ASSESSMENTS OF BEEF CATTLE PRODUCTION AND MARKETING

SYSTEMS IN HETOSA WOREDA, ARSI ZONE, ETHIOPIA

BY:
1. ABDULJEBAR TURE
2. AMARE GIRMA
3. ASEFA GEMECHU

A SENIOR RESEARCH SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL

SCIENCEIN PARTIAL FULFILLMENTS FOR THE COURSE SENIOR
RESEARCH PROJECT PROPOSAL IN ANIMAL AND RANGE
SCIENCE

ADVISOR: BELETE ASEFA (ASS.PROFESSOR)

JANUARY, 2022
BALE-ROBE, ETHIOPIA

i
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
First of all thanks to almighty God to give us health and strength to finish this Research work
successfully. Secondly we want to express out my deepest appreciation and gratitude to our
advisor Belete Asefa (Ass.Professor) for his great contribution and advising me effectively.
Thirdly, we would gratefully acknowledge my family for helping me to study B.Sc.

i
Table of Contents page
ACKNOWLEDGMENT..............................................................................................................................i
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS....................................................................................iv
ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................................v
1.1 Background of the study....................................................................................................................1
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE..................................................................................................................4
2.1 The role of livestock production in Ethiopia..........................................................................................4
2.2. Beef Cattle Productions Systems......................................................................................................5
2.2.1. High land crop-livestock production system..................................................................................5
2.2.2. Lowland pastoral system............................................................................................................5
2.3. Opportunities and Challenges of beef cattle production in Ethiopia.................................................6
2.3.1. Opportunities.............................................................................................................................6
2.3.2. Challenges.................................................................................................................................6
2.4. Cattle fattening system in Ethiopia...................................................................................................8
2.5. Beef marketing system.....................................................................................................................9
2.5.1. Formal market system................................................................................................................9
2.5.2. Informal cattle market................................................................................................................9
2.6. Beef Cattle Value Chain.................................................................................................................10
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS...........................................................................................................11
3.1. Study area.......................................................................................................................................11
3.1.1. Location.......................................................................................................................................11
3.2. Research design..............................................................................................................................11
3.4.1. Types and Data source.................................................................................................................12
4. RESULT AND DISCUTION................................................................................................................14
4. 1.Socio- Economic characteristics of household................................................................................14
4.2. Grazing way beef cattle in dry season and wet season....................................................................16
4.4. Reasons for the Feed shortage Of beef cattle at Hetosa Woreda, Arsi Zone, Ethiopia..................16
4.5. Purpose of keeping beef cattle......................................................................................................18
6. The Marketing seasons of beef cattle for Hetosa Woreda, Arsi Zone, Ethiopia.................................19
5. CONCLUSION AN D RECOMMENDATION....................................................................................21
5.1. Conclusion......................................................................................................................................21
5.2. Recommendation............................................................................................................................21

i
6. REFERENCES......................................................................................................................................23
7. Appendix...............................................................................................................................................24

ii
List Table page
Table 1.The sex of respondents ……………………………………………………….15

Table .2. Grazing in dry and wet season…….…………………………………………16

Table.3.Reasons for the Feed shortage………………………………………………………..17

Table.4. Purpose of beef cattle………………………………………………………………18.

Table.5. Marketing seasons beef cattle………………………………………………………19

Table.6. Marketing methods of Beef Cattle…………………………………………………20

iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ADG Average Daily Gains

AOAC Association of Analytical Chemists
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation

GDP Gross Domestic Product

NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations
CCPP Contagious Caprine Pleuropneumonia
LSD Lumpy Skin Disease
FMD Foot and Mouth Disease
PPD Pest des Petits Resistance
ND New castle Disease

iv
ABSTRACT
This study was under taken to assess beef cattle production systems and their constraints in
Hetosa Woreda, Arsi Zone, Ethiopia. Ethiopia is one of the countries in Africa in which their
population life is heavily dependent on agriculture. The agriculture sector plays an important
role in the overall development of the country’s economy. In the first stage out of 23 kebele4s in
district the total of 4 beef cattle producer kebeles are randomly selected. About 100 smallholder
beef producer were been selected randomly based on simple random sampling techniques by
using sample size were been determined. The collected data were been sorted, organized and
entered in to Microsoft excel spread sheet and analyzed using statically were been used for
analyzing for qualitative data while quantities data were been analyzed using least significant
difference then the results study were been presented in the form of table and charts. The study
showed the major feed source for beef cattle in the study area was natural grasses and crop
residues. The feeding was mostly by cut and carrying system. Beef cattle fattening season and
duration were mainly from June-September and 1-3 months. The common beef cattle
production constraints were feed shortage, management; diseases, breed and drought. Lastly
the researcher recommend that Empowering the farmers so that they can provide high-quality,
sustainable beef cattle and they should have access to basic production in puts, credit, and
market related information and Adoption of improved forage by Woreda Animal and Fishery
resource office, selection of forage breed, which have better adoption, proper usage of feed
and over all managerial activities should be carried carefully.

