Content uploaded by Onesmus Nderi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Onesmus Nderi on Jul 22, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Vol. 11(26), pp. 2337-2347, 30 June, 2016
DOI: 10.5897/AJAR2016.11162
Article Number: AA8B2C359262
ISSN 1991-637X
Copyright ©2016
Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
http://www.academicjournals.org/AJAR
African Journal of Agricultural
Research
Full Length Research Paper
Current status of fodder production, conservation and
marketing in the arid and semi-arid lands of Tharaka
Nithi County, Kenya
Levi Mugalavai Musalia1*, Gilbert Abura Odilla2, Onesmus Munene Nderi1
and Viona Muleke3
1Department of Animal Science, Chuka University, P. O. Box 109-60400, Chuka, Kenya.
2Department of Education, Chuka University, P. O. Box 109-60400, Chuka, Kenya.
3School for Human Resource Development, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, P. O. Box, 62000-
00200, Nairobi, Kenya.
Received 29 April, 2016; Accepted 2 June, 2016
The purpose of the survey was to document the current status of fodder production, conservation and
marketing in the arid and semi-arid land (ASAL) Divisions of Tharaka Nithi County, Kenya. The survey
covered specifically Nkondi, Igambang’ombe and Tharaka Central divisions. A sample of 74 livestock
farmers selected through stratified random sampling was engaged in the study. The study adopted a
descriptive research design and data was collected using a structured questionnaire to obtain farm
level information from livestock farmers. The data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and
inferential statistics. Chi-square statistics was used to test the relative significance between land
owned and fodder production. The majority of the respondents (68%) owned between 1 and 6 acres.
The results indicated that most farmers did not grow fodder crops. The main type of fodder produced
by farmers in the study area was Napier grass (cultivated by 10% of the respondents). Although a
number of livestock farmers grew napier grass, it was not adequate for marketing and conservation.
The results further indicated that only 1% of the respondents grew fodder on a piece of land between 1
and 3 acres thus implying that the amount of fodder grown was too little and could not cater for the
livestock feeds required. There was a significant association between land sizes and fodder production
(p < 0.05). Thus preference was given to crop cultivation due to limited land and approximately 80% of
the respondents conserved maize stalks and other crop residues for their livestock. Fodder production,
conservation and marketing were very low despite the high potential for its production and the
possibility of becoming an income generating enterprise. The study therefore recommended for
outreach programmes to train farmers on fodder production, conservation and marketing through
Chuka University in collaboration with the area extension agents.
Key words: Arid and semi-arid lands (ASAL), fodder production, fodder conservation, marketing.
INTRODUCTION
In Kenya, about, 56% of the rural dwellers live below the
poverty line while 48% are food insecure (Government of Kenya, 2004). They derive their livelihood largely from
agriculture which contributes 25% of the gross domestic
2338 Afr. J. Agric. Res.
product (GDP) and provides livelihood to over 80% of the
population (Alila and Atieno, 2006). Livestock, on the
other hand, contributes approximately 30 and 10% of the
agricultural and overall GDP’s, respectively. Thus,
livestock production plays an important role in the
national economy, especially in the subsistence and
semi-commercial smallholder farming systems,
dominated by resource poor farm households to improve
their households' food security and livelihoods
(Lanyasunya et al., 2005).
