk is whether it should be pasteurized or not. Often
unfounded statements are made that pasteurization is “must” for camel’s milk, probably based on
the fact that camels are normally dusty and their environment dirty-looking. However, the
literature does not reveal milk-borne diseases among camel-milk drinkers while many stories
have been told about the medicinal properties. (Dereje, 2005s)
Camel and milk can be sold to hospitals, where demand is high due to its health benefits for
patients. Camel meat contains less fat and more fluid than beef. Research has shown that camel
milk can help keep diabetes under control. Leading scientists at the Kenya Medical Research
Institute (KEMRI, 2007) detected a protein similar to insulin in the milk in Kenya and Germany
a few years ago. According to 2007 figures, Ethiopia has over 5 million diabetics. Clinical trials
shown that tuberculosis patients enjoy a quick recovery rate after consuming camel meat and
milk.
11
2.4. Camel Milk marketing
Market refers to a set of buyers and sellers who interact and influence price. However, the
existence of the market by itself does not ensure an exchange to take place. There should be a
channel. In pastoral area milk production is seasonal while consumption is throughout the season
(IPS, 2000). Moreover, there is no preservation and processing techniques, and physical
infrastructure, like roads and market facilities are limited (Jabbar et al., 1997). However, where
there is access to market, dairying is preferred to meat production since it makes more efficient
use of feed resources and provides regular income to the producer (Mahmoud, 2010). The
consumption of milk and milk products varies between the urban and the rural areas and the level
of urbanization (Ahmed et al., 2003).
In Fik donkey are used as a means of transport to carry milk from the water points to the urban
center. In general, in pastoral and agro-pastoral area of Somali region, milk is the main diet to
households and also it is affected by season of the year, and even during the rainy season this
production system is affected by the absence of transport facilities to markets (IPS, 2000).
There are a number of impediments to livestock marketing for producers from Eastern Ethiopia.
These include: poor quality roads, lack of reliable market information, stock rustling and general
insecurity, absence of consistent livestock marketing policies, and hence dependency on private
traders (Chabari and Njiru, 1991). A major constraint to camel marketing is the lack of
information concerning market prices due to the remoteness of camel rearing areas and
associated poor communication infrastructure. (Simpkin, 1993). However, Isiolo town is now a
prominent camel market outlet for pastoral and peri-urban camel producers (Heath, 1997). Camel
milk, which has been consumed for centuries by nomadic people for its nutritional values and
medicinal properties, is now experiencing greater awareness in the western world (Wernery,
2010). A major constraint to camel marketing is the lack of information concerning market
prices due to the remoteness of camel rearing areas and associated poor communication
infrastructure (Simpkin, 1993).
2.5. Constraints of Camel Milk Production
Although there is a little information on constraints to camel production in various agroecological zones (AEZ) in Ethiopia. The major camel milk production constraints are feed
12
shortage as a result of deforestation, livestock disease, low genetic potential of indigenous
livestock and water shortage. (Simpkin, 1993).
There are principal constraints limiting the potential of camel milk such as; diseases and
parasites, poor nutrition (Quality and Quantity), unimproved genetic potential of local breeds,
poor marketing infrastructure and access to markets. Minimal institutional and support services,
and poor access to and sub-optimal utilization of knowledge, information and technologies. The
most important constraint of camel production are diseases and parasites. This is a big threat to
camels in the area. Lack of market for milk is another constraint influencing the production of
milk. (Simpkin, 1993).
13
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1. Description of the Study Area
The study was conducted in Fik District. Fik is a town in eastern Ethiopia, which is located in
Erer Zone of Somali Region. This town has a latitude and longitude of 08 o8’N 42o18’E/
8.1300ON 42.300oE with elevation of 1229 meters above sea level. It receives annual rainfall that
fall from 350 to 500mm. The area has a semi-arid climate. The temperature range from 18 degree
siliceous up to 32 degree siliceous with average temperature of 25 degree siliceous. Based on
figures from the CSA in 2007, this woreda has an estimated total population of 134,813. And
99.93% of this population are Muslims, 0.07% are others. The population in this woreda is
mainly pastoralists. (CSA, 2007).
3.2. Sample Size and Sampling Technique
In this study, a purposive sampling was used to select four kebeles from total of 39 Kebeles, due
to the characteristics of the kebeles (The kebeles which are highly camel keepers). Then, random
sampling was employed to select the households/members to be interviewed, so that the total
sample size was 40 members (10 members from each kebele).
3.3. Method of Data Collection
Both primary and secondary data sources were used for this study. The primary data was
collected from the members using structured questionnaires. Interviews and FGD from 3 to 5
members was also used to collect data from the 4 kebeles. Whereas the secondary data was
collected from all possible documented sources which are relevant to our study.
The data that was collected includes: Educational Background, age distribution, perceptions of
pastoralists about the camel milk yield, main problems in the study area and general information
about the household and family size.
14
3.4. Method of Data Analysis
For this study both qualitative and quantitative were conducted. The quantitative data was
analyzed using mean, mode, percentage and litters, while the qualitative data (the data that can’t
be measured) was collected from both primary and secondary data sources. The data was
carefully analyzed using narration in order to represent actual words and the analyzed data is
presented in the form of tables, percentage, graphs and words.
