Pastoralists’ perception of livestock production systems and opportunities for improvement in Southwestern Marsabit, Kenya 

J C Njanja, J M Gathuma, G K Gitau*, F M Njeruh, R N Kinuthia** 

Department of Public Health, Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Nairobi,
PO Box 29053, Nairobi, Kenya.
* Department of clinical studies, University of Nairobi
PO Box 29053, Nairobi, Kenya.
** Department of range management., University of Nairobi
PO Box 29053, Nairobi, Kenya.
njanjaj@cgiar.org 

Abstract

Rapid rural appraisal (RRA) was conducted among the Rendille and Samburu pastoralists of Southwest Marsabit, Kenya to assess their perceptions on the roles of livestock, prevailing constraints, health status of the young stock and opportunities for improvement. The RRA tools used were; direct observations, free listing, scoring and ranking in focused groups. The results showed that livestock reared were; cattle, camels, sheep, and goats while chicken and bees were recently introduced. Milk for household use was ranked as the most important benefit while use of camels for transport and sales of milk, meat and live animals shared the second and third positions. The traditional and medicinal household needs were also fulfilled by these animals.

 

Major and common general constraints to livestock production were listed as: diseases, drought, insecurity, lack of water, limited markets and drug supplies, inadequate pastures and poor veterinary services. Coping strategies to alleviate these constraints were; use of veterinary drugs, ethnoveterinary practices, traditional quarantines and mobility of livestock. Detailed discussions on available opportunities for improvement of the animal health and production were carried out and conclusions made. 

Key words: Constraints to productivity, improved animal health delivery services, pastoral livestock production systems, rapid rural appraisal
 

Introduction 

In Kenya, the livestock subsector accounts for 30 per cent of the farm gate value of the agricultural commodities. The livestock population is estimated as 12.9 m cattle, 17.9 m smallstock (sheep and goats), 0.9 m camels and 0.9 m donkeys (Anon 1994). Arid and semiarid lands (ASALs) cover 80 per cent of the total land surface and provide subsistence economy to 25 per cent of the population who are mainly pastoralists and agropastoralists (NDP 2002). Marsabit District lies in the northern ASALs and it is 97 per cent arid, capable of supporting only livestock and wildlife.

 

Marsabit District covers an area of 66,000 km² and the pastoralists keep approximately 281,000 cattle, 673,000 smallstock (298,000 sheep and 375,000 goats), 69,000 camels, 17,100 donkeys and 77,950 chicken (Anon 2002). These livestock are reared on natural vegetation lying in agroecological zones (AEZ) V and VI, which cover 28 and 69 per cent of the total area respectively. Rendilles and Samburus are among the major ethnic groups who exploit these grazing resources in southwestern part of the district. These areas referred to as pastoral livestock production (PLP) systems are characterized by human and livestock mobility in order to exploit the spatial and temporal resources rationally. The PLP systems are now increasingly viewed as rational and productive (Sanford 1993; Mearns 1996; Blench 1997) although they are subject to many constraints, which affect their productivity ( Behnke and Kerven 1995; MPD/GTZ 1995; Doyo 1998). Animal health and production interventions are considered part of the process to improve productivity (Ghirotti 1993; Scoones 1994; MDP/GTZ 1995).

 

Participatory appraisals (PA) commonly called Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) or Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) have been used in the last decade to overcome some of the limitations of conventional methods in developing countries and in particular the ASALs (Chambers 1983; McCracken et al 1988; Cartley 1999). The PA methods used were those initially intended to involve farmers in analysis of problems and formulation of solutions by development workers (Water Bayer and Bayer 1994) and were later adopted in research although their qualitative and flexible aspects are limiting where quantitive analyses are required (Omiti 1995; Okuthe 1999 Cartley 2000). Cartley (1999) reviewed extensively the use of veterinary participatory approaches and methods focusing on experiences in dry land Africa. Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) meetings were conducted among the Rendille and Samburu with the objective of identifying the pastoral livestock production systems and prevailing constraints. The results of this exploratory exercise provided baseline information for improvement of the livestock and further epidemiological studies.

