54. The development potential of range enclosure depends on the productivity of fenced production versus open-range pastoral nomadism. The preceding discussion argued that the shift from open to fenced animal husbandry was likely to cause an immediate drop in herd performance in nomadic areas. This final section of the analysis examines the reasons for this decline, and reviews some of the steps that may be taken to counteract it.
55. The importance of herd mobility in African systems of livestock production becomes clear if we examine the problems of localized livestock management. If a herd is confined to one place, both livestock numbers and viability are limited by the scarcest resource in the most difficult season in that place. With the help of industrial inputs and commercial marketing channels modem ranchers have developed techniques to circumvent these seasonal environmental limitations. Surplus forage production during peak seasons can be harvested, stored, and fed to livestock during seasons of scarcity. Capital investments in fencing, water development, or bush control, for example, can help to stabilize the productivity of an area throughout the year. Seasonal stock sales, typical of cow-calf operations, can be used to bring stocking rates into line with regular variations in pasture carrying capacities. Finally, even in commercial ranching systems, sometimes the most profitable way to handle seasonal scarcity is to simply walk away from it, i.e., to nomadise. For African pastoralists with limited access to industrial inputs, herd migration has been one of the most effective adaptations to seasonal resource fluctuations.
56. Nomadism is a viable option, however, only under certain regional ecological conditions. Ideally, what nomads or mobile ranchers need is a series of environ mental zones each of which reaches peak carrying capacity in a different season. Mobile herds can then move from peak to peak, consistently avoiding the difficult months in each zone that they visit. In this way mobile livestock producers can maintain in a wide geographic region a total livestock population in excess of that which could be sustained, ceteris paribus, by several smaller herds each confined to its own locality.
57. The long-term policy implications of range enclosure hinge on the preceding ceteris paribus, they hinge, that is, on whether or not everything else is held constant in the shift from open to fenced ranges. Recent ecological research in the Sudanic and Sahelian zones has demonstrated the precision with which nomadic herds crop the best pastures at their seasonal peak (Breman and de Wit, 1983). The botanical principles involved suggest that a high level of efficiency is characteristic of most nomadic regimes, and that from the point of view of the nutritional status of grazing stock, it would be difficult under existing conditions to conceive of higher yielding patterns of herd mobility than those currently employed by many nomadic groups. Interference in this pattern of herd mobility will necessarily produce a decline in herd performance, unless restrictions on mobility are offset by the availability of new inputs.
58. Enclosure therefore poses a clear alternative to policy-makers. If fencing takes place without additional inputs or management innovations, it will precipitate a decline in herd performance. The picture is quite different, however, if new materials and techniques are available to herd operators. Nomadism is adjusted to the exigencies of the natural environment, but it rests on a strategy whereby herders physically avoid rather than confront production problems whenever possible. Regardless of the theoretical development potential of nomadism, a production strategy based on mobility discourages heavy investments in fixed assets which are a prerequisite of modern ranching. Thus, while enclosure poses short-run problems in terms of diminished productivity, it may nonetheless open the way for sustained commercial and industrial livestock development in the longer term.
59. The question remains as to how policy-makers might most effectively respond to this possibility. Part of the answer lies in a recognition of how enclosure actually happens in dry Africa, as distinct from how project papers and professional range managers say it ought to happen. The implicit model behind the typical range management project has been the Australian - American family or company ranch, with land held on a freehold or leasehold basis and ranch stock confined on this land. The explicit reason usually given for this kind of project was the impossibility of instituting modem range management practices without first establishing control over both the number and movement of animals in a given area.
60. More realistic project designs would require abandoning the model of the self-contained Texas or Australian ranch. In contemporary Africa we are dealing with relatively small private enclosures which can potentially be managed more intensively than large ranches. But these enclosed pastures will, at least in the foreseeable future, be used in conjunction with a vast "residue" of unenclosed range which is exploited extensively on a shared basis. If industrial ranching models are helpful, the closest paralled to the emerging African situation may be the small freehold farms and ranches of the arid American West. Many of these private holdings are too small to maintain an average family were it not possible for their owners to lease grazing rights on adjacent, unenclosed state-owned land. For ranching operations of this kind, effective management and development is a two-fold process. It implies, first, the disciplined management of state land to insure sustained yields. Secondly, it requires intensive production techniques, usually involving mixed farming and livestock husbandry, suitable to small private holdings.
61. An examination of the administrative and technical requisites of mixed private and public-land ranching lies beyond the scope of this paper. It should be noted, however, that the principal technical constraint to production on African enclosures is the sharp drop, in the dry season, of the nutritive value of standing hay. More effective hay-making techniques or equipment would undoubtedly help to alleviate this constraint, as would the introduction of high-yielding fodder crops which would improve the incentive for hay-making. Alternatively, many trees retain their value as dry-season browse better than unharvested grasses. Review of the possibilities of sylvo-pastoralism, and a summary of the research done on this topic, is provided by Payne (1984).
62. In many parts of dry Africa, current land tenture practices are conducive to private fodder production, hay-making and mixed livestock and tree-crop production. In these cases, it is not a matter of technicians or planners struggling to convince pastoralists to do what is best for themselves and for the range. The onus instead lies on government agencies and the livestock research establishment to deliver the resources which will permit the continued evolution of this new form of animal husbandry on partially enclosed range.
