ASSESSMENT OF COMMERCIAL FATTENING PRACTICES AND

FATTENING PERFORMANCE OF BEEF CATTLE IN SELECTED

DISTRICTS OF EAST SHOA ZONE

MSc THESIS

GENET DADI

OCTOBER 2016

HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY, HARAMAYA

Assessment of Commercial Fattening Practices and Fattening Performance
of Beef Cattle in Selected Districts of East Shoa Zone

A Thesis Submitted to School of Animal and Range Sciences

Postgraduate Program Directorate
HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURE
(ANIMAL PRODUCTION)

Genet Dadi

October 2016

HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY, HARAMAYA

 HARAMAYA UNIVERSITY
POSTGRADUATE PROGRAM DIRECTORATE
We hereby certify that we have read and evaluated this Thesis titled ‘Assessment of
Commercial Fattening Practices and Fattening Performance of Beef Cattle in selected
Districts of East Shoa Zone ‘prepared under our guidance by Genet Dadi. We recommend
that it be submitted as fulfilling the thesis requirement.

Mengistu Urge (PhD) ___________________________

Major Advisor Signature Date

Tsegay T/brehan (Ast.Prof) _________________ __________________

Co – Advisor Signature Date

As members of the Board of Examiners of the MSc Thesis Open Defense Examination, we
certify that we have read and evaluated the thesis prepared by Genet Dadi and examined the
candidate. We recommend that the thesis be accepted as fulfilling the thesis requirement for
the degree of Master of Science in Agriculture (Animal Production).

Yosef Tadessa (Dr.) _______________ _______________

Chairperson Signature Date

Mitiku Eshetu (Dr.)_______________ ________________

Internal Examiner Signature Date

Adugna Tolera (Prof.) _______________ ________________

External Examiner Signature Date

Final approval and acceptance of the thesis is contingent upon the submission of the final copy
of the thesis to the Council of Postgraduate Studies (CPGS) through the School Graduate
Committee (SGC) of the candidate’s major department.
 DEDECATION

I dedicate this thesis manuscript to my beloved late Grandmother AregeshGelan.

 STATEMENT OF AUTHOR

By my signature below, I declare and affirm that this thesis is my own work. I have followed
all ethical and technical principles of scholarship in the preparation, data collection, data
analysis and compilation of this thesis. Any scholarly matter that is included in the thesis has
been given recognition through citation.

This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for MSc degree in Animal
Production at the Haramaya University. The thesis is deposited in the Haramaya University
Library and is made available to borrowers under the rules of the library. I solemnly declare
that this thesis has not been submitted to any other institution anywhere for the award of any
academic degree, diploma, or certificate.

Brief quotations from this thesis may be made without special permission provided that
accurate and complete acknowledgement of the source is made. Requests for permission for
extended quotations from or reproduction of this thesis in whole or in part may be granted by
the Head of the School or Department when in his or her judgment the proposed use of the
material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be
obtained from the author of the thesis.

Name: Genet Dadi Signature: __________________

Date: October 2016

School/Department: Animal and Range Sciences

 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

The author, Genet Dadi, was born in North Shoa Zone, Oromiya National Regional State on
April 6, 1986. She attended elementary school education at Alemgena, Obora Elementary and
Junior School and Secondary Education at Robe comprehensive secondary school. She joined
Assela Agricultural Technical and Vocational College in 2004-2006 and graduated in Animal
Science with Diploma in 2006, then, she was employed by Oromia Agricultural Research
Institute (OARI) at Sinana Agricultural Research Center as Technical Assistant in Animal and
Nutrition division and served for two years. In 2008, she joined Haramaya University as
summer student and graduated with Bachelor of degree in Animal Science in 2012. After
graduation she worked at Sinana agricultural research center as a junior researcher. After two
years of service, she joined the Postgraduate Program Directorate of Haramaya University in
October, 2015 to pursue MSc degree in Animal production through SIDA, Haramaya
University Project scholarship.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Above all, loving, kindness and faithfulness of the Almighty God in bestowing health,
strength, patience and protection throughout the study period is highly appreciated.

My genuine gratitude and heartfelt appreciation goes to my advisors Dr. Mengistu Urge
and Tsagay Teklebrehan for their understanding, consistent and stimulating advices,
critical reading of the manuscript, valuable suggestions and careful guidance at every stage
of my research work.

My special thanks go to SIDA Haramaya University Female Students Scholarship Program

for providing me the opportunity and sponsoring me throughout the study period. And I am
grateful to my institute the Oromia Agricultural Research Institute (OARI) for allowing me
the study leave.

I would like to thank Sinana Agricultural Research Center for facilitating my study. Special
gratitude goes to the center manager, Dr. Tesfaye Lata and also other staff members of the
center who directly or indirectly supported me during the study. I would like to thank Adama
animal and plant Quarantine staffs for assistance and facilitation during my study.

I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to the Department of Animal science and the
School of Graduate Studies of Haramaya University for their contribution in the process of
developing the research proposal and provision of various services.

I also express my deepest and sincere appreciation to Ragasa Begna, Fayisa Kera and Sisay
Beleta for their valuable advice in preparing the proposal, research work and data analysis.
Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to all members of my family and my friends.
 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ADF Acid Detergent Fiber

ADG Average Daily Gain
ADL Acid Detergent Lignin
AOAC Association of Official Analytical Chemists
APHRD Animal and Plant Health Regulatory Directorate
BCS Body Condition Score
CP Crude Protein
CSA Central Statistical Agency
ESAP Ethiopian Society of Animal Production
ESSP Ethiopia Strategy Support Program
ETB Ethiopian Birr
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation
FMD Foot and Mouth Disease
GDP Gross Domestic Products
HGM Heart Girth Measurement
ILRI International Livestock Research Institute
IPMS Improving Productivity and Market Success
MOA Ministry of Agriculture
NDF Neutral Detergent Fiber
NSWN New South Wale Nations
OM Organic Matter
PLIP Pastoralist Livelihoods Initiative Project
SPS-LMM Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards and Livestock and Meat Marketing
SPSS Statistical Package for Social Science
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF AUTHOR v
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vii
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ix
LIST OF TABLES xii
LISTS OF FIGURE xiii
LISTS OF APPENDIX TABLES xiv
1. INTRODUCTION 2
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 3
2.1. Livestock Production in Ethiopia 3
2.2. Contribution of Cattle Production in Ethiopia 3
2.3. Challenges of Cattle Production in Ethiopia 4
2.4. Beef Cattle Production Systems in Ethiopia 5
2.4.1. Traditional fattening system 5
2.4.2. By-product-based fattening system 6
2.4.3. The Hararghe fattening system 7
2.4.4. Commercial feedlot fattening 8
2.6. Live Weight Gain 10
2.7. Body Condition Scoring 11
2.8. Nutrient Requirement of Beef Cattle 11
2.9. Housing System for Feedlot 13
2.10. Common Disease of Cattle Fattening 13
2.11. Marketing Systems for Fattening Cattle in Ethiopia 14
2.12. Challenges of Beef Cattle Fattening 15
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS 16
 Table of Content (Continued)
3.1. Description of the Study Area 16
3.2. Sampling Techniques 17
3.3. Data Collection 17
3.3.1. Survey data collection 18
3.3.2. Monitoring and evaluation of the feedlots 18
3.3.2.1. Animals and managements 18
3.3.2.2. Live weight measurements 19
3.3.2.3. Body condition score (BCS) 19
3.3.2.4. Feed sample collection 20
3.3.2.5. Chemical analysis of feeds 20
3.5. Data Analysis 20
4. RESULTS 23
4.1. Source, Experience and major selection Criteria for purchasing of
beef cattle 23
4.2. Season and length of fattening period 25
4.3. Major Feed Resources used by Commercial Feedlot 26
4.3.1. Feeding System of beef cattle fattening 26
4.4. Housing system 28
4.5. Source of water 28
4.6. Common Health Problems and Health Service Availability to Feedlot
Fattening Operation 29
4.8. Purchase and Sell of Fatten Cattle 30
4.9. Major Constraints of Beef Cattle Fattening 31
4.10. Chemical Composition of Feeds Used by Beef Fattening Farm 32
4.11. Performance Evaluation of Fattening Animals 35
4.11.1. Initial live weight 35
4.11.2. Final weight and total and average live weight gain 35
 Table of Content (Continued)
4.11.3. Condition score 38
5. DISCUSSIONS 39
5.1. Source, Experience and Major Selection Criteria of Beef Cattle 39
5.2. Major Feed Resources and Feeding System in the Commercial
Feedlot 40
5.3. Housing System 41
5.4. Common Health Problems and Health Service in the Feedlot 41
5.5. Major Constraints of Commercial Cattle Fattening 42
5.6. Purchase and Sell of Fatten Cattle 42
5.7. Type of Feeds and Chemical Composition 43
5.8. Performance of Fattening Cattle under Commercial Feedlot
Management 44
6. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 47
6.1. Summary and Conclusion 47
6.2. Recommendations 49
7.REFERENCES 50
8. APPENDIXES 61
 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page

1.Experience of feedlot operators in cattle fattening activities 23

2.Selection criteria of fattening cattle as reported by feedlot operators in the study area 24
3.Suitable season to fatten commercial beef cattle 25
4.Length of fattening period, season, and frequency of fattening per year, number of animals
fattened per cycle between scales of production 25
5.Major Feed resource used for cattle fattening by the respondents in scale of produce 26
6.Amount of feed offer to fattening beef cattle per day by districts and scales of production 27
7.Concentrate feeding strategy during cattle fattening phases 27
8.Housing System of fattening animals in the study area 28
9.Source of water in the study area 28
10.Major diseases observed in commercial feedlot in the study area 29
11.Health services available to commercial feedlot in the study area 30
12.Price of purchasing and selling animal 30
13.Trends of customers’ availability and buying and selling methods of live animals 31
14.Major constraints of beef cattle fattening ranked in the order of their importance 32
15.Least square means of chemical composition of feeds used at different phases under
different scale of beef cattle fattening 34
16.Least square means of live weight gain of fattening animals under commercial feedlot 36
17.Least Square Mean of Weight Gain and Body Condition Score of Fattening Animals at
Different Phases under Commercial Feedlot 37
 LISTS OF FIGURE

1.Map of the study area 16

 LISTS OF APPENDIX TABLES
Table Page

1.ANOVA for frequency number of animal per cycle, number animal per year and duration of cattle
fattening between scales of cattle fattening 62
2.ANOVA table for type of feed offered per day between scales of production 62
3.ANOVA Total live Weight gain 62
4.ANOVA Average daily gain 63
5.ANOVA initial heart girth 63
6.ANOVA Final heart girth final 63
7.ANOVA of body condition score initial 64
8. ANOVA of body condition score final 64
9. ANOVA average daily gain of animals at different phases 64
10.ANOVA body condition score of animals at different phases 65
11.Formal Survey questionnaire on assessment commercial cattle fattening practices 66
 Assessment of Commercial Fattening Practices and Fattening Performance of Beef
Cattle in Selected Districts of East Shoa Zone
ABSTRACT

The study was conducted in Adama, Lome and Adami-Tulu district of East Shoa Zone of
Oromia Regional State to assess commercial fattening practices, to evaluate performance of
commercial fattening and to evaluate chemical composition of mixed ration at different
feeding phase of fattening from selected feedlot .The questionnaire based formal survey was
conducted using semi structured questioners by interviewing a total of 45feedlot operators
purposively selected from the three districts and both quantitative and qualitative data on beef
cattle fattening systems were obtained. For the monitoring work nine farms among those used
for interview were selected for the purpose of monitoring animals’ performance under
different stage (phases) during fattening period. Eight Animals from each farm were
purposively selected from the farms based on age, initial body weight and body condition. The
study revealed that the major criteria for selecting animals to purchase for feedlot fattening
includes breed type, physical appearance and/or frame size, age, health and initial price body
condition, coat color, horn size are the top priority. The feed resources used by commercial
cattle fattening include crop residues and agro-industrial by products. The average crude
protein contents (CP) of the different rations was not different (P>0.05) among the scale of
fattening or phase of feeding, but numerically higher amount of CP content was recorded for
rations prepared by large (19.09±0.97%) as compared to medium (17.92±0.97%) and small
(16.33±0.97%) scale commercial cattle fattening and for the initial phase (19.06±0.97%) as
compared to medium (17.32±0.97%) and final (16.96±0.97%) stage of feeding. The average
NDF and ADL% was significantly higher (P<0.05) for small (47.04±1.12%; 6.22±0.28%) as
compared to large (42.25±1.2%; 5.08 ±0.28%) and medium (40.04±1.2%; 4.48±1.2%) scale
of commercial cattle fattening. The average NDF% of feed at different stage or phase was
significantly higher (P<0.05) for final (45.95±1.2%) stage as compared to middle
(42.45±1.2%) and initial (41.10±1.2%) stage of fattening, whereas the average ADF and
ADL% of ration was not significantly vary across the stage of fattening. The average total
weight gain and average daily weight gain of animals recorded in 90 days of fattening was
significantly higher (P<0.05) for large (97.7±1.16;1.09±0.01) and medium (97.58±1.16;
1.09±0.01) as compared to small scale (91.04±1.169 kg;1.01±0.01kg) commercial fattening.
Whereas, the average weight gain and daily weight gain recorded across the phase of
fattening was significantly higher (P<0.001) for initial (33.18±0.44; 1.11±0.01) and middle
(31.79±0.44; 1.06±0.01) phase as compared to small scale (30.46±0.44 kg; 1.02±0.01kg)
commercial fattening. Whereas the average weight gain recorded was significantly (P<0.001)
higher for initial phase(1.11 kg /day) as compared to middle(1.06kg /day) and final phase
(1.02kg/day )of fattening. We conclude that the dependence on only Borana breed may affect
the efficiency of the fattening industry by creating supply shortage and also it depletes the
breed population. Although the nutrient supply is good, the high CP level needs to be
considered in relation to the requirement of the animals at different phases of fattening.
Moreover, the Limited feed availability, high price of supplementary feed, market fluctuation
of fattened cattle, disease out breaks, and water shortage are the most challenges faced by
the sectors and needs to be addressed.
Key words:Beef cattle, Commercial, Performance, phase feeding.
 1. INTRODUCTION

Ethiopia has the largest livestock population in Africa, which including about 56.71 million
cattle, 58.44 million small ruminants, 1.6 million camels, 9.86 million equine and 56.87
million chickens (CSA, 2015). The sector also plays a significant role in the national economy
which contributes about 47% of the agricultural GDP, 15% of the total GDP and has
generated an estimated 31% of the total agricultural employment (IGAD, 2011). However, the
productivity and economic contribution of the livestock sector is much below the potential due
to various technical and non-technical constraints. The major technical constraints include
inadequate feed supply and inefficient feed management and utilization, widespread diseases
and poor animal healthcare and poor breeding practices. Among the non-technical constraints,
poor financial and infrastructural resources and inadequate policy support with respect to
extension, marketing, as well as credit facility are as the main issues (EEA, 2006).

Among the various livestock production activities, beef cattle fattening activity is one of the
potential sources for employment opportunity and to increase the volume and quality of meat
produced and to alleviate poverty in the country (Yitayeet al., 2007; Adugna, 2008; Kerstin
and Ellengowan, 2011). Moreover, fattening offers opportunity to exploit the vast cattle and
meat export market in the region as well as Ethiopia’s domestic market and also it add value
on simple livestock herding (Habtamu, 2012). Hence, it had been argued to be considered as
the pivot for rural development planning and enhancing income of small holding farmers of
developing countries (Habtamu and Akalu, 2012). Farmers can derive substantial income from
cattle fattening as well as maximize use of farm resources if provided with adequate support
services to manage their stock. Appropriate technical support in selecting stocks for fattening,
and efficient feeding management using locally available feed resources are important
services to be provided to farmers in order to boost farmers’ income from cattle fattening
business (Belachew, 2009).

The fattening activity can be undertaken at any level of livestock value chain ranging from
small holder farmers rearing livestock for multiple functions (Sarma and Ahmed, 2011) to the
level of enterprises engaged in fattening (Adugna, 2008 ) who export live animals and supply
fattened animals directly to abattoirs concocting meat for inland and international markets.
 3

Hence, different level of fattening activity is undertaken by different actors of livestock

market value chainDepending on the differences in the methods of fattening activities
employed at differentlevels, researchers classified the type of fattening in different
categories.Of this, classification small and large scale fattening is used differently among
different researchers. Some use small scale fattening practitioners as being small holding
farmers engaged in fattening (Adugna, 2008; Sarma and Ahmed, 2011; Teshageret al., 2013)
whereas others use it to present small sized commercial feed lots which only differ from large
scale fattening on the bases of employed capital (Tomy, 2003). Hence, enterprise
characteristics of small-scale and large-scale fattening projects are similar; therefore, both can
be categorized under commercial fattening practice.

In recent years, market oriented beef production system has been gradually emerging
concurrent to the increase in both domestic and export market demand for cattle meet in
Ethiopia. The Government is also trying to expand the sector by motivating producers’ in
order to meet the growing demand. As a result, meat processing factories and export abattoirs
are increasing in number and export earnings from the sector are rising ( MORD, 2008; ACR,
2010).However, inadequate supplies of export quality livestock in terms of the required age
and body weight for slaughter, lack of information on efficient way of feed resources
utilization for quick feedlot finishing, and the biological response of indigenous cattle to
feedlot fattening are remained to be a bottleneck to increase domestic per capita meat
consumption and export (Yosephet al., 2006, Tsegay and Mengistu, 2013).

