FACTORS AFFECTING TRACEABILITY OF CATTLE ACROSS NGUNI CATTLE PROJECT BENEFICIARIES

Full text

Grootfontein Agric 2021, 21(1), 31-40 Malusi, N. & Falowo, A.B.
31
FACTORS AFFECTING TRACEABILITY OF CATTLE ACROSS NGUNI CATTLE
PROJECT BENEFICIARIES
N. Malusi1,2# & A.B. Falowo2,3
1Grootfontein Agricultural Development Institute, Private Bag X529, Middelburg (EC), 5900, South
Africa
2Department of Livestock and Pasture Science, University of Fort Hare, Private Bag X1314, Alice,
5700, South Africa
3Department of Animal Science, Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko, Ondo State, Nigeria
#E-mail: NdumisoM@dalrrd.gov.za
INTRODUCTION
Cattle traceability was developed to enhance ownership, registration in breed associations and record
keeping for animal performance and health status (CFIA, 2018). Traceability is defined as the ability to
follow the processes that an item or group of items go through from one supply chain to the other. The
same author reported that the basic elements include animal identification, location identification and
animal movement. In addition, it is compulsory that all livestock be identified according to the Animal
Identification Act (Act No. 6 of 2002) (South Africa, 2002). Cattle identification is one of the crucial
ethical aspects as it involves human health, cattle production, preservation and management. Cattle can
be reared in different locations and eventually be traded before slaughter. Even the slaughtering process
can occur far away from the animal’s original location, and it can lack the recognised information about
the authentic source of cattle.
The freedom of animal movement from one location to another increases the risk of spreading animal
diseases, and thus leads to the contamination of meat products (Brester et al., 2011). Therefore, knowing
the origin of cattle is a significant determining factor about the health status of cattle and the quality of
the meat products. Moreover, Zhao et al. (2017) argued that confirming the health of the living cattle
and identifying diseases early is important for increased consumer awareness as well as food safety in
the supply chain. Cattle traceability does not only help in controlling the spreading of diseases, but also
increases the opportunity for beef exports. According to Brester et al. (2011), beef importing countries
have adopted the use of traceability systems for their products and such systems are emerging as a
prerequisite for market access. However, Musemwa et al. (2008) and Van Schalkwyk et al. (2012),
reported that the majority of smallholder farmers sell their cattle on informal markets, where there are
no requirements for proper animal records. One of the reasons for smallholder farmers are unable to use
formal markets is their inability to meet market standards.

Grootfontein Agric 2021, 21(1), 31-40 Malusi, N. & Falowo, A.B.
32
In many countries indigenous breeds have been regarded to be of lower market value than imported
breeds because of their lower body weight. This has resulted in a reduction in the use of indigenous
breeds while increasing the use of exotic breeds. However, exotic breeds are susceptible to harsh
environmental conditions tick-borne diseases, feed scarcity and poor feed quality that are prevalent in
most communal areas in southern Africa (Muchenje et al., 2008a). Exotic breeds require a high level of
dietary supplementation especially during the dry season to maintain body condition (Muchenje et al.,
2008a). Therefore, indigenous breeds such as the Nguni have been re-introduced to most communal
areas due to their adaptive qualities, including resistance ability to parasites and production of high
quality beef (Muchenje et al., 2008b).
Development programs to repopulate the Eastern Cape Province with indigenous breeds in communal
areas have been made. Among other development programs, the Nguni Cattle Project (NCP) has been
established where a number of Nguni heifers and bulls were distributed to selected communities to build
nucleus herds (Fuller, 2006). The first program began in 1998 which was specifically aimed at
reintroducing the Nguni breed in the Eastern Cape (Musemwa et al., 2008). The Eastern Cape NCP is
a partnership between the University of Fort Hare (UFH), the Eastern Cape Department of Rural
Development and Agrarian Reform (ECDRDAR) and the Industrial Development Cooperation (IDC).
The project was established due to the high adaptability of Nguni cattle to harsh environments.
According to a NCP report from the University of Fort Hare (Fuller, 2006), farmers in selected areas
were provided with 10 in-calf heifers and two bulls with the aim of building a nucleus herd. After the
period of five years the community gave back 10 heifers and two bulls to the project which were then
passed on to another community (Raats et al., 2004). The requirements for the project were that the
grazing area should be fenced and rotational grazing should be practised (Mapiye et al., 2007), as well
as the replacement of existing bulls in the community by registered Nguni bulls, and castration or culling
of the existing bulls (Musemwa et al., 2008). The major role of the project was to develop a niche
market for Nguni products (beef and skins) and to introduce communal farmers to global markets
through production and product processing (Raats et al., 2004). The project also aimed to train farmers
on cattle management. The project development committee had the responsibility of training farmers,
redistributing animals and developing infrastructure such as holding pens (Musemwa et al., 2008).
Irrespective of the benefits contributed by cattle, communal farmers face a significant number of
challenges that restrict them from generating income from their livestock. These include cattle records
that are commonly required by the formal markets. Most communal farmers are unable to give accurate
information about when cattle were dosed and what type of medication was used. This has a negative
impact on the economy of the country, as communal areas have high numbers (DAFF, 2017). The aim
of the study was, therefore, to determine factors affecting traceability of cattle across the Nguni Cattle
Project beneficiaries.