Key word: Assess Agriculture, Highlands, and Domestic. Cattle, Lowlands

v
1. INTRODUCTION

vi
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study
Ethiopia, like most of the countries in sub Saharan Africa, is heavily dependent on agriculture.
The agricultural sector plays an important role in the overall development of the country’s
economy. This sector plays a major role in the national economy and it is the source of
income and employment for the rural population (Negus, 2001). Ethiopia has the leading
livestock population in Africa and the animal population census (Bailey et al., 1999).the
livestock population of Ethiopia are 44.32 Million cattle, 23.62 Million sheep, 23.33 Million
goats, 2.31Million camels and over 42 Million poultry( barley,1999). Estimates 1.1% growth
rates for cattle which are against a backdrop of 2.5% human population growth per annum. In
other words, the livestock population growth has been lagging behind the human population
growth (FAO, 2011).
Livestock systems represent a potential pathway out of poverty for many smallholders in the
developing world like Ethiopia. The majority of the world’s rural poor and a significant
proportion of the urban poor keep livestock and use them in a variety of ways that extend far
beyond income generation. In many cases, livestock are a central component of smallholder
risk management strategies (Solomon, 2007). The economic contribution of the livestock sub-
sector in Ethiopia is also about 12% of the total and 33% of agricultural GDP and provides
livelihood for 65% of the population (Asfaw and Mohammad, 2007). Many Ethiopians, like
other developing countries, do not consume adequate amount of meat. The few that do,
however, maintain a meat diet of beef, sheep, goat and poultry. In 2001, 51% beef, 19%
sheep, 14% goat and 15% poultry contributed to a meat diet composition(Asfaw and
Mohammad, 2007). Most Ethiopians do not consume pork, in addition to many types of
fishes, due to religious factor (Abbey, 2004).

1
Formally, Ethiopia had been exporting approximately 200,000 livestock annually (Yacob and
Catley, 2010). This is significantly higher than the recent annual official exports of cattle
(12,934 head), sheep (13,554 head) and goats (1,247 head) between 1998 and 2003 (Abbey,
2004). In Ethiopia, recent studies estimated that annual illegal flow of livestock through
boundaries reaches high. The actual performance has remained very low, leaving most of the
projected livestock off take for the unofficial cross-border export and the domestic market.
These become barriers to understand and analyses the full range of activities required to bring
a product (live animals, meat) to final consumers passing through the different phases of
production, marketing, processing and delivery to the consumers. It creates barriers to identify
market focused collaboration among different stock holders who produce and market value
added products (Workneh, 2006).Therefore, this study is focused on the assessments of beef
cattle production systems and marketing system in Hetosa Woreda, Arsi Zone, Ethiopia.

1.2. Statement of the problem

The major challenges facing in the meat export abattoirs is lack of competition with their
products in the domestic as well as the export markets has been limited by underutilization of
their meat processing capacities. This is apparently due to inadequate supply of the required
quality live animals for meat processing by the export abattoirs which makes them less
competitive in the global or national meat market. The export abattoirs are competing for the
domestic supply of live cattle with the demand for live cattle for domestic consumption and
for formal and informal (cross border) trade. Therefore, this paper were been designed to
assess beef cattle production systems and their constraints in Hetosa Woreda, Arsi Zone,
Ethiopia.

1.3. Objective of the study

1.3.1. General objective

The general objective of the study is to assess beef cattle production systems and their
constraints in Hetosa Woreda, Arsi Zone, Ethiopia.

2
1.3.2. Specific Objectives

 To explore the practices of beef cattle production systems in Hetosa Woreda.

 To assess beef cattle marketing systems in Hetosa District

3
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 The role of livestock production in Ethiopia

Livestock have diverse functions in the livelihood of farmers in the mixed crop–livestock
systems in the highlands and pastoralists and agro-pastoralists in the lowlands of Ethiopia. In
terms of contribution to the national economy, livestock contribute about 16.5% of the Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) and 35.6% of the agricultural GDP and currently the subsector supports
and sustains livelihoods for 80% of rural population (Metaferiaet al., 2011). Cattlecontribute
about 80% of GDP that comes from livestock (Tefera, 2011). The meat and livestock sector in
Ethiopia contribute 14% to national expors (Jan Nell, 2006). Livestock also plays an important
role in providing export commodities, such as live animals, hides, and skins to earn foreign
exchange to the country. On the other hand, draught animals provide power for cultivation of
smallholdings farms and for crop threshing and are also essential modes of transport to take
holders and to convey their agricultural products(Metaferiaet al., 2011). Livestock also confer a
certain degree of security in times of crop failure, as they are a “near-cash” capital stock.
Furthermore, livestock provides farmyard manure that is commonly applied to improve soil
fertility and also used as a source of energy (CSA, 2014).