Livestock is raised in the mixed livestock-crop system
and the arid and semi-arid lands (ASAL) where pastures,
fodder crops, crop residues and agro-industrial by-
products represent the bulk of animal feed resources in
the country. The areas have biannual rainfall pattern with
long rains between March and May and short rains from
October to December. The rains are unreliable and
characterized with periodic droughts. Seasonal variation
in the nutrient content and nutritive value of feeds has
been reported in most parts which lead to inadequate dry
matter (DM) intake and limited organic matter digestibility
(McDowell, 1987). High population growth rate, together
with the traditional land inheritance norms and the
Government’s policy of resettlement, have culminated in
subdivision of land which exert high pressure on animal
feed resources (Zemmelink et al., 1999). Apart from
pastures and fodder crops many tropical regions are
endowed with leguminous fodder trees and shrubs that
are deep rooted for survival during the dry season while
providing livestock feed resource base (Abdulrazak et al.,
2001). Although, they require little or no cash investment
or land taken away from producing food or other crops,
the adoption of this technology in feeding systems for
ruminants is low mainly due to limited knowledge
(Franzel and Wambugu, 2007). Consequently, the
scarcity and low quality feed and fodder resources, in
addition to the shortage of water, contribute significantly
to low production of milk and meat in these regions
(Chinogaramombe et al., 2008; Mapiye et al., 2006). On
the contrary, many farmers do not know how to produce,
conserve and manage fodder, despite the high demand
of feeds. However, fodder production and conservation is
an appropriate intervention in cushioning pastoralists and
agro-pastoralist against the impact of droughts by
providing more food and income to improve their
livelihoods (African Development Solutions, 2012).
Tharaka Nithi county has a large population of livestock
but the productivity of milk and other livestock product per
animal is very low compared to other many counties in
the country. This is attributed to severe shortage of feeds
which affects, the future growth of livestock that can be
sustainable primarily through enhanced animal
productivity and not on increased number of animals
(Tharaka Nithi County, 2013). According to Ministry of
Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (2013) pasture and
browse situation is fair to poor in ASAL divisions and fair
in rain fed and mixed farming zones. In view of this
shortage, livestock owners in the lower parts of the
county access pasture in Meru National Park during the
dry spell where they are charged Kenya shillings (KES)
100 (1.1 US$) for cattle and KES. 40 (0.44 US$) for small
stock every month. Scarcity of animal feeds has been
associated with massive losses of livestock and livelihood
assets, despondency and rising poverty (Tharaka Nithi
County, 2013). Considering this scarcity of feed / fodder
resources, it is important to emphasise on fodder
development programmes for augmenting fodder/feed
supply, when formulating livestock development
strategies. The study aimed at gathering information on
the current status of fodder production and marketing
within three targeted ASAL divisions in Tharaka Nithi
County.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Description of the study area
Tharaka Nithi County borders the Counties of Embu to the South
and South West, Meru to the North and North East, Kirinyiga and
Nyeri to the West and Kitui to the East and South East (Figure 1).
The County lies between latitude 000 07’ and 000 26’ South and
between longitudes 370 19’ and 370 46’ East. The total area of the
County is 2,662.1 km2, including Mt Kenya forest which is estimated
at 360 km2. The County is divided into four administrative Sub
Counties namely Tharaka North, Tharaka South, Meru South and
Maara. The lower altitude is classified as semi-arid. The study
mainly focused on 3 areas in the lower altitude region namely
Marimanti (Tharaka Central Division), Nkondi (Tharaka Central
Division) and Igambang’ombe (Meru South). The region has a
bimodal rainfall distribution pattern with the long rains falling
between March and May and the short rains between October and
December. The average rainfall ranges between 200 and 800 mm
per year. The ambient temperatures range between 22 and 27°C,
with the lowest temperatures being in July and the highest in
January. Temperatures of up to 40°C are experienced at certain
periods (Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, 2013).
Data collection
The study adopted a descriptive research design as it was aimed at
describing the status of fodder production and conservation in the
County. According to Polit and Hungler (2004) descriptive design
describes data and characteristics about the population or
phenomenon being studied. A stratified random sampling was used
to select 74 livestock farmers in target area. Data was collected
using a structured questionnaire to obtain farm level information
from livestock farmers on the production, conservation and
marketing of forages.
*Corresponding author. E-mail: mugalavai@mail.com. Tel: +254722273792.
Author(s) agree that this article remain permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 International License
Musalia et al. 2339
Figure 1. Map of Tharaka Nithi County.
Data analysis
The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and inferential
statistics. Cross tabulation and chi-square statistics was used to
test for significance of relationship between land owned and fodder
production.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Respondents’ characteristics
The respondent characteristics assessed by the study
were gender, farm size, land under pasture and under
fodder. The results indicate that majority of the
respondents (51%) were female while 49% were male.