15
4. RESULT AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1. Result of the Study
4.1.1 Introduction
The study assessed the camel milk production practices in Fik woreda with a case study of four
kebeles in Fik woreda, Somali Region, Ethiopia. The first section presents the demographic data
of the respondents. The second section presents data on camel milk production systems in Fik
District. Third section of the chapter presents camel milk marketing in Fik Woreda. Finally the
fourth section covers data on challenges and opportunities of camel milk production in Fik
woreda. A total of 40 respondents were reached; 10 from kebele Mugwayn, 10 from kebele
Fikwayn, 10 from kebele Hodanwayn, and 10 from kebele Jeerinka.
4.1.2. Social-economic characteristics.
The study assessed the demographic data of the respondents including gender and education
level and the data was presented in the Table 1 (Gender) and Table 2 (education level).
Table 1. Gender distribution of the respondents.
Demographic
Study Kebele
Variable
Frequency
Percentage
Mugwayn
Male
7
70
Female
3
30
Male
8
80
Female
2
20
Male
9
90
Female
1
10
Male
6
60
Female
4
40
F actor
Fikwayn
Gender
Hodanwayn
Jeerinka
16
Table 1 shows that 75% and 25%of the total respondents from the sample size were male and
female respectively. This reveals that women are unwilling to keep the camels maybe because of
Somali peoples’ believe saying “Camel is for men”.
Table 2. Education level of the respondents.
Demographic
Study Kebele
Variable
Frequency
percentage
University Degree
0
00
Secondary
2
20
Primary
1
10
Not school at all
7
70
University Degree
0
00
Secondary
0
00
Primary
2
20
Not school at all
8
80
University Degree
1
10
Secondary
0
00
Primary
20
20
Not school at all
70
70
University Degree
0
00
Secondary
0
00
Primary
4
40
Not school at all
6
60
Factor
Mugwayn
Fikwayn
Education level
Hodanwayn
Jeerinka
Table 2 reveals that 70% of the total respondents from the four kebeles never went to school,
22.5% were primary graduates, 5% had secondary level and 2.5% of the respondents had a
university degree). The low education level of the respondents can be attributed to the inability to
access the services given, the nature of the area (semi-arid) and the belief that the farming
17
activity doesn’t require special skills to operate. Also the inadequate income from the activity
isn’t enough to educate children to higher levels.
However, this trend is changing given the introduction of free primary, secondary and university
level education and the requirement by law that all children should get basic education at least up
to the university level.
4.1.3 Camel feeds and Camel Watering Practices
The yield of milk produced by the camels is depended on the availability of feeds. The study
sought to find out the feeding habits commonly used by the camel milk producers and the results
are displayed in the Tables below.
Firstly, the researchers assessed the grazing system used by the respondents and the following
information realized is as shown in the Table 3.
Table 3. Grazing system used
Demographic Study Kebele
Factor
Grazing
Mugwayn
System
Fikwayn
Hodanwayn
Jeerinka
Variable
Frequency
Percentage
Zero Grazing
Semi-Grazing
Full grazing and browsing
Zero Grazing
0
0
10
0
00
00
100
0
Semi-Grazing
Full grazing and browsing
0
10
00
10
Zero Grazing
0
00
Semi-Grazing
0
00
Full grazing and browsing
Zero Grazing
10
0
100
00
Semi-Grazing
0
00
Full grazing and browsing
10
100
Table 4.3 shows that 100% of the four kebeles are used full grazing system. This results concurs
well with the literature review information that pastoral (nomadic) system which is characterized
by migration in communal rangelands in search of resources (especially pasture and water) is
18
highly practiced by camel milk producers in Fik woreda. In the literature review it was found
that Pastoral camel herders in eastern Ethiopia adopt rational and goal-oriented camel
management strategies in utilizing their rangeland environments (Farah et al., 2004).
Secondly, common feeds for the camels were also assessed and the following results obtained as
shown in Table 4 which shows common feeds for feeding camels.
Table 4 Common feeds for feeding camels
Study Kebele
Mugwayn
Fikwayn
Hodanwayn
Jeerinka
Common feed
Frequency Percentage
Native browses (Trees and shrubs
10
100
Others
0
0
Native browses (Trees and shrubs)
10
100
Native grasses
0
00
Native browses (Trees and shrubs)
10
100
Native grasses
0
00
Native browses (Trees and shrubs)
10
100
Native grasses
0
0
Table 4 shows that a 100% of all respondents feed their camels on native browses (trees and
shrubs). This concurs with the following findings in the literature review. The camel is, by
preference, a browser of a broad spectrum of fodder plants, including trees, shrubs, and
sometimes hard-thorny, bitter and halophytic (salty) plants that grow naturally in the desert and
other semi-arid areas (Field, 2003). The predominant forage species consumed by camels in
eastern Ethiopia include Acacia, Cordia, Duosperma, Euphorbia, Grewia, Indigofera and
Salvadora (Onjoro, 2004). Table 5 shows water related factors.
19
Table 5. Water related factors
Factor
Variable
Study Kebeles
Mugwayn
Sources of
Fikwayn
Hodanwayne
Jeerinka
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
frequency
%
water for
Pipeline/tap
7
70
6
60
7
70
3
30
camels
Ponds
0
00
0
00
0
00
1
10
Wells
3
30
4
40
3
30
6
60
Transport the water
0
30
0
00
0
00
0
00
Bring the camels
10
10
10
100
10
10
10
10
Water
transported
0
0
or
camels taken
to water
sources
Scarcity
9
90
8
80
7
70
8
80
Main water
Parasites
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
related
Unhygienic/
1
10
2
20
3
30
2
20
problem
Impurity
The above table shows that the first factor assessed the sources of water used for their
(respondents’) camels. It was revealed that 57.5% of the total respondents get water from the
pipelines. Even though Fik is a semi-arid area, wells and ponds are scarcely used. These water
resources are used often when the pipelines are not working. Only 2.5% of the respondents use
pond water while 40% use water from wells.) The camels are taken to the water sources to drink
water as represented by 100% of all members of the four kebeles.