Although Ethiopia owns large numbers of cattle population, its potential has not been fully
utilized. In both crop–livestock and agro-pastoral systems, animal traction ranked first, followed
by milk and reproduction. Meat consumption was about 8 kg per year (Sebisbe,2008). The total
quantity of beef produced in 2004 and 2008 was estimated 294,336 and 380,000 tons,
respectively (Negassaet al., 2011).

4
2.2. Beef Cattle Productions Systems

2.2.1. High land crop-livestock production system

This system is generally found in areas where the altitude ranges between 1500 and 3000 meters
above sea level (masl). The area has adequate rain fall and moderate temperature and is thus
suitable for grain production. The integration of crop and livestock is high in most areas. The
integration is low in perennial crop-livestock system (Coffee growing areas) in the south
Ethiopia where animals are of minor importance (Girmaet al., 2009). The estimated
ruralpopulation in the system is about 55 million, and possibly 80% of cattle (about 40 million
heads) in small herds (averaging 2-4 cattle and about 4 sheep and/or goats). Cattle are used
primarily for draught power (oxen are 40-50% of the herd) and dairy (dairy cows are 25% of the
herd). Meat production is secondary, and thought to involve mainly old and unproductive
animals such as retired draught oxen. The same author stated that, diminishing pasturelands in
highland systems, as a result of expanding croplands, and the heavy reliance of livestock on crop
residues and aftermath grazing is an important trend (Gebre Mariam et al., 2010).

2.2.2. Lowland pastoral system

The pastoral population occupies a disproportionately large area of Ethiopia and produces much
more than its share of national livestock output. The report of MoARD (2005), estimated that
pastoralists use 60% of the country’s land area, though exact figures of the pastoral livestock
population in Ethiopia are unknown. According to the report of IGAD (2010), the livestock
population of the pastoralists makes up 30% of the nation’s cattle, 70% of the goats and sheep

and all camels in the country.In the Ethiopian context, pastoral system of production is
characterized by annual precipitation which is less than 500 mm and altitude below 1500 m.a.s.l.
In this production system, livestock are maintained as a primary activity. Fifty percent of the
household’s revenue comes from livestock or more than 20% of household food energy is
derived directly from livestock or livestock related activities. Range land is the main land
resource (Alemu, 2009).

5
2.3. Opportunities and Challenges of beef cattle production in Ethiopia
2.3.1. Opportunities
Ethiopia has suitable agro-ecology for livestock production. The indigenous livestock
breeds/populations of Ethiopia have the capacity to cope with the harsh environmental conditions
of the country. They often have special adaptive traits for disease resistance, heat tolerance and
ability to use poor quality feed which they have acquired through natural selection over hundreds
of generations. They, therefore, need relatively less environmental modification to achieve
increased productivity (IPMS, 2010). On the other hand, the rapid growth in demand for meat
products in the world especially in developing countries representsa great opportunity for
livestock resource-rich countries. Ethiopia has some of the important opportunities influencing
the meat and live animals industry, particularly the export sector (Ameha, 2011). Ethiopia has
comparative advantage in terms of geo

graphic proximity to the Middle East markets, with the potential for the quickest delivery time of
fresh meat or meat products. Moreover, Ethiopia’s lowland cattle, sheep, goat, and camel breeds
are also highly demanded in the Middle East due to their better taste and the organic nature of
their production (Hurissa and Eshetu, 2003).

2.3.2. Challenges

2.3.2.1. Feeds quality and quantity

Shortage of rain and recurring droughts are common phenomenon. Moreover, the shortage of
feed, water and the harsh climate condition seriously affect the health and productivity of
animals in the region (Tolera and Abebe, 2007). Grazing lands do not fulfill the nutritional
requirements of animals particularly in the dry season, due to poor management and their
inherent low productivity and poor quality. Additionally, the uneven distribution of pasture
across arid zones and grazers’ preferences for certain desirable species are believed to affect the
nutrient content of herbaceous species. Under arid conditions, the nutritional quality of
herbaceous species is typically influenced by the seasonality of rainfall. The contributions ofcrop
residues reach up to 80% during the dry seasons of the year (Adugna, 2007). Furthermore,
increased dependence on crop residues for livestock feed is expected, as more and more of the
native grasslands are cultivated to satisfy the grain needs of the rapidly increasing human
population. In spite of the rising dependence on fibrous crop residues as animal feeds, there are

6
still certain constraints to their efficient utilization. Population associated problem is
environmental degradation due to deforestation and overgrazing which have substantially
reduced soil fertility and further reduced productivity (Tolera et al., 2007). In pastoral areas, lack
of feed and water during the dry season and frequent drought was the main constraint affecting
livestock production (Tolera and Abebe, 2007).