As in all commercial enterprises in cattle fattening enterprises, the main purpose is to make a
profit. From this point of view, evaluating the performances of cattle fattening enterprises
gains importance in terms of the continuation of business efficiencies. Performance in general
is a concept that quantitatively or qualitatively determines the gains at the end of a purposeful
and scheduled activity. In other words, performance is the level of achievement to reach the
planned output level (Erol,et al.,2014).Even though there is a prevalence of diversity of
fattening practices in Ethiopia, there was little systematic study and well organized
information concerning the utilization of available feed resources, husbandry of commercial
feedlot cattle fattening, performance of feedlot operation and marketing system.

3
 2

Therefore, it demands a holistic study of the system about the general cattle handling practices
employed by producers (feed lot operators). However, this type of information is currently less
available or inadequate to the best of our knowledge. Therefore, there is a need to assess how
commercial feed lot cattle fattening systems can provide sustainable and adequate live animal
supply which can meet the demand for domestic consumption and export markets. Such kind
of study is significant as it helps to improve income by devising a strategy on how to minimize
fattening cost. It also indicate the strategy on how to improve the available feed resources and
provide useful insights towards the designing and implementation of strategies to alleviate the
shortage of quality live animal supply to the market. Therefore, the present research was
proposed with the objectives;

 To assess the commercial fattening practices in selected districts of Eastern Shoa Zone
 To evaluate body condition and body weight gain of fattening beef cattle during the fattening
period
 To evaluate chemical composition of mixed ration at different feeding phase of fattening from
selected feedlot
 3

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Livestock Production in Ethiopia

The diverse agro-climatic conditions of Ethiopia make it very suitable for the production of
different kinds of livestock. Most of the livestock are produced by pastoralists, agro-
pastoralists, and smallholder mixed crop–livestock farmers and the private entrepreneurs
operating in a marketing chain involving collection, fattening and transportation up to terminal
markets (Getachewet al., 2008). Cattle and sheep are the major livestock in highland areas and
camels and goats are the prominent domestic animals in the pastoral lowlands below 1500
m.a.s.l (Ayeleet al., 2003). The predominantly highland (above 1500 m.a.s.l) regions of
Tigray, Amhara and Oromia also contain pockets of lowland (areas below 1500 m.a.s.l) and
such lowland pockets may contain production systems and livestock populations which are
slightly different from those found in the highland areas. On the other hand, there are mainly
lowland regions such as Oromiya, Somali and Afar where pastoralists predominate. Thus,
while pastoralists are usually located in lowlands, all lowland livestock producers, especially
those in lowland pockets of highland regions, may not be pastoralists.

Livestock is an integral part of the agriculture and the contribution of live animals and their
products to the agricultural economy accounts for 47% (IGAD-LPI, 2011). Among livestock
species, cattle contribute significantly to the livelihoods of farmers. They serve as a source of
draught power for the rural farming population, supply farm families with milk, meat, manure,
and also as source of cash income, playing a significantrole in the social and cultural values of
the society. Cattle contribute nearly to all the draught power for agricultural production at
smallholder level in Ethiopia (Melaku, 2011)

2.2. Contribution of Cattle Production in Ethiopia

Ethiopia is a largely rural country with an agrarian economy. Livestock are of economic and
social importance both at the household and national levels, and they have been providing
significant export earnings. Although estimates vary widely, livestock is thought to contribute
15–17% of Ethiopian gross domestic product (GDP), 35–40% of agricultural GDP and 37–
87% of the household incomes(MoFED, 2009). The large variations are due directly or
 4

indirectly to climatic variation. Livestock have multiple uses aside from income generation,
including cash storage for those who have less access to the banking system, provision of
draught and pack services, and manure for fuel and fertilizer. In addition to these, non-market
values, a thriving informal export trade in live animals further emphasizes the significance,
albeit unrecognized by official statistics of livestock (and particularly cattle) in the Ethiopian
Economy. Ethiopia borders half a dozen countries in the Horn of Africa, and in all cases
cultural, linguistic, clan and family links span the boundaries. Such connections employ
physical and organizational trading arrangements that predate modern frontiers, and serve
Middle Eastern markets for imported cattle and beef.

Ethiopia’s domestic meat consumption for 2006–07 has been estimated at 2.4 kg/capita per
year for beef (Jabbar and Negassa, 2008). Aside from economic factors, rural and urban
consumption differences can be explained by social and demographic characteristics such as
age structure and the rigor of adherence to religion-based fasting (Jabbar and Negassa, 2008).
Overall production for sale has proven difficult to estimate, but production and export volumes
indicate approximate self-sufficiency in beef, necessitating exports as an outlet for any future
increases in production. However, meat production per head of livestock is low by the
standards of other significant livestock producing African countries. For instance, De Haan
(2003) shows that production of cattle meat in Ethiopia is just 8.5 kg/head of cattle per year,
which is significantly lower than in Kenya and Senegal (21 and 16 kg, respectively).

2.3. Challenges of Cattle Production in Ethiopia

Ethiopia has the lowest livestock productivity among the least developing countries in the
world (Negassaet al., 2011). There is not much specialization in the livestock sector, which
lowers its productivity potential. Any observed productivity growth happens because of
increases in the total number of animals, not because of increases in the efficiency of livestock
production. The commercial off- take rate is only about 8 percent for Ethiopia. The majority of
sales are made in the local markets usually without establishment of advanced contractual
agreements (Negassa,et al, 2011). Particularly, the small-scale farmers cater their livestock
production largely to the domestic markets. The majority (about 60%) of the Ethiopian small-
scale livestock producers use green fodder as a main source of livestock’s feed. Some
 5

supplement it with the crop residues available on their farms. The use of animal feed mixes
(oilseed cakes, wheat bran etc.) is still very low. There exist significant regional productivity
differences as well as productivity differences between various livestock breeds .Several
factors influence the low livestock productivity statuesque in Ethiopia. Livestock feed and
water shortages, diseases combined with weak or not available veterinary services, poor
livestock feeding and management at farm level due to lack of trainings and financial
resources to obtain improved livestock feed, poor market information and lack of marketing
outlets, predators and parasites, low level of specialization in the livestock sector are all
directly or indirectly hamper the productivity of livestock.

2.4. Beef Cattle Production Systems in Ethiopia

Based on integration of livestock with crop production, level of input and intensity of
production, agro-ecology and market orientation, livestock production systems in Ethiopia is
categorized as pastoral, agro-pastoral, mixed crop-livestock farming, urban and peri-urban
farming and specialized intensive farming systems (Mohammed et al., 2004; Yitay, 2007).
However, the livestock production systems are predominantly categorized as agro-pastoral
system in the lowlands, and the mixed crop–livestock system in the highlands. Traditionally,
fattening of animals in both systems concentrates on male animals and on females which are
either infertile or have finished their reproductive cycle. In the lowland agro-pastoral system,
grazing is the most common source of feed, with limited use of crop residues, whereas in the
highland system, crop residues are the most important source of animal feed. During the wet
season, when crop residues are scarce in the highlands, male animals are taken to the lowland
areas for grazing (Elias et al., 2007). The different types of cattle fattening system recognized
in Ethiopia are outlined as follows.

2.4.1. Traditional fattening system

Cattle are kept mainly for draft power, milk and manure production and are usually only sold
when they are too old for these purposes, or drought or cash shortages force people to sell.
Oxen are usually sold after the plowing season while they are in poor body condition and
returns to farmers are often inadequate. Cattle in the lowlands are rarely fattened and are often
sold in poor body condition and at low prices. In the lowland, where pastoralists do not use
 6

cattle for draft and sometimes fattened on natural pasture in good seasons, however much
body weight is lost during long distance of trekking to Addis Ababa and the animals may
reach market in little better condition than culled highland stock, although there better way of
transportation like by truck is becoming common in recent years in connection with the start
of feedlot fattening in different parts of the country. In average or poor seasons, lowland cattle
are rarely fattened and often have to be sold in poor condition at low prices. These traditional
systems are very inefficient because they do not use the proven opportunity to add weight and
condition to cull animals before slaughter (MoA, 2004).

There are several improved traditional systems that are in use in the country. For example,
systems of cattle fattening exist in Bure area of the Amhara region where conditioned animals
are fattened by feeding oilseed such as cotton seed cakes in addition to wheat straw mixed
with local brewery residue (atela) (Shitahun, 2009). In Wolayita area, cattle feeders have
developed appreciable feeding strategies. In this area, feed resources such as enset and sweet
potato tubers are chopped and offered to fattening animals. Supplementation of semi-cooked
corn and haricot bean screenings to fattening animals is also widely practiced. These systems
of feeding significantly increased total dry matter intake of animals and improved nutrient
availability (Hadiet al., 2002).

2.4.2. By-product-based fattening system

This type of fattening system is undertaken based on agro-industrial by-products such as

molasses, cereal milling by-product and oilseed meals as a main sources of concentrate feed
ingredients (MOA, 2004). The Ministry of Agriculture began to help farmers in different area
such as DebreZeit to fatten purchased cull oxen using molasses and milling by products. This
has produced profitable results for the individuals involved and the number of animals
fattened has increased every year. According to Adugna (2008) and Tsagay and Mengistu
(2013) most of the commercial feedlot established around Matahara, Melkessa, Wonji and
Mojo can be categorized under agro-industrial by product based fattening system. These farms
use wheat bran, oilseed cakes and molasses to fatten cattle, and these feed sources made up the
major portion of the concentrate mix fed to the animals. In other areas that follow this type of
cattle fattening system such as Bale crop by-products such as straw, grain screenings, low
 7

grade grain and weed seeds are used to fatten animals(Adugna, 2008). Wheat and barley
straws are abundant roughage produced on all farms of the Enterprise and comprise a major
proportion of the diet of the animals. By product based fattening system is not recommended
for other parts of Ethiopia, except places where oilseed cake is abundant and cheap (MOA,
2004) and where different crops can be produced potentially and where flour/oil processing
industries are available. In Mojo, both commercial fattening and dairy are undertaken by large
and medium investors as well as small farms. However, fattening is more popular than dairy in
Mojo. There is a wide use of agro-industrial by-products including wheat bran, molasses and
oilseed cakes in the district. Both urban and rural producers use agro-industrial byproducts for
fattening (Berhanuet al., 2009).

Another group which may be classified under this system is the small scale home based
byproduct users in urban and peri urban areas, in which several households are engaged in
small scale fattening activities with about 1-3 head of cattle which are stall fed with crop
residues such as barley, teff and wheat straw mixed with local brewery by products such as
tella and katikala. This system, for example is common in Arsi Negele, and animals are
fattened in a cyclic way, i.e. new animals to be fattened are purchased only after selling the
previous ones (Mulugetaet al., 2005).

2.4.3. The Hararghe fattening system

Farmers buy young oxen from the adjacent low land pastoral areas, use them for traction for a
couple of years and then fatten and sell them before they become old and emaciated. This
system is largely based on cut-and-carry (zero grazing) feeding of individually tethered
animals in which free grazing is rare. Intensive feeding of the available feed to young oxen
used for draught power could best describe this fattening practice. The feed types used for this
purpose are entirely obtained from crop production especially from maize and sorghum. Pagot
(1992) described this practice of fattening by saying that in Ethiopia the farmers fatten young
bullocks at the edge of the fields with lower leaves taken from the stems of sorghum. Among
the most common feed types used for fattening are thinning, leaf strip and part of maize and
sorghum plants removed at different stage of crop cultivation for various reasons such as high
plant population, crop disease and drying. Farmers extend animal’s daytime feeding up to
 8

night time and supplement the animal with common salt or locally available mineral licks
twice a week. The night time feed offering is used to supplement the amount of day time dry
matter consumption and to compensate under supply of feed during daytime as in the case
when the farmer is away from his house. During short rainy season, they allow their oxen to
graze at the edge of farm plots or roadsides for about three hours every morning before
sunrise. In the cases where the farmer has more than one ox, he transfers the second one to his
relative or person in the same village to feed for him after using for traction (Abbey, 2004).

2.4.4. Commercial feedlot fattening

The feedlot/fattening operations include small scale private feedlots and those that operate
larger facilities aimed at animal exporting. The cattle from this fattening system targets
different markets. As part of Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary (SPS) requirements and according to
the rules and regulations of animal quarantine, fattening is operated after providing the cattle
with necessary vaccines and medication (Getachewet al., 2008; AGP – LMD, 2011,Tsegay
and Mengistu, 2013).This fattening system is becoming increasingly important in areas
surrounding major cities and towns in the country. Most of the feedlot operators are available
at central parts of the country including Adama, Dhera, Mojo, Adami TulluMethara, and some
parts of country like Gonder, Bahir Dar and Bale.

The feedlot operators buy cattle from places such as Borana, Bale, Arsi, Hararghe highland,
and Ogaden markets (Getachew et al., 2008; Tsegay and Mengistu, 2013). They use Borena
markets as the main source market because of accessible transportation, relative lower cattle
prices and their preference for cattle sourced from these areas due to fast growth of the breed,
large body size, efficiency in feed conversion and adaptation to harsh environments.
According to the report by Getachew et al. (2008) Borena breed cattle grown in Borena areas
are generally preferred for fattening and have superior quality than those coming from other
areas such as Bale lowlands. Also Arsi and Bale breeds are the second preferable and
Hararghe Highland and Ogden cattle breeds had least acceptance for commercial fattening
because of in availability (Tsegay and Mengistu, 2013). They use cattle of different age groups
and breed types according to the demands and the type of their customers. Older animals
(more than four years old) and some times of highland origin are fattened for domestic market
 9

(slaughter houses) while young bulls (three to four years old) and usually of lowland origin are
kept for export market.

Almost all commercial feedlots depend on purchased concentrates and roughage feeds for
their operation as they do not have land for feed productionThey can purchase different agro-
industrial byproducts such as wheat bran, oilseed cakes and molasses, which form a major
portion of the concentrate mix fed to the animals from central parts around Mojo, Adama,
Wong and Melkassa and Purchased native grass hay from Sululta, north of Addis Ababa, and
teff and wheat straws make up the roughage component of the diet (Adugna ,2008).

At times of high demand, some exporters buy young bulls that have finished their quarantine
requirements from feedlot operators at Adama or Dera and exported to Egypt market via port
of Djibut (Getachew et al., 2008).Ethiopia has export liveanimals toSudan, Somali, Egypt,
Djibouti and Saudi Arabia, Yemen and the United Arab Emirates and also in South
Africa(AGP- LMD, 2009).

2.5. Feed Source and Feeding System of Cattle Fattening

Feed is one of the most important and critical input for cattle fattening. Feeding systems
include communal or private natural grazing and browsing, cut and carry feeding, hay and
crop residues. At present, livestock are fed almost entirely on natural pasture and crop-
residues. Use of improved forages and agro-industrial by products is minimal and most of the
agro-industrial byproducts are concentrated in urban and peri-urban areas (Alemayehu, 2005).

The available feed resources are essentially of low digestibility such as tropical pastures (both
green and mature), crop residue (Straw and Stover). The availability of crop residue is closely
related to the farming system, the type of crop produced and the intensity of cultivation.
Therefore, in integrated crop/livestock systems the potential of using crop residue as feed for
livestock are greatest (Alemayehu, 2005). In Harari region, sorghum and maize are the major
crops, providing stable food to people and various forms of feed and by products to livestock
(Kurtu, 2003).

The fibrous agricultural residues contributes a major parts of livestock feed especially in the
populated areas where land is prioritized for crop cultivation. Adugnaet al. (2012) noted that
 10

crop residues contribute to about 50% the total feed supply in Ethiopia. Under smallholder
livestock production system, animals are dependent on a variety of feed resources which vary
both in quantity and quality for optimum livestock productivity.

In Ethiopia highlands, the natural pasture, crop residues, and stubble grazing are the major
sources of feed (Alemayehu, 2004), where as in Fogera the private and communal grazing
land, crop residues of Teff, Rice, Finger Millet, Barley, Chickpea, Maize Stalk, Hay, Agro-
industrial by products and Aftermath are the main available feed resources for livestock
production (Belete, 2006).

2.6. Live Weight Gain

For finishing cattle, approximately two-thirds of feed consumed is used for body maintenance
(i.e. to maintain physiological functions). As maintenance is largely a function of weight, a
heavier animal requires more feed to maintain itself, and furthermore, for a fixed rate of live
weight gain, the feed energy required is higher for heavier animals ( McGee, 2014). Live
weight is the measurement used mostly to evaluate body development in animals. It is used
both in practice and in experimental work in determining the growth rates of animals and in
predicting their likely body compositions and, therefore, the rates at which various tissues
have grown. It is highly desirable to know the weight gain of animals at various stages during
the fattening processes so that rations can be evaluated and rate of gain can be calculated. If a
body weight gain of higher than 1 kg/day is desired, roughages should not make up more than
15-20% of the ration. In order to obtain higher level of body weight gain, high energy feeds
such as maize should be fed in place of roughages. As the daily rate of gain increases, the net
energy of gain increases while the net energy of maintenance remains the same (Adugna,
2008). A recent study conducted by Yohannes (2011) revealed that Hararghe highland bulls
offered natural grass hay as a basal diet and supplemented with concentrate mixture of noug
seed cake, wheat bran and Prospisjuliflora pod flour gained on average 0.77g during the 120
days of the experiment.
 11

2.7. Body Condition Scoring

Body condition scores (BCS) are a way of subjectively assessing the amount of soft tissue,
especially fat cover, in relation to the animal’s skeletal size. Because the relationship between
body condition and frame size is an indicator of the animal’s nutritional history, BCS can be
used to monitor the success of a feeding program in situations where owners cannot use more
direct measures of nutritional status such as feed analysis, nutritional fecal profiling, or
monitoring blood chemistry (Soares and Dryden, 2011).

