7. STRATEGIC INTERVENTIONS FOR CASSAVA IN LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION IN WESTERN, EASTERN, CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN AFRICA

7.1 Identification of gaps, opportunities and constraints

African countries are at different stages of transformation of cassava from a famine reserve crop through staple food, cash crop and lastly industrial raw material and usage for livestock feeding. According to Nweke et al. (2002), COSCA studies in six African countries show that Nigeria, the leading world producer of cassava is the most advanced and is now poised to move to the stage of using cassava for livestock feed and industrial raw material. For this transformation to occur it is necessary to identify markets to absorb the increase in cassava production. The wide spread adoption of TMS varieties and the resulting increase in yields have shifted the problem of the Nigerian cassava industry from supply (production) to demand issues such as finding new uses for cassava in livestock food and other industries. Indeed while Nigeria has moved its cassava industry from a rural staple food to the urban and food export stage, a cycle of glut (excess cassava) has occurred every four years in the industry in the last decade. It was noted by the director of the Federal Department of Agriculture in Nigeria in early 2001 that cassava producers were losing money because of a glut in the market and declining cassava prices (Nweke et al., 2002). Therefore, there is a need for further diversification of cassava usage.

In Nigeria the proportion of cassava used in the livestock industry increased after the Government banned the importation of maize in 1985-86 and feed mills were forced to use cassava. Cassava was attractive because it was cheaper than maize. While the expertise to utilize this root crop is established in the feed milling industries, the price of cassava has escalated in recent times due to its scarcity following the period of glut; hence the quantity in use for feed has declined considerably to 5 percent of total production in recent times. Cost is therefore a major factor to take into consideration in substituting cassava for maize in livestock rations. In studies from various countries, the reported levels of the price of cassava as a proportion of the price of maize to make cassava competitive obtained from Côte d'Ivoire, Nigeria, Thailand and Zimbabwe indicates a range between 60 and 75 percent of the price of maize. Low cost processing technologies therefore need to be adopted. In recent studies in Nigeria by Tewe and Bokanga (2001), whole unpeeled cassava roots and leaves were washed, shredded, sun-dried and milled prior to their being pelletized in a ratio of four parts of cassava root meal to one part of cassava leaf meal. The high cost of peeling of cassava roots which is a major constraint in cassava processing is thus eliminated. It should be noted that even unpeeled roots are processed and exported from Thailand into the European Union. On the other hand, almost all the cassava flour adopted by feed millers in Nigeria is from the peeled storage roots.

Ghana is also at the third stage of the cassava transformation process as classified by Nweke et al. (2002). Indeed, it had embarked on an export of cassava chips and pellets to the European Union within the last decade. This project is threatened by the high cost of production, transportation, irregularity and quantity of products. Unless the cost of cassava production drops considerably to about US$20 as obtained in South Africa, the competitiveness of cassava in the export market will not be realized.

In Côte d'Ivoire, Tiemoko (1992) noted that the recommended price of 75 percent cassava cost relative to maize is rarely met as the price paid for cassava is generally high and often higher than the price of maize. Under such conditions, it seems that the opportunity cost of cassava for human consumption exceeds its value for human food. With the introduction of improved TMS varieties in Côte d'Ivoire the higher productivity and surplus production will justify its inclusion in commercial livestock rations. Similarly reports from Liberia (Ravindran and Kenkpen, 1992) confirm that almost all the cassava harvested is processed into various forms for human consumption. Large-scale utilization of cassava as animal feeds is only practiced at the government agricultural research station (CARI). Higher production of cassava may lead to its increased utilization as animal feed. In this regard, CARI has already released onto the market some animal feed formulations based on cassava roots as the major energy source.

