VET ON CALL: Yes, farming is a calling, but make it profitable this year

As the New Year starts, my work is well cut out going by the experiences in 2019.

To begin with, there are cases that are still pending which I will fast-track. Top on the list is the challenge to identify the disease that affected a pig farm in Kiambu.

Sharing out the case has encouraged many farmers to report pig disease outbreaks that fit the case definition for African swine fever. I have passed these reports to the relevant authorities for further action.

It has also become clear that there are animal health service providers advising farmers to sell African swine fever pigs for slaughter for human consumption. This practice is keeping the disease in circulation, especially in Nairobi and Kiambu.

Good pathogen management

Those providing this erroneous advice must revisit the science of good pathogen management, which dictates disease agents specific to one host should not be repeatedly exposed to another species to minimise the risk of adaptation to infect the new species. People should not be deliberately exposed to the ASF virus through infected pig meat.

One misadvised pig farmer in Nairobi has relentlessly engaged me via e-mail claiming that the disease cannot be controlled and the restriction of sale of sick pigs for human slaughter is meant to impoverish producers.

Throughout 2019, some farmers asked me whether livestock farming is inherently meant to be risky and unprofitable. Just like other businesses, farming has its fair share of challenges, which are enhanced because farmers deal with biological assets with an expiry date that is prematurely sensitive to an array of factors.

Foot and mouth disease

Some farmers can mitigate the impact of undesirable events in livestock farming, but many lack sufficient knowledge and financial power to do this.

A good case in point is the African swine fever outbreaks that started in 2016 and they continue to date. Some farmers, especially in Kiambu, Murang’a and Kajiado lost heavily and others continue getting outbreaks to date.

For cattle farmers, foot and mouth disease is currently live in a number of counties. It is surprising that some farmers are using ‘busaa’ to cure the disease, which is effectively controlled by vaccinating the animals twice per year without fail with a high quality vaccine containing strains of the virus that causes the disease in a particular region. In areas with very high disease challenge, animals could be vaccinated every four months.

In Kenya, we currently vaccinate for four strains of the disease named A, O, SAT1 and SAT2. The vaccine is called quadrivalent and is manufactured locally by the Kenya Veterinary Vaccines Production Institute (KEVEVAPI).

Any farmer who gets an FMD outbreak after appropriate vaccination should report to the Director of Veterinary Services (DVS), Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) and KEVEVAPI.

As farmers battle diseases like FMD, milk prices have been on a downward trend, what has caused uproar.

Drop in milk prices

Last year in August, there was an impromptu reduction in the producer price of milk by the major processors by about Sh10. This almost made the farm gate price of milk equal to the production cost especially in zero-grazing farming. The net result is that the farmer would produce milk either at a loss or at no profit at all.

We all know that no one wants to invest for nothing or loss, but that is where the milk processors are pushing the dairy farmers to. The situation is highly unsustainable. If unchecked, the dairy industry could collapse.

Milk processors blame the drop in prices to oversupply due to good weather and influx of cheap imports.

But several questions remain unanswered? Why is milk produced in Uganda cheaper in Kenya than locally produced milk? Why is the consumer price of processed milk still high even with the drop in producer prices?

A review of milk production and marketing reveals a number of factors that could provide answers to the questions.

The cost of a litre of processed milk ranges from Sh84 to Sh110 compared to Sh17 to Sh35 for producer prices. This means the producer price of milk is less than one third the cost of processed milk.

Three of the milk brands with a price range of Sh48 to Sh55 per 500ml pack are actually from one company, making it easy for the processor to dictate the producer price.

Research done by Tegemeo Institute in 2016 found that there was no data on the cost of processing a litre of milk or transparency in the setting of both the producer and consumer prices. This means that the processors independently set the producer and consumer milk prices and the farmer is left at their mercy.

Zero-grazers incur losses

It is known from research that the small-scale farmer under zero-grazing system produces 80 per cent of the milk sold to processors. Therefore, discussion on milk production price should centre on this production system.

The Tegemeo research further shows that the average cost of production of milk under zero-grazing is Sh19 per litre, Sh17.2 for semi-zero grazing and Sh10 for open grazing. They also reported the highest cost of production is attributed to the commercial dairy concentrate fed to cattle in zero-grazing. It comprised 41.8 per cent of total production cost. The other major cost was labour at 51 per cent.

These costs do not vary whether there is favourable or unfavourable weather because feeds and labour requirements remain constant round the year. From my experience, many farmers produce milk at Sh19 to Sh25 per litre as they seek to have high producing cattle, which also require high level of care.

When the profit of dairy production was calculated taking into account all the costs involved, as should be done with any other business, the figures were unfavourable for the farmers. The zero-grazers incurred a loss of Sh60 cents per litre but the semi-zero and open grazing farmers made a profit of Sh5.6 and Sh7.9 per litre respectively. These findings confirm the farmers’ complaints of poor returns from dairy production. They also show that the practice of processors lowering the producer cost of milk in a glut is not justified and it hurts them.

Good farming policies

This state of affairs, however, is not unique to dairy farmers. It cuts across the various livestock production segments, including meat and eggs. In all situations, it is the farmer who suffers while the middle actor makes the money. I have always said the farmer should always be supported and given a fair deal because she operates in one of the sectors that qualify to be patriotic duty. Therefore, this year, I implore livestock producers to engage deeply with the government and processors to enhance fair trade across the value chain, especially at the farm gate level.

Farmers should organise themselves into stronger groups that are able to push for enactment of good farming policies.

Such policies should ensure that farming promotes national food adequacy, safety and sustainable balanced development. This can only happen if the pricing of producer prices for livestock products is fair and transparently negotiated taking full account of the producer cost and the need for the farmer to make profitable returns on her investment.