An assessment of the multipurpose nature of small dams, water usage and water
productivity in the Limpopo Basin.
SENZANJE1a, A., S. RUSEREa and E. BOELEEb
Soil Science & Agricultural Engineering, University of Zimbabwe, P.O. Box MP167, Mt
Pleasant, Zimbabwe. bInternational Water Management Institute, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
a
Abstract
The history of dam construction in Zimbabwe dates back to the 1920s with over 7 000 small
dams having been constructed countrywide. Small dams are multipurpose structures whose
uses are aimed at improving rural livelihood. Despite the long history and widespread of small
dams countrywide, the multipurpose nature of these dams has largely gone unquantified in
terms of importance of the uses to the community, volume abstracted for the various uses,
water productivity and influence of management practises. The current study therefore made
use of questionnaire administration to small dam users, interviews, secondary data and
observation on four dams in Insiza District in Mzingwane Catchment in the Limpopo basin to
establish the uses, volume of water abstracted and water productivity for some uses and the
interrelationship between various organisations and the community in the management of
small dams. Uses on all dams in order of importance were livestock watering, domestic use,
irrigation, fishing, brick making, and collection of reeds (Cypress spp.) used for roofing.
Livestock consume on average over 70% of water for consumptive uses, with the least being
brick making. Water productivity in terms of yield per unit volume of water used ranged from
0.025 kg/m3 for vegetables to 7575.76 kg/m3 for bricks, and monetary value per unit volume of
water used were Z$389434.20/m3 for brick making and Z$1874.2/m3 for irrigation for the small
dams in the communal area. Traditional leadership and the community are pivotal in the
management of the small dams, with some organisations giving technical, financial and input
assistance. However, there is need for awareness on conservation and utilisation of small
dams to address problems like siltation, which threaten the longevity of the small dams
storage. The management of small dams needs to be well coordinated between the
communities, NGOs and government if the full benefits of these national resources are to be
realised for a long time.
Keywords: small reservoir, multipurpose, water use, water productivity, monetary value,
management
1. Introduction
Zimbabwe is a semi-arid country with a unimodal rainfall season, which generally runs from
mid November to early April averaging 650mm per annum. Protracted dry spells disrupt the
rain season especially in the southern parts of the country with serious repercussions on the
river network system, as most rivers are not perennial and consequently agricultural
production the backbone of livelihood security (Zvarevashe and Ellis-Jones, 2000). It is
against this backdrop that an extensive network of dams has been constructed throughout the
country dating back to the 1920s (Senzanje and Chimbari, 2002). These range from small
dams (reservoirs) to large dams supplying water to urban, industrial and mining areas and
large-scale irrigation. Small dams were developed mainly in the former large-scale
commercial farms and communal areas which constituted 61% and 39%, respectively
1
Corresponding author: senzanje@agric.uz.ac.zw Tel: +263-4-303211, Fax: +263-4-333880
(Sugunan, 1997). In relation to regional countries, 86% of the small reservoirs in Southern
Africa (excluding South Africa) are found in Zimbabwe, which constitutes only 6.8% of the
geographical area in the region (Sugunan, 1997). In Zimbabwe, dams are defined as small if
they have a dam wall height that is 8 m or less and an impounded volume of 1 million m 3 or
less (Kabell, 1986).
Small dams are an essential part of developmental activities as they can serve multiple uses,
which include livestock watering, domestic use, smallholder irrigation, silt trapping, fishing,
recreation and brick making (Keller et al., 2000; Sugunan, 1997; Senzanje and Chimbari,
2002). Apart from being operationally efficient, i.e., most are located close to the point of use
making abstraction of water relatively cheap and easy, small dams can also increase
biodiversity providing a sanctuary for wildlife and birds (Zvarevashe and Ellis-Jones, 2000).
Small dams also have been found to respond rapidly to precipitation runoff thereby harnessing
the sporadic, spatial and temporal rainfall found in their catchments (Keller et al., 2000).