This may be assessed visually and expressed as a condition score (Nicholson and Butterworth,
1986).The score of animal depends on the visibility of the anatomical parts, and the flesh and
fat cover at these points. According to Nicholson and Butterworth (1986), for Bosindcus
(zebu) cattle, nine scales are used in which three main conditions- fat (F), medium (M) and
lean (L) are subdivided into three categories. The scores are abbreviated as F+, F, F- ; M+, M,
M-; L+, L, L-. Each scoring is given a number from 1 (L-) to 9 (F+). For body condition
scoring, the following anatomical parts are important in determining the score: tail head,
brisket and hump; transverse process of the lumbar vertebrae hips and ribs; the shape of the
muscle mass between the hooks and pins; the worse the condition, the more concave the
muscle becomes.

2.8. Nutrient Requirement of Beef Cattle

Nutrient requirement of beef cattle have become more critical with the shift in beef production
practices. Nutrient classes are defined by their chemical structure or by their function in
metabolism (Hamilton, 2010). Beef cattle require nutrients to support body maintenance;
reproduction, lactation and growth. The nutritional needs of beef cattle vary by age, classes,
stage of production, performance level and weight. Physiological and environmental stressors
such as animal health and weather can also impact nutritional requirements. As feed represent
by far the greatest cost item in beef production, it is important that there should be a basic
understanding of the nutritive requirement of beef cattle. Efficient beef production cannot be
achieved unless nutrient requirement are met, and these are influenced by a number of factors;
body weight gain and frame size are especially important in growing and finishing cattle
(Ensmingeret al., 1990).
 12

Feed requirements are based on the need for specific amount of various classes of nutrients.
Generally, cattle require nutrients for maintenance, growth, production and reproduction.
Nutrients required for these functions are expressed in terms of energy, protein, minerals
(particularly calcium and phosphorous) and vitamins. Energy, protein, and digestibility of
feeds are central in determining nutritional adequacy and feeding levels for different classes of
stock (Streeter, 2006).

Conditions and age both affect feed capacity and there is much variation in animals of the
same condition and age. Cattle on finishing rations consume daily an amount of feed equal to
2.25-3% of their live weight with higher intake levels occurring in the early part of finishing
period. Older cattle such as cow in good conditions and fleshy individuals such as mature bulls
consume less even low as 1.5% of their live weight. Thin, growing yearling or older steers
may consume up to 4% of their weight daily for short periods. In general, the lower the fiber
content or bulk of feed the lower the voluntary intake (Neuman and Lusbay, 1986).

According to NRC (2001), the nutrient requirement for growing (250 kg) cattle is 4.84 Mcal
net energy and 239 gram crude protein per day, for maintenance and 3.21 Mcal energy and
300 gram crude protein per day for expected body weight gain of 1kg/d. Live weight and rate
of growth are the main factors that influence the nutrient requirements for growth. The higher
the rate of gain that is expected the higher level of any particular nutrient that is required. In
general, a growing ration is supposed to allow weight gains without actually fattening (Hill,
1988).

Cereal grains and agro- industrial by-products are the main supplements used to provide
energy to cattle under the feedlot system. Feeding rations with high-energy content improves
beef cattle performance and reduces the time spent in the feedlot (Ramos et al., 1998; Cabrera
et al., 2000; Weisberg et al., 2007). On the other hand, protein sources such as oil seed cakes
provide protein for muscle growth or lean meat production. Cole and Hutcheson (1990)
reported that increasing the crude protein (CP) concentration in the diets from 11 to 14% and
energy from 10 to 12.5 ME MJ/kg DM, result in increased average daily gains of animals in
the feedlot. Rutherglen (1995) recommended energy and protein contents of ME 10.93 to
11.21 MJ/kg DM and 12.31% to 15.91% CP, respectively, in cattle fattening.
 13

2.9. Housing System for Feedlot

Proper housing and equipment are important in successful fattening cattle. Cattle should be
protected from extreme hot or cold conditions. Beef cattle used in research or teaching may be
housed in intensive management systems, either indoors or in open lots, with or without
shelter. Facilities for beef cattle should provide cattle with opportunities for behavioral
thermoregulation (e.g., access to a windbreak, sunshade, mound, or roofed shelter. Proper
airflow and ventilation are essential in intensive facilities. In feedlots, cable or wire fencing
has minimal effect on natural airflow in summer. However, high airflow rates are undesirable
during periods of low temperature, and tree shelter belts and other types of wind break can
decrease the rate of airflow past the cattle.

In many modern beef units, animals are kept indoors all the year round. Therefore, it is
important to ensure that whatever housing system is provided, behavioral needs (e.g. resting,
feeding and drinking) are properly met. In loose housing systems, the freedom of movement of
the animal’s means that both individual and group behaviors must be satisfied (CIGAR, 2004).

2.10. Common Disease of Cattle Fattening

Animal diseases are still a major constraint on economic growth, reduction of poverty and
food security. Foot and mouth disease is the most significant diseases which is highly
contagious, multi-species animal disease with a devastating impact on national economics and
trade (Depa, 2012).The disease is caused by foot and mouth disease virus (FMDV), exhibits
complex epidemiology, existing in seven immunologically distinct serotypes (O, A, C, Asia1,
SAT1, SAT2 and SAT3) and innumerous divergent strains within the serotypes which can
manifest continuous genomic and antigenic evolutions. The causative agent of FMD has a
wide host range in ungulate animals, a multiplicity of modes of transmission and spread and
also it has the capacity to persist in the infected animals, animal products and in the small
environment. It exhibits high morbidity in herds and flocks and can also cause high morbidity
in young livestock. Foot and mouth disease imposes very serious impediments to international
trade in live animals and animal products (Garland, 2008; OIE, 2012).
 14

Foot rot is another common disease of cattle that can cause severe lameness and decreased
weight gain. Other common names for the disease are sore foot and foul foot. Technically the
disease is called inter digital necrobacillosis, meaning a bacterial disease creating dead tissue
between the toes inter digital area of the foot (John et al., 2009). The other is mortality and
morbidity associated with digestive disturbances in feedlot cattle, which are second only to
those from respiratory diseases. Among the digestive disorders of feedlot cattle, acidosis is
one of the most common and has been well known ever since grain feeding became a
widespread practice (Nagaraja and Lechtenberg, 2007). Acidosis in a feedlot results when
cattle consume fermentable carbohydrates in amounts sufficient to cause a non-physiologic
accumulation of organic acids in the rumen with a concurrent reduction in pH (Nagaraja and
Titgemeye, 2007). Lumpy skin disease (LSD) is a pox disease of cattle and is characterized by
fever, nodules on the skin, lesions in the mouth, pharynx and respiratory tract, emaciation,
enlarged lymph nodes, Oedema of the skin, and sometimes death (Carn&Kitching, 1995;
Davis et al., 1971; OIE, 2010).The disease is one of the most important viral diseases of cattle,
causing loss of condition in infected animals and permanent damage to hides. The most
effective route of transmission is mechanical via biting flies. The incidence of LSD is high
during wet seasons when populations of the flies are abundant. The incidence decreases during
the dry season (Gariet al., 2012).

2.11. Marketing Systems for Fattening Cattle in Ethiopia

In Ethiopia, the marketing process generally follows at three-step system with primary,
intermediate (secondary) and terminal (final) pass from producers to small traders and onto
large traders and/or butchers and finally to final consumers. However, most producers sale
their stock and livestock products at local markets directly to consumers or small traders at
relatively low prices. Without exception markets are open places in villages and towns.
Distance from the market and poor trekking conditions for producers are forcing them to sell
their stock at lower prices (Kefyalew, 2011). Marketing of livestock is not determined on the
basis of their weight and quality instead it is done by visual observation (estimation) and by
negotiation between buyers and sellers (Kadigiet al., 2013). Due to these unfavorable
marketing systems and the discouraging price on the producers’ side, they are not encouraged
to improve the quality and the off-take of their animals (Alemayehu, 2003). However, this
 15

author suggested that the possibility also exists forth country to regain its place in the export
trade, particularly in Gulf and Middle East countries where its stock, especially sheep and
cattle, have preference and established demand if marketing infrastructure is to be improved.
Perhaps the most insightful view of market dynamics is the interaction of demand and supply-
side. Attaining marketing equilibrium where both trader and livestock keepers enjoy equitable
returns from the beef cattle trade becomes critical question.

2.12. Challenges of Beef Cattle Fattening

The major challenges identified for beef cattle production include lack of well-defined
breeding program and production systems, lack of an integral connection between the
stakeholders involved in the production chain, inadequate market promotion and study tours to
potential importing countries, and some markets are also dominated by influential
personalities and illegal exporters (Daniel, 2008). According to the author, limited access to
market-related information (e.g. on prices, value chains, competitors, consumer preferences)
and lack of capital to invest in assets, equipment and inputs that would improve beef quality
have been found as another challenges. The practice is constrained by high feed cost, poor
quality and low availability of feed resources, inadequate veterinary service, as well
as,underdeveloped feed industry, absence of good management and proper policy support for
livestock development (Getachew ,et al, 2008 and Beleteet al., 2010).
 16

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1. Description of the Study Area

The study was conducted in selected districts of East Shoa Zone of Oromia Regional state,
Ethiopia. The selected districts in East Shoa zone are Adama, Lome and Adami
Adami-Tulu- JIdo-
Kombolcha were selected for the study. Adama district is located at altitude of 1400 – 2700 m
a. s. l and it receives uni- modal rainfall with annual amount of 600 – 1200mm
00mm and the average
temperature varies 17oC - 34oC. The number of livestock population in Adama was estimated
to be 1, 216, 39 cattle, 51,432 goats, 42,425 sheep, 36,180 equines, 87, 341 poultry and 474
camels (ESZARDO, 2015). Adami-Tulu-
Adami JIdo Kombolcha District
istrict is located at the altitude of
1650m a. s. l. It receives an annual rainfall amount of 500-760
500 760 mm and its average ambient
temperature varies from 12.7oC– 27oC East (ESZARDO, 2015). Lome district is located at the
altitude of 1604-2364
2364 m.a.s.l. It receives rain fall with annual amount of 1065mm and the
average temperature varies 18-28.7oC
18 (ESZARDO, 2015).

Figure . Map of the study areaa

 17

3.2. Sampling Techniques

Multi stage sampling procedure was employed for the survey study. Three districts were
selected based on their potentiality for the commercial cattle fattening practices. Totally forty
five feedlots were purposively selected based on their potential, size, accessibility and
willingness of the owners to cooperate for the study. Among the representative feedlots
selected from each district were twenty five from Adama, seventeen from Lome and three
from Adami-Tulu-Jido Kombolcha. The commercial farms were designated as small, medium
and large farm sizes based on the number of fattening animals hold by the farms and by
benchmarking earlier classification criteria employed by researchers (Tomy, 2003; Adugna,
2008; Sinteyehu; 2010; Tsagay and Mengistu ,2013). In the present study, small
scaleproduction represents those farms that hold less than 200 animals at a time. The medium
scale productionholds 201 – 500 and large scale production greater than 500 head of animals.
The selected commercial feedlots were used for the interview and for obtaining other
information. Among the feedlots used for the interview nine feedlots from each three farms
were purposely selected for monitoring of feedlots performances under the feeding
management followed by the farm throughout the whole fattening period. Based on their
initial body weight and age, eight fattening animals were selected from each of the feedlots
identified for the monitoring study. During the monitoring animals body condition was scored
and body weight was measured by using heart girth meter. The representative samples of feeds
used for fattening purpose at different stages of the fattening phase from each of the selected
feedlots were taken for the analysis of the chemical composition.

3.3. Data Collection

Survey data were collected from both primary and secondary sources. The primary data was
collected from producers (Commercial feed lots) by using semi-structured questionnaire and
group discussions. Secondary data including both published and unpublished documents
available at various sources was collected and used to consolidate the information generated.
Moreover, personal observation was made on different animal management aspects during
farm visit and monitoring to get an overview of general management activities practiced by
different commercial fattening enterprises.
 18

Monitoring data on weight gain and body condition score of animals were taken from selected
farm by using heart girth meters and visual observation at the initial stage, middle and final
stage of fattening. Feed samples for chemical analyses were collected in bags and stored at
cool places in laboratory until analysis for their chemical compositions.

3.3.1. Survey data collection

Semi-structured questionnaire were used to collect the data variables such as fattening cattle
breed types, sex of animals, type of animals (castrated or intact), age of animals preferred by
fatteners, source of animals, number of animals engaged in fattening operation per cycle, feed
types and sources of feeds used, feeding strategy (frequency of feeding, order of feeding if
different types of feed is offered separately), form of feeds offered (wet, dry, chopped etc.),
group or individual based feeding or selected group feeding, feed mixing method used, etc.,
watering system, fattening duration and cycle, animals selection and purchasing criteria for
fattening animals purpose, health care for the fattening animals, good opportunities and
constraints/problems/major challenges for fattening practices, animals management, marketing
system (buyers, market destination, any agreement/contract entered between producers and
buyers), and transportation of purchasing items. For Economic data such as total cost of
production such as cost of animal purchase, feed, medical care, return, selling, labor wage,
cost of transportation etc. were also collected.

3.3.2. Monitoring and evaluation of the feedlots

3.3.2.1. Animals and managements

A total of nine feed lots was selected purposively and categorized into three scale of
production based number of animals (Tomy 2003; Adugna 2008; Sinteyehu, 2010; Tsagay and
Mengistu, 2013) small, medium and large scale commercial feed lot. From nine feed lot three
from large, three from medium and three from small scale commercial feed lot were selected
based on accessibility and willingness of owners for the study. From each feed lot eight
animals were selected randomly age of the animal and body weight of the animals. The age of
cattle used for the fattening purposes were estimated by dentition (Vattaet al., 2006). Sex,
types of animals like whether they were castrated or intact and breed types of the animals used
by each feedlot were identified the initial body weights of animals were taken by using heart
 19

girth meter and body condition score by visual observation during different stages of fattening
period.

Feeding management: The types of feeds and feeding strategies used to fatten animals were
identified, monitored and evaluated periodically. The amount of feed and type of feed being
offered for animal was measured and recorded. The composite feed samples (mixed
diets/ration) were collected from each batch from the selected farm between phase feeding at
the interval of 30 days and their chemical compositions were determined.

3.3.2.2. Live weight measurements

The live weight of the animals was estimated by using heart girth meter and fitting into the
formula developed by Niioka and Shiratori (2009) for Borena breed. Heart girth was measured
and recorded from the smallest diameter running immediately behind the hump and the
forelegs of an animal standing erect. A total of seventy two (72) animals from nine feed lot,
eight 8 animals from each farm were selected for the purpose of monitoring and evaluation
study. The heart girth measurement and body condition score was taken at monthly interval
until the end of the fattening period (95) days.

The initial body weight of each animal involved in monitoring study was taken after
adaptation period and /five days after starting the concentrate feeding by using heart girt
meter. Then the weights of animals involved in the monitoring study were taken at interval 30,
60 and 90 days of fattening periods. The heart girth was measured after overnight fasting
and/or early in the morning before feeding. The average daily weight gain was calculated as
the difference between final live weight and the initial live weight of the animals divided by
the number of respective feeding days of each feeding period.

3.3.2.3. Body condition score (BCS)

For body condition scoring, the same eight animals selected from each feedlot were used.
Scoring was done on a monthly basis until the end of the fattening period, using the
methodology for the Zebu Cattle condition scores which range from 1–9. The body condition
score are established by subdividing the three main body conditions, viz. Fat [F], medium [M]
and lean [L] according to (Nicholson and Butterworth, 1986). Anatomical parts like the brisket
 20

and hump, transverse process, lumbar vertebrae, hips, ribs, hooks and pins were observed
during the scoring process.

3.3.2.4. Feed sample collection

Feed samples of ration formulated from different ingredients were collected from total of nine
(9) farms. A total of 27 feed sample used at different stages (Initial, Medium and Final) of
fattening were collected from large, medium and small scale production during monitoring
and evaluation study. Then these samples were submitted to Haramaya university animal
nutrition laboratory for chemical analysis.

3.3.2.5. Chemical analysis of feeds

Chemical analysis was done for each feed samples. The samples were dried in an oven at
1050C overnight in a forced draft oven to determine the DM contents of the feed. The dried
samples of feeds were ground to pass through 1mm screen size. Neutral Detergent Fiber
(NDF), Acid Detergent Fiber (ADF) and Acid Detergent Lignin (ADL) were determined
following the procedures of (Van Soest and berson, 1985). The ash and Nitrogen (N) content
was analyzed according to the procedures of (AOAC, 1990). Crude protein (CP) was
calculated as N x 6.25. The DM was calculated as 100 – Ash content.

