The dangers of boxing in the pastoralists (II)

It is clear that Nigeria and indeed Africa have to plan towards the transformation of pastoralism into settled forms of animal husbandry. The establishment of grazing reserves provides the opportunity for practicing a more limited form of pastoralism and is therefore a pathway towards a more settled form of animal husbandry. As the population continues to multiply and violent conflicts make extensive pastoralism more difficult to sustain, alternative solutions would be required and some planning period for conversion set aside and above all gets acted upon. Grazing reserves are areas of land demarcated, set aside and reserved for exclusive or semi-exclusive use by pastoralists.

Currently, Nigeria has a total of 417 grazing reserves all over the country, out of which only about 113 have been gazetted. However, only about 40 of them are currently available and useful to pastoralists. The longterm goal of government has always been to change nomadic pastoralists to settled and semi-settled agro-pastoralists and ultimately mixed farmers. Mixed farming is a system of farming in which crop growing is combined with keeping livestock for profit. The grazing reserve concept originated from a study conducted by the Colonial Government in 1954 to review the conditions of Fulani pastoralists. After independence in 1960, the programme was reviewed and consolidated into a comprehensive plan that included the establishment of grazing reserves in major pastoral areas in Northern Nigeria. As with virtually all Nigerian plans however, it was never implemented even when it was integrated into the Second and then the Third National Development Plans.

Whether we support or oppose pastoralism, it is clear that at least in the short and medium term, many herds must continue to practice seasonal migration between dry and wet season grazing areas, incorporating past harvest grazing farmland in the highly developed and ecologically sound pattern of transhumance evolved by the pastoralist over the centuries. This is an important point to make at this point when many political actors think it is possible to simply and abruptly ban open grazing.

One of the greatest difficulties in addressing and resolving issues surrounding pastoralism is the politicisation of legal regimes and the blockages to the enactment of or implementation of laws that can redress the key challenges we have been discussing. In 2016 for example, a bill was proposed - the National Grazing Reserve (Establishment) Bill 2016. The Bill was aimed at actualising the long enunciated but yet to be implemented policy of developing grazing reserves in all states in the Federation. The Bill collapsed due to deep-rooted suspicion and the argument that emerged that it would favour one group and therefore runs contrary to the principle of fairness and equity. Others argued that it would negatively affect the rights of states to dispose of their land as they deem fit.

There is an emerging conflict between the constitutional principle on free movement of persons and goods and laws emerging in some states restricting movement. In Section 41(1) of the Nigerian Constitution, it is stated that: ‘‘Every citizen of Nigeria is entitled to move freely throughout Nigeria and to reside in any part thereof, and no citizen of Nigeria shall be expelled from Nigeria or refused entry thereby or exit therefrom.’’

Transhumance operates at the wider level of West and Central Africa within which the pastoralists operate in. At the regional level, Decision A/DEC.5/10/98 Relating to the regulations on Transhumance between ECOWAS Member States that: “All animals of the bovine, caprine, cameline, equine plus asinine species shall be allowed free passage across the borders of all Member States, under the conditions set out in this Decision.” So far, four states have enacted laws or are processing bills to prevent open grazing on their territory. They are Ekiti, Taraba, Benue and Edo states. The Benue law for example prohibits open nomadic livestock rearing and grazing in the state and the law provides that no individual or group shall, after the commencement of this law engage in open nomadic livestock herding or grazing In the state outside the permitted ranches.

The immediate impact of these laws is to restrict the movement of herdsmen excessively into limited areas where they are likely to overgraze limited resources. Indeed, following the coming into effect of the Benue Law on 1st November 2017, the Nasarawa State branch of the Miyeti Allah Cattle Breeders Association (MACBAN) has already spoken about a looming crisis in this regard: “MACBAN Chairman in Nasarawa State Mohammad Hussaini expressed over situation of nonavailability of grasses, other animal feeds and water to graze with about two million cattle that migrated from Benue into the state, saying that if not urgently addressed it could lead to clashes between herders and farmers” (Daily Trust, 6th November 2017, page 14). The danger we are facing is that as more states block out the herders, they would be forced to concentrate in only states that agree to accommodate them but their concentration in a few states will result in over-grazing and even more destruction of crops multiplying push factors towards increased conflicts and ecological hazards.

Over the past five years, ranching has become the “way forward” or desired solution to the problems posed by pastoralism. Ranching however is not the magic solution to the problems that have arisen. It is a practice adopted in zones with low population densities, usually semi-arid land where extensive production can be carried out in the context of the availability of vast lands and small population where ranches could have access to hundreds of square kilometres. What most people mean by ranching however, as is clear from the Benue State anti open grazing law, is commercial animal husbandry in which livestock stay on the farm and are fed therein. They mean therefore intensive integrated livestock system as is found in temperate countries in Europe and North America. The problem is that that is a different political economy that requires huge investments and a commercial process of production and sale of livestock feed. We are simply not there as a Nation.

It is worthwhile posing the question whether laws can be effective in prohibiting pastoralism, which is practiced by millions of Nigerians and other herders from neighbouring West and Central African countries? I doubt it? Can these laws stand if challenged in court? I doubt it? The Constitution guarantees free movement of persons and goods across Nigeria and no state government can withdraw constitutionally entrenched rights. Secondly, following legislation by the Ogun State Government a Supreme Court Judgment on matter cited as “A.G. OGUN STATE V. ALHAJA AYINKE ABERUAGBA (1985)” States were barred from interfering with inter-state commerce and the free movement of goods and services. At that time, Ogun State had tried to control and tax goods entering from other states and the Supreme Court ruled that it would be chaotic if states enacted any laws they please restricting movement of goods and services in the Federation. It was this judgment that led to the introduction of value added tax (VAT) as a State tax that is determined at the national level and collected by the federal government, which takes an administrative fee and redistributes the proceeds back to the states. The reality we are facing is that the issue of pastoralism has developed into a national crisis that is leading to increased violence so a legal approach alone cannot resolve the issue. It is therefore important to negotiate a national policy framework that would protect the interests of both farmers and herders. The federal government should take the initiative of negotiating a consensual policy framework that would address the issues.

Nigeria must quickly develop a new policy framework that is comprehensive and mutually beneficial to pastoralists and farmers. Any policy that does not take into consideration the welfare of both sides will most likely fail. There must be a consultative process that listens to the concerns of all stakeholders in developing the new framework so that the outcome would have national ownership. Over time, we have to phase out pastoralism. Meanwhile, we should map out the duration, strategy and timelines for the transition plan. As there is no miracle model for solving the problems, the plan should simultaneously pursue a number of models including.

Ranching can be pursued as one of the possible models in areas with lower population densities. This would require huge investments in infrastructure and human capacity development. Semiintensive systems should be pursued accompanied with requisite massive investment in infrastructure, training, extension, marketing and animal health service delivery. The traditional pastoralism should continue with some improvements in the form of coordinated mobility between wet and dry season grazing areas and effective management of farmers and pastoralists’ relations. The use of grazing reserves should be expanded to target pastoralists with large stocks where skills for pasture production; large milk production, etc can be promoted. The development of integrated crop-livestock systems with farmers and pastoralists being encouraged to keep some animals in their farms could also be pursued.