Given the above advantages, small dams were seen as a viable option for communal areas
development. In excess of 7 000 small dams have been constructed in Zimbabwe dating from
the early 1920s to date
However, management, ownership and location of small dams influence the number and
types of uses on small dams. In the former large-scale commercial farming areas, the farmers
were given water rights, which gave them the power to manage and use the small dams in a
way they so pleased, whereas in communal areas a different approach was used.
Development Committees (VIDCO) and Ward Development Committees (WADCO) managed
the small dams with the help from traditional leaders (Mohamed-Katerere and Chenje, 2002).
With the passing of the 1998 Water Act and 1998 Traditional Leaders Act, all water is state
water and local stakeholders have been given the mandate to plan, organise and control
activities surrounding usage of small dams in their areas. Apart from the community and
traditional leadership, there are a number of organisations and institutions that are involved in
the management and utilisation of small dams (Zirebwa and Twomlow, 1999).
Despite the long history and widespread of small dams countrywide, the multipurpose nature
of these dams has largely gone unquantified in terms of the range and importance of the uses
to the community, volume of water abstracted for the various uses, water use efficiency
(productivity and economic value) and the management of these small dams. This is more so
given that small dams are unique structures in terms of use, management, spatial and
temporal characteristics, and tend to be semi-permanent impacting on water quantity and
quality.
This paper reports on a study conducted in the Limpopo basin to find answers to the
questions raised above on small dams and had the specific objectives:
 To determine the range of uses of the small dam and the extent to which they are carried
out.
 To quantify the volume of water utilised for the various uses and determine the water
productivity for some of the uses.
 To evaluate the economic value of water used of each use.
 To establish the linkages between institutions and organizations involved in the utilisation
and management of the dam.
2. Methodology
Study Area
Te study was undertaken on four small dams located in Godhlwayo communal area in the
Insiza District of Mzingwane catchment in the Limpopo basin. These are Avoca, Dewa and
Denje in Ward 12 and Makoshe in Ward 6. This is a low rainfall area, which is erratic, and
frequent dry spells are experienced. Main livelihood activities are livestock production and
rain fed crop production. Figure 1 shows the map of the Mzingwane Catchment, Avoca the
study area is approximately between Filabusi and Mataga. The basic characteristics of the
studied dams are given in Table 1.
Figure1: Mzingwane Catchment showing the study area lying between Filabusi and Mataga.
Map courtesy of David Love (Waternet, Univ of Zimbabwe, 2004).
Table 1: Characteristics of the small dams studied
Name
of Grid
Catchment Mean
Dam
Reference Size (km2) annual
runoff
Dewa
Denje
Avoca
Makoshe
QG620000
QH681990
QH623923
QG587770
4.0
9.5
4.0
na
152000
332500
152000
na
Capacity
(x103
m3)
Type of Year
Dam
Built
60
na
60
926
Earth
Earth
Earth
Earth
1954
1955
1947
1998
na = not available, Source: District Development Fund (this study)
The households served by the Dewa, Denje, Avoca and Makoshe are, respectively, 150, 250,
200, and 150. It is important to note that Avoca also partly serves the Avoca business centre
if problems arise at the larger Siwaze dam that technically serves the centre.
Data Collection
A questionnaire was designed which sought to identify the multiple uses of small dams and
their importance to the community, quantify the volume of water used by the various
consumptive uses, evaluation of the yield (output) and monetary value of the yield. Pretesting of the questionnaire was done during the reconnaissance visit and necessary
amendments were then made. Simple random sampling was used to choose respondents.
The questionnaire was administered orally in local language (Ndebele) and answers written in
English. Fifteen respondents were interviewed for dams Avoca, Denje and Makoshe whilst 14
were interviewed in Dewa constituting 7.5%, 6%, 10% and 7% of the households served by
the dams, respectively. Respondents were asked to identify the uses of the dam and give a
score of between 0 and 5 to show its importance, 0 being of least importance and 5 indicating
high important.