Grootfontein Agric 2021, 21(1), 31-40 Malusi, N. & Falowo, A.B.
33
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Different geographical locations with different climatic conditions were used in the study. The study
was conducted in six district municipalities of the Eastern Cape Province in South Africa, namely Alfred
Nzo, Amathole, Joe Gqabi, O.R. Tambo, Chris Hani and Sarah Baartman. The geographical coordinates
and pedo-climatic conditions of the study areas are presented in Table 1. The selection of these district
municipalities was due to their participation in the NCP. The sample size of the study was 120
beneficiaries. All the NCP beneficiaries in these municipalities, who were willing to participate in the
study, were interviewed.
Table 1. The geographical coordinates and pedo-climatic conditions of the study areas
District Geographical
coordinates
Rangeland
type
Annual
rainfall
(mm)
Mean annual
temperature
(
℃
)
Altitude
(m)
Alfred Nzo 30.54°S, 28.85°E Sour 600-950 14-15 600-1400
Amathole 32.58°S, 27.36°E Sweet 400-700 15-20 400-700
Joe Gqabi 30.98°S, 26.98°E Sweet-Sour 400-700 12-16 1100-1600
O.R. Tambo 31.46°S, 29.23°E Sweet-Sour 450-750 17-18 600-850
Chris Hani 31.87°S, 26.79°E Sweet-Sour 400-700 12-16 400-1450
Sarah
Baartman
33.57°S, 25.36°E Sour 600-945 12-14 800-1350
Source: Mucina & Rutherford (2006)
Before the commencement of the data collection, a pilot study was done, where 10 farm workers of the
University of Fort Hare who are also farmers, were selected for the interviews with the use of the
questionnaires to be used for the study target group (NCP beneficiaries). The aim of the pilot study was
to ensure that farmers do understand the concept and the objectives of the study. The pilot study was
also conducted for the betterment of the questioning style and to determine the possible interview time.
The data were collected from the respondents using the questionnaires. The questionnaire was designed
to include cattle record keeping, cattle buying and identification methods. The enumerators that assisted
in data collection understood IsiXhosa and English since most respondents were IsiXhosa speaking and
few needed explanations in English. The enumerators were informally trained on how to approach and
record the information obtained from the respondents.
The data collected from the beneficiaries were coded and captured. The frequencies of cattle buying,
records received when buying, formal livestock training received by farmers, record keeping and

Grootfontein Agric 2021, 21(1), 31-40 Malusi, N. & Falowo, A.B.
34
identification methods were analysed using Freq of SPSS (SAS, 2016). The Chi-square test from SPSS
(SAS, 2016) was used to determine the degree of association between the following categorical
variables, demographic information, livestock formal training and cattle traceability of the beneficiaries
of the NCP.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The demographic characteristics of the NCP beneficiaries are presented in Table 2. The results of the
current study show that of the 120 interviewed Nguni farmer beneficiaries, 85.8% were males, while
only 14.2% were females. This accords with the results of Gwala et al. (2016) who found that in the
agricultural sector of rural areas in South Africa, male farmers are dominating. The results show that
60.8% of beneficiaries were above 60 years, followed by 51-60, 41-50 and 31-40 with percentages of
28.3%, 8.3% and 2.5% respectively. Chris Hani district municipality had the highest number of
beneficiaries (84.6%) above 60 years of age, while Joe Gqabi had the lowest number of beneficiaries
(40%) at the same age range. The majority (94.2%) of the beneficiaries interviewed were married, while
5% and 0.8% of the beneficiaries were widowed and single, respectively. About 47.5% of beneficiaries
had primary education (Grade 1-7) while 37.5% had secondary education (Grade 8-12). These results
agree with the findings by Gwala et al. (2016) who found that about 59% of Nguni beneficiaries in two
villages of the Eastern Cape Province had primary education (Grade 1-7). The results also reveal that
the majority (55%) of the beneficiaries mainly depend on social grants and old age pensions from the
government. This is in agreement with the findings of Molefi (2015) who reported that about 45% of
the respondents in Mpumalanga mainly depended on pension as their primary source of income.
The association between district, demographic information, formal livestock training, cattle ownership,
marketing and traceability factors are summarised in Table 3. The results show that district had a strong
association with the record keeping and types of identification methods used, however, district had no
association with cattle buying. The age of the beneficiaries had no association with cattle buying and
type of identification methods used. However, education level had a strong association with record
keeping and the types of identification method used. According to Mudzielwana (2015), education
promotes understanding and knowledge of policies, which help to develop their farming skills. The
source of income was found to have no association with cattle buying and the type of identification
method used. As expected, formal livestock training had a strong association with record keeping and
the type of identification method used. These results suggest that farmers with formal livestock training
are more likely to keep records than those who have no training.