In East Africa, United Republic of Tanzania and Uganda indicate that presently the proportion of cassava used for livestock feed constitutes 0.3 and 27 percent of total production, respectively (FAOSTAT). Similarly export of cassava from United Republic of Tanzania stood at 164 000 metric tonnes in 1991 and declined to 15 000 metric tonnes in the year 2000. Lekule and Sarwatt (1992) reported that in United Republic of Tanzania, in areas where cassava is a staple food, there is always an excess of production which is sold to the National milling corporation, most of which is exported. Presently, it is only when grains are in very short supply that some amounts of cassava chips are included in feeds. Another problem is that cassava is produced in dry areas where intensive livestock production is not practiced. Also, the high price of cassava makes its use in livestock feeds uneconomical. The need for improved cost-effective processing techniques to produce cheap cassava chips and pellets for the local and export markets is a major constraint in United Republic of Tanzania. With 556 000 tonnes or 27 percent usage of cassava for animal feed in Uganda (FAOSTAT), the country stands as having the highest percentage usage as animal feed not only in the region but in the whole of sub-Saharan Africa. As reported by Otim-Nape, donor interest in the introduction of the TMS variety in Uganda was sparked by the appearance and rapid spread of cassava mosaic in the late 1980s. By the year 2000, 80 000 ha of the mosaic resistant TMS varieties were under cultivation. The higher productivity of cassava and its competitive price to maize explains the high percentage usage of this root crop for livestock feeding in Uganda.

Ethiopia, Kenya and the Sudan have no recorded usage of cassava for livestock feeding. The higher livestock density to human population in these countries as compared with United Republic of Tanzania and Uganda (Table 11) shows tremendous potentials for use of cassava for livestock feeding if the improved TMS varieties are promoted in these countries. Sanda and Methu (1992) reported that in the high cassava producing areas of western and coastal regions of Kenya, excess cassava is not always fermented before being sun-dried. These regions also have notable household dairy units; one or two exotic breeds being used for milk production. Supplement feeding with sweet potato roots and leaves in this region increases the profit margin of milk producers from almost 90 to 1 000 Kenyan shillings per week. Complete substitution of maize meal with cassava meal in the dairy ration in western Kenya has also been demonstrated to be economical and associated with a reduction in feed cost of Kenyan shillings 328 (US$10 per tonne). Cassava roots and leaves therefore have high potential for usage in this region and by extension in other cattle producing areas of sub-Saharan Africa where cassava can be profitably cultivated.

In Central Africa, Cameroon shows great potential as its utilization of cassava for livestock feed has been maintained at about 10 percent of production between 1991 and 2000. Also, use of other roots steadied at about 20 percent of production within the same period. The competitive price of cassava and other root crops, notably sweet potato, to that of maize in Cameroon might explain higher percentage utilization than for maize, which stands at 5 000 metric tonnes as compared with 150 000 metric tonnes for cassava in 2000 (Tables 20 and 21).

In Chad, percentage cassava usage is also significant at 5 percent of production or 17 000 metric tonnes. With the high cattle and poultry population in Chad and Cameroon, high potentials exist for exploiting cassava usage for feed. Also export of dry chips holds high promise in Chad and other arid and semi-arid regions of Africa due to intense solar energy which still remains the main source of drying cassava for local use or export. The D.R. of the Congo reveals very low usage of cassava for livestock as most of its cassava is for traditional foods. Also the poor road infrastructure in the country increases transportation costs making it unfeasible to produce cassava products competitively to maize.

Madagascar in the South African region indicated a steady usage of cassava in livestock feeding at 10 percent of total production between 1991 and 2000. It is noteworthy that while use of maize declined from 187 000 metric tonnes in 1991 to 74 000 tonnes in 2000, cassava usage remained constant at 223 000 metric tonnes in 2000, representing about three times the quantity of maize used for this sector. Within the region, it also has the highest cattle density caput. Its pig population declined considerably due to the African Swine Fever Epidemic. Its pig industry was a major consumer of the cassava-based feeds. The opportunities lie in diversifying cassava usage to other livestock species.