The respondents were from three ASAL divisions where
22% were from Nkondi, 57% were from Igambang’ombe
and 21% were from Marimanti.
Farm utilization
Land utilization by farmers is summarized in Table 1. The
majority of farmers did not disclose information about
their land size and usage and were classified as non
responsive. The land sizes ranged from 0.5 to 24 acres.
However, the majority of the respondents (68%) owned
between 1 and 6 acres. These farm sizes are
characteristic of smallholder farms in Kenya (Musalia et
al., 2007), whereas there were no farmers who did not
spare land for crop production, about 19% did not have
land under pasture. The land spared for pasture ranged
between 0.25 and 13 acres with the majority of farmers
(31%) sparing between ≤1 and 3 acres. Most farmers
(34%) allocated between 1 to 3 acres for crops. About
5% of the farmers did not plant any fodder crops as
compared to 23% and 1% who planted fodder on ≤1 acre
and between 1 to 3 acres, respectively. This implies that
2340 Afr. J. Agric. Res.
Table 1. Land use in the arid and semi-arid areas of Tharaka Nithi.
Land sizes (acres)
Land under pasture
Land under fodder
Land under crops
Frequency
Percent
Frequency
Percent
Frequency
Percent
< 1
10
13.4
17
23
1
1.4
1 to 3
13
17.6
1
1.3
25
33.7
4 to 6
2
2.7
0
0
5
6.8
7 to 9
1
1.4
0
0
0
0
10
2
2.7
0
0
0
0
Non response
46
62.2
56
75.7
43
58.1
Total
74
100.0
74
100.0
74
100.0
Figure 2. Type of forage fed to animals in arid and semi arid areas of Tharaka Nithi.
the land spared for pasture and amount of fodder grown
was too little compared to the acreage spared for crops.
Thus, farmers tended to utilize most of the land for crops
compared to forage production. This is a typical crop-
livestock production system where all farmers in this
study planted crops and spared very little land for
pastures and fodder production.
Fodder production
The main type of fodder produced by farmers in the study
area was Napier grass (Pennisetum purpureum), which
was cultivated by 10% of the respondents. Napier grass
is the major fodder used by smallholder farmers in Kenya
(Orodho, 1990). It is estimated to form about 40% of the
total dry matter intake in the diet of dairy cattle. However,
the cultivation of small amounts of Napier grass in the
study area can be attributed to low rainfall and small
pieces of land (Glover and Birch, 1962). Apparently, the
bulk of feeds for the animals came from the crop residues
(Figure 2). About 3% of the respondents used millet straw
to feed livestock, 48% used maize stalk and 40% used
other crop residues such as beans, pigeon peas
(Cajanus cajan) and sorghum residues etc. This
observation is typical in the crop-livestock farming system
where crop residues form a significant portion of the
ration due to lack of land that can be spared for pasture
and fodder crops (McDowell, 1987). The findings agree
with the study of Orodho (1990) who also observed that
the smaller the farms the more the contribution of crop
residues to the diet of animals. On average crop residues
are estimated to provide from 35 to 45% of the total
livestock feeds in addition to grazing on the fallow land
(Orodho, 1990), which, can go up to 80% in very critical
times (Sandford, 1989). These findings are in agreement
with Shah et al. (2011) who reported that feed and fodder
production and its utilization depend on the cropping
pattern, climate, socio-economic condition and livestock
type. Apart from the limited land for planting fodder, the
study further revealed that one required KES 3000 (32.6
US$) to get cuttings (Napier grass) for planting in 1 acre
piece of land. This amount was considered high by most
farmers and most probably explains why the production
of fodder is too low in the region. Further, the results
indicate that 98% confirmed that their animals got enough
feeds during the wet season as illustrated in Figure 3.
This implies that availability of more feeds during the
rainy season can be conserved for use during the dry
period. Inadequate supply of feeds during the dry season
Musalia et al. 2341
Figure 3. Adequacy of feed during the wet
season in arid and semi arid areas of Tharaka
Nithi.