Grootfontein Agric 2021, 21(1), 31-40 Malusi, N. & Falowo, A.B.
35
Table 2. Demographic characteristics of the Nguni Cattle Project beneficiaries (n = 120)
Demographic characteristics Number (%)
Gender
Male
103 (85.8)
F
emale
17 (14.2)
Age (years)
31
-
40
3 (2.5)
41-50 10 (8.3)
51-60 34 (28.3)
>60 73 (60.8)
Marital status
Married
113 (94.2)
Single
1 (0.8)
Widowed
6 (5)
Level of Education
None 6 (5)
Grade 1-7 57 (47.5)
Grade 8-12 45 (37.5)
Tertiary 12 (10)
Primary Source of income
Salary
10 (8)
Old age pension
66 (55)
Crops 3 (2)
Remittance 13 (11)
Other social grants 8 (7)
Livestock 20 (17)
Table 3. The association between district, demographic information and livestock training
Record keeping Cattle buying Type of identification
method
District * NS *
Age * NS NS
Education level * NS *
Source of income * NS NS
Livestock training * NS *
* Significant at P <0.05

Grootfontein Agric 2021, 21(1), 31-40 Malusi, N. & Falowo, A.B.
36
Factors affecting traceability of cattle across beneficiaries of the NCP in the Eastern Cape are presented
in Table 4, while the factors according to district municipalities are presented in Table 5. The minority
of beneficiaries (20%) were buying cattle, while 80% were not buying cattle during the study. All the
farmers who were not buying cattle reported that their reason for not buying was because the own
enough stock themselves for breeding purposes. The majority of beneficiaries who were buying cattle
reported that they buy bulls to breed with their stock. All the beneficiaries in Joe Gqabi municipality
were not buying cattle, followed by Amathole (88.3%) and O.R. Tambo (75%) beneficiaries. This is
due to the fact that most of the farmers in these municipalities own land and have desired herd sizes. Of
the 120 interviewed beneficiaries, 37.5% claimed to receive records when buying cattle, while 62.5%
did not receive cattle records. These results show that traceability is an important management issue
that need to be addressed as it contributes to the health status of the individual cattle and the population
at large.
Table 4. Factors affecting traceability of cattle across beneficiaries of the Nguni Cattle Project in the
Eastern Cape (n=120)
Factors %
Beneficiaries buying cattle 20.0
Beneficiaries received cattle records when buying 37.5
Beneficiaries received formal livestock training 50.0
Beneficiaries keeping cattle records 25.8
Identification methods
Ear-tagging 23.0
Ear-notching 49.0
Branding 28.0
Table 5. Factors affecting traceability of cattle across beneficiaries of the Nguni Cattle Project of the
Eastern Cape according to district municipalities (n=120)
Factors Districts (%)
ATL ORT JG AN CH SB
Beneficiaries buying cattle 11.7 25.0 0.0 35.7 30.8 33.3
Beneficiaries received formal
livestock training 36.7 18.8 80.0 50.0 23.1 91.7
Beneficiaries keeping cattle records
16.6 12.5 80.0 42.9 23.1 50.0
Identification methods
Ear-tagging
11.8 37.6 50.0 21.4 30.7 41.7
Ear-notching
73.4 43.7 0.0 50.0 7.7 0.0
Branding
14.8
18.7
50.0
28.6
61.6
58.3