 

Materials and Methods 

Study Areas

The study was conducted in Marsabit District Kenya, which lies between latitude 01° 15’ and 04^° 27’ N and longitude 36° 03’ and 38° 59^’E (Figure1) among the Rendille and Samburu ethnic communities in the south-western region occupying an area of about 11,500 km².

Figure 1. Map of the project area

 

These communities have intermarried forming a transitional group referred to by the anthropologists as the “Ariaal” who identify themselves with either of the ethnic group. The pastoralists rear mixed herds of camels, cattle, sheep, goats and donkeys. Six market centres representing six sublocations were chosen on the basis of consideration of agroecological zones (AEZ), as the only major human settlements and also on ethnic grouping found in the area. Three of the centres; Olturot, Ilaut and Ngurnit were in AEZ V (“arid“) and the rest Kargi, Korr and Loglogo were in AEZ VI (”very arid”) (Pratt et al 1966). The geographical positioning system (GPS) was used to record the coordinates of these centres using a GPS 12XL (Garmin).

Data Collection  

Rapid rural appraisal meetings were conducted for two days at each market centre. The RRA tools and techniques used were adopted from those described for animal health problems and were; direct observations, free listing, scoring and ranking exercises in focused group discussions (McCracken et al 1988; Theis and Grady 1991; Ghirotti 1993; Cartley and Mohammed 1996). The resource and facilitation team included the first author (a veterinarian) an animal scientist, a technical assistant and a community based animal health workers (CBAHWs) based at each site. The CBAHW assisted in translation of vernacular language and local logistics such as identifying the key informants and organisation of venues.

 

Pastoral groups at each site were comprised of 16, 15, 17, 17, 18 and 21, people at Kargi, Olturot, Ilaut, Ngurnit, Korr and Loglogo respectively being the local informants and key resource persons of their own choice. These representatives comprised of CBAHWs, environmental management committee members (EMCs), water users association (WUA) members and other community workers (in the fields of “relief food” distribution, school and women groups, catechists and the chiefs’ elders). In each site, discussions were guided by use of a semi structured questionnaire giving each participant enough exposure and encouragement to contribute. The first author modulated the discussion; the animal scientist ensured that active participation and positive deliberations were made while the technician maintained the visual aid recording. During the discussions the pastoralists were facilitated to understand what were termed as causes of diseases and agents (”felt causes”) in order to contribute positively. In all centres the pastoralists occasionally used names of clinical signs of a diseases as specific disease names. A consensus was established for application and use of these phenomenon and concepts during the discussions.

 

Similar meetings were held at each centre and all information presented was triangulated and a consensus reached at the end of each exercise. The topics discussed were species of livestock reared, utilization of the livestock and their products followed by general constraints to productivity and diseases of the young stock. Thereafter pastoral perceptions on the “felt causes” of diseases or agents, coping strategies and opportunities to be exploited for improvement of animal health and production were discussed. Finally the pastoralists listed their daily activities and seasonal calendars. At the end of the meetings the participants carried out a “self-wealth evaluation” exercise using the criteria of livestock ownership, family size, education, non-livestock income (salary and/or business) and housing. Of what they considered as a wealth criteria they quantified and ranked the resources into poor or rich categories. The pastoralists were initially suspicious of the topic despite several explanations that it was only for the purpose of research and planning. However, the discussion was well conducted as a general topic after dispelling the fears and as a conclusion at the end of each meeting.  

Data analysis  

Data collected during the discussions were subjected to proportionate levels of importance at every site using the matrix and pair-wise scoring and ranking comparisons (Edgerton and Langness 1997; Cartley 1999).The data were analysed using descriptive statistics (Marshall and Rossman 1989; Silverman 1993)

 

Results

 

Rapid rural appraisal was carried out in Loyangalani and Laisamis divisions

 

Animals reared and their role in the pastoral systems.