Table 2. Chi square test results.
Test
Value
Df
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square
59.699a
40
0.023
Likelihood Ratio
41.291
40
0.414
Linear-by-linear association
.110
1
0.740
No. of Valid Cases
22
Figure 4. Type of fodder conserved in arid and semi arid areas of Tharaka Nithi.
was expressed by 93%. A chi square test was run to
established whether the size of the land influenced the
cultivation of fodder. As shown in Table 2, the test yielded
a chi square value; χ =59.699 with a high association
between land sizes and fodder production (p < 0.05).
Similar to these findings, Musalia et al. (2007) also
observed that farmers with large farms spared more
proportion of land for pasture and fodder production. In
Contrast, Franzel and Wambugu (2007) found that fodder
trees require little or no cash investment or land taken
away from producing food or other crops but still most
farmers did not grow them. It is estimated that a 250
metre hedgerow of fodder trees like Calliandra
calothyrsus, can supplement one dairy cow in a lactation
period (Paterson et al., 1998).
Fodder conservation
The study further investigated the kind of fodder that was
being conserved, methods used and technologies that
were applied in the conservation. Regarding the kind of
fodder that was being conserved, 80% of the
respondents indicated that they were conserving maize
stalks, 16% were conserving other crop residues such as
sorghum straw, beans residue and millet straws, while
4% were conserving natural grasses (Figure 4). These
findings revealed that maize stalk was the major livestock
feed that was conserved by the local community, though
other crop residues, and natural grasses were conserved.
The higher percentage of maize stalk conservation was
due to the fact that the communities practiced mixed
2342 Afr. J. Agric. Res.
Figure 5. Method used in conservation of fodder in arid and semi arid areas of Tharaka Nithi.
farming whereby maize was considered to be a major
staple diet and the residues were used as livestock
feeds. These results accord with the work done by Nderi
et al. (2014), that mixed farming was common in
Igambang’ombe division. Conservation of conventional
fodder such as Napier grass was poor probably due to
low scale of production which was fed while green thus
leaving none for conservation.
Figure 5 also revealed that 57% of the respondents
conserved fodder under a shade particularly on tree
branches (Figure 6) and makeshift sheds (Figure 7), 30%
of them dried fodder under direct sunlight before storing
in sacks (4.3%), and only 8.7% of them chopped fodder
into small pieces before storage. From these findings, it is
clear that the majority of farmers employed traditional
methods to conserve fodder. This can be attributed to
little knowledge on modern farming methods among the
residents which could be due to limited agricultural
extension services. This situation, therefore, calls for
farmers training on the modern conservation
technologies.
Fodder marketing
An assessment of fodder marketing revealed that only
1% of the respondents had produced fodder for sale. This
is a clear demonstration that the farmers were not
producing adequate fodder despite the potential. Other
farmers indicated that they were not producing enough to
cater for their livestock needs and sale. Although selling
fodder may not be a primary objective of livestock
farmers in the County, Ekodere et al. (2014) observed
that sustainable fodder production has a significant
impact not only on income but also on livestock asset and
food security. Furthermore, during periods of drought,
lack of fodder is often a major cause of livestock mortality
in the ASAL regions such as parts of the study area. As
shown in Table 3, 1% of the respondents generated an
income KES 500 (5.4 US$), while 1 % generated KES
10,000 (108.7 US$) in one season. However, the majority
of the respondents (97%) did not sell any amount of
fodder.
Factors influencing price formation and variability
When asked to indicate the factors that influenced price
fluctuation and determination, 12% felt that the price
changed with seasons while 12% stated that the changes
were as a result of demand and supply (Table 4). The
outcomes showed that the prices were highly volatile,
probably because of the forces of demand and supply.
The findings were in accordance with that observed by
the Economic Research Service (1999) where the degree
of variability in commodity prices is traditionally believed
to depend heavily on stock levels and on the nature and
frequency of unexpected shifts in demand and supply.