2.3.2.2. Animal health

In Ethiopia, there are many livestock diseases that create frequent livestock mortalities. The
presence of livestock diseases apart from affecting the efficiency of production, it hampersexport
market development as a result of frequent bans by importing countries. There are still some
serious trans-boundary animal diseases (TADs) such as, CBPP (Contagious Bovine
Pleuropneumonia), CCPP (Contagious Caprine Pleuropneumonia), FMD (Foot and Mouth
Disease), LSD(Lumpy Skin Disease), AHS (Africa House sickness), PPR (Pest des
PetitsRuminants) and ND (New castle Disease) which are limiting the productivity and
international trade of livestock and their products (APHRD-MOA, 2011).

2.3.2.3. Input supply

Various services and inputs are supplied to the livestock sector in Ethiopia (IPMS, 2010).
However, these services and inputs are way inadequate compared with the needs of the sector.
The major inputs for livestock development include animal genetic resources, feeds and forages,
veterinary drugs, vaccines, machinery equipment and utensils as well as knowledge. Feed is the
key input for animal productivity and its cost represents more than 60% of operating costs in a
commercial fattening business (LMD, 2013). AGP-LMD (2013) report , in East Oromia,
producers self-source most of the feed ingredients, whereas wheat bran, wheat middlings,
brewery by-products, noug cake, sesame cake and cotton seed cake are purchased as industrial
by-products. Modjo and smaller edible oil factories, Alema-Cowdis and Addis Alem
Agricultural Development Company, the Ada milk cooperative’s feed processing unit and small
flour mills are sources of ingredients. The rising prices of feed ingredients and shortage of supply
were major issues in feed provision (LMD, 2013). Limited credit facilities to support livestock
development have been provided by microfinance institutions, food security projects, small-scale
micro enterprises and NGOs (Tegegneet al.,2010).

7
2.3.2.4. Beeff cattle constraints

The key constraints that the domestic livestock markets are facing include: lack of and unequal
access to up-to-date market information on prices; time-specific demand and quality
requirements; poorly developed road networks connecting the livestock supply areas (e.g.,
pastoralist areas) to the markets; an inadequate number of market centers for live animals with
adequate waiting and holding ground, feeding, watering, resting facilities, livestock scales,
loading ramps, crushes, etc.; clan conflicts due to competition for limited land and water
resources; lack of grades and standards (Asfaw et al., 2011). The other main challenges facing
beef cattle production, value chain and marketing system is the lack of well-defined breeding
program, an integral linkage between the stockholders involved in the production chain, illegal
exports, lack of capital to invest in assets, equipment and inputs that would improve quality
(Daniel,2008).

2.4. Cattle fattening system in Ethiopia

In both rural and urban areas, smallholder cattle fattening is emerging as an important source of
income. In rural Ethiopia, cattle fattening is based on locally available feed resources (Takele et
al., 2009). In Ethiopia, there are three types of fattening systems. These are traditional, byproduct
based, and the Hararghe type of fattening (MoA, 2004). According to Sintayehu et al. (2013),
only a small fraction of the Ethiopian beef is raised in feedlots and smallholders throughout the
country fatten the vast majority of cattle in backyard system.In traditional system, oxen are
usually sold after the ploughing season while they are in poor body condition. Therefore, meat
yields are low, the beef is of poor quality and returns to farmers are often inadequate to buy a
replacement ox. In the lowlands, where pastoralists do notuse cattle for draft, cattle are
sometimes fattened on natural pasture in good seasons. In average or poor seasons, low land
cattle are rarely fattened and often have to be sold in poor condition at low prices. In the lowland
agro-pastoral system, grazing is the most common source of feed with limited use of crop
residues, whereas in the highland system, crop residues are the most important source of animal
feed (Kefyalew, 2010). According to Birhan et al. (2013) smallholder farmers commonly fatten
mature and therefore much older animals (5 to 7 years old) for short durations (usually three
monthsThe by-product system is a type of fattening in which agro-industrial by-products such as
molasses, cereal milling by-products and oilseed meals are the main sources of feed. In this

8
system, grazing land is completely unavailable and crop-residues are only significant roughage
source (MoA, 2004).