 

The participants listed all domestic animals kept traditionally and the new ones, which were recently introduced through development interventions. In all centres, indigenous livestock reared were; camels, cattle, sheep, goats and donkeys. Livestock types were recognised by the ethnic identities of origin such as Turkana, Rendille/Gabra, Boran, Somali, Suk (Pokot) and Meru. The camels reared were described as Rendille/Gabra, which were crossed with Turkana and Somali breeds. In Ngurnit, crossbreeds of exotic Pakistan and Somali camels have been introduced. Cattle reared were the Zebus, which were crossed with Borans at Kargi and Olturot areas. The goats reared were the East African breed crossed with the Galla goats at Olturot and Ilaut. Blackhead sheep were reared in all centres.

 

The participants reported that chicken were kept in all centres and that exotic breeds of White Leghorn and Red Head Rhodes Island had been introduced in Ngurnit and the Essex Brown at Loglogo. In addition, some pastoralists reported keeping bees at Ilaut and Ngurnit

 

The list on utilization of the animals and their products at household and sales level is presented in Table 1. Twenty six household needs and six commercial roles were listed. All the animals were reported to contribute to household needs and sales but camels were mainly reared for household utilization. Milk, meat, hides and skins, live animals and tourism were reported as the main source of income. The fat of sheep was important for medicinal purposes.

 

The results on ranking of 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rd positions of means of utilization of camels, cattle, goats and sheep by relative frequencies are shown on Figures 2a, 2b and 2c. Milk from camels, cattle, goats and sheep for household use was ranked as the most important utilization of livestock. However for sheep, use of its fat in Korr and in traditional ceremonies (payment of dowry) in Ilaut shared the first position.

 

Figure 2a: Frequency of 1^st ranked means of utilization of livestock  

 

Figure 2b: Frequency of 2nd  ranked means of utilization of livestock 

 

 

Figure 2c: Frequency of 3rd  ranked means of utilization of livestock

 

In the second position, different preferences in utilization were shown for the different species of animals. Use of camels for transport dominated (80%) and their blood for household took only 20%. For cattle, milk for sale and blood for household use took 40% each while the remaining proportion of 20% was occupied by sale of live animals. For goats, live animals for sale took 40% while blood for household use and milk and meat for sale took 20% each. For sheep, meet and fat for household use took 40% each while the rest 20% was taken by milk for household use.

 

In the third position, similar uses at the household and sales level to those in second position shared the ranks. Additional preferences in these ranking were; ploughing, ghee and traditional use at 20% each in cattle, while the latter was also listed in sheep taking a 20% proportion.

 

General constraints to pastoral livestock production  

Overall the participants listed twelve general constraints to livestock production. The constraints were described and ranked as they occurred in the six areas. The results of scoring and ranking are presented in Table 2.

 

Diseases of livestock and lack of water were the most important constraints cited by the pastoralists in all the locations. The diseases were ranked second in Kargi, Ilaut and Korr and fourth in Olturot, Ngurnit and Loglogo. Lack of water was ranked first in Loglogo and Ilaut, second in Olturot and Ngurnit, third in Kargi and fifth in Korr.

 

Diseases of livestock and lack of water were reported in 100 % of the area and drought, insecurity and predators in 83.3% of the area. Lack of markets and pastures were reported in 66.7% of the area and presence of gullies, poisoning, lack of drugs and mobility or occurrence of wild fires in 16.7% of the area respectively.  

 

Diseases and/or agents causing poor performance and death of youngstock

 

The participants listed 15,14, and 10 diseases and agents affecting camel calves, kids and lambs respectively. The importance of each disease in relation to performance and death of young stock was rated by the pastoralists in a scoring and ranking exercise. The position of each disease or agent as ranked by market centres and percentage relative frequency of occurrence are shown in Table 3.

 

Ticks were a problem in all young stock in all areas. They were ranked first in camel calves, except in Korr where they took second position (ranking was not successfully carried out in Ngurnit since the participants could not reach a consensus). Lice and fleas were listed in kids and lambs in all areas and they were more severe in the later than the former where they were ranked number one at Kargi and Loglogo. Other external parasites described were mange and ringworms in camel calves in Kargi, Ngurnit and Ilaut.

