Applied Animal Husbandry & Rural Development 2010, Volume 3
©South African Society for Animal Science
15
Peer-reviewed paper: 43rd Congress of the South African Society of Animal Science
The effect of stock theft and mortalities on the livestock industry in South Africa
M.M. Scholtz1,2 & J. Bester1
1
2
ARC – Animal Production Institute, Private Bag X2, Irene 0062, South Africa
Post Graduate School in Animal Breeding, University of the Free State, P.O. Box 339,
Bloemfontein 9301, South Africa
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract
This article reports on the effect of stock theft and mortalities on the livestock industry in South
Africa, using the information from a survey based on a sample framework where urban/rural/deep rural
enumerator areas of the South African population census are fused onto the input variables of the different
biomes. The results are grouped according to the land owner system, viz. private land and communal land,
since the dynamics between the two are different. It demonstrates that involuntary exits (death and stock
theft) are much higher on communal land than it is on private land. Stock theft is of particular concern in the
case of sheep, irrespective of land owner system. Official figures on stock theft seems to be an under
estimation and this survey indicates that the effect thereof may be higher than what the official figures
indicate. A decrease in mortality can also have a big effect on production levels and its negative impact is
even larger than that of stock theft. These involuntary exits have a negative impact on sustainable rural
livelihoods of livestock farmers.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Keywords: Cattle, sheep, goats, mortalities, stock theft, private land, communal land, livestock survey
Corresponding author: gscholtz@arc.agric.za;
Introduction
A major problem in the South African livestock industry is stock theft and damage causing animals.
According to the Red Meat Producer’s Organisation (Schutte, 2008, rpo@lantic.net; personal
communication) stock theft is resulting in annual losses of more than R300 million per year and damage
causing animals in losses of R800 million per year.
According to Greyling (2008) one of the important challenges that resource-poor farmers face is stock
theft, as it has the potential to cripple their sustainable livelihood. Greyling (2008) reports that on a national
level, close to 700 000 animals (cattle, sheep and goats) were reported stolen in the period 2003 to 2006. The
impact of stock theft on resource-poor farmers is often more severe than on commercial farmers, because
they often own small numbers of animals. In many cases, following theft these owners also do not have the
financial means to make a rapid recovery and subsequently the sustainability of their farming practices is
threatened.
These estimations are based on general observations, or statistics released by the South African Police
Service, but have never been properly quantified. To this end the information gathered through a survey of
FAO/UNDP/SADC Project RAF/97/032 (Scholtz et al.,,2008) can be used to quantify livestock losses in the
South African livestock industry. The aim of the project was to identify, characterize, conserve and improve
farm animal resources in order to maintain biological diversity. However, socio-cultural information,
population demographics, production and animal health data were also collected to create a holistic approach
to the design of sustainable livestock systems with the potential to improve food security, rural livelihoods
and incomes.
This survey was based on a sample framework where urban/rural/deep rural enumerator areas of the
South African population census were fused onto the input variables of the different biomes and contain
valuable information on the effect of stock theft and mortalities on livestock production.
Materials and methods
The field work of the survey was completed by the end of November 2003. Following a number of
delays, sufficient analysis was completed to contribute towards the South African Country Report on Farm
Animal Genetic Resources, finalized in 2006. However a lot of information is still available from this survey.
This article summarizes the results of the survey in respect of stock theft and mortalities in the different
Citation of this paper: Appl. Anim. Husb. Rural Develop. 2010, vol .3, 15-18: www.sasas.co.za/aahrd/
Applied Animal Husbandry & Rural Development 2010, Volume 3
©South African Society for Animal Science
16
Peer-reviewed paper: 43rd Congress of the South African Society of Animal Science
livestock sectors. More information on the survey can be obtained from Bester & Ramsay (2005), Scholtz, et
al. (2008) and Scholtz & Bester (2009).
The information was grouped into (1) private land, which refers to commercial farmers and the
beneficiaries of South Africa’s land reform programme on private land; and (2) communal land. This was
done on the presumption that the dynamics in these two systems of land ownership and farming are different.
The sample sizes (farmers interviewed) for the different land ownership systems in respect of cattle, sheep
and goats are presented in Table 1.
