Zero-grazing of improved cattle breeds using

drought‑tolerant fodder in Uganda

Source FAO, Le Groupe-Conseil Baastel, Global Climate
Change Alliance
Keywords Disaster risk reduction, drought, diseases, cattle breed
zero-grazing, fodder
Country of first practice Uganda
ID and publishing year 8926 and 2017
Sustainbale Development Goals No poverty, zero hunger, decent work and economic
growth and life on the land
Summary
This technology describes how improved of animals. For this reason, zero‑grazing is
cattle breeds can benefit from an alternative usually practiced only with high-yielding
grazing system, namely zero-grazing. In a improved breeds. With good planning, many
zero-grazing system, the cattle are usually dairy animals can be kept on a relatively
kept in the farm and the fodder is brought to small piece of land, making this system
them. Improved breeds are more productive suitable in areas where a farmer owns a
and resistant to diseases which make them limited amount of land for grazing. Under
more efficient for the zero-grazing system, zero-grazing, individual attention in terms of
and in Uganda, breeds are fed with drought feeding is possible as the cattle do not spend
tolerant fodder to ensure cattle feed is also energy searching for food. Zero-grazing also
available in dry seasons. makes disease and vector control easier.
This good practice contributes to increase Figure 1: Drought tolerant forage

productivity and enhance the resilience of

cattle raising to dry regions and diseases in
Uganda.

Description
Zero grazing is a system where the cattle
are usually kept in the farm and farmers
© FAO/TECA

bring the feed and water to the animals.

Due to reduced communal grazing land,
zero‑grazing has become a common livestock
management practice in most areas of 1. Benefits of Zero-grazing
south‑western Uganda. systems
The aim of a zero‑grazing system is to Zero-grazing Zero-grazing is
maximize the efficiency and sustainability
of livestock production by improving animal
considered as an adaptation
option because of the
TECA
productivity while reducing the number following: TECHNOLOGIES
and PRACTICES
for SMALL
AGRICULTURAL
1/6 PRODUCERS
 Climate Change Adaptation and
Disaster Risk Reduction

• The availability of pasture could become 2.1 Elements for an effective zero-grazing
limited due to climate change, leading system
to a shortage of food for animals during To have an effective zero-grazing unit, the
droughts. Zero grazing could address this following elements should be taken into
risk as farmers can save natural fodder account.
resources and store fodder. 2.1.1 Safety
• Zero-grazing helps in reducing animal
pressure on the land such as overgrazing A good dairy animal is a costly investment
eventually leading to desertification. which should be secured. This can be
• Zero-grazing limits the spread of disease ensured by an appropriate selection of the
among animals because they are less unit location.
clustered around watering points. Locating the unit close to farm houses will
• Easier manure collection from the farm contribute to security. When choosing the
or enclosures where the cattle are kept, location also take into account the wind
which can be used for crops and lower direction to make sure that the wind can
the costs and labour needed in applying carry away the dung smell.
manure. 2.1.2 Ventilation
Figure 2: Cow enclosure collecting urine to make liquid
manure
Good ventilation is recommended for a
healthy animal respiratory system and
adds to the comfort, which is crucial for
maximal milk production.
Ventilation is also important to regulate
the temperature and avoid stress to
animals caused by high temperatures.
2.1.3 Isolation
Different animals are kept separated into
different units to avoid injuries resulting
from fights and mounting, to control
breeding and avoid spread of diseases.
© FAO/TECA

2.1.4 Maintenance
Regular maintenance of the floor and
the roof ensures that the floor does not
develop holes that can injury the livestock
and the roof does not leak when it rains.
With good management a cow will typically
2. Constituent parts of a zero-grazing system
eat between 75 and 100 kg of fresh grass
The unit of zero-grazing has three major per day which equates to 14-16 kg of dry
parts: matter per cow per day.
• the feeding and rest area; For a 100 cow herd this would mean that
• the exercise area; and approximatively 0.75 ha (1.9 acres) would
• the manure collection area.

2/6
 need to be harvested each day to ensure a The CBA calculates the cumulative net
dry matter intake of 15 kg per head per day. benefits obtained from an average farm
3. Success Story with 10 cattle over a period of 11 years
(10 percent discount rate), as well as the
In one community, a farmer had four benefit-cost ratio (BCR), which is the ratio
improved breed cows for which he built between total discounted benefits and total
enclosures such as the one presented in discounted costs over the appraisal period.
Figure 2. Building such an enclosure costs
around UGX 700 000 to UGX 800 000. Figure 5 provides an overview of the
outcome of the CBA. In particular, it shows
The enclosure allowed the farmer to collect that:
cow urine and make his own liquid manure.
The farmer received support and training to • In farms affected by dry spells and
implement his production system. diseases, the cumulative net benefits of
improved practice are about one and a
4. Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Practice half times higher than those of the local
The performance of improved cattle breeds practice.
raised with zero-grazing and drought tolerant • The BCR of the good practice (2.92) is
fodder was assessed at farm-level in Uganda. higher than the BCR of the local practice
The net benefits obtained from the good (2.85), meaning that the good practice
practice were measured through a cost- brings greater benefits relative to costs, as
benefit analysis (CBA), and compared to the compared to the local practice.
net benefits of the local practice which was The assessment was conducted in farms
free ranging local cattle breeds. that were affected by dry spell and diseases
4.1 Good practice during the monitoring period (June to
Improved cattle breeds in a zero grazing September 2016). The additional costs
production system with drought resistant associated with the cultivation of improved
fodder. fodder (as opposed to free range) as well
as the capital costs of building livestock
4.2 Local practice sheds and fodder storage facilities are
Free ranging local cattle breeds. more than compensated by the increase in