 

The diseases and other clinical conditions listed in camel calves were, orf, diarrhoea, gulor (navel ill) and wounds while worms, trypanosomosis, haemorrhagic septicaemia, camel pox, pneumonia, saam (calves have sunken eyes with lacrimation and latter die). Unknown conditions were listed in less than 50% of the areas (Table 3). In kids, the common diseases and conditions listed were contagious caprine pleuropneumonia (CCPP), diarrhoea, orf, konkoro (central nervous disorder resulting in death), lkang (rabies like disease), worms and foot rot. Diseases limited to less than 50% of the areas were pox, coenurosis, cough, ndis (yellow liver) and unknown conditions (Table 3). In lambs the common disease listed were diarrhoea, worms, foot rot and ndis. Diseases and conditions described in less than 50% of the area were cough, orf, pox, gulor (navel ill) and enlarged liver (Table 3).  

There were active debates on the causes of diseases in all centres, where pastoralists were only able to conceptualise the phenomenon of what they thought harboured and therefore brought about diseases. The results on the pastoralists’ perception of causes diseases (“felt causes”), coping strategies and opportunities are presented in Table 4. Some pastures, soils, stones and bushes were listed as sources of diseases. Dirt, poisonous water and plants, rodents, flies, ticks, lice and fleas, other livestock, wildlife and some unknown sources were also incriminated (Table 4). Coping strategies listed were traditional management practices of moving animals away from “known disease areas”, quarantines, cleaning and shifting of bomas and use of herbs. Use of conventional drugs for treatment and topical application of acaricides were also practiced. The pastoralists listed community drug stores and CBAHWs as their local source of drugs. Veterinary personnel were reported to provide professional advice, supply drugs and train CBAHWs.

 

Suggested opportunities for improved animal health delivery services

 

 The pastoralists debated with enthusiasm opportunities, which could be availed to improve their livestock and animal health delivery services as shown in Table 4. In all locations they agreed on improving management practices by; increased traditional mobility and quarantines, cleaning of bomas and wells and avoiding of known poisonous plants and parasite infested areas. On animal health delivery services pastoralists requested for improvement of traditional and modern medicine supplies. The promotion of community drug stores, training of community animal health workers (CBAHWs) and traditional practioners were listed as additional opportunities to reduce low drug availability. Further training of the CBAHWs on drug use and veterinary control of malpractices was listed as opportunities of improving these community services. In Olturot, Ngurnit, Korr and Loglogo pastoralists requested construction of dip-tanks as an alternative to the current practice of topical application of acaricides. However, after long deliberations on their knowledge and the known facts about tick control this method was discouraged. The pastoralists were aware of non operational dip tanks in the area. Additional opportunities listed were; to seek professional advice; increased veterinary advice; seek Kenya wildlife services to control predators and conduct research on causes and treatment of diseases. 

Animal husbandry practices 

The pastoralists listed daily activities and seasonal events on animal husbandry practices in respect to births, age when herding and watering begins, times of milking and weaning. They also listed the gender and age group involved in each activity. There were two peak births for camel calves occurring in April/May and October/December and the calves were later weaned after a minimum of one year. Preweaned calves were first grazed and watered from three to four and six to eight months of age respectively. Boys and young men carried out herding and watering. The dams were reported to be milked in the morning and evening. The Rendille camels were milked by boys and young men since women were not allowed by tradition to milk camels. Samburu men informed the participants that, they allowed the women to milk camels and also that they had a third milking late in the evening.

 

 Does and ewes were reported to kid and lamb throughout the year but peaks births occurred in February/April, August/September and December. The kids and lambs were grazed and watered together from the second to third month of age and were herded by girls and women. The kids and lambs were released in the morning and returned to rest around midday and were later returned to the pastures for afternoon grazing. The does and ewes were milked in the morning and evening by girls and women.