Oral interviews were undertaken using a pre-prepared checklist with representatives from
government departments, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and local leadership to
identify the uses of the small dams, establishing specific roles and services regarding the
operation and management of small dams in the area.
Where possible, secondary data was obtained which was used in the analysis. Observation
of the activities around the small dams was undertaken to verify some of the responses given.
Due to the nature of the study, some indirect methods were used to quantify volumes of water
used (for any particular use). For the key uses identified, the following approaches were
used:
 Livestock: Total number of livestock per dam was obtained from livestock census
records (from Veterinary Services department) and multiplied by per capita daily
consumption of each type of animal. The per capita consumption figures used were
50 l/day for cattle, 11.5 l/day for goats and sheep, and 22.7 l/day for donkeys (Pond,
et. al., 1995, Aganga, et. al., 2000).
 Irrigation: Respondents were asked to give the number and size of buckets of water
used in a season. An average value was then calculated per garden per crop type, and
then multiplied by the number of gardens. The data was cross checked by observing
farmers under taking their daily irrigations during the study period.
 Domestic: An average household daily consumption was obtained, cross-checked with
general per capita consumption, and multiplied by the number of households.
 Brick making: An average value of number of bricks and volume of water used per
1000 bricks was calculated for each dam then multiplied by the number of bricks
moulded per dam.
Data Analysis
One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the mean volumes of water consumption
per household for the following consumptive uses, livestock, irrigation, domestic and brick
making using SPSS package. This was done on each of the four dams to ascertain if there is
a significant difference between the volumes of water abstracted at a level of significance p <
0.05.
Water productivity is the yield from a particular use per unit volume of water used (Molden, et.
al., 2003). In the research this was evaluated using average yield for each use from the
questionnaire and dividing by the volume obtained above.
The economic value of water is a measure of economic water use efficiency; it is the monetary
value (Z$2) of the yield per unit volume of water (m3) used. This was obtained from the market
value of the produce for the use divided by volume calculated above.
In the questionnaire, respondents were asked to give a rating out of 4 of the most common
institutions and organisations involved in the utilisation and management of the small dams.
The rating gives the respondent’s view of the influence the particular institution has in the
management and utilisation of the small dam. The rating of 4 depict very influential and 0,
least influential. A Venn diagram was then used to visualise the influence of the institution
using the average rating from all respondents. The more important an institution the closer it
was to the centre of the Venn diagram.
3. Results
Use and their ratings
Figure 2 shows the uses of the small dams and gives the ratings (importance) as viewed by
the respondents. From the results, it is quite apparent that livestock (cattle, goats, sheep and
donkeys) watering is the most important across all dams, followed by domestic use. Note that
irrigation has been split into nutritional (community) garden, small (individual) gardens and
drip (community) garden. Absence of bars on some uses depicts absence of the use at that
particular dam.
Small Dams' Uses and Rating
Dewa
Denje
Avoca
Makoshe
5
Rating out of 5
4
3
2
1
ig
at
io
n
Irr
ta
nk
D
rip
D
ip
n
R
ec
re
at
io
R
ee
ds
Br
ic
ks
sh
in
g
Fi
G
ar
de
n
ga
rd
en
io
na
l
N
ut
rit
D
om
es
tic
Li
v
es
to
ck
0
Use
Figure 2: Small dams’ uses and their ratings.
Volume Used Per Annum
Livestock consumes the bulk of the water on most small dams (see Figure 3), domestic and
irrigation average household water use showed no significant difference (P<0.05) due to the
2
Official exchange rate during the study in early 2005 was US$1=Z$6200
fact that the uses have similar water conveyance methods (buckets) mainly women involved
and carrying water roughly over the same distance. Brick making consumes the least with
volumes ranging from 14,85m3 to 37.61m3 per annum. This is because brick making is
normally carried out in winter and very few people are engaged as it is labour intensive and is
being discouraged by village heads as it causes deforestation and ultimately siltation.