Table 1 Sample sizes of the different systems for cattle, sheep and goats
Private land
Communal land
Sample size (number of farmers interviewed)
Cattle
Sheep
328
269
1322
230
Goats
140
752
Results and discussion
The total number of animals that was sampled for cattle, sheep and goats, as well as the involuntary
exits (died, stolen) for the different species are presented for private and communal land in Tables 2 and 3
respectively.
Table 2 Total number of cattle, sheep and goats in the survey (excluding pre-weaned progeny), and
involuntary exits expressed as the percentage of the total herd/flock size on private land
Item
Total number
Deaths
Stolen
Species
Cattle
Number
56 870
1 230
71
%
2.16
0.12
Sheep
Number
121 425
2 455
801
%
2.02
0.66
Goats
Number
6 343
12
2
%
0.19
0.03
Table 3 Total number of cattle, sheep and goats in the survey (excluding pre-weaned progeny), and
involuntary exits expressed as the percentage of the total herd/flock size on communal land
Species
Cattle
Sheep
Goats
Item
Number
%
Number
%
Number
%
Total number
17 491
1 850
5 049
Deaths
826
4.72
32
1.73
138
2.73
Stolen
211
1.21
34
1.84
33
0.65
The number of animals covered by the survey in respect of goats on private land, sheep on communal
land and goats on communal land is probably too low to be accepted as accurate. The results from these
groupings should therefore be treated with caution.
In Table 4 the involuntary exits on communal land is expressed as a multiple of that on private land
(% exit on communal land / % exit on private land). In the case of cattle, mortalities on communal land are
twice that on private land and theft on communal land is ten times higher. In the case of goats the mortalities
are 14 times and theft 22 times higher on communal land than on private land.
Citation of this paper: Appl. Anim. Husb. Rural Develop. 2010, vol .3, 15-18: www.sasas.co.za/aahrd/
Applied Animal Husbandry & Rural Development 2010, Volume 3
©South African Society for Animal Science
17
Peer-reviewed paper: 43rd Congress of the South African Society of Animal Science
Table 4 Involuntary exits on communal land expressed as a multiple of that on private land
Item
Deaths
Stolen
Cattle
2.19
10.08
Sheep
0.85
2.79
Goats
14.47
21.67
Figures from the South African Police Service’s National Stock Theft Unit (SAPS) indicate that
between 15 000 and 16 000 cattle; between 20 000 and 24 000 sheep; and between 8 000 and 14 500 goats
are stolen annually (NERPO, 2009).
The current estimate is that there are 8.2 million cattle in the commercial sector and approximately 5.5
million cattle in the communal sector. Sheep numbers averaged about 25 million over the last number of
years with an estimated 13 percent of animals in the communal sector (RMRDT, 2008); that is about 21.75
million on private land and 3.25 million on communal land. These sheep numbers are 3 million lower than
10 years ago. The main reasons provided for the drop in sheep numbers is stock theft, problem animals and
vermin, i.e. the financial implication of the latter three reasons caused farmers to invest in other agricultural
enterprises. Goat numbers are believed to be around 2.5 million of which 1.5 million is on communal land.
The aforementioned livestock numbers and the percentage stock theft and mortalities from the survey,
were used in an attempt to quantify the magnitude of these involuntary exits on a national scale. The results
are presented in Table 5.
Table 5 The number of animals that die or are stolen annually on a national scale in South Africa, estimated
from the results of the survey; on private and communal land
Cattle
Sheep
Goats
Land type
Dead
Stolen
Dead
Stolen
Dead
Stolen
Private
177 120
9 846
439 350
143 550
1 900
300
Communal
259 600
66 550
56 225
59 800
40 950
9 750
Total animals
436 720
76 396
495 575
203 350
42 850
10 050
20% less mortality* 87 344
91 115
8 570
* - Indicates the number of additional animals that will survive if mortality can be reduced by 20%
According to the estimations in Table 5 the total number of cattle stolen annually in South Africa is 76
396, with the majority (87%) stolen from communal land. This is much higher than the figures of between
15 000 and 16 000 cattle released by the South African Police Service’s National Stock Theft Unit (NERPO,
2009). A similar trend is observed for sheep and goats. The differences reported here are major. Greyling
(2008) reports that on a national level, close to 700 000 animals were reported stolen in the period 2003 to
2006. On average this amounts to 175 000 animals per year, which is closer to the total of 290 000 reported
in this study.