 

Wealth ranking

 

The results of pastoralists’ perception of wealth based on the criteria of livestock, family size and additional sources of livelihoods such as education, salary, business or type of house are presented in Table 5. Most of the criteria except housing and education were perceived as indicators of wealth in the Rendille and Samburu communities. Livestock kept and family sizes were the best-understood criteria and the participants were able to categorise quantitatively the rating of their rich and poor members. In Kargi, Olturot, Ilaut and Loglogo the rich were rated to have over 100 cattle or camels and over 200 sheep and goats. Pastoralists in Ngurnit and Korr rated the rich as having only over 40 camels or cattle but a similar range of sheep and goat numbers as listed in the other centres. The Rendilles and Samburus showed the traditional ethnic preferences for camels and cattle as the favoured ones respectively.

 

The ranking of family sizes by quantification was uniform in all centres by the two communities. The rich were considered to have more than two wives and three sons or girls. In Kargi many wives were not considered a criteria for wealth. Supporting relatives was indicative of wealth in Korr and Ngurnit.

 

The pastoralists appreciated additional ” non livestock” sources of income from salary or business but could not rank them on wealth classes. Their appreciation was only shown by comparison of “better to do status” if one had livestock, a salary and business. A person without livestock and had only alternative resources was considered worse of than any livestock owner. Although education was not considered as wealth, participants in Ngurnit and Korr recognised it’s benefits only when one secured a job and helped the community.  

 

Discussion

 

The results of this study showed that RRA techniques were beneficial in obtaining quick information on livestock management and wealth status among the Rendille and Samburu pastoralists in a short time. The participation of pastoralists was encouraging and their enthusiasm helped to improve awareness and involvement in research and development activities. The process has been described as useful by other workers (Vlassoff 1991; Ghirotti 1993; Cartley 1999) and as a departure from the traditional “development tourism” (Chambers 1983).The approach also allowed the researchers to appreciate and understand pastoralists’ perspectives and wishes for better livestock performance and adopting of new technologies. This RRA was one of the stakeholders–oriented participatory research approaches to catalyse and stimulate change in the communities.

 

The confirmation by pastoralists that some exotic breeds of camels, cattle and goats had been introduced in the systems and that chicken and bees have also been accepted suggested their willingness to diversify the production enterprises. Similar changes have been reported in the southern arid and semi-arid lands of Kenya (Roderick 1995). The pastoralists believed that exotic breeds would produce more but were less resistant to diseases and the harsh environment. The results on utilization of livestock and their products showed that milk for household use was ranked the most important product in their livelihood for subsistence while its sales and that of, meat, eggs, live animals, hides and skins contributed to the cash economy. It was evident that the system was mainly subsistence oriented and there was need for improved commercialization which was constrained by lack of markets. In this region of southwestern Marsabit, where there are no other income generation activities there is need for a well-established marketing system for efficient livestock productivity. This requirement has been expressed in the past in many stakeholders forums (Behnke and Kerven 1995; MDP/GTZ 1995; Doyo 1998). Development of markets is, however, limited by factors such as remoteness of the area and poor road infrastructure.

 

It was observed that all the general constraints listed were real and development agents and government departments have addressed most of them in the past (MDP/GTZ 1995; Anon 1999). Through participatory approaches, community- based efforts had been initiated to implement development activities (Haro et al 1998). The CHAHWs, EMC and WUA participants in this appraisal were evidence of these communal activities. Although all these initiatives have been made, there is need to monitor and evaluate the success through field data collection and investigations.

 

Early studies have reported the diseases found in camels, sheep and goats in southwest Marsabit region (O’Leary 1985; Rutagwenda 1985; Carles 1986). Through these studies many diseases affecting camel calves, kids and lambs were recorded. Follow up study by Kaufmann (1998) reported that ticks and diarrhoea were the major causes of deaths in camel calves. In this study, additional diseases recorded were mange and orf which were ranked highly. There has been no follow up studies on diseases of sheep and goats but in this appraisal the pastoralists indicated that, there were many diseases and clinical conditions affecting kids and lambs. Unlike in the past, this was the first time the pastoralists had a role in listing and prioritising the animal health constraints. The new information suggests opportunities for alternative changes in development of appropriate control strategies.