In addition to that, it was also revealed that scarcity of water is the main water related problem
experienced by the camel milk producers. This was depicted by 77.5% of the respondents. Fik
woreda is served mainly by one perennial river namely Erer River. Then the government built
20
water trough and water points from the river for both human and animals. That explains why the
camel milk producers mainly depend on pipelines as source of water. However, the district’s
climate is hot and dry and experiences two rainy seasons throughout the year. Camels producing
milk have a need for large quantities of water (milk is about 90% water) (Wilson, 1998) and
hence water is an important requirement in camels.
4.1.4 Camel milk marketing
Camel milk production is an income generating activity to the producers as most of them depend
on it as their source of daily bread. The researchers therefore sought to unearth the factors
affecting marketing of camel milk and the following results were obtained in table 5.
Table 6. Marketing factors that influence camel milk marketing
Study Kebeles
Factor
Variable
Mugwayn
Fikwayn
Hodanwayn
Jeerinka
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
Demand of
Yes
10
100
10
100
10
100
10
100
camel milk
No
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
Purchasers of To individuals
7
70
8
80
9
90
7
70
camel milk
To caterers
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
To retailers
3
30
2
20
1
10
3
30
To others
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
Milk
Price of milk per 6
60
8
80
10
100
7
70
marketing
litre
outlet
Distance of
4
40
0
00
0
00
1
10
selection
market for milk
Criterion
Market reliability
0
00
1
10
0
00
2
20
Long term
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
Contract
21
Table 6 shows that the demand for camel milk was high as revealed by 100% of the respondents
from all Mugwayn, Fikwayn, Hodanwayn and Jeerinka societies.
This can be attributed to the economic, nutritional and cultural benefits of camel milk
production. As a drought resistant animal, people in dry areas take advantage of the situation to
keep camels in addition to the believe that the animal produces milk high in nutrients and closest
to human milk. Also the high demand can be associated with the decrease in milk consumption
within households during the dry season due primarily to lack of feed resources and general
decline in the nutrition health of lactating animals. Camels are therefore important for household
food security because the lactation period extends longer into the dry season.
Camel milk purchasers were found mainly to be individuals as depicted by 77.5% of the total
respondents. Some farmers sell camel milk to retailers (22.5%) of the total respondents. The
assessment of the criterion mostly used in selecting milk marketing out let revealed that camel
milk farmers used price of milk per litre.
This is shown that 77.5% of the total respondents form the four target kebeles relay on the price
of milk per litre as their milk outlet selection criteria. Others 12.5% of the respondents relay on
distance of market for milk as their milk outlet selection criteria. Only 7.5% of respondents from
the total respondents select reliable suppliers to sell the camel milk probably on their behalf or at
reasonable negotiation price as they have little time to reach consumers far away in urban areas
to assess their demand. However, as stated in the literature review where there is access to
market, dairying is preferred to meat production since it makes more efficient use of feed
resources and provides regular income to the producer (De Leeuw, 1999).
Marketing also has its own challenges and the study sought to find out some of the major
problems experienced in marketing of camel milk. The data is displayed in the tables below.
Table 7 shows whether milk marketing problems have been experienced at any period.
22
Table 7. Whether milk marketing problems have been experienced at any period
Factor
Ever
experienced
Marketing
problem
Variable
Study Kebele
Hodanwayn
%
Frequency %
Mugwayn
Frequency
%
Fikwayn
Frequency
Yes
10
100
10
100
10
No
0
00
0
00
0
Jeerinka
Frequency
%
100
10
100
00
0
00
All the respondents (100%), as shown in the above table, admitted that they experience
marketing problems. The study therefore assessed some of the challenges the milk marketing
producers go through and the results were as shown in the table 8.
Table 8 Challenges faced in the marketing of camel milk
Study Kebele
Challenges faced in Marketing
Frequency
%
Mugwayn
Inadequate transport means
1
10
Poor roads
1
10
Lack of cooling facilities
No organized market or links
7
1
70
10
Lack of capacity building
0
00
Inadequate transport means
Poor roads
Lack of cooling facilities
0
0
6
00
00
60
No organized market or links
4
40
Lack of capacity building
0
00
Inadequate transport means
1
10
Poor roads
0
00
Lack of cooling facilities
6
60
No organized market or links
Lack of capacity building
1
2
10
20
Inadequate transport means
2
20
Poor roads
Lack of cooling facilities
1
7
10
70
No organized market or links
0
00
Lack of capacity building
0
00
Fikwayn
Hodanwayn
Jeerinka
23
The above table 8 reveals that 65% of the total respondents from the four kebeles were lack of
cooling facilities as their main challenge. This is due to the nature of milk that is highly
perishable and can easily spoil unless it is converted to other products. This is also the reason
why a reliable marketing out let is chosen to supply milk. This is supported by the following
findings in the literature review, the scattered nature of the production units, the poor
communication system, and the low rate of urbanization and low infrastructure of road facilities
may also not warrant the establishment of processing plants (IPS, 2000). A pastoral community
depends mainly on milk and milk products for its survival and therefore, these items are not
perceived to be for commercial purposes. Thus it’s only the households who are in a walking
distance from the urban centers who sell milk and milk products to urban consumers (IPS, 2000).