Figure 3: Drought tolerant forage cultivation Figure 4: Drought tolerant forage cultivation
© FAO/TECA

© FAO/TECA

3/6
 Figure 5: Cumulative Net Benefits and Benefit Cost Ratios (BCR) of improved cattle
breeds raised with zero-grazing and drought tolerant fodder (USD per farm per season)

Source: FAO/TECA

profits from increased milk production. The collection because of enclosures could also
benefits of the good practice may be even help reduce soil fertility loss induced by
higher if accounting the potential profits climate change.
derived from additional land available after 5.2 Socio-economic and ecological benefits
the introduction of zero grazing. Indeed,
the additional land could be used for other The free grazing livestock often damage
income generating activities, including for crops also in neighbouring farms, and this
crop production. is a major cause of conflict. Zero-grazing
allows to have less pressure on the crops
5. Effectiveness and benefits and on reduce land conflict. In addition,
5.1 Climate Change Adaptation related enclosures make it easier to collect manure
benefits which can be used for sustaining soil fertility
In a context of climate change, pastures in cropland.
could become less available in the near Other goals are to improve household
future, which is why cutting and storing income, reduce expenditure on pests and
fodder for animals could be a way to adapt disease management through livestock
to climate change. isolation from other animals, and to reduce
Zero-grazing helps reduce animal pressure labour by cutting and storing fodder for use
on the land and limit the spread of disease over a period instead of grazing in distant
amongst animals, a risk that could increase pastures daily. Increased manure collection
with climate change. Easier manure and application increases crop yields.

4/6
 Advantages of zero-grazing systems are the 8. Validation of the practice
following: 8.1 Hazard context during monitoring
• Exposure to parasites and diseases vectors period
is reduced. During the 2016 dry season (June to
• Manure is easily collected and distributed September), the performance of this good
in the farm enhancing soil fertility. practice package was monitored in 13 farms
• Better control on breeding and animal in Kiboga (4), Mubende (2), Sembabule (2),
health. Nakaseke (4), and Nakasongola (1) districts.
• Milk yield in dry season tripled after All the farms were affected by dry spell
introducing this good practice, from 100 during the monitoring period. In particular,
liters to 300 liters per cow. rainfall was between 50-100 percent
6. Synergies below normal in August, and land surface
temperatures were 3 to 7 °C above average,
Other adaptation options that would create causing a reduction in water availability.
the most synergies with zero-grazing are:
8.2 Farmers’ perception
• Fodder banks;
• organic fertilizers; and Seven of the farmers who were interviewed
• planting of fodder trees s.a. calliandra, all reported that they would replicate the
albizia, where possible. good practice (i.e. raising improved cattle
breed in confinement and produce drought
7. General recommendations tolerant fodder to feed the cattle) in the
Technical and financial support should be coming seasons since it increases climate
provided to allow farmers to acquire and resilience, leading to higher profits. Farmers
properly manage zero-grazing cows. Zero- assigned a score of 4.6 out of 5 to the
grazing cows should be integrated in the performance of the good practice towards
whole production of the farm so that feed dry spell and disease. Some of the farmers,
can be provided easily at no additional costs. however, raised concerns regarding the
In terms of minimal requirement to be able high investment required to start the good
to establish such a zero-grazing system: practice, such as the costs of clearing land
for pasture growing.
• Should a farmer have available for fodder
production a minimal amount of land? i.e. 9. Minimum requirements for the successful
if he does not have a certain amount of implementation of the practice
land, the system is not sustainable as he 9.1 Major costs are
cannot produce the necessary fodder for • One hired worker: 160 000 UGX per
the animals? month.
• Should the farm have guaranteed access • Construction of forage storage facility.
to a certain amount of water for cows to Average cost per average farm (10 cows)
drink? is UGX 3.5 million.
• Other elements that are essential for the • Construction of a zero-grazing unit for an
successful implementation of such zero average farm (10 cows): UGX 750 000.
grazing system? • Average price of improved cattle breed:
UGX 2.25 million per cow.

5/6
• Cost of producing forage: UGX 175 per kg 10. Agro-ecological Zone
of fresh grass, or about UGX 26 million per Tropics, warm
average farm (10 cows).
• Price of fresh forage: UGX 400 per kg, or 11. Country of first practice
about UGX 60 million per average farm Uganda
(10 cows) (This cost can be avoided when 12. Objecctives fulfilled by this technology
farmers grow their own fodder on their • Labour-saving technology
farms). • Resource use efficiency
9.2 Major barriers are • Pro-poor technology
There were not many farmers adopting
zero-grazing in the visited district of Uganda
as improved breed are very expensive and
less resistant. The main barrier against
zero-grazing is the additional cost of not
only purchasing a “zero grazer” but also the
running costs associated with cutting the
grass along with the additional slurry which
will have to be spread as a result of housing
the herd over the summer.

TECA
TECHNOLOGIES
and PRACTICES
for SMALL
AGRICULTURAL
6/6 PRODUCERS