3.5. Data Analysis

Survey data was analyzed by Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS Version 20.0).Data for
feed chemical analysis was analyzed using General Linear Model (GLM) procedures of SAS (SAS,
2009). Mean comparisons were done by using the Least Significant Difference (LSD). The model
employed was as follows:

1.Yij = μ + Ai +Bj+A*Bij +eij------------------------------------------------------- (Model 1)

Where: yij = Response variables (body weight gain and condition score)

μ = Overall mean;

Ai = ithfeedlot size effect (large, medium and small scale),

Bj = lthage effect
 21

A*Bij = jith interaction effects

eij = residual effect.

Yijkl = μ + Ai +Bj +Ck+Ai*BJ+Ai*Ck+Bj*Ck+Ai*Bj*Ck+eijk------------------- (Model 2)

Where: yij = Response variables (weight gain and condition score at different phase of
feeding)

μ = Overall mean;

Ai = ith feedlot size effect (large, medium and small scale)

Bj= jth age effect

Ck= kth phase effect,

Ai*Cl=feedlot interacts with phase feeding

Ai*BJ= feedlot interacts with age of animals,

Bj*Ck= Age interacts with feed,

Ai*Bj*Ck= feedlot, age and phase feedings

Yijk = μ + Ai +Cj +A*Ck+ eijk-------------------------------------------------------- (Model 3)

Where: yij = Response variables (chemical compositions of feed at different phase of feeding)

μ = Overall mean;

Ai = ith feedlot size effect (large, medium and small scale),

Cj=jth phase effect,

A*Ck=kth interaction effects

2. An index was calculated to provide overall ranking of beef cattle fattening constraints by
developing rank index formula based on the method used by Musa et al. (2006).
(R n * C1 + R n -1 * C 2 … . + R 1 * C n ) a -g
Rank index 

ag
(R n *C1 + R n -1 * C 2 ….+ R 1 * C n )

Where,
Rn = Value of the least rank of constraint a (if the least rank is 7th, then Rn = 7, Rn-1 = 6, R1 =
1)
 22

Cn = Counted value of the least ranked level (in the above example, the counts of the 7th
rank=Cn, and C1= the count of the 1st rank)

(Rn *C1 +Rn-1 *C2 ….+R1 *Cn)a-g = *W= weighted summation of each constraints (a, b,

c...,g)
Similar formulas also used to calculate ranking index for major resources, criteria of selecting
beef cattle for fattening and preference of veterinary service.
 23

4. RESULTS

4.1. Source, Experience and major selection Criteria for purchasing of beef
cattle

The commercial feedlot operators purchased animals for fattening purpose from different open
local market in Borena zone According to the response of all commercial feed lot operators,
young bull of Borena breed within the age of 3-6 year were used for fattening operation in the
study area. The majority of the feedlot operators have experience of about 1 to 10 years in the
business (Table 1) and a significant number also have experience of over 10 years.

Table . Experience of feedlot operators in cattle fattening activities

Experience of Feed lot Operator Frequency (N=45) % (N=45)

Less than one year 2 4.4

One up to five year 12 26.7
Six up to ten year 17 37.8
Eleven up to fifteen year 5 11.1
Above fifteen year 9 20
Total N 45 100
N=Respondent Number

The majority of beef cattle fattening operators selected the animals purchased for fattening by
considering the breed type, physical appearance and/or frame size, age, health and initial price
as the top priority (Table 2). Moreover, body condition, coat color, horn size and skin
conditions (stretchable upon pulling and smoothness) were also considered and used as the
selection criteria to purchase beef animals.
 24

Table .Selection criteria of fattening cattle as reported by feedlot operators in the study area

Variable Districts Weighted frequency Index Rank

Adama=25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Age 3 3 9 4 2 3 1 - - 0.13 3
Breed 24 1 - - - - - - - 0.18 1
Body condition - 2 3 8 8 1 2 1 - 0.1 6
Frame size 13 8 1 1 2 - - - - 0.16 2
Price - 4 6 8 2 2 - - - 0.13 5
Health 1 2 9 9 4 2 - - - 0.08 4
Color - - 4 4 5 6 5 1 - 0.05 7
Adaptation - - 1 2 5 4 - 3 - 0.06 9
Horn size (shape) - - - 2 8 2 4 10 0.11 8
Lome N=17
Age 2 2 3 4 2 3 1 1 - 0.15 2
Breed 12 5 - - - - - - - 0.2 1
Body condition - 1 - 4 3 - 6 - 3 0.1 5
Frame size - 4 5 3 1 1 - 4 - 0.14 3
Price 3 - 5 - - - - - - 0.08 6
Health - 5 3 2 3 1 2 - - 0.13 4
Color - - - 3 4 5 - - - 0.08 7
Adaptation - - 1 1 2 5 2 - - 0.07 8
Horn size (shape) - - - - 2 2 5 - - 0.05 9
Adami-Tulu
N=3
Age - - - - 1 2 - - - 0.09 6
Breed 2 - - - - - - - - 0.13 3
Body condition - - 3 - - - - - - 0.15 2
Frame Size 2 1 - - - - - - - 0.19 1
Price - - 1 - 2 - - - - 0.12 4
Health - - - - 2 1 - - - 0.1 5
Color - - - 1 - - 1 - - 0.06 9
Horn size (shape) - - 1 - - - 1 1 - 0.09 7
Adaptation - - 1 1 - - 1 0.07 8
N=Number of Respondent
Unlike in Adama and Lome districts, the beef cattle fattening operators in Adami Tulu district
responded to give their attention to the physical appearance and /or frame size, body condition,
breed, price and health of the animals as the top priority for purchasing the animals to
undertake the fattening work (Table 2).
 25

4.2. Season and length of fattening period

The majority of the feedlot operators considered January to March and October to December
to be the most suitable seasons to start fattening operation (Table 3).

Table . Suitable season to fatten commercial beef cattle

Season Frequency (N=45) % (N=45)

July –September 4.4

October –December 16 35.6
January –March 22 48.9
April-June 5 11.1
Total N 45 100
N= Number of Respondent.
The length of fattening periods across the farm scale were significantly (p<0.05), lower in
medium followed by small scale production whereas the frequency of cattle fattening per year
and number of animal fatten per cycle was significantly (p<0.001) higher for large, followed
by medium and small scale commercial cattle fattening, respectively.). These suggest that
large scale feedlot operators have the largest size of the finished beef cattle exported to Middle
East market.

Table .Length of fattening period, season, and frequency of fattening per year, number of
animals fattened per cycle between scales of production

Variables Mean ±SD P-value

Large Medium Small
Fattening duration 4±0.38 3.69±0.48 4.18±0.39 P<0.011**
(months)
Number of cattle 1104.6±1042 437.38±65.7 234.82±117.58 P<0.001***
fatten per cycle
Frequency of 3.2±0.77 2.46 ±0.66 2.18±0.64 P<0.001***
fattening per year
***= significant at (P<0.001 **= significant at (P<0.05); NS= not significant
 26

4.3. Major Feed Resources used by Commercial Feedlot

Large scale commercial cattle fatteners preferred noug seed cake, cotton seed cake and faba
bean bran as protein sources and wheat bran and maize as energy sources (Table 5).The
medium scale operators prefer to use cotton seed cake and lentil bran as protein feed sources
while wheat bran, ground sorghum and ground maize energy sources. Whereas small scale
commercial cattle fattener preferred cotton seed cake and faba bean bran as protein feed and
ground maize and wheat bran were utilized as energy sources.

Table .Major Feed resource used for cattle fattening by the respondents in scale of produce

Variable Farm size Weighted frequency Index Rank

Small scale 1 2 3 4 5
N=18
Cotton seed cake 7 1 7 - - 0.32 1
Wheat bran - 8 5 5 - 0.28 2
Lentil bran - - 6 8 3 0.18 3
Maize flour 1 2 4 0 2 0.13 4
Faba bean bran - - - 9 2 0.09 5
Medium
scale N=12
Wheat bran 6 3 3 - - 0.35 1
Cotton seed cake 6 2 1 3 - 0.32 2
Sorghum flour - - 3 3 1 0.11 4
Maize flour - 1 4 - 1 0.12 3
Lentil bran - - 4 2 - 0.1 5
Large scale
N=15
Noug cake 4 2 3 3 2 0.26 1
Wheat bran - 8 7 - - 0.25 2
Cotton seed cake - - 2 5 6 0.24 3
Maize flour 1 5 4 3 2 0.12 5
Faba bean bran - - 3 5 6 0.13 4

N=number of respondents

4.3.1. Feeding System of beef cattle fattening

All the commercial feedlot operators’ uses confined feeding system. Almost all feedlot
operators offered roughage first on feeding trough and followed by concentrate feeding twice
per day. The amount of feed offered to beef cattle per day per animal was presented in (Table
 27

6). The amount of the concentrate mix and roughage feeds offered per animals per day was
significantly higher (p<0.001) in large scale farms followed by medium small scale farms.

Table .Amount of feed offer to fattening beef cattle per day by districts and scales of
production

Variables Mean ±SD P-value

Large Medium Small
Concentrate(kg) 8.47±2.07(15) 7.6±1.45(13) 6.18±1.42 (17) P<0.001

Roughage(kg) 2.17±0.70(15) 2.08±0.53(13) 1.76±0.56(17) P.>0.154

N=Number of respondents; SD =Standard deviation; ***= significant at (P<0.001); **=

significant at (P<0.05); NS= not significant

The type of supplementary feeds offered to beef cattle at different stage (phase) of fattening is
presented in Table 7.The concentrate feeding strategy varies across the fattening stages
individual commercial feedlot operators and farm sizes. The majority of feed lot operators fed
protein feed to animals at initialfinishing stage for about one weeks following feed lots
adaptation period. The majority of the large scale farms provide energy feeds at middle stage
of fattening operation whereas few of them feed the combination of protein and energy feeds
at the middle stages of fattening. When compared with the others the small scale cattle
fattening operators feed the combination of protein and energy feed during the finishing stage
of the fattening operation

Table .Concentrate feeding strategy during cattle fattening phases

Variables Farm Size

Small scale (%) Medium scale (%) Large scale (%)
At initial stage: protein concentrate 7(41%) 6(46.15) 6(40)
At middle stage :energy concentrate 5(29.41) 4(30.77) 5(33.33)
At middle stage :energy and protein 3(17.65) 2(15.38) 3(20)
Concentrate
At finishing stage: protein and energy 2(11.76) 1(7.69) 1(6.67)
Concentrate
Total N 17(100%) 13(100%) 15(100%)
N=number of respondents
 28

4.4. Housing system

The experience of housing system of commercial feed lots in the study area was presented in
Table 8. Open overhead shelter with enclosures was observed to be the predominant type of
housing system across all the commercial cattle fattening system in study area. While few of
the medium and small scale fattening system used no shed, but open enclosure housing
system.

Table .Housing System of fattening animals in the study area

Type of housing system Farm size

Small scale (%) Medium scale (%) Large scale (%)
N-17 N=13 N=15
Open overhead shelter with 13 76.5 10 76.9 15 100
and enclosure
Open without overhead 4 23.5 3 23.1 - -
shelter but enclosure
Total 17 100 13 100 15 100

4.5. Source of water

The source of water used by feedlot operators in study area was presented in Table 9. The
majority (88.9%) of feedlot operators uses pipe water and animals drink ad libtum but few of
them were using river and ground water sources for fattening animal.

Table .Source of water in the study area

Source of Scale of production

water Small (%) Medium scale (%) Large scale (%)
scale N=13 N=15
Pipe N=17
15 88.24 10 76.92 13 86.67
River 2 11.76 3 23.08 -
Ground water 2 13.33
Total 17 100 13 100 15 100
N=number of respondent
 29

4.6. Common Health Problems and Health Service Availability to Feedlot

Fattening Operation

The present study indicates that the major diseases constraining feedlot operation in the order
of their importance include lumpy skin disease, Foot and Mouth disease, bovine respiratory
disease, and digestive system disorder (Table 10). The lumpy skin disease was more frequent
in small scale feedlots than the others. Comparatively, the metabolic disorder was more a
problem in medium scale farms.

Table .Major diseases observed in commercial feedlot in the study area

Scale of production
Variables Small scale (%) Medium scale (%) Large scale (%)
Lumpy skin diseases 14(82.4) 7(53.9) 5(33.3)
Foot Mouth Disease 2(11.7) 3(23.1) 2(13.3)
Bovine Respiratory Disease 0 1(7.7) 0
Digestive System Disorder 0 2(15.4) 1(6.7)
Multiple response 1(5.9) 0 7(46.7)
Total N 17(100) 13(100) 7(100)
Multiple response= Lumpy Skin Disease Foot Mouth Disease, Bovine System Respiratory
Disease, Digestive System.

Feedlot operators in the study area use both private and government animal health services.
The majority of the respondents prefer to use private veterinary practitioner than the
government veterinary services rendered at the study areas (Table 11).
 30

Table .Health services available to commercial feedlot in the study area

Variable Farm size Weighted frequency Index Rank

Small scale N=18 1 2 3 4
Government clinic 9 2 2 1 0.38 2
private clinic - - - 1 0.01 4
Private pharmacy 1 5 - - 0.15 3
Private Vet practitioner 7 9 1 - 0.46 1
Medium scale N=12
Government clinic 4 3 2 1 0.35 2
private clinic 0 1 - - 0.04 4
Private pharmacy 2 2 - - 0.16 3
Private Vet practitioner 6 4 1 - 0.45 1
Large scale N=15 -
Government clinic 5 3 2 - 0.31 2
private clinic - - 1 - 0.02 4
Private pharmacy 3 3 - - 0.19 3
Private Vet practitioner 7 8 - - 0.48 1
N=number of respondents

4.8. Purchase and Sell of Fatten Cattle

The fattening operators purchased animals mostly from open markets where the pastoralists
and agro-pastoralists sold their cattle. Almost all feedlot operators purchased cattle for
fattening operation from the towns of Borena Zone which includes Taltale, Dubulk, Elewi and
Haro Bake. The price of cattle differed according to sex, body conformation and age of
animals. As indicated in Table 14 mature animals are purchased with high price than young
animals. The selling prices also differ with age and condition of the animals.

Table .Price of purchasing and selling animal

Variable Mean SD
Purchase price per animal 7088.8 ±1415.37
No of animal purchased per market 114.24 ±65.6
Selling price per animal 13966.67 ±1772.26
 31

The majority of the respondents perceive that the customers who buy finished live animals
decreased during the past years (Table 13). Some say the availability of customer’s depends
on situations and few perceive customer increased. According to the respondents the main
reasonsfor the decrease in the number of customers are disease outbreak, Middle East conflict
and illegal export of animal. The majority of the respondent purchased live animals for
fattening purpose by negotiation and visual observations. Whereas, the majority of
respondents sell finished animals based on live weight and few of them sell by visual
estimation.