The method used to deliver milk and means of transport used to transport milk tor sale most of
the time were also assessed and the results tabulated as shown in table 9.
Table 9. Milk delivery methods and transport means used in the sale of camel milk
Study Kebeles
Mugwayn
Factor
Variable
Hodanwayn
Jeerinka
%
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
100
10
100
10
100
10
100
by 0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
Collected by consumers 0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
transport Private transport
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
used in Traveling on foot
4
40
5
50
3
30
2
20
6
60
5
50
7
70
8
80
Milk
Delivery
delivery
member
method
Collected
by
Frequency
Fikwayn
family 10
cooperative society
or purchasers
Means
Public transport (buses)
of
milk
Using pack animals
sale
24
Table 9 reveals that 100% of the all study kebeles use family members as of milk delivery
method to deliver milk for sale. The main means of transport used in transporting milk for sale
was using pack animals such as donkeys, as they comprised of 60%, 50%, 70% and 80% of the
respondents from Mugwayn, Fikwayn, Hodanwayn and Jeerinka kebeles respectively. This is
because the public/private transport means are not readily available and are quite expensive. This
concurs with literature review in which the informal market involves direct delivery of fresh milk
by producers to consumers in the immediate neighborhood and sales to itinerant traders or
individuals in nearby towns (Siegefreid, 2001). The differences in distance to different milk
market places affect the price of milk (Kurtu, 2004).
4.1.5 Camel milk production performance
The camel milk production performance factors were assessed and the results are shown in
Table 10 which shows number of times camels are milked per day, the milk produced per camel
per day on average and the months of lactation.
Table 10. Number of times camels are milked per day, the milk produced per camel per
day on average and the months of lactation.
Factor
Variable
Mugwayn
Frequency
0
Study Kebeles
Hodanwayn
%
Frequency %
00 0
00
%
00
Fikwayn
Frequency
0
Jeerinka
Frequency
0
%
00
Morning and evening
7
Morning, Evening and Mid- 3
day
70
30
6
4
60
40
60
4
60
40
7
3
70
30
Less than 1 litre)
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
1-5 litres
3
30
2
20
1
10
3
30
6-10 litres
7
70
8
80
9
90
7
70
Number
of times
camels
are
milked
per day
Milk
produced
per camel
per day
on
the
average
Morning Only
More than 10 litres
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
Months
of
lactation
1-3 months
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
4-6 months
7-9 months
1
8
10
80
2
8
20
80
0
10
00
100
0
90
00
90
10 and above
1
10
0
00
0
00
1
10
25
The above table 10 shows that most of the time, camels, like other cattle (for instance cows), are
milked in the morning and evening. This was responded to by 65% of the total respondents
(70%, 60%, 60% and 70% of Mugwayn, Fikwayn, Hodanwayn and Jeerinka kebele members
respectively). Few farmers milk their camels thrice (morning, evening and midday) a day. This
explains why they produce quite large amounts of milk.
The milk produced per camel per day ranges from 6-10 litres. This was highlighted by 77% of
the respondents (70%, 80%, 90% and 70% of Mugwayn, Fikwayn, Hodanwayn and Jeerinka
households respectively). Some camels produce about 1-5 litres of milk each per day as
represented by 22.5% (30%, 20%, 10% and 30% of the respondents from the four kebeles
respectively). The milk production varies with seasonality which affect feeds availability and the
lactation period. The lactation months were around 7-9 months as specified by 87.5% of the total
respondents (80%, 80%, 100% and 90% of the responses from the kebeles above respectively).
Few animals had lactation periods of about 4-6 months (7.5%) and 10 months and above (5%) of
the total respondents.
This is supported by the following findings in the literature review. Bekele et al. (2002) reported
the number of milking per day ranged from 1 to 4 for camels under traditional pastoral
management. Wernery (2003) states that camels must be milked 4 to 6 times a day to gain
optimal milk yield. Although there are fewer long-term studies covering full lactation period, it is
widely recognized that, in absolute terms, the camel produces more milk and for a longer period
of time than other livestock species under harsh environmental conditions (Farah et al., 2007).
Average daily milk yield of the Somali breed camels is reported to range from 5 to 8 litres
(Bekele et al., 2002; Farah, 2004; Farah et al., 2004). Under exceptionally favourable conditions,
Somali camels can potentially produce more than 15 litres of milk a day during the peak of their
lactation (Farah et al., 2004).
Ramet (2001) had also reported that under more intensive systems camels can yield up to 12 to
20 litres a day. The constraints influencing camel milk production were assessed and the results
displayed in the table 11.
26
Table 11. Constraints influencing camel milk production.