2.5. Beef marketing system

2.5.1. Formal market system
The Marketing of livestock and livestock products is an important activity all over Ethiopia.
Livestock are generally traded by ‘eye-ball’ pricing and weighing livestock is uncommon. Prices
are usually fixed by individual bargaining and depend mainly on supply and demand, which is
heavily influenced by the season of the year and the occurrence of religious and cultural
festivals. Ethiopia’s livestock supply is heavily influenced by the severity of the dry season
(Asfawet al., 2007).

The livestock marketing structure follows a four-tier system (Ayele et al., 2003; Avery, 2004;
ACDI/VOCA, 2006) in which different actors involve in buying and selling of beef cattle in the
market system. The main actors of the 1st tier are local farmers and rural traders who transact at
farm level with very minimal volume, 1–2 animals per transaction irrespective of species
involved. Some traders may specialize in either small or large animals. Those small traders from
different corners bring their livestock to the local market (2nd tire). Traders purchase a few large
animals or a fairly large number of small animals for selling to the secondary markets. In the
secondary market (3rd tier), both smaller and larger traders operate and traders and butchers
from terminal markets come to buy animals. In the terminal market (4th tire), big traders and
butchers transact larger number of mainly slaughter type animals.

2.5.2. Informal cattle market

In Ethiopia, both legal and illegal livestock marketing systems are operating at different
magnitudes. Small farmer exporters and traders are the major actors in the illegal cattle
marketing system while medium- to large scales licensed exporters are dominantly operating in
the legal system. Most cattle sales are related to farm households’ cash needs and commercial
orientation. However, cattle sales are also induced by fear of theft and insecurity (Elias et
al.,2007). Illegal cross-border trade is carried out in the eastern, western and southern and
northwestern borderlands of Ethiopia. Few medium to high quality female animals are also
exported, which are used for slaughtering in Sudan or for live animals re-export to Egypt, Libya
and Yemen. Most of the borders are characterized by arid and semi-arid agro-ecologies

9
wherelivestock play dominant role in household livelihoods. Eastern Ethiopia/Somaliland cross
border livestock trade accounts for the largest share among the four borders in terms of the
volume and value of export from Ethiopia and port of Berber is the main outlet for livestock
exports (Tewodros, 2008).

2.6. Beef Cattle Value Chain

The meat and live animal value chain describe and analyze the market factors, value chain
performance against key metrics, product flow, core actors and their transactional and
collaborative relationships, incentives for investment, inputs and services, other supporting
actors, enabling environment, and gender concerns. The Ethiopian meat and live animal value
chains have developed through a time into a series of complex constituents involving various
actors that include producers, collectors, small private and cooperative fatteners/feedlots, various
(and in some places, numerous) middlemen, livestock trading cooperatives, individual traders
and exporters (AGP-LMD, 2013). In general, there has historically not been a reliable, sustained
relationship among actors within this value chain. Most relationships are casual and change often
to suit the situation and the actors.

10
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1. Study area

3.1.1. Location
The study was conducted in Hetosa Woreda, which is located in 150 km far from the capital city
of the country, Addis Ababa. Hetosa Woreda district is situated between 6.91° to 7.28° latitude
and 39.9° to 40.37 °E longitudes (HWAO, 2021). Hetosa Woreda, has a total population of
112,234 of which male and female are 53,615 and 58,619, respectively (CSA, 2008). Urban and
rural population is 9609 and 103,030, respectively (HWAO, 2006). The climate of Hetosa
Woreda ranges from cool to warm. The average temperature of the area is 18oc. Generally, the
climate of the area is characterized as highland and middle land. Rainfall is usually intense and
short in duration, with an annual average of about 667.8 mm (Hetosa Woreda Admistarive
office, 2022). According to Hetosa Woreda planning office (2021) the dominant cereal crops of
the area are barley, wheat, teff, maize and sorghum. Among the pulses, beans, field pea and lentil
are the major dominant crops. There are also cattle, equines, sheep, goat, camel, and beekeeping.
Honeybee colony multiplication through overcrowding and splitting method is practiced in the
highland areas where as honey production is a common practice in middle altitude. Livestock
population of the study area was; Oxen 21908, Cows 30588, Goats 15431, Sheep 82950,
Donkeys 9416, Mules 1333, Horses 79, Camels 54, Poultry 47265, Honeybee Hives with
honeybee Colony 16915 (DWARD, 2021).

3.2. Research design

Cross sectional survey research design were used for this study.