Table .Trends of customers’ availability and buying and selling methods of live animals

Variables N frequency Percent

Methods of purchasing animals
On live weight base with using measurement 0 0
By visual estimation 45 100
Method of selling animals
By visual estimation 4 11.1
On live weight base with using measurement 41 88.9
Reasons for decreased
Disease 10 22.2
Middle east conflict 20 44.5
Illegal export 15 33.3
Status of customer availability
Increasing 2 4.4
Decreasing 31 68
It depends 12 26
Constant 0 0
N=number of respondent

4.9. Major Constraints of Beef Cattle Fattening

The major constraints of commercial cattle fattening in the study area was ranked and
presented in Table 14. Feed scarcity, marketing problem, water scarcity, animal health
problems, and lack of appropriate stock for fattening were identified as the major problems
that are hindering the performances of the fattening operations as a whole. According to the
respondent’s lack of feed, marketing problems, water scarcity and animal health problems
were the primary constraints to run the fattening operations in all the scale of production.
 32

Table .Major constraints of beef cattle fattening ranked in the order of their importance

Variable Scale of production Weighted frequency Index Rank

Small scale N=18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Feed 5 4 3 - - - - 0.28 1
Market 6 3 1 - - - - 0.17 2
Animal health 0 5 0 6 - - - 0.14 4
Lack of animal supply 0 0 0 4 3 - - 0.16 3
Management knowhow 0 0 0 3 - 1 2 0.08 6
Water 1 1 0 3 - - - 0.11 5
Absence of promotional activities - - - - 4 - 0.06 7
Medium N=12
Feed 5 4 3 - - - - 0.22 1
Market 6 3 1 - - - - 0.18 3
Animal health - 5 - 6 - - - 0.20 2
Lack of animal supply - - - 4 3 - - 0.13 4
Management knowhow - - - 3 - 1 2 0.11 5
Water 1 1 - 3 - - 0.09 6
Absence of promotional activities - - - - - 4 - 0.07 7
Large scale N=15
Feed 10 3 2 - - - - 0.42 1
Market 6 - - - - - - 0.17 2
Animal health - 3 2 - - - - 0.14 3
Lack of animal supply - - 3 1 - - - 0.11 4
Management knowhow - - - - 2 - - 0.06 6
Water - - 3 - - - - 0.08 5
Absence of promotional activities - - - - 1 - - 0.03 7
N=number of respondent

4.10. Chemical Composition of Feeds Used by Beef Fattening Farm

The chemical composition of mixed feeds available and used by different cattle fattening
farms is presented in Table 16.The fattening feeds samples composition in terms of (DM, OM,
Ash and CP) from all the cattle fattening operators was statistically non-significant (p <0.05).
However, NDF and ADF was significantly (p< 0.001) higher in feed samples from large scale
farms. The amount of ADL was significantly (P< 0.001) higher in feed samples from small
scale cattle fattening operations. The chemical composition for the composite feed samples of
 33

the different fattening phases across the farms studied did not differ in DM, OM Ash, CP,
ADF and ADLcontent, but the amount of NDF was observed to be significantly higher at
final phase feeding.
 34

Table .Least square means of chemical composition of feeds used at different phases under different scale of beef cattle fattening

Variables
Factors Levels DM ASH OM CP NDF ADF ADL
FS Large 92.16±0.85 10.49±0.98 81.76±1.30 19.09±0.97 42.25b±1.12 18.46a±0.87 5.08b±0.28
Medium 90.38±0.85 10.47±0.98 80.14±1.30 17.92±0.97 40.21b±1.12 14.00b±0.87 4.48b±0.28
Small 92.07±0.85 9.11±0.98 82.81±1.30 16.33±0.97 47.04a±1.12 16.45ab±0.87 6.22a±0.28
P-value p>0.2617 P>0.5201 p>0.3500 P>0.1426 P>0.0003 P>0.0003 P>0.0002
SL NS NS NS NS *** *** ***
PH P1 90.06±0.85 10.29±0.98 80.16±1.30 19.06±0.97 41.10a±1.12 16.40±0.87 5.22±0.28
P2 92.42±0.85 9.44±0.98 82.45±1.30 17.32±0.97 42.45ab±1.12 16.58±0.87 5.26±0.28
P3 92.14±0.85 10.34±0.98 82.11±1.30 16.96±0.97 45.95b±1.12 15.93±0.87 5.29±0.28
P-value P>0.1120 P>0.7626 P>0.4089 P>0.2735 P<0.0105 P>0.8617 P>0.9853
SL NS NS NS NS * NS Ns
FS*PH L,P1 92.46±1.47 11.79±1.69 80.87±2.25 20.27±1.68 36.07c±1.93 16.26±1.50 4.82±0.48
L,P2 92.20±1.47 11.05±1.69 80.86±2.25 18.17±1.68 43.50abc±1.93 20.42±1.50 4.89±0.48
L,P3 91.83±1.47 8.64±1.69 83.57±2.25 18.82±1.68 47.20ab±1.93 18.71±1.50 5.52±0.48
M,P1 92.65±1.47 10.09±1.69 76.05±2.25 19.10±1.68 42.11abc±1.93 14.1±1.50 4.5±0.48
M,P2 92.68±1.47 10.41±1.69 82.03±2.25 17.20±1.68 38.42bc±1.93 13.98±1.50 4.83±0.48
M,P3 92.83±1.47 10.92±1.69 82.35±2.25 17.47±1.68 40.10bc±1.93 13.87±1.50 4.0±0.48
S,P1 92.06±1.47 8.99±1.69 83.55±2.25 17.8±1.68 45.11ab±1.93 18.78±1.50 6.32±0.48
S,P2 92.38±1.47 6.85±1.69 84.48±2.25 16.60±1.68 45.45ab±1.93 15.34±1.50 6.05±0.48
S,P3 91.77±1.47 11.47±1.69 80.40±2.25 14.60±1.68 50.56a±1.93 5.22±1.50 6.29±0.48
P-value P>0.5600 P>0.2821 P>0.2236 P>0.9430 P<0.014 P>0.1447 P>0.6053
SL NS NS NS NS * NS NS

SL= level of significant; *= significant at (P<0.05);**= significant at (P<0.01);***= significant at (P<.0001), PH =phase feeding.
FS=farm size, L=large, M= medium, S=small, DM=Dry matter, OM=organic matter, CP=crude protein, NDF=neutral detergent fiber,
ADF=acid detergent fiber, ADL=acid detergent fiber
 35

4.11. Performance Evaluation of Fattening Animals

4.11.1. Initial live weight

The average initial weight of beef cattle purchased for fattening was almost similar for the
different farm sizes; with animals purchased by small scale farms weighing a little (P < 0.001)
lower as compared to the medium (Table 16). Animals with age ranging 5-6 weighed
significantly higher as compared to those aged 3-4 years.

4.11.2. Final weight and total and average live weight gain

The final weight was lower for small scale fattening farms than the medium. The total and
average daily weight gain was significantly (P<0.001) higher for large and medium than the
small scale commercial fattening farms. In terms of the age of the animal, age range of 5-6
recorded higher final weight, but lower total and daily weight as compared to age range of 3 -
4.
 36

Table .Least square means of live weight gain of fattening animals under commercial feedlot

Variables

Total
Factors Levels IBW(kg) FBW(kg) gain(kg) ADG (kg) BCI BCF
b b a a
Age I 245.11 ±2.60 344.00 ±2.82 98.89 ±0.95 1.10 ±0.01 4.33 ±0.08 7.25a±0.11
a

II 292.72a±2.60 384.69a±2.82 91.97b±0.95 1.02b±0.01 4.33a±0.01 7.06b±0.11

p-value P<0.0001 p<0.0001 P<0.0001 P<0.0001 P>1 P>0.23
SL *** *** *** *** NS NS
a a a a a
FS L 270 ±3.18 368.46 ±3.45 97.67 ±1.16 1.09 ±0.01 4.5 ±0.09 7.42a±0.14
a
M 275.00 ±3.18 372.58a±3.45 97.58a±1.16 1.09a±0.01 4.29ab±0.09 7.13ab±0.14
b
S 260.96 ±3.18 35200b±3.45 91.04b±1.16 1.01b±0.01 4.17b±0.09 6.92b±0.14
p-value P<0.0004 P<0.0004 p<0.0001 P<0.0001 P<0.05 P<0.05
SL *** *** *** *** * *
c e a ab a
Age*FS IL 242 ±4.42 342.58d ±4.81 100.58 ±1.58 1.118 ±0.02 4.58 ±0.13 7.5a±0.2
IM 252c±4.42 355.4cd±4.81 103.41a±1.58 1.15a±0.02 4.33ab±0.13 7.6a±0.2
IS 241.33c±4.42 334e±4.81 c
92.67bc±1.58 1.03 ±0.02 4.17b±0.13 7.08ab±0.2
IIL 299.58a±4.42 394.33a±4.81 94.75b±1.58 1.05bc±0.02 4.5ab±0.13 7.33ab±0.2
ab
IIM 298 ±4.42 389.75ab±4.81 91.75bc±1.58 1.02c±0.02 4.33ab±0.13 7.08ab±0.2
IIS 280.58b±4.42 370bc±4.81 89.41c±1.58 0.99c±0.02 4.17b±0.13 6.75b±0.2
p-value P>0.1188 P>0.1441 P>0.0296 P>0.0324 P>0.824 P>0.8158
SL NS NS * * NS NS
N=number of animals; SL= level of significance;*= significant at (P<0.05);**= significant at (P<0.01);***= significant at
(P<.0001); I=3-4 years; II=5-6years. FS =Farm Size, IBW=Initial Body Weight, FBW=Final Body Weight, ADG=Average Daily
Gain,IBCS =Initial Body Condition Score and FBCS=Final Body Condition Score.
 37

The average daily gain for the fattening animals was significantly (P<0.001) higher during the
early stage (initial phase) of the fattening period as compared to phase three and for large and
medium than the small Scale farms (Table 17).

Table .Least Square Mean of Weight Gain and Body Condition Score of Fattening Animals at
Different Phases under Commercial Feedlot

Factors Levels Variables

GP ADGP BCSP
a a
Age I 32.96 ±0.36 1.10 ±0.01 6.23a±0.07
b b
II 30.66 ±0.36 1.02 ±0.01 6.04b±0.07
p-value P<0.0001 P<0.0001 P<0.0403
SL *** *** *
a a
FS Large 32.56 ±0.44 1.08 ±0.01 6.42a±0.08
a a
Medium 32.53 ±0.44 1.08 ±0.01 6.10b±0.08
Small 30.35b±0.44 1.01b±0.01 5.89b±0.08
p-value P<0.0004 P<0.0004 P<0.0001
SL *** *** ***
a a
PH P1 33.18 ±0.44 1.11 ±0.01 5.11a±0.08
P2 31.79ab±0.44 1.06ab±0.01 6.14b±0.08
P3 30.46b±0.44 1.02b±0.01 7.15c±0.08
p-value P<0.0001 P<0.0001 p<0.0001
SL *** *** ***
FS*PH L,P1 34.00ab±0.77 1.13ab±0.03 5.42a±0.14
L,P2 32.13bc±0.77 1.07bc±0.03 6.42a±0.14
L,P3 31.54bcd±0.77 1.05bcd±0.03 7.42ab±0.14
a a
M,P1 35.50 ±0.77 1.18 ±0.03 5.04bc±0.14
M,P2 30.92bcd±0.77 1.03bcd±0.03 6.13c±0.14
M,P3 31.17bcd±0.77 1.04bcd±0.03 7.13cd±0.14
S,P1 30.04cd0.77 1.00cd±0.03 4.88de±0.14
abc abc
S,P2 32.33 ±0.77 1.08 ±0.03 5.88e±0.14
S,P3 28.67d±0.77 0.96d±0.03 6.92e±0.14
p-value P<0.0005 P<0.0005 P<0.9971
SL *** *** NS
N=number of animals; SL= level of significant; *= significant at (P<0.05);**= significant at
(P<0.01);***= significant at (P<.0001), I=3-4 years, II=5-6years.PH=phase feeding,
FS=farm size, GP =Total gain between phase feeding, ADGP=average daily gain between
phase feedingBCSP=Body condition score between phase feeding.
 38

4.11.3. Condition score

The average condition score recorded during late fattening period were shown 7.42± 0.14,
7.13 ± 0.14 and 6.92± 0.14 for large and small medium scale and small scale commercial
cattle fattening respectively (Table 17). The body condition score result show that animals in
large scale farms laid down more fat compared to the medium and the small scale fattening
farms.
 39

5. DISCUSSIONS

5.1. Source, Experience and Major Selection Criteria of Beef Cattle

The inclination of feedlot owners to buy cattle mainly from Borena area is an indication of
preference for a specific breed of animals which the producers know very well about the
performance. This show that the lack of information about other breeds of animals that could
suit for feedlot fattening. For example, it is noted that the Ogaden (Getechewet al., 2008;
Tsegay and Mengistu, 2013) and Kerayu (Mohammed et al., 2008) cattle breeds have a good
feedlot fattening performance. Better preference of bulls at the age of 3-6 years suggest that
animals after grown to these ages are more suitable to fatten and produce high yield and
quality beef production to the standard required by the export market niche for Ethiopian
cattle breed. According to Sintayehu (2010) most cattle fattened in feedlots are in the range of
50 to 60 month-old Boran bulls targeted to the higher value export market. Malede and Yilikal
(2013) noted that intact male animals between four and six years of age and weigh at least 280
kg are preferred by the purchasing agents of the abattoirs which are based on the end market
requirements. Intact male gains faster and convert feed more effectively than castrated animal
(Field, 1971).

The long year experience of feedlot operators indicates their success in the business and the
opportunity for other investors to involve in fattening business for they can obtain advises and
assistance from the experienced owners. The experience they gained helped the operators to
utilize appropriate environment that include suitable agro-ecology, access to market and
available feed resources in the area. The choice of animals based on the breed type, body
condition, body size (frame size), color and age could be to meet the preference of the end
user and the finishing ability of the animal. Body size as an individual trait is also said to be
very important since it is related to potential growth at every stage of the development process
(Webster, 1986) and affect the whole production system, due to its influence on aspects such
as the food conversion efficiency, the time taken to meet a specific market finishing degree, or
the final quality of the product obtained (Romeraet al., 1998).

In the current study, the length of fattening periods is also in line with the finding reported by
Hutcheson (2008) for Boran bull that has been fed for about four months finished and would
 40

produce a desirable carcass and neither over finished nor under finished they had enough fat
covering to improve the flavor of the meat and possibly will be marbled adequately. Similarly,
Tsesgay and Mengistu (2013) noted that most feed lot operators fed their animals for three up
to four months.

The preference for some months of the year to fatten animals is related to market demand
picks. For example, fattening operations target to finish their animals and sale at the month of
March for religious holiday of Easter festival in Ethiopia and for export market during Muslim
holidays, particularly Eid Al-Adha, and Eid Al- Fetir (Haji).and also finish their animals at the
month December for Ethiopian charismas. The main goal of all commercial enterprises in
cattle fattening enterprises is to maximize their profit. Thus, to achieve this goal all feedlot
operators prefer suitable time to start cattle fattening activities. According to the information
obtained from respondents’ cattle fattening operation is a time bound activity based on the
availability of resource such as feed and labor, and market demand locally as well as at an
export market niche.

5.2. Major Feed Resources and Feeding System in the Commercial Feedlot

All commercial feedlots operators (Table 5) depend on purchased feed resources for fattening,
because of shortage of land for feed production. The current study is in accordance with that
reported by Adugna (2008) and Tsagay and Mengistu (2013). The type of roughage and
concentrate feeds utilized depend on accessibility, importance for fattening such as the feed
nutrient content and palatability, and based on ability to be purchased by the farms due to
their cost and availability. Use of agro-industrial feed by-product as a major concentrate
source and teff straw as a principal roughage by all scale of commercial feedlot operators is an
attribute of the availability of the feed resource in the area and cost advantage from using this
feeds.

All the commercial feedlot feed animals in confined feeding system. The practice of offering
roughage first and concentrate next and rationing the concentrate offer into morning and
afternoon meal is a normal practice and may reduce the risk of digestive disorder. Same
amount of roughage offer by all scale of farms imply that the fattening operators uniformly
utilize the limited amount of roughage feeds, which is in agreement with earlier reports
 41

(Tsegay and Mengistu, 2013).The type of feed offered is according to the ingredients
availability and price, and stage of fattening. This finding is similar with the criteria noted by
Alex (2015) for selecting feed ingredients are easily available in their locality, most preferred
by the animals and cheap and easier to transport.

5.3. Housing System

Cattle should be protected from extreme hot or cold conditions. Hence, proper housing and
equipment are important in successful fattening operation. Open overhead shelter with
enclosure was the predominant type of housing in large (100%), medium (75%) and small
(72.2%) scale commercial cattle fattening operations studied. But, open without overhead
shelter housing system was used by few medium and small scale fattening operators. The
environment where the commercial fattening of the present study located is hot particularly
during some seasons of the year. Hence, it is important to provide shed where the animals will
get access to be protected from excessive heat. According to Koknaroglu (2005) providing an
overhead shelter in open lots improved ADG of beef cattle in warm and hot environments via
increased dry matter intake and feed conversion efficiency.

5.4. Common Health Problems and Health Service in the Feedlot

Animal diseases are still a major constraint to livestock productivity there by affecting
economic growth and the effort made to attain food security Yimenu (2014) and Solomon
(1991) noted that the losses caused due to animal health problems could be classified into
direct and indirect losses. Direct losses are mainly caused by mortality, while indirect losses
are caused by decreased growth, fertility and work output (morbidity losses). The occurrence
of various diseases across the fattening farms could be one of the problems that can jeopardize
the business if sufficient attention is not given. As the survey result the most feedlot operators
lumpy skin disease are the major concern this result is disagreed with the finding of (Gezahign
and Samson ,2014) 83.9 % the disease of most concern was foot Mouth Disease and16.1 %
the most disease concern was Lumpy Skin Disease. While the other disease in few percent
.Efficient and reliable animal health services constituent an essential pre-requisite to the cattle
fattening production. Leonard and Cornelius (1984) stated that animal health care services can
be evaluated based on accessibility and service delivery efficiency. The preference of feedlot
 42

farms for private veterinary practitioner could be due to the accessibility although the
government veterinary and clinic is low price.According to (Yemenu 2014) the most feed lot
operators (71%) of them used private veterinarians (private veterinary practitioner).

5.5. Major Constraints of Commercial Cattle Fattening

According to the respondents, productivity and fattening activity of livestock were affected by
shortage of feed, market, animal health problems, water shortage, lack of animal supply,
management skill, and housing system The present finding is in line with the finding of
Bezhign (2014) who noted poor nutritive value of available feeds, its limited availability and
high price of supplementary feed associated with poor management practices and seasonality
of market price for fattened cattle as a major constraint to cattle fattening business in Chiro
area of Western Hararghe small holder cattle fattening operation and similar constraints were
also listed by the study of Tsagaye and Mengistu (2013), which identified market, shortage of
feed, type of livestock, water shortage, disease and skilled personnel as a major constraint to
commercial feedlot fattening

5.6. Purchase and Sell of Fatten Cattle

The basic goal of the cattle fattening owners was to add value to their cattle by fattening
before selling them in order to fetch higher prices and enhance profit (Mloteet al.,
2012).Almost all feed lot operators Purchasing oflive cattle at the markets is performed based
on therequirements of the customers.Thus breed, sex, ageand sometimes color of the animal
for the liveexport are the major criteria considered by the feedlot operators during purchase by
visualestimation. This in line with(Filip, 2006)Due to lack of weighingfacilities, mostly cattle
transaction is done ‘based onevaluation and assessing the body conditions, which tend to be
highly subjective.