The authors will not speculate on the reasons for these differences and which figures are more reliable.
However, it remains a fact that stock theft is a major problem in South Africa and that it is much higher on
communal land than it is on private land. These high stock theft rates poses major challenges for livestock
farming and it is understandable why some sheep farmers have switched to cattle farming. Stock theft
amongst resource-poor farmers particularly, has a crippling effect on their food security, rural livelihoods
and incomes.
It is unfortunate that deaths as a result of damage causing animals were not recorded separately in the
survey. This would have shed light on the perception that the effect of damage causing animals is much
bigger than that of stock theft.
Mortality is 5.7, 2.4 and 4.3 times higher than stock theft in cattle, sheep and goats respectively.
Firstly, this demonstrates that the effect of mortality is higher than that of stock theft and that mortalities
should not be ignored. Secondly, the fact that the difference between stock theft and mortality in the case of
Citation of this paper: Appl. Anim. Husb. Rural Develop. 2010, vol .3, 15-18: www.sasas.co.za/aahrd/
Applied Animal Husbandry & Rural Development 2010, Volume 3
©South African Society for Animal Science
18
Peer-reviewed paper: 43rd Congress of the South African Society of Animal Science
sheep is much smaller than in the other two species, demonstrate that stock theft is of particular concern in
the case of sheep. Furthermore if mortality can be reduced by 20% in cattle and goats it will negate the effect
of stock theft. However in the case of sheep mortality will have to be reduced by 41% to negate the effect of
stock theft.
Conclusion
A survey that is based on a sample framework where urban/rural/deep rural enumerator areas of the
South African population census are fused onto the input variables of the different biomes can render very
valuable results regarding the effect of stock theft and mortalities on the livestock industry in South Africa.
Official figures on stock theft seems to be an under estimation and this survey indicates that the effect
thereof may be higher that what the official figures indicate. A decrease in mortality can also have a big
effect on production levels and its negative impact is even larger than that of stock theft.
Researchers, development practitioners, producer organizations, policy makers and livestock farmers
should all take note of these high levels of involuntary exits, especially on communal land. Measures should
be developed, investigated and implemented to address this problem. Livestock is the backbone of many
rural communities and the high levels of involuntary exits have a negative effect on sustainable rural
development in general.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the FAO for the funding of the survey through project RAF/97/032. The
enumerators and supervisors of the different Provincial Departments of Agriculture and the ARC are
recognized for their hard and dedicated work in carrying out the survey. The University of Pretoria is
acknowledged for designing the sample framework and guidance during the survey.
References
Bester, J. & Ramsay, K.A., 2005. Preliminary findings of a South African national Livestock survey:
Community based resources. Proceeding of 6th Global Conference on the Conservation of Domestic
Animal Genetic Resources. 9-13 October 2005, Magalies Park, South Africa.
Greyling, B.J., 2008. DNA technology for resource-poor farmers. Agrinews November 2008, 4–5.
RMRDT, 2008. Research and development plan for the large stock and small stock meat industries in South
Africa. October 2008, Pretoria. http://www.samic.co.za/samic/rd.htm#rdRMRDT
Scholtz, M.M. & Bester, J., 2009. Off-take and production statistics in the different South African cattle
sectors: Results of a structured survey. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. (Submitted)
NERPO, 2000. An investigation into the current livestock and business profile of the emerging red meat
producers of South Africa. Report to National Emerging Red Meat Producers Organization (NERPO),
July 2000.
NERPO, 2009. Stock theft: time for drastic action, says NERPO. NERPO News, February 2009, 1–3.
Scholtz, M.M., Bester, J., Mamabolo, J.M. & Ramsay, K.A., 2008. Results of the national cattle survey
undertaken in South Africa, with emphasis on beef. Appl. Anim. Husb. & Rural Develop. 1, 1–9.
Citation of this paper: Appl. Anim. Husb. Rural Develop. 2010, vol .3, 15-18: www.sasas.co.za/aahrd/