Volume Used Per Year
Dewa
Denje
Avoca
Makoshe
Volume (m3)
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
Livestock
Domestic
Nutritional
garden
Garden
Bricks
Drip Irrigation
Use
Figure 3: Volume consumed per annum (m3) by the various uses
The average water consumption for the various uses per household is given in Table 2.
Table 2: Average household consumption per use per dam (m3) (se)*
Use
Dewa
Denje
Avoca
Makoshe
Livestock
144.5(21.7)
174.4(27.5)
199.7(34.5)
171.5(23.3)
Irrigation
108.6(11.9)
91.3(18.8)
111.9(12.8)
855.6(312)
Domestic
46.0(3.3)
50.4(3.5)
38.1(7.7)
42.4(5.1)
Brick making
2.5(1.2)
0.6(0.08)
2.8(1.5)
1.2(0.3)
*se=Standard error
Water Productivity
Irrigation activities comprise mainly vegetable production on the small dams and these include
leaf vegetables, tomato and cabbages whose average water productivity on all dams were
0.356 kg/m3, 6.680 kg/m3, and 10.937kg/m3 respectively. Table 3 shows water productivity
values in kg/m3 of the various crops grown under irrigation using water from the small dams
(gaps in the table were because of either the crop is not grown or the respondents could not
give information on the yields and volume). Livestock water productivity (live weight per unit
annual water consumption) for cattle, goats, sheep and donkeys were 19.18 kg/m3, 10.72
kg/m3, 10.72 kg/m3 and 25.95 kg/m3 respectively. Brick making water productivity generally
ranged from 4621.5 kg/m3 to 7575.76 kg/m3.
Table 3: Crop water productivity (in kg/m3) of irrigation water per dam
DEWA
AVOCA
DENJE
MAKOSHE
Small Garden Small Garden Small Garden Nut Garden Small Garden Drip System
Leaf vegetable 0.508
Tomato
6.250
Onion
Cabbage
Maize
Wheat
Sweet potato
0.513
6.250
0.234
9.722
22.222
0.322
4.498
1.042
10.278
0.533
0.025
0.311
0.028
0.014
0.187
Since similar per capita water consumption for the various types of livestock used to calculate
annual volume of water consumed for all the dams as well as average live weight, livestock
water productivity for all the dams was similar averaging 16.64 kg/m 3. Specific water
productivity for the different types of livestock were as follows; cattle 19.18kg/m3, donkeys
25.95 kg/m3 and both sheep and goats 10.72 kg/m3. Brick making water productivity results
for the small dams were almost similar except for Avoca whose value is 4621.5 kg/ m3. Dewa,
Denje and Makoshe brick making water productivity values are 7179.9 kg/ m3, 7055.56 kg/ m3
and 7575.76 kg/m3 respectively.
Economic Value of Water
Generally a comparison of the dams’ economic value of water for each particular use shows a
similar trend this can be attributed to the dams being located in the same area hence similar
marketing structure and market values (Fig. 4).
Economic Value of Water
Economic value ($/m3)
500000.0
400000.0
300000.0
200000.0
100000.0
0.0
Livestock
Nutritional
garden
Garden
Bricks
1293.5
454726.8
Dewa
76908.9
Denje
79323.3
1243.5
439012.3
Avoca
76908.9
1902.0
297836.1
Makoshe
74337.0
1066.7
366161.6
3093.6
Drip Irrigation
2646.1
Use
Figure 4: Economic value of water for the various uses put to small dams
Management and Institutional Analysis
Various organisation and institutions are involved in one way or the other in the management
and utilisation of small dams in different capacities. The Venn diagram (Fig. 5) gives a general
picture on all dams of the influence of organisations as viewed by the community. The more
influential an organisation is the closer it is to the dam.