3.3. Sample Size determinations and Sampling techniques.

In the first stage, out of 23 kebeles in the district, a total of four (4) kebeles (shaki sherera ,oda
jila . boru chilalo and gonde fichama) are randomly selected. About 100 beef producers were
been selected randomly based on simple random sampling techniques by using sample size were
been determined by Yamane (1967) formula. The sample size where select from 1,470 totals
among of this 1,336 Male and 134 female are included population using formula developed by
Kothare (2014) formula.

11
12
n=Z²pqN

E² (N-1) +Z²pq

Where n=total house hold samples

N=total house hold farmer proportion

P=proportionality of population to considered 5%-10%

Q=1-p

Z=allowable (5%) use of agriculture

Q=confidence interval of 93% in the case of agriculture and accuracy level from and table 1.96
to determine sample size the formula above and to show how sample size or determined.

Given:

N=1470, P=0.5

Q=0.93, E=0.005

Z=1.96

N=Z²PQn

E² (N-1) +z²pq

= (1.96)²*0.25*0.5*0.93

(1.96)²(1470-1) + (0.5)²*0.05*0.93

n=100

3.4. Types, Sources and Methods of Data Collection

3.4.1. Types and Data source

Both primary and secondary sources of data were been employed. For this study, both
qualitative and quantitative types were been collected from primary and secondary sources.
Aqualitative method were been used to collect the qualitative type such as data collected
through focus group discussion and key informant interview. A quantitative method is used to

13
collect information that has been transformed into numbers such as demographic, institutional,
and socio-economic factors.
3.4.2. Data collection tools
The data were collected through formally by the method of individual interview using structured
and semi-structured using questionnaire, focus group discussion and key informants using
checklists and observations from concerned agents and model farmers by using data collectors.
The Data were been gathered from published materials, district agriculture and rural
development offices, livestock development offices, farmer’s organization, districts industry and
trade office and published and unpublished documents.
3.5. Methods of data analysis
The collected data were sorted, organized and entered in to Microsoft excel spread sheets and
analyzed using statistical analyses systems (SAS, 2008). version 9.4 chi-square(X2) were been
used for analyzing qualitative data while qualitative data were been analyzed using least
significance difference then the results study were been presented in the form of table and
charts.

14
4. RESULT AND DISCUTION
4. 1.Socio- Economic characteristics of household
From the sample of 100 house hold the result in the table indicate that 82% are male and 18
% of respondents are female.

Table1. Socio-characteristics of respondent

From the study of respondents almost indicated that 18% all females’ house hold head are
participated in beef cattle production and marketing systems. During discussion women house
hold head, the main reason why women house hold head are not involved in the Production and
Marketing System that females limited access of information and more involved in regular house
hold responsibilities. During discussion with community elders 82% male households are
involve dinneusly beef cattle production and marketing systems. From the survey of the study
the house hold head between 25 -35 ages are more participating in beef cattle production and
marketing systems because they age which present in these interval have been need more
income for there on their day to day activity .

The house hold head between 35_45 age they are participate in the beef cattle production and
marketing systems even if they participated on these work it is less than the age interval 25 -35
and also There is lack of capital to construct permanent beef cattle production and marketing
systems. The older farmers>45 more aware problem of beef cattle production and Marketing
System understanding the severity of beef cattle production and marketing systems could
influence their conservation decision negatively. From the result the survey of house heads had
no normal education,( 34) 34% had completed grade 8 and had higher grade. From the survey
result, better Illiterate (66) 66% had more good participated toward beef cattle production and
marketing systems and even if they have not contended any knowledge related to beef cattle
production activities. A large percentage of the clients (46%) were Muslim, while 34% were
Orthodox Christians and 20% were Protestant.

15
Table1. Socio-characteristics of respondent

Parameter sex of house N Percentage (%)

Male 82 82
Female 18 18
Age of respondents Number of respondents Percentage
<25 0 0
25-35 43 43
35-45 37 37
>45 20 20
Education Educational level

Number of respondents Percentage%

Grade 1_8 34 34

Illiterate 66 66

Religion Number Percentage %

Ethiopian Orthodox 34 34

Muslim 46 46

Protestant 20 20

16
4.2. Grazing way beef cattle in dry season and wet season
Table.2. Grazing in dry season and wet season

In dry seasons, as the time is all the crop product was not present on the field majority
households (55%) were as (40%) wet season preferred that they under goes through Free
grazing, tether their animals while 10% were as (8%) of households because they have not
understand tethered grazing. use cut and carry methods and only few of them herd (20%)
were as (12%) their flock. Although the mixing Free grazing and tethered grazing intensity
and the purpose differs similar practices were also reported 15 (15 %.) were as (40%)and also
grazing as common practice for beef cattle systems management.