The majority of feed lot operators said that mature animals are purchased with high price
compared to the young animals and selling price is also high as age of the animals increased
and condition of the animals improved. However, this depends on the customer preference and
the ability of the animals to convert feed muscle at any stage of age feedlots to achieve the
live weight of animal demanded by exporters.
 43

Decreased demand for fatten animals was attributed to the conflicts in the Middle East
countries and considered this as a main important problem that decreased the customers of the
live animals marketing, especially the continuous conflicts between Arab countries during the
last two years significantly decreased the demand for live animals. During the summer season
the local traditional cattle fattener finish animal with on farm produced high quality feeds,
such as crop thinning, young grass etc. and the illegal exporters use the opportunity and
collect animals and export illegally. According to Sintayehu (2013) the live animal exports are
subjected to periodic interruption due to bans imposed by importing countries following
outbreaks of disease, which the commercial fattening farms consider as one of the important
challenge. One example mentioned by the feedlot operators is the embargo placed by Egypt
before one year due to FMD disease suspicion.

5.7. Type of Feeds and Chemical Composition

The type of feeds used for fattening beef cattle under commercial feedlot is composed of both
roughage and concentrate feeds. Teff straw was the major roughages used by different feedlot
operators in the study area. This is linked to the agro-ecology where the fattening operation is
running. That is the fattening area studied in the present study is located in the area where teff
cultivation is the main crop agricultural activity. The low CP and high NDF and ADF content
of the teff straw is a typical characteristics of low quality roughage feeds. The value for the
chemical composition recorded for samples collected from the farms studied is similar to that
reported in previous studies (Andualemet al., 2015).The agro-industrial by-products are the
major concentrate diet and the type used depends on the farm size, may be because of the
price, and the fattening phase as well as their presence in the study area. The ration is
formulated from cereals such as ground maize and sorghum and the different agro-industrial
by products. The feeding proportion of roughage to concentrate was 20:80. This shows that
the roughage is mainly used to maintain the rumen ecology of animals in order to avoid
feedlot digestive disorders. Crude protein content of concentrate was 19.09, 17.02 and 16.33%
of the DM for large, medium and small scale fattening operation. These values are within the
range of 120-140 g CP/kg DM crude protein requirements of finishing beef cattle
recommended by Galyean (1996) and Bailey and Duff (2005), when it is fed with low quality
 44

roughage. The results were also similar with 15 –16% and 12–15% crude protein requirements
recommended by Donald (2008) for growing and finishing phase.

The crude protein (CP) of concentrate offered at different stage (phase) of production was
19.06, 17.32 and 16.96 for first, second and third phase, respectively. The CP at third phase
was numerical higher than second and first which is in accordance with high protein demand
by the animal at early and high energy need at latter phase of fattening. Reducing the crude
protein content of the feed at finishing is important to minimize feed cost and loss of nitrogen
to environment without affecting the performance of animals. In addition to protein, NDF and
ADF are also the important nutrient in the ration of ruminants. Optimum feeding of NDF and
ADF maintain the activity of cellulolytic micro-organisms, which are responsible for digestion
of fiber to generate energy from low quality feed and increase microbial protein, which
contribute to the fulfillment of the protein requirements of the animals. The NDF of the
concentrate feed used for fattening at different scale of productions was 42.25, 40.21 and
47.04% DM for large, medium and small scale production. These results are similar with NDF
requirement of>40% recommended by Donald (2008) and Mark (2014) for growing beef
cattle. Similarly, NDF concentration at different stage (phase) of production were 41.00, 42.00
and 45.95% DM for first, second and third phase, respectively. The NDF compositions of the
concentrate were significantly higher (p<0.05) at third phase, followed by second and third
phase, respectively. In addition to other chemical compositions, structural carbohydrate or
fiber are also very important to maintain rumen micro flora. The ADF content of concentrate
feed used for fattening was 18.46, 14.00 and 16.45% DM for large, medium and small scale
production. These results is below the value of ADF (20 -30% DM) recommended for
ruminants to maintain the rumen ecology by Mark (2014), however it lies within the
recommended range when the concentrate is fed with teff straw.

5.8. Performance of Fattening Cattle under Commercial Feedlot

Management

The average initial weight of beef cattle at entry to the fattening schedule in different
commercial feedlot was 254.3±4.55 with a range of 226±4.55 to 330 ±4.55 kg. The higher
initial body weight recorded for the medium scale farms is an advantage for producer to
 45

achieve desired market weight of beef cattle. The initial live weight recorded in the three
commercial feedlot in the present study, was higher than reported by Mohammed et al. (2014)
for Baggara bulls used for feedlot experiments which lies in the range 165 and 185kg, and also
higher than was reported by Girma et al. (2015) for Borana bulls which recorded 182kg
average initial body weight but lower than reported by Bezhign (2014) for Hararghe high land
cattle which lies between 415.41 ± 4.8 and 333.9 ± 7.4 for traditional fattening and small scale
fattening operation, respectively.

The average daily weight gain of about 1 kg recorded for all size of the commercial feedlot is
a good rate of gain by the standard of experimental reports for Zebu cattle. For example,
Eltarhiret al. (2000a) reported a daily weight gain of up to 1.13 kg for feedlot finished
indigenous Western Baggara bulls in Sudan. This finding was little higher than ADG recorded
for Borena cattle (0.889 kg per day) under station conditions in Tanzania (Mwilawa, 2012).
The higher average weight gain for large and medium compared to small farm size can be
attributed to sufficient nutrients contained in diets (feeds), which were able to meet body
maintenance requirements and gain.

The average weight gain between different phase (stage of fattening) were 33.18±0.44,
31.79±0.44 and 30.46±0.44 for phase one, two and three, respectively. The higher weight gain
recorded at first phase was probably because of the high protein diet provided at this stage and
may be a reflection of compensatory growth. The main objective of feeding different feed at
different stage of fattening is to achieve compensatory growth of animals at first phase and to
develop marbling in muscles of beef cattle at finishing phase. As the fattening day increase the
daily gain of beef cattle steadily decrease. The average daily gain reported by Girma et al.
(2015 ) for two years Borena bulls up to 56 days of the fattening periods show that all
experimental bulls has gained on average 1kg body weight per day. But after 56 days to the
end of the fattening trial the bulls had gained less than1kg per day. Mieso et al. (2013) also
reported that ADG of one year old Borana bulls to steadily decrease as the number days of the
fattening period is increased from 70 days to the end of the fattening periods. The mean body
condition score obtained for the present study was comparable with the condition score of
7.67 ± 0.12 and 7.69 ± 0.11 for fattened Hararghe highland oxen measured on farm during the
main rainy season which was managed under experienced and less experienced farmers group
 46

for fattening cattle, respectively (Fikadu, 1999). The mean values of condition scores for this
study was lower than condition score values of 7.82 ±0.49 and 7..462 ±0.62 for Hraraghe
highland oxen fattened under traditional system and small scale cattle fattening system,
respectively (Bezhign, 2014).
 47

6. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1. Summary and Conclusion

The study was conducted in three districts of East Shoa zone namely Adama, Lome and
Adami Tulu Jido kombolcha which are found in Oromia National Regional State of Eastern
Ethiopia. It consists of survey and on-farm monitoring and evaluation of beef cattle
performances in different scale of production. The specific objectives, of this study involved
assessment of commercial fattening practices, evaluation of body weight gain and body
condition of beef cattle andchemicalcomposition of different mixed ration at different phase
feeding in the selected feed lots. A total of 45 commercial feedlot operators were purposively
selected from three districts and stratified into large scale, medium and small scale
commercial cattle fattening to identify the effects of management and overall beef cattle
fattening systems in the area. Data was collected from primary and secondary sources by
using semi-structured interview questionnaires. Personal observation and visiting of selected
beef cattle fattening farms, live weight gain and body condition scoring were recorded to
assess the performance of fattening animals and chemical analysis feed was done kept under
large, medium and small scale commercial cattle fattening system.

The results of this study indicated that there is significant difference (p<0.01) across the size
of feedlots in number of animals fatten per cycle, fattening frequency per year, length/duration
of fattening period. The higher number of animals per cycle was recorded for large
commercial cattle fattening, which was 1106 heads, followed by medium and small scale
commercial cattle fattening which was 437 and 234 heads, respectively. The frequency of
fattening was recorded to be 3.2±0.77 months, 2.46±0.66 months, 2.18±0.18 months for large,
medium and small scale commercial cattle fattening, respectively. Similarly, 4, 3.69 and 4.8
months were recorded as duration of fattening for large, medium and small scale commercial
cattle fattening.

Crop residues ( teff straw and wheat straw ) and agro- industrial by products such as wheat
bran, wheat middling, ground maize, cotton seed cake and noug cake are the principal feed
used for cattle fattening in the study area. The respondents in all scale of productions reported
the proportion of roughage to concentrate in ration formulation to be 20: 80. The amount of
 48

feed offered (concentrate and roughage) per day per animal is significantly higher (p<0.05) for
large commercial feedlots. The feedlots operators offered high protein concentrate at
initialfinishing stage of fattening, and followed with high energy concentrate at middle and
final stage of cattle fattening. ADF were fed to maintain the activity of cellulolytic micro-
organisms in all farms. The NDF content of the concentrate feed used for fattening at different
scale of productions in the present study is comparable with the NDF requirement (>40%) in
the ration for growing beef cattle. The NDF compositions of the concentrate were
significantly higher (p<0.05) during the final stage of fattening. The ADF content of the feed
is in the range of value of ADF 20 -30% DM recommended for ruminants to maintain the
rumen ecology when it is fed with teff straw. Open shed with enclosure housing was identified
as predominant housing system of beef cattle in the districts, while few used open without
shed but have enclosure housing system. The survey result indicate that lumpy skin disease,
Foot Mouth disease, bovine respiratory disease, and the digestive system disorder were the
major diseases of the feedlots in order of importance in the study area.Limited feed
availability and high price of supplementary feed, market fluctuation of fattened cattle water
shortage, and disease out breaks were the most challenges of faces the cattle fattening in the
study area.

The average daily gain for the fattening animals was significantly (P < 0.001) higher during
the early stage (initial phase) of the fattening period. The higher weight gain was recorded at
first phase probably because of high protein diet provided at this stage and the evidence that
animals showing more compensatory growth during the initial stage of fattening activity. The
average total weight gain and daily weight gain was significantly (P < 0.001) higher for large
scale commercial fattening probably due to large scale commercial fattening operations have
potential to keep their animals under high plane nutrition and maintain regular feeding
management

The high average condition score recorded during late fattening period were shown for large
commercial cattle fattening indicating that animals were shown high fattening performances
and or laid down more fat accumulation in large scale fattening operations.

Generally, the survey result indicate that the commercial feedlots operators of study area are
preferred to fatten Borena bulls immediately purchased from open market of Borena zone in
 49

the season of October to Decemberand January to March by considering these months as

suitable time to start fattening operation. The management practices regarding utilization of
existing feed, feeding system, housing system and health care of animals varies across large,
medium and small scale commercial fattening.

6.2. Recommendations

Based on the finding of the study, the following recommendations are set for environmental
friendly commercial cattle fattening operation business in the study area.
1. Currently, the major breed involved in the fattening operation in the districts is Borena breed.
However, exploiting this breed without any intervention on breeding strategies endangers the
breed. Therefore; the government should design proper livestock policy to optimize the
population of animals used for beef and replacement stock at its original area. Moreover, use
of breeds that have good feedlot performance like the Borena should be encouraged.
2. The feedlot operators in the study area have been fed their animals with rations that have
different chemical compositions at different stage of fattening. Especially, feeding CP beyond
the requirements of animals increases the excretion of nitrogen with urine and feaces which
leads to environmental concern due to nitrate (NO3) leaching contributing to the pollution of
surface and ground water, as well as effects on air quality and greenhouse gas emissions
through gaseous losses as ammonia (NH3) and nitrous oxide (N2O). Thissituation must be
supported with knowledge and skills of animal nutrition to minimize feed cost and reduce
amount of nitrogen released to the environment.
3. Animal health is also the major constraints of beef cattle productions in the study area.
Therefore the government should design community based livestock health policy in the
districts to maximize the profit of the producers and export healthy and highly demanded beef
cattle at international market. Because, producing safe products are a forefront strategy to
protect the health of consumers and maintain export market trust.
4. There is marketing problems of live animals due to conflicts of Middle East countries.
Therefore, the government should search other international market through creating sorting
diplomatic relationship with other developed and developing countries through reducing
illegal marketing systems.
5. Investment on meat processing and beef cattle production sectors should be encouraged.
 50

7. REFERENCES

Abbey, A. 2004.Red Meat and Poultry Production and Consumption in Ethiopia and
Distribution in Addis Ababa.MSc thesis, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
ACR (Access Capital Research). 2010. Ethiopian export performance review. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.
Adugna Tolera. 2008. Feed resources and feeding management: A manual for feedlot
operators and development workers. Ethiopian Sanitary and Phyto-sanitary Standards
and Livestock and Meat Marketing Program (SPS-LMM), Addis Ababa, pp 43.
AdugnaTolera,AlemuYami and DawitAlemu, 2012.Livestock feed resources in Ethiopia:
Challenges Opportunities and the need for transformation. Ethiopia Animal Feed
Industry Association, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
AGP (Agricultural Growth Program- Livestock Market Development Project).2009.End
Market Analysis for Meat/Live Animals, Leather and Leather Products, Dairy
Products Value Chains.
AGP (Agricultural Growth Program- Livestock Market Development Project).2011.Value
Chain Analysis for Ethiopia: Meat and Live Animals Hides, Skins and Leather
andDairy products.
Alemayehu Mengistu. 2003. Country pasture/Forage resources profiles: Ethiopia. FAO (Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations).
http://www.fao.org/ag/agp/agpc/doc/counprof/ ethiopia/ethiopia.htm.
Alemayehu Mengistu. 2005. Feed resource base of Ethiopia: limitation and opportunities for
integrated development. pp 250-259. In: Participatory Innovation and Research:
Lesson for Livestock Development. Proceeding of the 12th Annual Conference of
Ethiopian Society of Animal Production (ESAP), Volume II Technical papers. 12-14
August, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Alemayehu Mengistu. 2004. Pasture and Forage Resource Profiles of Ethiopia.Pp19.Ethiopia/
FAO. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Alex, G. M. 2015. Evaluation of Locally Available Feed Resources for Cattle Fattening under
Traditional Feedlot Production System in Kahama and Misungwi Districts,Tanzania D
octoral Dissertation, Sokoine University, Morogoro, Tanzania.
 51

AndualemTonamo, BerhanTamir and GebyehuGoshu. 2015. Assessment of cattle feed

resources; chemical composition and Digestibility of major feeds in Essera Districts,
Southern Ethiopia. Science of Technology Research Journal.Vol .4(2): 89-98.
AOAC (Association of Official Analytical Chemist). 1990. Official Methods of Analytical,
18th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gathersburg, USA.
Bailey, C.R. and Duff, G.C. 2005.Protein requirements of finishing beef cattle.In: Proc.
Southwest Nutrition Conference.pp.78–85.
BelechewHurrissa. 2009. Donor Supported Livestock Marketing Initiatives: the Experiences
and Achievements of SPS-LMM Program in Ethiopia, Paper presented at the Regional
Symposium on Livestock Marketing in the Horn of Africa: Working Towards Best
Practices, 21-23 October, 2009, Kenya Commercial Bank Training Centre, Karen,
Kenya.
BeleteAnteneh. 2006. Studies on Cattle Milk and Meat Production in Fogera Woreda:
Production Systems, Constraints and Opportunities for Development. MSc thesis,
Hawassa University, Hawassa, Ethiopia.
Belete Anteneh, Azage Tegegne, Fekadu Beyene and Berhanu Gebremedhin. 2010. Cattle
milk and meat production and marketing systems and opportunities for market-
orientation in Fogera woreda, Amhara region, Ethiopia. IPMS (Improving Productivity
and Market Success) of Ethiopian Farmers Project Working Paper 19. ILRI
(International Livestock Research Institute), Nairobi, Kenya.
Berhanu Gebremedhin, Moti Jaleta and Dirk Hoekstra. 2009. Smallholders, institutional
services and commercial transformation in Ethiopia. Agricultural Economics 40 (2009
) supplement.pp.773-787.
BezehegnAbebe. 2014. Small scale beef cattle fattening practices on farm performance
evaluation and opportunities for market orientation in western harrghe zone, chiro
district. MSc thesis, Haramaya university, Haramaya.
Cabrera, E.I., Mendoza, G.D., Aranda, I.E., Garcia, B.C., Barcena, G.R. and Ramos, J.A.
2000.Saccharomyces cerevisiae and nitrogenous supplementation in growing steers
grazing tropical pastures.Animal Feed Science and Technology 83: 49 – 55.
Carn,V.M. and Kitching, R.P. 1995. The clinical response of cattle experimentally infected
with lumpy skin disease (Neethling) virus. Archives of Virology, 140: 503–513.
 52