DDF
RDC
ZINWA
Village
heads
Irrig com
*
Chief
Dam
Clinic
Community
Veterinary
NGOs
Police
AREX
DNR
Figure 5: Venn diagram on management of small dams
The Venn diagram shows that the communities are much more involved in the day to day
operation and management of the small dams.
4. Discussion
Uses common to all dams in order of importance of use from livestock, domestic, irrigation,
fishing, brick making, collection of reeds and recreation is the same on all four small dams.
These similarities may be attributed to similarities in the social set up as three of the dams
Dewa, Denje and Avoca are in the same ward and Makoshe dam about 30km away. Zirebwa
and Twomlow (1999) identified the same uses in the communal areas of Masvingo Province.
These uses are typical of small dams in communal areas. Livestock is given the highest rating
of 5 and domestic about 4 showing the importance of livestock in the communal areas
particularly southern areas of Zimbabwe supporting the reason why most communal small
dams were developed for livestock (Senzanje and Chimbari, 2002). Despite the importance of
water for household use, i.e., drinking and cooking, domestic fell short of the highest mark
because the water is dirty and unfit for direct consumption thereby being restricted to washing
and bathing. Where possible, farmers use borehole water for drinking and cooking.
Irrigation however varies from one dam to the other in the form of small gardens common to
all dams; nutritional gardens found at Denje and Makoshe dams and drip irrigation at
Makoshe. Irrigation is also given a fairly high rating, as it is important for family income as well
as contributing to the nutritional status of the household showing that communal way of living
is agro-based. Fishing is widely carried out to provide a cheap source of protein. One
important feature is that fishing is not labour intensive; every member of the family from
children to the elderly is able to fish contributing to the family’s income and livelihood.
Brick making is given a low rating of about 2 due to a number of reasons, in Avoca for
instance; village heads are discouraging it as it causes siltation of the dam due to
deforestation and some moulding sites are located very close to the dam. Zvarevashe and
Ellis-Jones (2000) also pointed to brick making as one of the cause of siltation in small dams.
It is also labour intensive and only done in winter when conditions are favourable. Collection of
reeds is not very important on all dams partly because they do not contribute to family income
and that in most dams they are low in quantity as cattle also feed on them. On all dams, no
significant recreation is taking place. Swimming is discouraged on all dams and the areas are
not well developed to attract visitors.
Distance has an influence on the uses, the average distance for people using the small dams
for domestic use is 1 km and that for irrigation 1.3 km showing that people very close to the
dam normally carry out these uses. However due to the presence of a drip irrigation system at
Makoshe dam, some come from as far as 3 km away. For livestock the average distance is
greater than 1.5 km showing the importance of small dams to livestock as people can travel
long distances in search of water.
All dams showed significant variations (p<0.05) in the volumes of water utilised for the uses,
livestock watering, irrigation, domestic and brick making. Livestock consume the greatest
amount of water for the small dams ranging from 17995 m3 to about 39093 m3 per annum
except for Makoshe, which has a drip irrigation system. The high value shows why the
livestock was given the highest rating of importance and most small dams being developed
primarily for livestock watering. Irrigation and domestic use consumes almost similar amounts
of water within the range of 15633m3 to 5794m3 (excluding Makoshe dam).
Leaf vegetables were the most common vegetables grown under irrigation on all dams. Water
productivity for leaf vegetables on all small gardens ranged from 0.2 to 0.5 kg/m 3. This is
typical of similar irrigation practices, i.e., using buckets and in the same area as these dams
are located within 30 km of each other. Water productivity for tomatoes ranges from 4.498 to
9.722 kg/m3, which is low compared to the range given in FAO (2002) of 10-12 kg/m3, this
may be attributed to agronomic practices. Extremely low water productivity for the drip system
is a cause for concern as drip irrigation is the most efficient method. Water productivity is
based on two variables, yield of produce, which is a function agronomic practice, and volume
of water applied which depends on the efficiency of irrigation method. Therefore one or both
variables is responsible for the low water productivity, a careful look at the two will give a
clearer picture of the causes of such a low value. Low water productivity of the drip irrigation
may be explained by the inefficiency of the system as the system does not have a filtration
system so the emitters may be heavily clogged and it is also because of the water
management practices as the irrigation interval is set by rotation as opposed to crop water
requirements.