No Grazing/Browsing In dry season In wet season

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

(%) (%)
1 Free grazing 55 55 40 40

2 Tethered grazing 10 10 8 8
3 Cut and carry 20 20 12 12
4 Free grazing and 15 15 40 40
tethered grazing

4.4. Reasons for the Feed shortage Of beef cattle at Hetosa Woreda, Arsi Zone, Ethiopia

The relative importance of various reasons for the prevailing feed shortage as suggested by

Hetosa Woreda households in the four studied areas classified according to the density of beef

cattle. Values in the body of the table are % of households that viewed the respective reason

The problems of feed shortage was more sever in the highlands where sheep are dominantly

reared and this may be due to presence of relatively higher density of livestock in the area as

well as high intensity of annual and perennial crop cultivation32(32%) and Cultivation other

Cush crop 20(20%) which in turn causes shrinkage of grazing lands and also Decrease in size

17
and productivity of grazing lands15(15%) because the farmer have only think about their own

benefit that main they have not need any expanses rather they need only income , In low land

areas where goats are dominant relatively higher proportion of households reported the problem

of rainfall shortage as a limitation for low fodder production. This may be due to low and

erratic nature of rainfall (25%) in lowlands than in relatively wetter highlands.

Table. 4.Reasons for the Feed shortage

No Reasons Frequency Percentage

1 Increase land allocation for crop 32 32

2 Cultivation other cash crops 20 20

3 Decrease in size and productivity of 15 15

grazing lands

4 Increase in human population 8 8

5 Erratic nature rainfall 25 25

18
4.5. Purpose of keeping beef cattle
About 32(32%) of the beef cattle keepers keep them mainly for income generation. Similar to

this finding, beef cattle are rear in many parts of the country mainly for income generation

(Markos, 2006). The second main reason for keeping beef cattle in the study area is for saving

purpose 29 (29%). According to group discussion participants and key informants in the area,

wheat is the main cash crop. For most farmers, however, their economic profitability is highly

limited by various factors. In most cases, there is fluctuation of wheat yield; So farmers

nowadays keep beef cattle as saving and insurance. Keeping beef cattle for meat and manure

purposes were ranked as third and fourth important reason18 (18%). Although its amount is

small, in most households farmers prefer beef cattle manure to cattle manure.

Table. 5. Purpose of beef cattle

No purpose of beef cattle Ranked purpose

Frequency Percentage

1. Income Generation 32 32

2. Saving 29 29

3. Meat 18 18

4. Manure 5 5

5. Risk/benefit distribution 16 16

19
6. The Marketing seasons of beef cattle for Hetosa Woreda, Arsi Zone, Ethiopia
New Year, Easter, Christmas, Meskel and Ed al Fetir are also targeted by 24%, 19%, 11%,10%,

11% and 25% of households respectively. This may be due to differences in the religion

categories of the inhabitants in specific area. The lower percentages of targeting Christian

holidays may be due to the small proportion of rural inhabitants who consume beef cattle meat

during these holidays. beef cattle holds the major share of income sources for household heads in

Hetosa Woreda, Arsi Zone,. This may be due to an increase in demand for beef cattle marketing

Animals as the result of increase in urbanization in the country as whole and emerging middle-

class urban dwellers with higher income and more buying power that brings opportunities for

beef cattle marketing Animals production. Therefore, the farmers supply their beef cattle to the

market using different marketing systems. As it is indicated in (Table.4.6.) most respondents

80(80%) take animals to local market place for selling, the rest 8(8%) 7(7)% and 5(5%) sell at

farm gate to brokers, traders, and consumers respectively.

Table.6. Marketing seasons beef cattle

Festival People assumption

Frequency Prasentage

New year 24 24

Ester 19 19

Christmas 11 11

Meskel 10 10

Ed Al fetir 11 11

Arafa 25 25
20
21
Table. 7. Marketing methods of Beef Cattle
About 8(32%) of the Picked at farm gate by broker mainly for Small Ruminants Marketing
System. Similar to this finding, Picked at consumer many parts of the country mainly for income
generation. The second main reason for the study area is for saving purpose 80 (80%). So
farmers nowadays Small Ruminants Marketing System. Keeping beef cattle for meat and
manure purposes were ranked as Taken to market place in reason7 (7%).