Contrary to these findings, Wright (2010) found that
fodder prices were also determined by certain quality
aspects like good lustre, taste, cleanliness, softness, and
moisture contents of fodder other than the market forces.
The results also indicate that majority of the respondents
(76%) did not know the factors that affected the fodder
prices because they had not been involved in the sale of
fodder.
Types of livestock kept
An evaluation of the types of cattle kept in the ASAL
areas of Tharaka Nithi was also undertaken as presented
in Table 5. Results indicate that dairy cattle were mostly
kept in Igambang’ombe (54.8%) but they were not
popular in Marimanti (0%). There was a similar trend for
the local cattle whereby 88% were found in
Igambang’ombe and only 1.4% was kept in Marimanti.
Generally, it emerged that majority of the farmers reared
local breeds as it is practiced by most smallholder
farmers (Musalia et al., 2007). However, dairy cattle
farming are practiced in the transition agro-ecological
zones of the upper parts of Igambang’ombe and Nkondi
Musalia et al. 2343
Figure 6. Storing hay on a tree in the arid and semi arid areas of Tharaka Nithi.
2344 Afr. J. Agric. Res.
Figure 7. Storing crop residues in a constructed structure in the arid and semi arid areas of Tharaka Nithi.
Table 3. Income from sales of fodder (Kenya shillings) in Tharaka Nithi County.
Income
Frequency
Percent
500.00
1
1.4
10000.00
1
1.4
Never sold
72
97.3
Total
74
100.0
Table 4. Factors influencing price formation and variability of fodder.
Factor
Frequency
Percent
Seasonal
9
12.2
Demand and supply
9
12.2
Total
18
24.3
Don’t Know
56
75.7
Total
74
100.0
where climate is more favorable but at a relatively lower
scale. The introduction of modern farming technologies
like irrigated fodder crops can spur livestock production in
ASAL where land is plenty, thus enhancing feed security
and improving rural livelihood.
Nkondi division reported the highest milk yield of 2.9 L
per cow per day (Table 6). This production could be due
to the favorable agro-ecological location of Nkondi
division and influenced by the lucrative dairy farming
enterprises in Meru central region which is an immediate
neighbour. The level of milk production in the area is low
and animals do not require high inputs in terms of feeds
which can be supplied by fodder trees planted as
hedgerows (Paterson et al., 1998).
Musalia et al. 2345
Table 5. Types of cattle kept in the arid and semi-arid lands of Tharaka Nithi county.
Division
Female dairy
cattle
Male dairy
cattle
Total dairy
cattle
Female local
cattle
Male local
cattle
Total local
cattle
Nkondi
Frequency
10.00
4.00
14.00
9.00
13.00
22.00
%
50.0
36.4
45.2
7.0
18.3
10.5
Igambang'ombe
Frequency
10.00
7.00
17.00
119.00
55.00
184.00
%
50.0
63.6
54.8
93.0
77.5
88.0
Marimanti
Frequency
0
0
0
0.00
3.00
3.00
%
0
0
0
0.0
4.2
1.4
Overall
Frequency
20.00
11.00
31.00
128.00
71.00
209.00
%
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
N= 74.
Table 6. Milk yield per cow in the arid and semi arid areas of
Tharaka Nithi (litres/day).
Division
Average milk yield
Nkondi
2.8571
Igambang'ombe
2.6207
Total
2.6667
Table 7. Goat production in the arid and semi-arid lands of Tharaka Nithi County
Division
Females
Males
Total
Nkondi
Frequency
28
8
36
%
7.3
7.1
6.3
Igambang'ombe
Frequency
344
103
522
%
90.3
92.0
91.9
Marimanti
Frequency
9
1
10
%
2.4
0.9
1.8
Overall
Frequency
381
112
568
%
100.0
100.0
100.0
The results on goat rearing in the Arid and Semi-Arid
Lands of Tharaka Nithi County are presented in Table 7.
Among the divisions, Igambang’ombe had the highest
population of goats (91.9%) with Nkondi and Marimanti
having very low goat populations. The high number of
goats in Igambang’ombe can be attributed to availability
of the browse forage compared to Marimanti where some
parts are bare, thus having low ability to support livestock
growth.