Livestock water productivity was the same on all dams, because same average per capita
consumption rates of water for each type of livestock was used for all the dams and that
average live weight were also assumed to be similar on all the dams.
A comparison of economic value of water for each particular use shows that the values show
a similar trend because the dams are located in the same area hence the marking structure
and market values are similar. Despite using the lowest amount of water, brick making is the
highest on all the dams averaging Z$380000/m3. This figure may, to a large extend, be
misleading for one to embark on brick making as a business as it is being discouraged and in
most communal areas people prefer to make the bricks themselves. Though drip irrigation is
consuming most water at Makoshe, there is not much money being earned per unit water
used. This calls for a review of this particular system, agronomic practices and the marketing
system.
From the overall Venn diagram, located very close to the dams are the community and
traditional leaders and for Makoshe the drip irrigation committee. This is typical of communal
small dams where the dams are seen as community property with everyone having equal
access (Zirebwa and Twomlow, 1999). Chiefs are located slightly outside the first ring
because he is distant from the community and only attends to critical issues passed to him by
the village heads. The next ring comprises of the AREX, RDC and NGOs. AREX officers are
in constant interaction with the community, for instance in all the irrigation projects, the
communities look up to them for some advice on agronomic practices. NGOs on the other
hand fund most of the projects and get approval from the local government representatives
the RDC. The above shows a close-knit relationship amongst the organisations.
The other groups then follow which are veterinary, clinic and DDF. From the interviews, they
seem not to be doing much because of resource constrains, as they are required to cover the
whole district while operating on meagre budget allocation. Zimbabwe National Water
Authority (ZINWA) is virtually unknown by most people maybe because it was recently
established and still in the process of adjusting and getting small dams into the system.
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
Small dams are multipurpose structures whose uses have varying water consumption, water
productivity and water economic value figures. From the research, the following uses were
established in order of importance, livestock watering, domestic use, irrigation, fishing, brick
making, reeds Cypress spp. collection and recreation. These uses have been found to be
similar on all dams but vary in form from one dam to the other thereby proving the hypothesis
correct.
Livestock consumes the bulk of the water followed by domestic and irrigation whist brick
making uses the least. Different water productivities and economic values were realised for
the uses but had a similar trend on the uses for all the dams, both parameters were in
descending order, brick making, livestock and finally irrigation.
There are a number institutions and organisations mainly government departments that are
involved in the utilisation and management of small dams in different capacities. Of these,
traditional leadership and the community at large were found to be pivotal in the management
of the dam with some organisation giving technical and financial assistance in various
activities surrounding the small dams.
One greatest threat to the multipurpose nature of small dams is rampant siltation on most
dams as some of the dams dry up late in the season. Frequent siltation evaluation and
awareness on ways to reduce soil erosion should be carried out and measures taken to curb
soil erosion in the catchments. This may be done through more interaction between the
community and organisations such as the AREX and DNR. There is also a need for further
research in siltation of small dams.
Water abstraction is mainly done using buckets for irrigation, domestic and brick making,
which is laborious as a result the small dams are not fully utilised. Usage of technology such
as drip irrigation will see more people benefiting from the small dams and more water being
put into productive use. However for these to be of benefit they need proper maintenance and
frequent evaluation.
In this research much focus was on the demand side of water for various uses but there is a
need to look at the supply side that is the amount of water available for use at nay instant. The
supply side can then be matched with the demand side and appropriate measures taken to
ensure that maximum benefits are derived from small dams.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank all those who helped during the study, especially Mr. S. Ncube
(AREX Officer) and the Godhlwayo community.