 

This process of RRA made the pastoralists understand and identify diseases, some causative agents and factors contributing to severity of clinical conditions. Comments like Duosperma (a bush) “causes worms” by pastoralists only showed their perception of the relationships between the suspected worm infections, seasons and gross signs after feeding on this plant. By citing examples of non - sustainable and uneconomical development inputs such as the existing non - functional cattle dip tanks (Anon 2002), pastoralists revealed their ignorance and curiosity. In reference to these physical structures they were made to appreciate the fact that some ideal opportunities may not always be appropriate options. Accordingly, it was clear that the pastoralists were aware of the need to improve animal health practices but agreed that they had limited knowledge and some of their traditional believes didn’t benefit the animals. They also accepted that lack of knowledge in use of drugs was additional constraint. Thus, use of the right drug, dosages and time of treatment were not carried out correctly despite the fact that they administered drugs regularly. Through this functional learning it was agreed that in the next step of this participatory research process more of improved animal health practices through exploitation of available opportunities is expected while studies on the non - specific and little understood diseases such as lkang, gulor, konkoro, ndis and saam is carried out.

 

During the appraisals, both Rendille and Samburu communities participated fully in the discussions and accepted each other. This harmony of coexistence has been recorded in the past and considered as an adaptation to exploit the range resources (Spencer 1973; Oba 1992; Fratkin et al 1999). The only differences expressed were traditional cultural beliefs and practices. Samburus considered cattle more important than camels while Rendilles regarded the latter highly. Also, camels milked by Samburu women were not claimed to perform poorly in any way despite the fact that the practice is unacceptable and considered a taboo by Rendilles. This transition in livestock mix and breaking of cultural myths evident from this interaction was positive trend and good lesson in community development.

 

In conclusion, the RRA tools selected for this process were used to benefit from the experiences of both the pastoralists and researchers. The results provided direct answers to the pastoralists understanding of the production process and were also a contribution to animal health information delivery system. The information gaps identified will complement future field data collection and selection for epidemiological studies. However, the lessons learnt were that the exercise could not be conducted on a standard format. This is in agreement with Leyland’s observation (1994) where in the current study wealth ranking was only well done as the last activity. Further, it was realised that members of the discussion groups needed to clearly understand the objectives and agree to reach a conclusion in order to avoid a stalemate situation as that experienced in Ngurnit where scoring and ranking of utilization and diseases was not possible.

Acknowledgements

 

This research was supported and funded by the European Union/Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (EU/KARI). Sincere gratitude to the extension team of government agents for their support and collaboration. Thanks to Mr. Matere of ILRI, Nairobi for the technical assistance on GPS. The contributions of, Ndung’u, Walaga and all KARI staff are appreciated.

 

References

 

Anonymous 1994 Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Development and Marketing. Animal Production Division, Annual report, 1993.

 

Anonymous 1999 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Marsabit district, Annual report, 1998.

 

Anonymous 2002 Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Marsabit District, Annual report, 2001, Marsabit.

 

Behnke R and Kerven C 1995 Redesigning for risk: Tracking and buffering environmental variability in Africa’s rangelands. Proceeding of the joint FAO/ILRI Roundtable on livestock development strategies for low income countries. ILRI Addis Ababa, 27^th February-02 March 1995.

 

Blench 1997 Aspects of resource conflict in semi-arid Africa. Natural perspectives, ODI, Portland House, London, UK.

 

Carles A B 1996 The level of, and constraints to, productivity of goats and sheep at Ngurnit and Korr in Marsabit district, IPAL, Technical Report E-8, UNESCO, Nairobi.

 

Cartley A 1999 Methods on the move: A review of veterinary uses of participatory approaches and methods focusing experiences in dryland Africa. IIED, London, UK.

 

Cartley A 2000. The use of participatory appraisal by veterinarians in Africa. Revue Scientifique et Technique, Office International des Epizooties 19 (3)702-714

 

Cartley A and Mohammed A 1996 The use of livestock disease scoring by a primary animal health programme in Somaliland, Preventive Veterinary Medicine, (23) 3: 175-186.

 

Chambers R 1983 Rural Development: Putting the last first. Longman Scientific and Technical, New York.