Study Kebele
Constraints
Frequency
%
Mugwayn
Feed shortage
7
70
High feed prices
0
00
Diseases and parasites
High medicament costs
2
1
20
10
Shortage of land for grazing
Lack of capital
0
0
00
00
Lack of market for milk
0
00
Inefficient breeding services
0
00
Feed shortage
High feed prices
Diseases and parasites
6
0
4
60
00
40
High medicament costs
0
00
Shortage of land for grazing
0
00
Lack of capital
0
00
Lack of market for milk
0
00
Inefficient breeding services
0
00
Feed shortage
6
50
High feed prices
0
00
Diseases and parasites
4
40
Fikwayn
Hodanwayn
High medicament costs
Jeerinka
00
Lack of market for milk
0
00
Inefficient breeding services
0
00
Feed shortage
8
70
High feed cost
Diseases and parasites
0
1
00
30
High medicament costs
1
00
Shortage of land for grazing
Lack of capital
0
0
00
00
Lack of market for milk
Inefficient breeding services
0
0
00
00
27
Table 11 shows that the most important constraints influencing camel milk production were
varied among the respondents from the four kebeles. The most important constraint specified by
the respondents was feed shortage. This was specified by 67.5% of the respondents from the four
kebeles (70% 60%, 60% and 80% of Mugwayn, Fikwayn, Hodanwayn and Jeerinka kebeles
respectively). Diseases and parasites is another constraint influencing the production of milk.
This was specified by 27.5% of the respondents (20%, 40%, 40% and 10% of the group
members of Mugwayn, Fikwayn, Hodanwayn and Jeerinka societies respectively). Only 5% of
the respondents said high medicinal cost is their main constraint.
4.1.6 Camel breeds.
Table 12 shows camel breeds kept by the women groups.
Table 12. Types of camel breeds kept
Study Kebeles
Mugwayn
Factor
Variable
Fikwayn
Hodanwayn
Jeerinka
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
Frequency
%
Type of Local/ indigenous
10
100
10
100
10
100
10
100
camels
Cross breeds
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
Exotic breed
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
Breed
Local/ indigenous
10
100
10
100
10
100
10
100
that
Cross breeds
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
produce Exotic breed
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
s most
milk
Types
Single humped
10
100
10
100
10
100
10
100
of
Double humped
0
00
0
00
0
00
0
00
camels
Kept
28
Table 12 shows that all (100%) camel milk producers of Mugwayn, Fikwayn, Hodanwayn and
Jeerinka members prefer local/indigenous breed as opposed to other breeds. This is due to claims
that the other breeds especially the exotic and crossbreeds are quite expensive and susceptible to
diseases.
4.2. Discussion of the results
4.2.1. Camel feeds and watering
The study found that full grazing and browsing were the mostly used grazing systems with native
browses as the main feeds.
The study also found that the main source of water for the camels was from the pipelines. Wells
were used sparingly. However, if the pipeline stop working, wells are mostly used. The camels
were mostly taken to the pipelines and other watering areas for watering. The farmers being
nomads move with their camel from one place to another in such of feeds and water.
The results above concur with a previous report ( Field, 2005) that the camel is, by preference, a
browser of a broad spectrum of fodder plants, including trees, shrubs, and sometimes hardthorny, bitter and halophytic (salty) plants that grow naturally in the desert and other semi-arid
areas. Fik is a semi-arid area too and most of the farmers don’t have their own land hence use the
communal rangeland to graze their camel.
4.2.2. Camel milk marketing
The study found that the farmers mostly use retailers to supply the camel milk to the environs
and beyond. The main distribution channel used therefore is Farmer-Retailer Consumer. The
retailers bridge the gap between the busy nomads and the camel milk customers and the main
means of transport used was the pack animals involving the use of donkeys to deliver camel milk
to urban and peri-urban consumers. It was revealed that demand for camel milk was on high and
this can be attributed to the nutritional and medicinal value of the milk.
The results coincide with leading scientists at the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI
2007) who detected a protein similar to insulin in the milk in Kenya and Germany a few years
ago. According to 2007 figures, Kenya has over 5 million diabetics. Clinical trials carried out by
29
KEMRI in Nairobi have also shown that tuberculosis patients enjoy a quick recovery rate after
consuming camel meat and milk.
4.2.3. Camel breeds
The study findings revealed that local/ indigenous breeds which includes Somali, Rendie/Gabra
and Turkana are mostly kept by the farmers mainly due to their belief that they produce more
milk. The single-humped (dromedary) camels were the main camel breeds kept.
These results concur with a similar study in Russia on milking capabilities of the Bactrian camel,
the dromedary camel and the hybrid of the two breeds of camels which were examined
(Kheraskov, 1955, 1961, 1965; Lakosa & Shokin, 1964; Dzhumagulov, 1976). The dromedary
camel gave more milk than the Bactrian or the hybrids. The study also revealed that natural
mating was the main breeding technique used due to unavailability of artificial insemination
services.
4.3 Challenges and Opportunities toward camel milk production and
marketing
4.3.1. Challenges
It was observed that only a small volume of milk was marketed by the camel herders, and
middlemen were not fully involved in the milk trading due to the factors discussed below (Fig.
8). The major sources of camel feed in Fik woreda are natural pasture and browse species, but
rangeland-based animal feed resources are declining year after year due to cutting trees for
making charcoal and firewood, as well as due to recurrent drought. Thus, feed availability is a
very critical challenge contributing to low milk productivity. Camel diseases were another
concern in the Somali region of Ethiopia, leading to low milk productivity (Kebede et al. 2015).
There was no transport service which fulfils the need of camel herders to carry their milk long
distances to markets; hence, camel herders are forced to sell their produce at the farm gate.
Underdeveloped marketing infrastructure had forced the women in the Somali region to sell their
milk at the roadsides. Poor infrastructure also led to the absence of conventional milk value
addition as compared to the Kenyan pastoral systems (Noor et al. 2013).