REFERENCES
Aganga, A.A., Letso, M., Aganga, A. O., (2000). Feeding Donkeys.
http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd12/2/agan122.htm#Livestock%20Research%20for%20Rural%
20Development
Ellis-Jones, J., Zvarevashe,V. Tamirepi,M, (1999). CARE Zimbabwe, Small Dam
Rehabilitation Project, Programme Of Activities For 1999/00 Silsoe Research Institute, UK.
Kabell,T, (1986). Assessment of Design Flood Hydrographs. The Zimbabwe Engineer,
Vol.24(1)
Keller A., Sakthivadivel, R., Seckler D., (2000). Water scarcity and the role of storage in
development
http://www.iwmi.cigiar.org/pubs/Pub039/RR039.htm
Mbanje, E.,Chatizwa, I., Koza, T., Machiwana, A., O’Neill, D., Ellis-Jones,J. (1997).
Implements For Use With Smaller/ Weaker Animals. ATNESA, Intermediate Technology
Publications, London.
Mohamed-Katere, J.C. and Chenje, M. (eds), (2002). Environmental Law and Policy in
Zimbabwe. SARDC, Harare.
Molden, D., Murray-Rust, H., Sakthivadivel K., Makin, I. (2003). A Water Productivity
Framework For Understanding And Action. In Water Productivity. In ‘Agriculture. Limits And
Opportunities For Improvement’. Eds. Kyne W., Barker R., Molden D. CABS International.
Wallingford, UK.
Nelson, K.D., (1985). Design and Construction of Small Earth Dams, Inkata Press Proprietary
Limited. Melbourne.
Ogbeide H.E., E. Uyigue, S. Oshodin (2003). Socio-economic and Environmental
Performance
of
Dams
–
Case
Study
of
Ojirami
Dam,
Nigeria.
www.riverfestval.com.au/2003/files/symposium/OGBEIDE,%20H.doc
Pearson, R. A., Nengomasha, E., Krecek, R., (1999). Meeting the challenges of animal
traction. A resource book of the Animal Traction Network for Eastern and Southern Africa
(ATNESA), Intermediate Technology Publications, London. 326pp.
Pond, W.G., Church, D.C., Pond, K.R., (1995). Basic Animal Nutrition and Feeding. John
Wiley and Sons, Inc. Canada.
Sander K., Astatke A., El Wakel A., Molden D., Peder D.,(Undated). Strategies for increasing
livestock Water Production in Water Stressed Agricultural System.
http://www.knowledge bank.irri.org/theme1/pdf/livestock
Senzanje,A. and Chimbari,M. (2002). Inventory of Small Dams in Zimbabwe, Draft Report.
IWMI, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Stephens, T, (1991). Handbook On Small Earth Dams and Weirs, A Guide to Siting, Design
and Construction, Cranfield Press, UK, pp4.
Sugunan, V., V., (1997). Fisheries Management of Small Water Bodies in Seven Countries in
Africa and Asia. FA.O. Fisheries Circulars-C933.
http://www.fao.org/documents/show_cdr.asp?url_file=/docrep/W7560E/W7560E02.htm
Tobaiwa,G, Twomlow,S, Ellis-Jones,J, (1998). CARE Zimbabwe, Small Dam Rehabilitation
Project, Proceedings Of The Agronomy (Soil and Water Conservation) Planning Workshop,
Silsoe Research Institute, UK
Zirebwa. J. and Twomlow, S, (1999). Historical Profiles of Selected Small Dams in Communal
Areas Of Masvingo Province, Silsoe Research Institute, UK.
Zvarevashe, V. and J. Ellis-Jones (eds), (2000). The role of Small Dams in the Improvement
of Rural Livelihoods in Semi-Arid Areas. CARE Stakeholder Workshop Masvingo, Zimbabwe,
Masvingo. DG/00/18.