South Africa's interest in cassava cultivation is very recent. It is however, presently the model in cassava plantation in Africa with a single plantation of 5 000 ha with a yield of 50 tonnes/ha. The cost of production is also estimated at about US$20 per tonne. With modern planting techniques and inputs, this industry envisages expansion to 10 000 ha plantation in the very near future (Cassey, 2000 personal communication). Its emphasis is on the production of starch for the region and export market. With the lowest cost of cassava production per tonne in Africa, this root crop stands a high chance of competing with maize as an energy source in its livestock industry. Moreover, the waste from the starch industry which includes the peels, leaves and starch sieviate constitute pollutants which can be profitably harnessed particularly for ruminant feeding. With 119 000 000 poultry, use of cassava in the poultry industry will appear economically feasible, if appropriate processing technologies are put into place.

Zambia has enormous potentials of cassava usage in its livestock industry; however, the feed industry is very reluctant to take on this opportunity because of the high cost of cassava chips which is put at about US$300/tonne as compared with maize at US$220/tonne. The price of cassava however, drops to US$150/tonne during the dry season (Mokuka, 2002 personal communication). The opportunity to use cassava in the dry season feeding of livestock is apparent. Presently, cassava is not used in commercial feed milling although leaves and peelings are used in the traditional system of rearing. The government agricultural research station is presently promoting the use of cassava in commercial milling as unfavourable weather patterns have led to a serious decline in maize production in recent times.

7.2 Practical cassava-based feed formulations

A major limitation to adoption of cassava-based feeds in sub-Saharan Africa is the absence of necessary information on cost-effective formulations for different livestock species. Such rations need to be packaged for different livestock production systems in different agro-ecologies of the continent. Information provided in this regard will build the confidence of livestock farmers and feed producers to substitute cassava for maize in commercial rations where the price favourably dictates a competitive advantage for cassava. This is envisaged to happen in many countries of Africa with the rapid spread of disease resistant high yielding TMS varieties when this is combined with modern production techniques with resultant yield increase and reduced cost of production per metric tonne. Tables 27-36 provide linear programmed cost effective formulations in rations for poultry (chick starter, growers, layers and broilers) growing pigs, beef cattle, sheep, goats, dairy cattle, rabbits and cat fish. These computerized formulations include partial or total substitution of maize with cassava root meal. Peels and leaves are included in some formulations. Prices are based on the Nigerian market prices of ingredients except the cassava products which are novel feed ingredients developed at the IITA (Tewe and Bokanga, 2001) with costs of the cassava products being about 40 percent lower than that of maize. While the formulations are not exhaustive, they provide a useful baseline for cassava feeds and can be manipulated to fit specific production systems and different agro-ecologies in sub-Saharan Africa.

Table 27. Maize and cassava-based feed formulations for poultry (chick starters) (by least cost linear programming)

US$1= 128 (Naira)

Table 28. Maize and cassava-based feed formulations for poultry (growers) (by least cost linear programming)

US$1= 128 (Naira)

Table 29. Maize and cassava-based feed formulations for poultry (broilers) (by least cost linear programming)

US$1= 128 (Naira)

Table 30. Maize and cassava-based feed formulations for poultry (layers) (by least cost linear programming)

US$1= 128 (Naira)

Table 31. Maize and cassava-based feed formulations for pig feed supplements (by least cost linear programming)

US$1= 128 (Naira)

Table 32. Maize and cassava-based feed formulations for beef cattle feed supplements (by least cost linear programming)

US$1= 128 (Naira)

Table 33. Maize and cassava-based feed formulations for sheep and goat feed supplements (by least cost linear programming)

US$1= 128 (Naira)

Table 34. Maize and cassava-based feed formulations for dairy cattle feed supplements (by least cost linear programming)

US$1= 128 (Naira)

Table 35. Maize and cassava-based feed formulations for rabbit feed supplements (by least cost linear programming)

US$1= 128 (Naira)

Table 36. Maize and cassava-based feed formulations for fish (catfish) feed supplements (by least cost linear programme)

US$1= 128 (Naira)

Table 37. Composition and cost of maize or cassava-based tested layer diets

Source: Tewe and Bokanga, 2002