 

Doyo G J 1998 Prevailing constraints and strategies for interventions in natural resource management and pastoral livestock production systems: Proceeding of the stakeholders’ workshop held at KARI -NALRC, Marsabit, November 1997, Marsabit.

 

Edgerton R B Langness L 1997 Methods and styles in the study of culture, Chander and Sharp Publication, San Francisco, California, U.S.A.

 

Fratkin E M Abella E R and Nathan M A 1999 When nomads settle: effects of commercialization, nutritional change and formal education on Ariaal and Rendille pastoralists. Current Anthropology, (40)5:729-735.

 

Ghirotti M 1993 Rapid appraisal benefiting from the experiences and perspectives of livestock owners. World Animal Review, 77: 26-37. http://www.fao.org/ag/aga/agap/frg/FEEDback/War/v1650b/v1650b0d.htm

 

Haro G O, Lentoror E I and Von Lessau A 1998 Participatory approaches in promotion of sustainable natural resource management. Experiences from southwest Marsabit, Northern Kenya. Advances in Geology 31:1047-1056.

 

Kaufmann B 1995 Analysis of pastoral camel husbandry in northern Kenya Dissertation, Margraf Verlag, Weikershereim, Germany.

 

Leyland T 1994 Planning a community animal health care programme in Afghanistan. In: RRA Notes, No 20 Special issue on Livestock. IIED, OXFARM, VETAID and IT, IIED. London, UK.

 

Marshall C and Rosman G B 1989 Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA, Sage Publications.

 

McCracken J A, Pretty J N and Conway G R 1988 An introduction to rapid rural appraisal for agricultural development. IIED, London, UK.

 

MDP/GTZ (Marsabit Development Programme) 1995 The Marsabit district development strategies (January 1996-December 2000). Proceeding and outcomes of an intersectoral workshop, Marsabit.

 

Mearns R 1996 When livestock are good for the environment. IDS Working Paper. Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.

 

National Development Plan (NDP) 2002. Ministry of Finance and Planning, 9^th National Development Plan, 2002-2008, Nairobi

 

Oba G 1992 The role of indigenous range management knowledge for desertification control in Northern Kenya. Research Report 4, EPOS, Linkoping University, Sweden.

 

Okuthe S O 1999 Participatory epidemiological assessment of livestock productivity constraints in western Kenya highlands. PhD Thesis, University of Reading, U. K.

 

O’Leary M F 1985 The economics of pastoralism in Northern Kenya. The Rendille and Gabbra. IPAL, Technical Report F-3, UNESCO, Nairobi.

 

Omiti J M 1995 Economic analysis of crop livestock integration: The case of the Ethiopian highlands. PhD thesis, Department of Agricultural Resource Economics, University of New England, Armidale

 

Pratt D J, Greenway P J and Gywnne M D 1966 A classification of East African Rangelands, Journal of applied ecology 3: 369-382

 

Roderick S 1995 Pastoralist cattle productivity in Department of Agriculture, Veterinary Epidemiology and Economics Research Unit, Reading University, England.

 

Rutagwenda T 1985 The control of important camel diseases in the IPAL study area. IPAL, Technical Report E-7, UNESCO, Nairobi.

 

Sanford S 1993 In: Behnke R, Scoones I and Kerven E (Editors) Range Ecology at Disequilibrium: New models of natural variability and pastoral adaptation in African Savannahs, UOI, London.

 

Scoones I 1994 (Editors) Living with uncertainty: New directions in pastoral development in Africa. Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd., London, UK.

 

Silverman D 1993 Interpreting qualitative data, Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction. London, Sage Publications.

 

Spencer P 1973 Nomads in alliance: Symbiosis and growth between Rendille and Samburu, Kenya. Oxford University Press, London, UK.

 

Theis J and Gady H M 1991 Participatory rapid rural appraisal for community development. A training manual based on experiences in Middle East and Africa. IIED. London, UK.

 

Vlassoff C 1991 Social and economic research in TDR: future directions, Parasitology Today, 7:37-39.

 

Water-Bayer A and Water W 1994 Planning with pastoralists: PRA and more. A review of methods focussed on Africa. Deutsche Gessellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), Eschborn.