30
Limited efforts have been initiated by Ethiopian Meat and Milk Institute (EMMI) and the
Pastoral Resilience Improvement through Market Expansion (PRIME) project in providing
technical training and financial support to build pastoralists’ milk handling, marketing capacity
and capability. However, it was revealed in our study of Afar region that there were scant
support services provided to camel herders and middlemen in terms of camel health, milk safety
and improved technical facilities. Camel herders and informal cooperatives were observed
selling their milk on roadsides using plastic containers which have a high probability of being
contaminated and spoiling the milk. Similarly, in the Somali region, poor milk storage and
processing facilities led to the loss of milk (Kebede et al. 2015). Muslims are the main
consumers of camel milk, but some do not drink for fear of diarrhoea.
However, Christian people in Ethiopia are forbidden to consume camel milk. On the other hand,
some camel herders are still reluctant to sell camel milk due to the traditional belief that if they
sell camel milk their camel milk production will decrease and eventually die. They had not
allowed milk to be sold for fear of boiling the milk and thereby decreasing its nutritional and
medicinal value.
4.3.2. Opportunity
Even though camel milk production and marketing fall under different challenges, there are
various opportunities which would allow the commodity to move forward as a business (Fig. 9).
The large number of female camels kept by each household would be a main source for surplus
milk production throughout the year. Tadesse et al. (2013) confirmed that a large number of a
camel population dominated by females is indicative of the importance of camels as milk
providers to the pastoral community, in addition to the adaptability of the animal to the hostile
environment of the area. Besides, camel herders in our survey confirmed that consumption of
camel milk has better nutritional and medicinal value and longer shelf life compared to other
livestock milk. Shelf life is recorded as 7seven days (Seifu 2007). It has been also observed that
the price of camel milk was increasing from year to year and the market price was remarkable
(USD 1.16–1.39 per litre) relative to other livestock milk price, e.g. cow milk (mean USD
0.55/L). As a result, consumers purchase the milk without compromising about its price. Tefera
et al. (2012) also confirmed that camel milk fetches the highest price in Afar and Somali regions
and has the highest turnover irrespective of the season. This implies that camel milk was highly
31
valued despite its cost. During the survey period, a milk processing factory was being installed in
the region, which aimed to collect raw milk from a distance of 100 km radius, which would be
good fortune for camel milk to break through into the value chain.
32
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Conclusions
Camel milk is considered as the key to pastoralists’ children’s survival amongst the Somali
Region. Camel milk is rich in nutritives, creates cash income, builds social relations and is used
to treat a wide range of diseases.
The study found that several factors influenced camel milk production ranging from the
production of milk to the consumption. The main factors influencing camel milk production
included camel feeds (grazing systems practiced, supplements and availability of water). Camel
milk marketing and infrastructure affects camel milk production. The most important problem
experienced was lack of cooling facilities and that the main means of transport used in
transporting camel milk for sale was public transport. Camel breeds and breeding techniques
influence camel milk production. The Dromedary Camel gave more milk than the Bactrian or
Hybrid Camel.
There are opportunities for the commodity move forward as a business; however, it is
constrained by feed shortage for camels, poor marketing services, unavailability of clean milk
containers and milk collection centres, traditional taboos and lack of institutional and technical
support.
5.2. Recommendations
Therefore, the following recommendations are put forward to better realize the camel milk
production and marketing efficiency and effectiveness.
1. Provision of continuous training of the pastoralists would change the traditional taboos
related to selling of camel milk, thereby enhancing household income generation.
2. The regional government needs to call on private investors to engage in camel milk value
addition.
3. Interventions on camel milk should target women and recognize the informal
cooperatives, allowing them to enter into formally organized camel milk business.
33
4. Camel herders and middlemen need to use appropriate milk containers made up of
aluminium and hygienically prepared during collection, transportation and storage of the
milk, to ensure safety and quality standards of the milk.
5. Regulations on forest protection against illegal cutting of trees for making charcoal and
firewood, and conservation of natural resource would minimize the camel feed shortage,
thereby improving camel milk productivity.
6. The real medicinal importance of camel milk for the treatment of diseases mentioned by
the camel herders should be further investigated scientifically.
34
6 APPENDEX: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR RESPONDENTS
Please tick in the relevant boxes and fill blank spaces.
Social Economic Characteristics (Tick the Appropriate Response Option)