CIGAR, 2004. Design recommendation of beef cattle housing. Report of the CIGAR section
II, working group No .14.2nd edition. East Lansing, Michigan, USA.
Cole, N.A. and Hutcheson, D.P. 1990. Influence of dietary protein concentrations on
performance and nitrogen repletion in stressed calves. Journal of Animal Science. 68:
348 – 349.
Cornelius Haan and Solomon B Kure. 1991. Animal Health Services in Sub-Saharan Africa:
Initial Experiences with New Approaches. Network Paper No. 29, Washington D.C.
CSA (Central Statistics Agency). 2015. Statistical Report on area and production of major
crops Part VI: Ethiopian Agricultural Sample Enumeration, 2014 / 2015 (2008 E.C.).
Central Statistical Agency, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Daniel Tewodros. 2008. Beef Cattle Production System and Opportunities for Market
Orientation in Borena Zone, Southern Ethiopia. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University,
Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Davies, F.G., Krauss, H., Lund, J. and Taylor, M. 1971. Laboratory diagnosis of lumpy skin
disease. Research of veterinary Science.12: 123–127.
David Hutcheson. 2006. Ethiopia sanitary & Phytosanitary standards and livestock & meat
marketing program (sps-lmm). Feeding to produce export quality Ethiopian beef
requirements and recommendations.
Dawang, N.C. 2011. Efficiency analysis of local chicks multiplication and production system
(CMPS) in Plateau State, Nigeria, MSc. Thesis. Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria,
Nigeria.
De Haan, C. 2003. Federal Republic of Ethiopia diagnostic trade integration study, livestock
and meat sector: Challenges and opportunities. Agriculture and Rural Development
Department. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Depa, P.M., Dimri, U., Sharma, M.C. and Tiwari, R. 2012. Update on epidemiology and
control of Foot and Mouth Disease - A menace to international trade and global animal
enterprise.
Donald Brown, Keenan Rumans and Mary Vickers. 2008. Feeding growing and finishing
cattle for Better Returns. EBLEX Beef better return program manual 7.
 53

EEA (Ethiopian Economic Association). 2006. Evaluation of Participatory Demonstration and

Training Extension System with emphasis on extension management, technologies
promoted and their impact on productivity and income. Ethiopian Economic
Association, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
EliasMulugeta, BerhanuGebremedhin, Hoekstra, D. and Jabbar Mohammad,2007. Analysis of
the Ethio-Sudan cross-border cattle trade: The case of Amhara Regional State. IPMS
(Improving Productivity and Market Success) of Ethiopian Farmers Project Working
Paper 4. ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute), Nairobi, Kenya. pp 44.
Eltahir, I.E., Babiker, S.A. and El Khidir, O.A. 2000a. Feedlot performance and carcass
characteristics of Western Baggara and Friesian crossbred bulls. 1. Slaughtered at 300-
kg live weight. Sudan Journal of Animal Production.13: 1-10.
Ensminger, M.E., Oldfield, J.E. and HeiNemann, W.W. 1990.Feeds and Nutrition.2nd edition.
The Ensminger Publishing Company, California.
Erol, A.,Cavit, Y. and Engin, S. 2014.Measuring the Performance of Cattle Fattening
Enterprises withData Envelopment Analysis: Comparative Analysis ofEnterprises in
the Northeast Anatolia Region (TRA).Journal of Animal Science, 20(5):719-725.20
Eyob Eshetu and Zewudu Abraham. 2016. Review on live animal and meat export marketing
system in Ethiopia: challenges and opportunities. Journal of Scientific and Innovative
Research 2016; 5(2): 59-64.
Fekedu Abebe. 1999. Assessment of the feed resource based and the performance of drought
oxen of the traditional fattening practices of small holder farmers in the eastern
haraghe highlands.
Field, R.A. 1971. Effects of castration on meat quality and quantity.Journal of Animal
Science.32: 849-858.
Filip, C. 2006.Ethiopian Borena and Southern Somali Areas Livestock Value Chain Analysis
Report.ACDI/VOCA Pastoralist Livelihood Initiatives Livestock Marketing Project.
Galyean, M.L. 1996. Protein levels in beef cattle finishing diet: Industry application,
university research and system results. Journal Animal Science. 74: 2860-2870.
Gari, G., Grosbois, V., Waret-Szkuta, A., Babiuk, S., Jacquiet, P. and Roger, F. 2012.
Lumpy skin disease in Ethiopia: seroprevalence study across different agro climate
zones.
 54

Garland, A.J.M. 2008. Epidemiological surveillance for foot-and-mouth disease: Current

status and future strategy: Position Paper. Pirbright, Surrey, United Kingdom.
Getachew Legese, Hailemariam Teklewold, Dawit Alemu and Asfaw Negassa. 2008. Live
animal and meat export value chains for selected areas in Ethiopia: Constraints and
opportunities for enhancing meat exports. Discussion Paper No. Market Opportunities
International Livestock Research Institutes paper no. 12.
Gezahegn Alemayehu and Samson Leta 2014.Biosecurity practices in central Ethiopia .Its
implication for live cattle export .International Journal of Livestock Production
.5(11),pp181-187.
Girma Debale, Mieso, Gurru, Tesfaye, Alemu, ArseGebeyehu, Frehowit, Mesele,
AshebirWerku. andAmanGudeto. 2015. Effect of different feeds option on growth
response and carcass characteristic of two years aged Borana bulls for export market
weight gain at Adami Tulu agricultural research center. Basic Research Journal of
Agricultural Science. Vol. 4(5):139-145.
HabtamuYesiga and AkaluTeshome. 2012. Market orientation and institutional arrangements
in smallholder context: The case of cross border livestock market chain in North West
Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Vol. 3(5):061-066.
HabtamuYesigat. 2012. Risk analysis in cattle fattening in North West Ethiopia: Empirical
evidence form two liemittobit model. International Journal of Development and
Sustainability. Vol. 1(2):240-254.
Hadi, P.U., Ilham, N., Thahar, A., Winarso, B., Vincent, D. and Quick, D. 2002. Improving
Indonesia’s Beef Industry, ACIAR (The Australian Center for International
Agricultural Research) Monograph No. 95:128p. Nicholson MJ, Sayers AR (1987).
Reliability, reproducibility, and sequential use of condition scoring of
Bosindicuscattle.Tropical Animal Health Production. 19: 127-135.
Hamlton Tom. 2010. Basic beef cattle nutrition, Home about Agriculture Food and Rural
Research Publication News. http://www.omarfa.gov.onca/english/beef/ 96-066htm.
HelinaTilahun and Emily Schmid. 2012. Spatial Analysis of Livestock Production Patterns in
Ethiopia, Ethiopia Strategy Support Program II (ESSP II) Working Paper 44.
Hill, D.H. 1988. Cattle and buffalo meat production in the tropics. Intermediate tropical
agriculture series.Longman scientific and technical, UK, England.158p.
 55

IGAD (Intergovernmental Authority on Development) Livestock Policy Initiative. 2011.The

Contribution of Livestock to the Economies of IGAD Member States. Study Findings,
Application of the Methodology in Ethiopia and Recommendations for Further Work.
IGAD LPI Working Paper No. 02 – 11.
John, F., Currin, D.V.M., Dee,W. and Whittier, D.V.M . 2009. Foot Rot in Beef Cattle.
Extension Veterinarian School of Medicine, University of California, Davis.
Kadigi, R.M.J., Kadigi, I.L., Laswai, G.H. and Kashaigili, J.J. 2013. Value chain of
indigenous cattle and beef products in Mwanza region, Tanzania: Market access,
linkages and opportunities for upgrading. Academic Journal of Agricultural Research.
1(8): 145-15.
Kefyalew Alemayehu. 2011. Value chain assessment of beef cattle production and marketing
in Ethiopia: Challenges and opportunities of linking smallholder farmers to the
markets. Livestock Research for Rural Development.23 (255).Retrieved December 19,
2012, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd23/12/alem23255.htm.
Kerstin, K., Zander, A. and Ellengowan, D. 2011.Attitudes of Livestock Keepers to Breeding
Strategies – Threats and Opportunities for on-farm Conservation of the Borana Cattle
Breed. Journal of Agricultural Science: Vol. 3, No. 2.
Koknaroglu, H., Loy, D.D., Wilson, D.E., Hoffman, M.P. and Lawrence, J.D. 2005. Factors
affecting beef cattle performance and profitability. The Professional Animal Scientist.
21 (4): 286-296.
MohammadYusuf, 2003. Certain aspects of the dairy system in the Harar milk shed, Eastern
Ethiopia. PhD Thesis dissertation submitted to University of the Free State,
Bloemfontein, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal,
wildlife and Grassland Sciences. South Africa. P195.
Leonard, D.K. 1984. The Supply of Veterinary Services.Conference on Livestock Policy
Issues in Africa, International Livestock Centre for Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Mafimisebi, T.E. and Okunmadewa, F.Y. 2006.Empirical Evidence from the Sun-dried Fish
Market in Southwest, Nigeria.In: Rebuilding Fisheries in an Uncertain Environment,
CD-ROM of the 13th Biennial Conference of the International Institute of Fisheries
Economics and Trade. Pg I2.
 56

Maki Niioka and kiyoshiiShiratori. 2009. Heart girth-weight conversion for Borena cattle,
Farmer-research group extension material series No.31.
MaledeBirhan and YilkalManaye.2014. Survey study on Feeding Strategies, Challenge and
Marketing of Beef Cattle Production in Ethiopia. Middle-East Journal of Scientific
Research. 21 (4): 669-674.
Malope, P., Tsopito, C.M., Aganga, A.A. and Madibela, O.R. 2007. Profitability of dry season
beef lotting in rain deficit countries: the case of Botswana. Livestock Research Rural
Development. 19(6).
Mark, W. 2014.Nutritional Requirements of Beef Cattle.
McDonald, P., Edward, R.A., Green, J.F.D. and Morgan, G.A. 2002. Animal
Nutrition. 6thedition. Pearson Educational Limited. Edinburgh, Great Britain. 544p.
McGee, M. 2014. Feed Efficiency in Beef Finishing Systems. Teagasc-IGFA Nutrition
Conference, Teagasc, Grange Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre,
Dunsany, Co. Meath.
MelakuTefera ,2011. Oxenization versus Tractorization: Options and Constraints for
Ethiopian Framing System. International Journal. SustainableAgriculture3(1):11-20.
MiesoGurru, Girma Debale, Tesfaye AlemuTucho ,FrehiwotMesele and Tesfaye Alemu,
2013. Evaluation of different feeding options on yearling Borana bulls to attain export
market weight at Adami Tulu agricultural research center, American Journal of Cell
and Animal Biology, Vol. 1, No. 1.
Mlote,S.N., Mdoe,N.S.Y., Isinika, A.C. and Mtenga, L.A. 2012. Value addition of beef cattle
fattening in the Lake Zone in Tanzania: Challenges and opportunities. Livestock
Research Rural Development.24 (95).
Miote, S.N., Mdoe, N.S.Y., Isinika, A.C. and Mtenga, L.Y. 2013. Profitability Analysis of
Small Scale beef cattle fattening in Lake Zone in Tanzania. Journal of Agricultural
Economics and Development .vol.2 (5), pp.203-216.
MoA (Ministry of Agriculture). 2004. Livestock Services Project. Volume 1 (Credit
application to the IDA).Livestock and Meat Board, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Ministry of Finance and Economic Development(MoFED), 2009.Survey of the Ethiopian
Economy Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
 57

Mohamed, A., Ahmed, A., Ehui, S. and Yemesrach, A. 2004.Dairy Development in Ethiopia.
EPTD discussion paper No. 123. International Food Policy Research Institute.
Washington, DC. U.S.A. 41p.
Mohammed Negash, Tesfaye Lemma, TakeleFeyera, HailuDadi, TatekWoldu, Tesfaye
Alemu and Birhanu Shilima. 2008. Comparison of body weight gain performance and
carcass characteristics of the two Ethiopian cattle breeds under natural pasture grazing
management. Livestock Research for Rural Development 20(8).
Mohammed, H., Ahmed, B., Salih, A., Babiker, M., Mohammed, S., AbdElnasir, M.A. and
Fadel, E. 2014. Feedlot Performance of Sudan Baggara Zebu Bulls Finished on Urea-
Treated Sugar-cane Bagasse. ARPN Journal of Science and Technology; Vol. 4(10).
MulugetaBekele, Girma Abebe and Solomon Legesse. 2005. Urban Cattle Fattening System.
Debub University, Animal and Range Sciences, Ethiopia.
Musa, L., Peter, K. and Ahmed, M. 2006. On farm characterization of Butana and Kenana
cattle breed production system in Sudan. Livestock research for rural development.
Mwilawa, A.J. 2012.Effect of different diet on weight gain of, carcass and meet quality
characteristics of two indigenous cattle breeds of Tanzania. A PhD thesis submitted to
Sokoine University of Agriculture. Department of Animal Science.p.245.
Nagaraja, T.G. and Titgemeyer, E.C. 2007.Acidosis in beef cattle. Dairy Science; 90 (ESuppl.
0):E17–38.
Nagaraja, T.G., Kelly, F. and Lechtenberg, F. 2007. Acidosis in Feedlot Cattle. Veterinarian
Clinical Food Animal, 23 :333–350.
NegassaAsfew, and Jabbar Mohammad, 2008.Livestock ownership, commercial off-take rates
and their determinants in Ethiopia. ILRI Research Report No.9. Nairobi: ILRI
(International Livestock Research Institute).
Negassa Asfew, Rashid Sedikand GebremedhinBerhanu,2011.Livestock Production and
Marketing. ESSP II Working Paper: 1-40.
Neuman, L.A. and Lusby, S.K. 1986. Beef Cattle.New 8th edition. John Wiles and Sons, New
York.
Nicholson, M.J. and Butterworth, M.H. 1986. A Guide to Condition Scoring of Zebu
Cattle.ILCA, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.PP 29.
 58

NRC (National Research Council). 2001. Nutrient requirements of beef cattle, 7threvised
Edition.
OIE. 2012. World Organization for Animal health Manual of Standards for Diagnostic Tests
and Vaccines. Office International des Epizooties Terrestrial Manual, Version adopted
by the World Assembly of Delegates of the OIE, pp: 145-173.
Okoruwa, V.O., Obadia, F.O. and Ibrahim, G. 2005. Profitability of beef cattle fattening in the
Cosmopolitan city of Ibadan, Oyo State.Journal of Agriculture Research. 6(1): 45-51.
Pagot, J. 1992. Animal production in tropics and in subtropics, 2nd edition.Macmillan press,
Hong kong. pp: 56-59.
Perdana, T. 2003. Competitive and Comparative Advantage of Beef Cattle Fattening in
Bandung Regency. Research Institute. Padjadjaran University, Bandung.
Ramos, J.A., Mendoza, G.D., Aranda, I.E., Garcia, B.C., Barcena, G.R. and Alanis, R.J. 1998.
Escape protein supplementation of growing steers grazing star grass. Animal Feed
Science and Technology 70: 249 – 256.
Reuben, M., Kadigi, J., Ibrahim, F., Kadigi, L., Germana, H., Laswai, J., Japhet, J. and
Kashaigili, S. 2013. Value chain of indigenous cattle and beef products in Mwanza
region, Tanzania: Market access, linkages and opportunities for upgrading. Academia
Journal of Agricultural Research. 1(8): 145-155.
Rewkot, H.2009. A guide to feed resources for cattle fattening, National animal production
research institute, Shika, Zaria, Nigeria.
Romera, A.J., Mezzadra, C.A., Villarreal, E.L., Brizuela, M.A. and Corva, P.M. 1986.
Productivity of grazing Angus steers of different structural size. Animal science
Journal vol 67(3) pp. 455-460.
Rutherglen, D.C.1995. Energy and Protein Requirements of Beef Cattle.Victoria State
Government Agricultural Notes.pp. 1329 – 8062.
Sarma, P.K. and Ahmed, J.U. 2011. An economic study of small state cattle fattening
enterprise of Rajbari district. Journal of Bangladeshian Agriculture. 9(1): 141-146.
Shitahun Mulu. 2009. Feed Resources Availability, Cattle Fattening Practices and Marketing
System in Bure Woreda, Amhara Region. A MSc Thesis Presented to the School of
Graduate Studies of Mekelle University. 20p.
 59