The results further indicate that Igambang’ombe
Division was leading in sheep production (96.6%),
followed by Nkondi (3.4%) which showed a noteworthy
difference (Table 8). This trend is similar to what was
observed in goat rearing which implies that
Igambang’ombe division is favorable for small stock
production probably due to availability of feeds and the
possibility of farmers relying on animals as an income
earner. Sheep were absent in Marimanti, which is drier
compared to the other two divisions.
Conclusion
Very few farmers grew pasture and fodder for livestock
feeding. The cost of planting materials was high and
together with the small pieces of land may have resulted
2346 Afr. J. Agric. Res.
Table 8. Sheep rearing in the arid and semi-arid lands of Tharaka Nithi.
Division
Females
Males
Total
Nkondi
Frequency
5
0
5
%
4.8
0
3.4
Igambang'ombe
Frequency
99
44
144
%
95.2
100.0
96.6
Total
Frequency
104
44
149
%
100.0
100.0
100.0
in low production of fodder in the region. The main type of
feed for animals was crop residues from the crop-
livestock production system that favoured crop cultivation
to fodder production. The area produced enough feeds
for animals during the wet season with scarcity in the dry
season. Farmers did not have the technology for
conserving excess forage in the wet season. Fodder
production, marketing and conservation were very low
despite the high potential for its production and demand.
In order to improve the productivity of livestock in the
ASAL part of the County there is need to improve
linkages between fodder suppliers and farmers to
stimulate the production and marketing of fodder.
Farmers should also adopt modern fodder conservation
technologies to reap the benefits of seasonal price
fluctuations and maximize the scarcity during drought.
Conflict of Interests
The authors have not declared any conflict of interests.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was supported, in part, by ST&I Grant
Fund of the National Council for Science and
Technology, Ministry of Higher Education Science and
Technology, Kenya. Special thanks are due to staff
members of the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries
Development (MoLFD) and administrative staff in
Tharaka Nithi County for their support in administering
the survey questionnaire especially in mobilizing the
farmers. The authors also wish to thank all the farmers
for their cooperation and provision of valuable information
in this study.
REFERENCES
Abdulrazak SA, Nyangaga J, Fujihara T (2001). Relative Palatability
to sheep of some browse species, their in saccodegradability and
in vitro gas production characteristics. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci.
14(11):1580-1584.
African Development Solutions (2012). LISHE-Supporting
Livelihoods through Fodder Production Garissa, Kenya. Available
at: http://www.adesoafrica.org Retrieved April 26, 2016.
Alila PO, Atieno R (2006). Agricultural Policy in Kenya: Issues and
Processes. A paper presented in, Future Agricultures Consortium
workshop, Institute of Development Studies, 20-22 March 2006
at the Institute for Development Studies, University of Nairobi,
Nairobi, Kenya, P 3. Available at:
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/fsn/docs/Ag_policy_Ke
nya.pdf Retrieved on March 2, 2016.
Chinogaramombe G, Muchenje V, Mapiye C, Ndlovu T, Chimonyo
M, Musemwa L (2008). Challenges for improving smallholder
dairy production in the semiarid areas of Zimbabwe. Crops 7:0-3.
Economic Research Service (1999). Assessing Agricultural
Commodity Price Variability. Agricultural Outlook/October, USDA.
pp. 16-19.
Ekodere P, Koen J, Miano G (2014).Best Practice Brief – Fodder
production in Baringo County. International Livestock Research
Institute, pp. 2-4. Available at: https://asals-
markets.wikispaces.com/file/view/Best+practice+brief+-
+Mayiani+fodder+group+%282%29.pdf Retrieved.on April 26,
2016.
Franzel S, Wambugu C (2007). The uptake of fodder shrubs among
smallholders in East Africa: key elements that facilitate
widespread adoption. In: Hare MD, Wongpichet K (Eds.).
Forages: a pathway to prosperity for smallholder farmers.