1. What is your gender?
A. Male
B. Female
2. What is your education level?
A. University degree
B. Secondary education
C. Primary education
D. No school at all
4. Which is your kebele?
A. Mugwayn
B. Fikwayn
C. Hodanwayn
D. Jeerinka
Section A: Camel Feeds
1. What type of grazing system are you using?
A. Zero grazing
B. Semi-grazing
C. Full grazing and browsing
2. Which is the most common feed for feeding your camels?
A. Native browses (Trees and shrubs)
B. Native grasses
C. Traditional plant roots, tubers and pods
35
D. Non-traditional feed resources e.g. Euphorbia
E. Purchased commercial feeds
F. Others (specify)
2. Do you grow fodder forage?
A. Yes
B. No
3. If yes, which fodder forage?
A. Grass
B. Cultivated forage
C. Acacia trees and pods
4. If NO, what are your major reasons for not growing fodder crops?
A. Insufficient land
B. Insufficient labor
C. Insufficient inputs (seed, fertilizer, and cash)
D. Insufficient draft animal power
E. Feed for animals is adequate
F. Insufficient information
5. Do you buy any feed supplements for your camels?
A. Yes
B. No
6. If YES, which feed supplements do you buy?
A. Hay
B. Minerals supplements like mineral licks
C. Concentrates like dairy cubes
7. Why do you buy these feed supplements most of the time?
A. for lactating camels
36
B. for pregnant camels
C. for male calves
D. for female calves
E. for male camels
8. From where do you buy your feeds?
A. from the farmers’ cooperatives
B. from private agro vet retailers in Fik
C. from other agro vets
D. Supplied by ministry
9. Which sources of water do you use for your camels?
A. Piped/tap water
B. The nearby river
C. Ponds
D. Wells
10. Do you usually transport the water or bring the camels to the rivers or pond or tap water?
A. Transport the water
B. Bringing the camels to the river, pond or tap water point
11. What is your main water related problem?
A. Scarcity
B. Parasites
C. Unhygienic/impurity
Section B: Camel milk marketing
1. Is there a demand of camel milk?
A. Yes
B. No
2. Whom do you sell your camel milk to?
37
A. to individuals
B. to caterers/hotels
C. to retailers
D. to Processing cooperatives
E. to others
3. What criterion do you mostly use in selecting your camel milk marketing out let?
A. Price of milk per litre
B. Distance of market for milk
C. Market reliability
D. Long term contract
4. Is there any period you have problem of marketing your milk?
A. Yes
B. No
5. If yes, rank the challenges you face (1 most important and 5 least important)
A. Inadequate transport means for the camel milk.
B. Poor roads which become impassable during the rainy seasons.
C. Lack of cooling facilities/use of plastic jerri cans.
D. 4. No organized market/ no linkage to other markets resulting to low milk prices.
E. Lack of capacity building on clean milk production and camel milk value addition
5. Which method are you using for the delivery of your milk?
A. I or another family member delivers it to the market
B. Collected by cooperative society
C. Collected by consumers or purchasers
6. Which transport means are you using to transport your milk for sale most of the time?
A. Public transport (buses)
B. Private transport (Motor bikes/bicycles)
C. Traveling on foot
38
D. Using pack animals (Donkey carts)
Section C: Camel milk production performance
1. How many times do you milk your camels per day?
A. Morning only
B. Morning and evening
C. Morning, mid-day and evening
2. How much milk is produced per camel per day in your herd on the average presently?
A. Less than 1 litre
B. 1-5 litres
C. 6-10 litres
D. More than 10 liters
3. How many months of lactation do you normally have?
A. 1-3 months
B. 4-6 months
C. 7-9 months
D. 10 and above
4. Please rank the following most important constraints influencing camel milk production
(1 most important and 8 least important)
A. Feed shortage
B. High feed prices
C. Diseases and parasites
D. High medicament costs
E. Shortage of land for grazing
F. Lack of capital
G. Inefficient breeding services
H. Lack of market for milk
39
Section D: Camel breeds
1. Which types of camel breeds do you keep?
A. Local / indigenous
B. Cross breeds
C. Exotic breeds
2. Which of the above breeds produces most milk?
A. Local / indigenous
B. Cross breeds
C. Exotic breeds
3. Which of the following two types of camel do you keep?
A. Single humped
B. Double humped
4. Why do you keep the breed of camel mentioned in (1) above? (Only one best answer)
A. They produce higher amount of milk.
B. They produce calves faster
C. They grow better and faster.
D. They are easy to manage
E. They are more resistant to diseases
3. What kind of breeding technique do you use mostly?
A. Artificial insemination
B. Natural mating
4. If you use AI, indicate why?
A. I do have access to AI services
B. It is simpler than raising a male camel
C. It is more economical than a male camel mating
D. I do not have a male camel for mating
40
5. If you do not use AI, indicate why?
A. I have no access to AI services
B. The efficiency of AI service is not good
C. I do not want to use AI services because of cultural reasons
D. I have a male camel, which I can also use for other purposes like transport
6. When you want to dispose your camels, what criterion do you use in selecting the one(s) to
dispose in relation to breeding?
A. Old age
B. Sickness
C. Low milk production
D. Infertility
41
7. REFERENCE
1. Ahmed Shek, M., A.A. Tefera, B.P. Belay, and B.D. Ahmed. 2005a. Schwartz and Walsh
(1992). Traditional feeding management, drought and migration of the camel herds of
Afder Zone, Somali Regional State. In Participatory innovation and research: Lessons for
livestock development, 125–135. Addis Ababa: Proceedings of the 12th conference of the
Ethiopian Society of Animal Production, August 12–14, 2004.
2. Ahmed Shek, M., B.P. Belay, and A.A. Asefa. 2005b. Farid, (1995). Reproduction,
breeding and management of female and male camels in Afder Zone of Somali Regional
State, Ethiopia. In Participatory innovation and research: Lessons for livestock
development, 175–184. Addis Ababa: Proceedings of the 12th conference of the Ethiopian
Society of Animal Production, August 12–14, 2004.
3. Ahmed, M.M., Megersa. A., Bezabih Emana, Jabbar M.A., Tangka F.and Ethuni S,
(2003), Ahmed, Mohamed, S. K. Ehui, and B. Gebremedhin. Forthcoming. (2003),
Simpkin (1993). Socioeconomic and Nutritional Impacts of Market-oriented dairy
production in the Ethiopian and policy factors affecting the adoption of improved forage.