Sintayehu GebreMariam, Samuel Amare, Derek Baker and Ayele Solomon. 2010. Diagnostic
study of live cattle and beef production and Marketing, Constraints and Opportunities
for enhancing the system.
Soares, F.S. and Dryden McL, G. 2011a. Body condition scoring system for Bali cattle Asian
–Austrian Journal of Animal science. Vol.24.11; 1587-1594.
Streeter, S. 2006. Feeding livestock in temporary holding facilities in the Northern
Territory, Australia. http://www.nt.gov.au/d/Content/File/p/Anim_Man/831.pdf.(Acces
sed on October 20, 2009).
Strydom, P.E., Naudé, R.T., Smith, M.F., Kotzé, A., Scholtz, M.M. and Van Wyk, J.B.
2001. Relationships between production traits in subpopulations of Bonsmara and
Nguni cattle. South African Journal of Animal Science. 31: 181-194.
Teshager Ayalew, Belay Duguma and Taye Tolemariam ,2013. Traditional cattle fattening
and live animal marketing system in different agro ecologies of Ilu Aba bora zone,
oromiya. Ethiopia Global Veterinarian 10: 620-625.
Tsegay Teklebrhan and Mengistu Urge. 2013. Assessment of commercial feedlot finishing
practices at eastern Shoa, Ethiopia. Open Journal of Animal Sciences, vol. No.4, 273-
280.
Vansoest, P.J. and Robertson, J.B.1985. Analysis of forages and fibrous feed.Laboratory
manual for Animal Science 613, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 202 pp.
Vatta, A.F., Abbot, M.A., Villiers, J.F., Gumede, S.A., Harrison, L.J.S., Krecek, R.C., Letty,
B.A., Mapeyi, N. and Pearson, R.A. 2006. Goat Keepers’ Animal Health Care Manual.
Agricultural Research Council. Onderstepoort Veterinary Institute with KwaZulu-
Natal Department of Agriculture and Environment, South Africa, 60 pp.
Webster, A.J.F. 1986. Factors affecting the body composition of growing and adult animals.
In: Symposium on comparative aspects of body composition of farm and laboratory
animals. The Queen's University of Belfast, Bristol BSI87DU. pp. 45-53.
Weisbjerg, M.R., Hvelplund, T., Madsen, J., Mtenga, L.A. and Mwilawa, A.J. 2007. Evaluatio
n and Combination of feeds for improved beef production. In: Proceedings of the 33rd
TSAP Conference, ICC, Arusha, Tanzania 33: 35-39.
 60

Yidirim, I. 2006. A comparison of profitability and economic efficiencies between native and
culture-breed cattle fattening farms in Eastern part of Turkey. Pakistan Journal of
Science. 9(6): 1061-1067.http.//www.ansijournals.com/pjbs/2006/1061-1067.pdf.
Yimenu Hailu. 2014. Biosecurity hones in Central Ethiopian cattle feedlots: Its suggestion for
live dairy cattle export. International Journal of Biosecurity and Bioterrorism Vol. 1
(3) pp. 041-046.
Yitaye Alemayehu, 2008. Characterization and analysis of the urban and peri-urban dairy
production systems in the N-W Ethiopian highlands. PhD Dissertation, Boku
University, Vienna, Austria.
Yohannes Dagnew. 2011. Feeding Value of Prosopisjuliflora Pod Flour as a Substitute Wheat
Bran in Fattening Ration of Cattle. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University Haramaya.
Yoseph Mekasha, Azage Tegegn, Alemu Yami, and Umunna, N.N. 2002. Evaluation of
nonconventional agro-industrial by-products as supplementary feeds for ruminants: In
vitro and metabolism study with sheep. Small Ruminant Research (USA). 44 (1): 25-
35.
 61

8. APPENDIXES
 62

Appendix table . ANOVA for frequency number of animal per cycle, number animal per year
and duration of cattle fattening between scales of cattle fattening

Sum of df Mean F Sig.

Squares Square
Number of cattle Between 8.699 2 4.349 9.088 .001
fatten per year Groups
Within Groups 20.101 42 .479
Total 28.800 44
Number of cattle Between 6417501.652 2 3208750.826 8.709 .001
fatten per cycle Groups
Within Groups 15474469.148 42 368439.742
Total 21891970.800 44
Duration of Between 1.738 2 .869 5.041 .011
fattening Groups
Within Groups 7.240 42 .172
Total 8.978 44

Appendix table . ANOVA table for type of feed offered per day between scales of production

Sum of Df Mean F Sig.

Squares Square
Concentrate Between 43.030 2 21.515 7.705 .001
Groups
Within 117.281 42 2.792
Groups
Total 160.311 44
Roughages Between 1.429 2 .715 1.960 .154
Groups
Within 15.315 42 .365
Groups
Total 16.744 44

Appendix Table . ANOVA Total live Weight gain

Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr> F

AGE 1 861.1250000 861.1250000 28.68 <.0001
FS 2 693.5277778 346.7638889 11.55 <.0001
FS*AGE 2 223.0833333 111.5416667 3.71 0.0296
 63

R-Square Coeff Var Root MSE GP Mean

0.472846 5.742266 5.479876 95.43056

Appendix Table .ANOVA Average daily gain

Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr> F

AGE 1 0.10733889 0.10733889 28.25 <.0001
FS 2 0.08507778 0.04253889 11.19 <.0001
FS*AGE 2 0.02747778 0.01373889 3.62 0.0324

R-Square Coeff Var Root MSE GP Mean

0.467154 5.809588 0.061646 1.061111

Appendix Table . ANOVA initial heart girth

Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr> F

AGE 1 40802.72222 40802.72222 174.09 <.0001
FS 2 2492.58333 1246.29167 5.32 0.0072
FS*AGE 2 1031.69444 515.84722 2.20 0.1188

R-Square Coeff Var Root MSE GP Mean

0.666327 4.574318 16.66640 364.3472

Appendix Table . ANOVA Final heart girth final

Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr> F

AGE 1 29808.68056 29808.68056 107.31 <.0001
FS 2 5692.52778 2846.26389 10.25 0.0001
FS*AGE 2 1108.36111 554.18056 2.00 0.1441

R-Square Coeff Var Root MSE GP Mean

0.114583 10.69153 0.463300 4.333333
 64

Appendix Table . ANOVA of body condition score initial

Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr> F

AGE 1 0.000000 0.000000 0.00 1.00
FS 2 1.75 0.875 4.08 0.0214
FS*AGE 2 0.08333333 0.04166667 0.19 0.824

R-Square Coeff Var Root MSE GP Mean

0.110499 0.689935 9.645691 7.152778

Appendix Table . ANOVA of body condition score final

Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr> F

AGE 1 0.68055556 0.68055556 1.43 0.2361
FS 2 3.02777778 1.51388889 3.18 0.048
FS*AGE 2 0.19444444 0.09722222 0.2 0.8158

R-Square Coeff Var Root MSE GP Mean

0.251313 11.86542 3.757933 31.6713

Appendix Table . ANOVA average daily gain of animals at different phases

Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr> F

AGE 1 0.32201667 0.32201667 20.46 <.0001
FS 2 0.25521111 0.12760556 8.11 0.0004
PHASE 2 0.29705833 0.14852917 9.44 0.0001
AGE*PHASE 2 0.013975 0.0069875 0.44 0.6421
AGE*FS 2 0.08187778 0.04093889 2.6 0.0767
FS*PHASE 4 0.32717222 0.08179306 5.2 0.0005
AGE*FS*PHASE 4 0.01860556 0.00465139 0.3 0.8806
 65

R-Square Coeff Var Root MSE GP Mean

0.296927 11.83143 0.125446 1.060278

Appendix Table . ANOVA body condition score of animals at different phases

Source DF Type III SS Mean Square F Value Pr> F
AGE 1 2.0416667 2.0416667 4.15 0.043
FS 2 10.1759259 5.087963 10.34 <.0001
PHASE 2 150.0648148 75.0324074 152.5 <.0001
AGE*PHASE 2 0.0277778 0.0138889 0.03 0.9722
AGE*FS 2 1.1944444 0.5972222 1.21 0.2992
FS*PHASE 4 0.0740741 0.0185185 0.04 0.9973
AGE*FS*PHASE 4 0.1111111 0.0277778 0.06 0.994

R-Square Coeff Var Root MSE GP Mean

0.626908 11.43462 0.701430 6.134259
 66

Appendix Table .Formal Survey questionnaire on assessment commercial cattle fattening

practices
Name of enumerator------------------ Date of interview-----------------------
Region----------------------------------- Zone--------------------------------------
Districts _______________ Name of the farm --------------------
Name of respondent-------------------------

I. Main production practices

Feed resource and feeding system

1. List of feed resources used for fattening cattle in your farm in order of importance(rank)

No. Roughage feeds Concentrates Non-conventional feeds Mineral/vitamin

supplements/Feed additives
1
2
3
4

2. Is the roughage feed offered ad libitum? a. yes b. no

3. How much concentrate is offered to each animal/day? ____________________.

4. What is the basis for feeding such amount of concentrate?

____________________________________________________________

5. How do you offer the concentrates? a. sole b. in mixture

6. Is the concentrate feed offered throughout the whole fattening period? a. yes b. no

7. Do the amount of concentrate fed change over time? a. yes b. no

8. If yes to question 11, how is the amount to be changed is determined?

___________________________________________________________________
 67

9. Do you practice ration formulation? a. yes b. no

10. If yes to question 25 mention the ration formulation method employed?

a. using computer b. manual c. others, specify ________________________

11. How much kilo gram do you offer per cattle per day from each type of feed?
Basal feeds---------------------- Supplement feeds----------
12. In what sequence do you feed your fattening cattle per day?
a. Basal feeds first and supplemental feeds next c. Basal feeds at the middle
b. Supplemental feeds first and basal feeds next d. Supplemental feeds at the middle
e. There is no predetermined sequence of feeding
13. What type of feeding system you employ for the fattening animals?
a. grazing plus install feeding b. confined feeding only c. others, specify
_____________________
14. How much daily gain do you expect and how much you feed for that?

Daily gain: __________________ Daily feed intake: _________________

15. Are feed resources owned or purchased

No Feed type Purchased Owned Source Cost

1 Roughage
2 Concentrate
3 Non-conventional feed
4 Mineral supplement
5 Vitamins supplement
6 Others, Specify _____
16. What are the major challenges in terms of feeds and feeding in relation to the aspects
noted in the first row of the following table?

No. Feed type Availability Feed Price Knowhow of Others

of feeds quality ration formulation
1 Roughage
2 Concentrate
3 Non-conventional feed
4 Mineral supplement
5 Vitamins supplement
6 Others, Specify _____
 68

17. Is feed supply and/or price affected by season? a. yes b. no

17. Which season is of high feed shortage (price) and which one is low feed shortage (price)
season and why?

________________________________________________________________________

19. Which type(s) of feed is affected by season?

___________________________________________________________________________
_

20. What strategy do you follow to combat the seasonality of feed supply
(price)?_____________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________

II. Husbandry practices

1. What types of feeding facilities you use for fattening cattle?

2. Is there a separate feeding trough for roughages and concentrate? a. yes b. no

3. What are the major diseases that affect your fattening cattle? -------------------------------------
4. What are the major parasites that affect your fattening cattle? ------------------------------------
5. What do you think are the predisposing factors for cattle diseases in the area?

_________________________________________________________________
6. Do you have access to veterinary services? Yes / No
If yes, to what type of veterinary services? (Rank in the order of access)
a. Government veterinary .and Clinic b. Private Vet. c. Private Vet. Pharmacy
7. Have you experienced for deworming your fattening cattle? Yes / No
If yes, how many tablet per cattle at one time? --------; how many times per fattening period?
8. Is cattle vaccination practiced in the area? Yes / No
If yes, to what type of diseases? ----------------------------------------------------------------
9. How much cost do you pay for one fattening cattle associated with health aspect? (Birr)
 69

10. What is the source of water for the fattening cattle? _________________________

11. How do you offer water to the fattening cattle? __________________________________.

12. Is there a clean and adequate water supply to the fattening cattle? a. yes b.
no

13. What do you suggest need to be done to improve quality and adequate water supply to
fatteningcattle?_______________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________

14. What type of housing is used for fattening cattle? _____________________________.

15. Is this the preferred housing system by you? a. yes b. no

16. If the answer for question 15 above is no, why such housing system is used?

___________________________________________________________________________

17. Who does the following activities in order of importance?

No Feed collection Feeding Watering Cleaning Taking care of sick Selling Other
animals activities
1
2
3
20. Is labor a constraint for cattle fattening in your area (farm)? a. yes b. no

21. If yes to question 21, how do you fill labor demand for the activities?
___________________________________________________________________________
_

III. Breed types and choices

1. What kind of cattle breed does prefer?

a. Horro 2. Boran 3. Arsi Bale 4. Hararghe 5. Any other (specify)
2. What type of cattle breeds are currently used for fattening purpose? ------------------
3. Do you get the required breed at the market?a Yes b. No
4. What are the criteria’s to purchase these animals from the market?
 70

a. Sex b. Age c. Color d weight f. all 6. Other (Specify)

IV. Fattening issues
1) How long have you been in cattle fattening business?
a. < 1 year 2. 1-5 years 3. 5-15 years 3. 15-20 years
2. How many times do you fatten the cattle per year?
a. Only one time b. Two times c .Three times d. Four times
Why? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. How many cattle do you fatten per fattening period? ---------------------------

4. How many cattle are being fattened last year?

5. For how long the animals are fattened? __________________________________

1. Two weeks 2. One month. 3. Two months 4. Three months 5. > three months.
6. Which time is preferred for fattening cattle?

a. summer b. dry season c. fasting period d. religious holidays period

7. What is/are the reason(s) for your answer to question

6?_____________________________.

8. Is there any standard weight to put the cattle for fattening? a. yes b. no

9. At what weight do you put the animals for fattening? ______________________________.

10. Is there any standard age to put the cattle for fattening? a. yes b. no

11. At what age do you put the animals for fattening? _____________________________.

12. Is there a targeted weight at the end of fattening? a. yes b. no

13. What is the targeted weight at the end of fattening? ______________________________.

14. Is there a targeted age at the end of fattening? a. yes b. no

15. What is the targeted age at the end of fattening? _____________________________.

16. Which sex of cattle is preferred for fattening? a. male b. female

 71

17. What is/are the reason(s) for the sex preference for cattle fattening?_________________

18. What age range is preferable for your market? ---------

19) Do you get this age group at the market? a. Yes b No
20. If yes, how do you identify their age? a. Teeth b. Observation c. Other (specify)
21. If no, what do you think is the reason? --------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. Does skin color has effect on your cattle purchase and fattening system? a. Yes b. No
23) If yes, what color is preferable? a. White b. Brown c. Gray d. Other (Specify)
24. What weight range is preferable to purchase? -------------
25. Do you get this weight range at market? a. Yes b. No
26. What is the source of your fattening cattle?
a. Own production b. immediate purchase for fattening
c. Culled cattle due to old age & being unproductive d. Supplied by agriculture office
27. What type of cattle do you prefer for fattening purpose? (Rank in the order of preference)
a. Old oxen b. Matured oxen c. Young bull d. Old cow f. Unproductive cow f. Heifer
28. Why? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
29. Can you record (starting Date) the entering date? A. yes b .no
30. If no, how do you decide the end of finishing period?
a. By calculating feeding length b. By considering rate of live-weight change
c. Anticipated Current and future price d. Others (specify) ---------------------------
31. On which months of the year do you prefer to start cattle fattening? --------------------------
Why? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
32. On which months of the year, demands for fattened cattle become high? ----------------------
Why? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
33. On which months of the year, demands for fattened cattle become low? ----------------------
-
Why? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
34. How do you transport your cattle before and after fattening? A. Trekking on foot b. using
vehicle C. Other (specify
V. Marketing of fattening cattle
1. Who supply (source of) cattle for you?
 72

a. Yourself b. Brokers c. Official suppliers d. Pastoralist (farmers) e. Others, please specify---

2. If purchase, where do you buy your fattening cattle? a. In the village b. At local market
c. Supplied by agriculture office (not known) d. Out of the district market (specify

3. How much do you pay per animal? -------------

4. How do you buy (purchase) fattened cattle

a. On live weight base using measurements b. With negotiation by visual estimation

c. Others (specify) ----------------------------

5. What criterions have you considered for buying fattening cattle? Rank in the order of
importance)

a. Age of the cattle b. Body size /frame c. Breed D. Health e. Body condition
f. Price g. Color h. Adaptation i. Presence of horn and / or its shape

6. At what age and weight do you purchase them?

Age: ________________. Weight: ______________.

7. Does physical defect affect your purchase of cattle? a. Yes b. No

8. If yes, what type of defects?
1. Skin damage 2. Blind eyes 3.Broken horn 4.Broken leg 5. Other (Specify)
9. If no, what is your reason? -------------------------------------------------------------)
10. Does the supply of cattle to your farm vary from season to season? a. Yes b. No
11. If yes, what is the reason?
a. Price change b. Transportation problem c. Drought (Lack of grazing land)
d. Disease incidence e. Or other, specify
12. Why do you think is the reason for cattle price variation across months/season?
13. How do you sell your fattened cattle?
a. On live weight base using measurements b. With negotiation by visual estimation
c. Others (specify) ----------------------------
14. For whom do you sell your fattened cattle most of the time?
a. For individuals/ group consumers b. For local butchers c. For middlemen
 73

d. For big traders e. For meat processing factory f. Export g. Other (specify) ---------------
15. Currently what is your selling price of fattened cattle? ------------ Br/kg
16. Who specifies the selling price of fattened cattle? a. Yourself b. Government c. Other
(Specify)
17. Do you think the price for export market affect the domestic market? a. Yes b. No
18. If yes, mention how it affects. ------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. If no, why? -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. How is the trend on demand/volume of your customers?
a. Increasing b. decreasing constant d. It depends e. Other (specify)
21. If decreasing, what is the reason?
a. High price b. Low quality c. Disease causes d. Other (specify)
22. What are your customer’s criterions to purchase the fattened cattle?
a. Age b. Sex c. Weight d. All e. Other (mention)
23. Do you fulfill the customers’ criterion? a. Yes b. No
30. If no, what is your reason?
VI. Constraints of production

1. What are the constraints of fattening? Rank in their order of importance and give reason.

Constraint Rank Reason

Feed
Health
Management knowhow
Lack of animals
Water
Market
Others, specify i.____________
74