Proceedings of an international symposium. Ubon Ratchathani
University, Thailand: Faculty of Agriculture, pp. 203-222.
Glover JA, Birch WRB (1962). The effect of rainfall and age on the
yield of some unfertilized fodder crops in Kenya. J. Agric. Sci.
58(1):53-57.
Government of Kenya (2004). Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of
Livestock and Fisheries Development, Strategy for Revitalizing
Agriculture (SRA) 2004-2014, March 2004. pp. 37-39.
Lanyasunya TP, Musa HH, Yang ZP, Mekki DM, Mukisira EA
(2005). Effects of poor nutrition on reproduction of dairy stock on
smallholder farms in the tropics. Pak. J. Nutr. 4:117-122.
Mapiye C, Foti R, Chikumba N, Poshiwa X, Mwale M, Chivuraise C,
Mupangwa J (2006). Constraints to adoption of forage and
browse legumes by smallholder dairy farmers in Zimbabwe.
Livest. Res. Rural Dev. (12). Available at:
http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd18/12/mapi18175.htm Retrieved on April
26, 2016.
McDowell RE (1987). Importance of crop residues for feeding
livestock in smallholder farming systems. In: Reed JD, Capper
BS, Neate PJH (Eds.). 1988. Plant breeding and the nutritive
value of crop residues. Proceedings of a workshop held at ILCA,
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia,7-10 December 1987. ILCA, Addis Ababa.
Available at:
http://www.fao.org/wairdocs/ilri/x5495e/x5495e02.htm Retrieved
on April 26, 2016.
Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries (2013). Regional
Pastoral Livelihoods Resilience Project project Report on
Environmental and Social Management Framework pp. 23-26.
Musalia LM, Wangia SMM, Shivairo RS, Okutu P, Vugutsa V
(2007). Dairy production practices among smallholder dairy
farmers in Butere/Mumias and Kakamega districts in Western
Kenya. Trop. Anim. Health. Prod. 39:199-205.
Nderi MO, Musalia LM, Ombaka O (2014). Livestock farmers
perceptions on the relevance of natural licks in Igambang’ombe
Division, Tharaka-Nithi County, Kenya. Int. J. Agric. Sci. Vet.
Med. 7:52-59.
Orodho AB (1990). Intensive forage production for smallholder
dairying in East Africa. Available at: from
http://www.fao.org/ag/agp/agpc/doc/newpub/napier/eastafrica_or
odho.htm Retrieved.on April 26, 2016.
Paterson RT, Karanja GM, Nyaata OZ, Kariuki IW, Roothaert RL
(1998). A review of tree fodder production and utilization within
smallholder agroforestry systems in Kenya. Agroforest. Syst.
41(2):181-199.
Polit DF, Hungler BP (2004) Nursing research: Principles and
methods. Philadelphia. Lippincott, pp. 61-62.
Sandford S (1989). Crop residues/livestock relationships. In:
Renard C, Vandenbeldt RC, Parr JF (Eds.). Soil, Crop and Water
Management Systems for Rainfed Agriculture in the Sudano-
Sahelian Zone. Proceedings of an International Workshop, 11-16
January 1987, ICRISAT Sahelian Centre, Niamey, Niger.
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics,
Patancheru, India. pp. 169-182.
Musalia et al. 2347
Shah VD, Makwana M, Sharma S (2011). Economics of Production,
Processing and Marketing of Fodder Crops in Gujarat. Agro-
Economic Research Centre, Sardar Patel University Vallabh
Vidyanagar, Gujarat.
Tharaka Nithi County (2013). Long Rains Food Security
Assessment Report. pp. 1-12.
Wright A (2010). Improvement of Fodder Markets and Identification
of Crop Varieties with Improved Fodder Characteristics in
Selected Disadvantaged Areas of India. New Delhi 110012,
India. International Livestock Research Institute pp. 5-6.
Zemmelink G, Premaratne S, Ibrahim MNM, Leegwater PH (1999).
Feeding of dairy cattle in the Forest-Garden farms of Kandy, Sri
Lanka, Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 31(5):307-319.