4. Aklilu, Y., and A. Catley. 2010. Mind the gap: Commercialization, livelihoods and
wealth disparity in pastoralist areas of Ethiopia. Feinstein International Centre, Tufts
University.
5. Belay, G.and Tazera. B., (2006). Camel Husbandry: A Practical Guide to Camel
Husbandry. Intermediate Communications Ltd., Nairobi (Kenya).
6. Belay. A., Noor, I.M., Tezera, B., and MoARD, (2007). Tadesse. E., (2015).The role of
camels (Camelus
dromedarius) in the traditional lifestyle of the Somali pastoralists in
the arid and semi-arid areas of eastern Ethiopia. Outlook on Agriculture, 36(1):29 - 34.
7. Chabari, F.N. and Njiru, G.K. (1991). Livestock Marketing, Pastoralism and sustainable
pastoral Development. Pastoralist Forum in Ethiopia. 23-24 Dec, (2003). Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia. p156.
42
8. Coppock, D. L., (1994), Tefera B., and Abebe, G., (2012): The Borana plateau of
southern Ethiopia. Synthesis of Pastoral Research, Development and Change, 1980-91.
International Livestock Center for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
9. Coppock. (2009). Plasma concentrations of some vitamins in camels. Proc. First Int.
Camel Conf. Dubai, U. A. E. Pp. 335 – 338.
10. Dereje, M. and Uden, P. (2005). The browsing dromedary camel Behaviour, plant
preference and quality of forage selected. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 121:
297- 308 in developing countries. Socio-economic and policy research Working paper
26. Nairobi, Kenya.
11. Desta, S., and L. Coppock. 2004. Pastoralism under pressure: Tracking system change in
Southern Ethiopia. Human Ecology 32 (4): 465–486.
12. Farah, K.O., Nyariki, D.M., Ngugi, R.K., Noor, I.M. and Guliye, A.Y. (2004). The
Somali and the Camel: Ecology, Management and Economics. Anthropologist, 6 (1): 4555.
13. Farah, Z., Kappeler, S., Bruntse, A. and Mertz, L. (2004). Milk Products. In: Farah, Z.,
Fischer, A. (Eds.), Milk and meat from the camel: Handbook on Products and Processing.
VDF, Germany and ETH, Switzerland, pp 29-50.
14. Farah, Z., Mollet, M., Younan, M., Dahir, R., (2007). Camel dairy in Somalia: Limiting
factors and development potential. Livestock Science, 110: 187–191.
15. Farid (1995). Management and handling of the camel. The one-humped camel (Camelus
dromedarius) in eastern Africa: A pictorial guide to diseases, health care and
management, pp. 62-154. Verlag Josef Margraf, Weikersheim, Germany.
16. Faye, B. 2015. Role, distribution and perspective of camel breeding in the third
millennium economies. Emir. J. Food Agriculture 27 (4): 318–327.
17. Field, C.R. (2005). Where there is no Development Agency. A manual for Pastoralists
and their Promoters. Natural Resources International, Aylesford, Kent, UK. p260.
18. Hashi, M.A., Kamoun, M. and Cianci, D. (1995). Feed requirements of the camel.
CIHEAM –Options Mediterranean’s, n. 13: 71-80
43
19. Health (1997). characterisation of a camel’s milk protein rich in proline identifies a new
Betax-casein fragment. Regul. Peptides 15:55-62
20. Jabbar M., T. Emmanuael and M, Gary, (2009). A methodology for characterizing dairy
marketing systems: Market oriented smallholder dairying research. Working document
No 3. I (International Livestock Research Institute). ILRI, Addis Ababa. Ethiopia.p 62.
21. Kaufmann B A and Binder C, 2002. Production Aims and Functions of Camels in
Kenyan Pastoral Systems. In: Hulsebusch C G and Kaufmann B A 2002 (Editors). Camel
Breeds and Breeding in Northern Kenya, an account of Local Camel Breeds of Northern
Kenya and Camel Breeding Management of Turkana, Rendille, Gabra and Somali
Pastoralists. Kenyan Agricultural Institute (KARI), Nairobi, Kenya. pp. 15-28.
22. Lemma Fita, and Fekadu B., (2005) Rural smallholder milk and dairy products
production, utilization and marketing systems in East Showa zone of Oromia. pp 17-28.
In: Participatory innovation and research: Lesson for livestock development. Proceedings
of the Annual conference of the Ethiopian Society of Animal Production (ESAP) held in
Addis Ababa Ethiopia. August 12-14. ESAP, Addis Ababa volume 2: technical papers.
23. Mahmoud, H.A. (2010). Camel Marketing in the Northern Kenya/Southern Ethiopian
Borderlands. FAC Resaerch Update (2003). Future Agricultures Consortium, University
of Sussex, UK. www.future-agricultures.org.
24. Schwartz, D.L. & Walsh, J.D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16,
475-522.
25. Tadesse Mesfin, (2014). What should a pastoralist development strategy continue
towards poverty reduction among pastoral communities in Ethiopia. In: Proceeding of 2
Annual Conference on Pastoral development in Ethiopia. Pastoral Forum in Ethiopia,
May 22-23, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. p136. Development and Marketing, Nairobi, Kenya.
pp 219-225.
26. Wolde, D. and Wernery, U. (2010). Camel milk
– An udderly healthy
product. A poster presented at International Camel Symposium held at Garissa, Kenya,
June 7th – 11th (2010).
44