Grootfontein Agric 2021, 21(1), 31-40 Malusi, N. & Falowo, A.B.
37
ATL = Amathole; ORT = O.R. Tambo; JG = Joe Gqabi; AN = Alfred Nzo; CH = Chris Hani; SB =
Sarah Baartman
The Nguni beneficiaries who received formal livestock training, such as animal handling, health and
nutrition, were tied at 50% with those who never received formal training. Sarah Baartman was the
leading municipality with 91.7% of beneficiaries obtaining formal training, followed by Joe Gqabi and
Alfred Nzo with 80% and 50% of beneficiaries respectively. The O.R. Tambo and Chris Hani
municipalities had the highest number of beneficiaries (81.2% and 76.9%) who had never received
formal livestock training.
Only 25.8% of beneficiaries were keeping cattle records during the study, while 74.2% reported that
they do not keep cattle records. The types of cattle records included cattle birth date and weight, parents’
performance records and dates of medication application. The results of the current study agree with
Mapiye et al. (2009) and Hangara et al. (2011), who found that about 85% and 95% of farmers were
not keeping records in the communal areas of South Africa and Namibia respectively. All the farmers
who were not keeping records reported, however, that they keep the records in their head without
writing it down. For instance, on medication, they use their knowledge of the required withdrawal
period to determine when the meat from an injected animal can be consumed. However, the inability to
keep records has an effect on their participation in the formal market, for example at abattoirs and
feedlots, as these records are required.
Joe Gqabi was the only municipality where the majority (80%) of beneficiaries were keeping cattle
records during the study. As reported before, farmers in this municipality are land owners and are
making use of different market channels, therefore they require records to have access to the formal
markets. O.R. Tambo and Amathole had the most beneficiaries who were not keeping cattle records,
with 87.5% and 83.3% respectively. Therefore, the beneficiaries in these municipalities are less able to
sell their animals to the formal markets.
Ear-notching was the most commonly used cattle identification method, with 49% beneficiaries, while
28% and 23% were using branding and ear-tagging respectively. The current study is in contrast to the
study by Hangara et al. (2011) who reported that branding was the most commonly used cattle
identification method, compared to ear-notching and ear-tagging, by farmers in the Omaheke Region
in Namibia. The differences between the current study and previous studies may be due to the fact that
the previous studies included many farmers who were more informed about livestock practices such as
branding, while the current study is dominated by poor resourced farmers who have less knowledge.
Ear-notching is less recommended and needs to be reduced as it causes bleeding, which can lead to
infections and more distress to the animal (Hangara et al., 2011). In addition, the same author reported

Grootfontein Agric 2021, 21(1), 31-40 Malusi, N. & Falowo, A.B.
38
that ear-notching is not scalable and can only identify a few animals, therefore it is not suitable for large
herds.
The Amathole and Alfred Nzo municipalities had the majority of beneficiaries using ear-notching, with
73.4% and 50% respectively. These municipalities are dominated by village-owned enterprises, hence
they mostly used ear-notching. Joe Gqabi municipality has only group-owned enterprises (farms), hence
there are no beneficiaries in this municipality using ear-notching. The beneficiaries in Joe Gqabi using
branding and ear-tagging were tied at 50%. Chris Hani and Sarah Baartman had the majority of
beneficiaries using branding with 61.6% and 58.3% respectively. According to Hangara et al (2011),
the branding method does not provide sufficient reliability and accuracy as it can be easily altered or
duplicated.
CONCLUSION
Many beneficiaries of the Nguni Cattle Project are not buying cattle as they are satisfied with their cattle
numbers, while the majority of those who buy cattle do not receive records from the sellers. This has a
negative effect on traceability, as there are no details of cattle health status and the location in which
cattle were reared. The majority of the beneficiaries are not keeping cattle records, however, farmers
who are land owners keep cattle records because of their participation in the formal market. Ear-
notching is the mostly used identification method by the Nguni beneficiaries, especially by the village-
owned enterprises. It is recommended that policy makers of the Nguni Cattle Project must invest in
training farmers on traceability aspects as this affects their participation in the formal market, and
therefore affects their level of commercialisation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The following persons / institutions are acknowledged for their contribution to this study:
 National Research Foundation (NRF), the Nguni Cattle Project (Project P329) and
Govan Mbeki Research Development Centre (GMRDC), University of Fort Hare for
the funding
 The Eastern Cape Nguni Cattle Project beneficiaries for their participation in the study
 Personnel at the Department of Livestock and Pasture Science, University of Fort Hare.
REFERENCES
Brester, G., Dhuyvetter, K., Pendell, D., Schroeder, T. & Tonsor, G., 2011. Economic impacts of
evolving red meat export market access requirements for traceability of livestock and meat.
http://www.agmanager.info/livestock/marketing/AnimalID/USMEFFinal-Project-Report-
Tonsor_03-30-11.pdf. (Accessed 25 July 2018).