Beef cattle Marketing System 100

Fer. Parentage (%)

1 Picked at farm gate by broker 8 32

2 Picked at consumer 5 5

3 Taken to market place 80 80

4 Picked by trader at farm gate 7 7

22
5. CONCLUSION AN D RECOMMENDATION
5.1. Conclusion
The main purposes of beef cattle were for income generation and consumption. The major feed
sources of beef cattle in the study area was free gazing system, tethered grazing and cut and
carry system. The feeding was mostly by cut and carrying system. Beef cattle fattening
season and duration were mainly in wet season. The common beef cattle production constraints
were feed shortage, management, diseases, breed and drought. Marketing constraints were
seasonal price variation and unequal demand and supply. Beef cattle marketing were practiced
mainly during holiday and festivals. The length of fattening period varies according to type of
feed availability used and market demand. This may be due to an increase in demand for beef
cattle marketing as the result of increase in urbanization in the country as whole and emerging
middle-class urban dwellers with higher income and more buying power that brings
opportunities for beef cattle marketing production.

5.2. Recommendation
 Empowering the farmers so that they can provide high-quality, sustainable beef cattle and

they should have access to basic production in puts, credit, and market related information.

 Adoption of improved forage by Woreda Animal and Fishery resource office, selection

of forage breed, which have better adoption, proper usage of feed and over all managerial

activities should be carried carefully.

 In generally there is a need from government to provide extension services with the

capacity, support and physical means to expose small scale farmers to markets and by so

doing, efficiency in production and marketing of beef cattle to achieve huge profit.

 It is used to mitigate beef cattle it has great benefit rather than commercial high and occur

local farmers are poor and they cannot have ability to buy this beef cattle to their farm lands

so compost preparation and increase its utilization is the best solution.

23
 So,this organic harming is sustainable and advisable technology to improve the livelihood of

occur farmers and increase beef cattle as are result increase farmers income and ensure

development.

24
6. REFERENCES
Abbey, A. (2004): Red Meat and Poultry Production and Consumption in Ethiopia and
Distributi on in Addis Ababa. Addis Ababa, Msc thesis, Addis Ababa.
Addisu, A., Solomon, M., Solomon, A., Fantahun, W. and Thorpe, W. (2012): Duncan EIAR,
DebreZeit Agricultural Research Center,
AGP-LMD (Agricultural Growth Project-Livestock Market Development). 2013. Value chain
analysis, Expanding livestock markets for smallholders producers.
Bailey, D., Barrett, B., Little, D. and Chabari, F. (1999): Livestock markets and risk management
among East African pastoralists: a review and
FAO, (2011): Draft guidelines on phenotypic characterization of Animal genetic Resource. On
Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Rome.18-22 July, 2011, pp. 6.
Girma A., Solomon A. &Kassahun A. 2009. Sheep and Goat Production System in Ethiopia.
In:Ethiopia Sheep and Goat Production Improvement Program (ESGPIP), pp: 28-32.
Girma C., Yoseph M. &Mengistu U. 2014. Feed resources quality and feeding practices in
urban and Peri-urban dairy production of southern Ethiopia.
MoARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development). 2005. Agricultural input and
products marketing strategy and implementation mechanism. MoARD, Agricultural
Marketing and Inputs Sector State Ministry, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
NDDB (National Dairy Development Board). 2012. Animal nutrition group Nutritive value of
commonly available feed and fodders in India.
Negus, T. (2001): The Productivity and Profitability of beef cattle Technologies in Selected
Villages of Ethiopia Msc. Thesis presented to Addis Ababa University, Addis
Absssaba, Ethiopia.
Workneh, A., (2006): Getting the Incentives Right: Concerns Associated with Expansion of
Cattle Export Markets in Ethiopia. Ethio. J. of An. Pro., 6: pp. 99-103.

25
7. Appendix
Section1.Respondents back ground information
1.1 Name of house holds----------------------------------------
Age------------- Sex-------------------- Region----------------------Zone-------------------- District
Date of interview----------------------
1.2 PA--------------------------- village--------------------------
1.3 Marital Status 1.Married 2.Single 3.Divorce 4. Widow
1.4. Indicate the house hold size-----------------
1.5 Sex composition of households 1. Male ------------ 2. Female--------------3. Total----------
1.6. Main occupation ------------- (rank more than one)
1. Pastoralist 2.Agro Pastoralist 3.Pure Agriculturalist 4.Other (Specify)
1.7 educational back ground of the family
1. Illiterate 2.Read Write Only 3.Elementary 4.High School Complete 5.Diploma And Above
Section two : holding characteristics
2.1 How many beef cattle do you have ?-----------------
2.2 How many beef cattle are milked? ---------------------
2.3 For how long do you owned them? ------------------------
2.4 Where do you keep your beef cattle marketing and goat after and before milking?--------------
I. Herding
II. Feed collection and feed
III .Watering
IV. House clearing
V. Health care
2.5 Do you own obtain other species animals? 1. Yes 2.No
2.6 if yes list them

26
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________.

27