Grootfontein Agric 2021, 21(1), 31-40 Malusi, N. & Falowo, A.B.
39
CFIA., 2018. Livestock identification and traceability. http://www.inspection.gc.ca/animals/terrestrial-
animals/traceability/eng/1300461751002/1300461804752. (Accessed 30 of July 2018).
Fuller, A., 2006. The sacred hide of Nguni; the rise of an ancient breed of cattle is giving South Africa
new opportunity. Miracles that are changing the Nation. Industrial Development Corporation
(IDC) Newsletter. pp. 3-4.
Gwala, L., Monde, N. & Muchenje, V., 2016. Effect of agricultural extension services on beneficiaries
of the Nguni cattle project in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: A case study of two
villages. Appl. Anim. Husb. Rural Dev. 9 (1), 31-40.
Hangara, G.N., Teweldemedhin, M.Y. & Groenewald, I.B., 2011. Major constraints for cattle
productivity and managerial efficiency in communal areas of Omaheke Region, Namibia. Int.
J. Agric. Sustain. 9 (4), 495-507.
https://espace.curtin.edu.au/handle/20.500.11937/20088. (Accessed 20 July 2018).
Mapiye, C., Chimonyo, M., Dzama, K., Raats, J.G. & Mapekula, M., 2009. Opportunities for Improving
Nguni Cattle Production in the Smallholder farming system of South Africa. Livest. Sci. 124
(1-3), 196-204.
Mapiye, C., Chimonyo, M., Muchenje, V., Dzama, K., Marufu, M.C. & Raats, J.G. 2007., Potential for
value-addition of Nguni cattle products in the communal areas of South Africa: a review. Afr.
J. Agric. Res. 2 (10), 488-495.
Molefi, S.H., 2015. Utilization and management of beef cattle farming as a contributor to income of
households in communal areas of Chief Albert Luthuli Local Municipality in Mpumalanga
Province. MSc. Thesis, Agriculture. University of South Africa, South Africa.
Muchenje, V., Dzama, K., Chimonyo, M., Raats, J.G. & Strydom, P.E., 2008a. Meat quality of Nguni,
Bonsmara and Angus steers raised on natural pasture in the Eastern Cape, South Africa. Meat
Sci. 79(1), 20-28.
Muchenje, V., Dzama, K., Chimonyo, M., Raats, J.G. & Strydom, P.E., 2008b. Tick susceptibility and
its effects on growth performance and carcass characteristics of Nguni, Bonsmara and Angus
steers raised on natural pasture. Animal 2 (2), 298–304.
Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M.C., 2006. The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. South
African National Biodiversity Institute.
Mudzielwana, G., 2015. Determinants of cattle ownership and herd size in Vhembe district of South
Africa: A Tobit approach. Master of Agricultural Economics Thesis. University of Limpopo,
South Africa.
Musemwa, L., Mushunje, A., Chimonyo, M., Fraser, G., Mapiye, C. & Muchenje, V., 2008. Nguni
cattle marketing constraints and opportunities in the communal areas of South Africa: Review.
Afr. J. Agric. Res. 3 (4), 239-245.
Raats, J.G., Magadlela, A.M., Fraser, G.C.G. & Hugo, A., 2004. ‘Re-introducing Nguni Nucleus Herds
in 100 Communal Villages of the Eastern Cape Province’. A proposed co-operative project

Grootfontein Agric 2021, 21(1), 31-40 Malusi, N. & Falowo, A.B.
40
between the University of Fort Hare, Agricultural and Development Research Institute
(ARDRI) and the Eastern Cape Department of Agriculture and the Kellogg Foundation.
SAS, 2016. SAS Online Doc, Version 9.2. SAS Institute Inc. Cary, N.C., USA.
South Africa., 2002. Land and Agricultural Development Bank Act 15 of 2002. Available at:
<https://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/a15-02.pdf> [Accessed on: 22 May 2014]
Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF), 2017. A Profile of the South
African Beef Market Value Chain. https://www.saiia.org.za/value-chains-in-southern-
africa/1053-002-beef-market-value-chain-profile. (Accessed 20 July 2018).
Van Schalkwyk, H.D., Groenewald, J.A., Fraser, G.C., Obi, A. & Van Tilburg, A., 2012. Unlocking
markets to smallholders: Lessons from South Africa. Springer Science & Business Media.
https://www.springer.com/la/book/9789086861682. (Accessed 30 July 2018).
Zhao, J., Zhu, C., Xu, Z., Jiang, X., Yang, S. & Chen, A., 2017. Microsatellite markers for animal
identification and meat traceability of six beef cattle breeds in the Chinese market. Food Control
78, 469-475.