Edo reserves 2000 hectares for ranching to curb grazing crisis

8th April 2014

To protect food and cash crops from destruction by grazing cattle of nomadic herdsmen, the Edo State government says it has reserved 2000 hectares of land for the establishment of ranch in the state.

The land, which is located at Okpilla in Etsako East Local Government Area, has been reserved as grazing reserve since the past 21 years. Abdul Oroh, the state commissioner for agriculture and natural resources, stated this when he appeared before members of the Edo State House of Assembly’s plenary session.

The commissioner was invited to brief the House on measures so far taken by the state government to address the incessant cases of clashes between Fulani herdsmen and several farming communities in the state.

The lawmakers had between May 10, 2012, and June 27, 2013, passed resolutions on the clashes between Fulani herdsmen at Ologbo in Ikpoba Okha Local Government Area and Odighi and Odigutue communities in Ovia North-East area, respectively.

Oroh, who noted that the Fulani herdsmen cases had assumed a national dimension, said the state government was also considering setting aside parcel of lands in all the major entries point to the state across the three senatorial districts for setting up grazing reserves.

He said if established, the reserves would among others encourage organise and coordinated method of grazing by herdsmen. The reserves, which he said would have well equipped veterinary offices and recreational facilities, would also serve as a meeting point for livestock products, among others.

The commissioner, who observed that these were temporary measures, however advocated that a modern ranch technology could stem the movement of live cattle across the country.

He posited that a ranch of about four hectares can accommodate about a thousand herds of cattle.

“I was also advised by the officials of my ministry that by using modern technology you could do a ranch of not more than four hectares and that can accommodate about a thousand herds of cattle,” he stated. Speaking further, he said “but I think the modern method of livestock production is what is required in Nigeria. We can carry a refrigerated truck from the North to sell it to supermarkets all over the country. We can produce livestock anywhere in the country. It does not have to come from Mali, Chad or Benin Republic, or anywhere.”

He then added: “We can graze and produce any livestock in Edo State in abundant quantities. So, we should also rise up to that challenge that what is coming here to creating a menace to us, especially insecurity that is threatening us, that we can deal with them here. If we have abundant of it here we cannot expect that people will bring it elsewhere and find a market here. That is also a challenge to us.”

While calling for a legislative measure, he however urged the lawmakers to enact a law that would coordinate and regulate the activities of cattle herdsmen in the state, saying the state had moribund ranches at Igarra and Ubiaja as well as a dairy farm, and the ranches were available for public private partnership participation.

A committee has been set up by his ministry to engage the national association of cattle breeders on dialogue, he said, as heads of security agencies in the state had also be briefed of the development.

IDRIS UMAR MOMOH

==============================================0

Grazing Reserves in Edo State: A Time Bomb

Abuja

February 02, 2016

The Comrade Governor

Edo State Government of Nigeria

Edo State liaison office

Abuja

Your Excellency,

Grazing Reserves in Edo State: A Time Bomb

The undersigned, a lawyer and public interest advocate, is a proud Edo of Eware-Anwain indigenous community of your State. He is also on the Board of Peoples’ Rights & Social Responsibility Movement (PRSRM); a non-Governmental public responsibility advocacy group.

I write in relation to the above subject matter. I have resolved to write you personally, for the following reasons;

- By divine providence you rode to fame and public reckoning on the pedestal of public interest and peoples’ right, which advocate you have been;

- Thus you have a mandate to stand out as the conscience of the common larger Nigerian people;

- The most important resource of our state is its agricultural land;

- As trustee of the land resource of the State it is part of the real, apparent and ostensible responsibility of your leadership to ensure that this limited resource is managed in manner that best serves tradition, cultural and economic rights of our people.

- Our people who gave you a mandate expect and believe in you to protect any common heritage, and way of life.

- Recently I read a report credited to your Commissioner Abdul Oroh, proposing the creation of grazing reserves for ‘nomadic Fulani’ herdsmen, in Edo State. Despite the fact that this program is being pushed from the centre, if implemented our people will suffer untold, irreversible problem from it. It will shrink the people’s self-empowerment resource base and breed eternal conflict that would outlive us all. It is doubtful if you wish to live such a legacy

The worry

The Federal Government’s proposal to create grazing reserves, to cater for the pastoral needs of Fulani Cattle herdsmen across the country is simply a scheme to take land from indigenous land owners, make a gift of it; and use the coercive force of the State to protect this for the use and promotion of the private economic interest of the Fulani beneficiaries. This is without considering the plight of the communities who own the land, many of whom because of their low level of literacy are not aware of this scheme and will only suddenly discover that their state government has given away their land without considering them.

The proposal is said to be designed to curb the menace of itinerant cattle movement, the tide of criminality, and insecurity associated with activities of nomadic Fulani herdsmen, and their regular conflicts with indigenous land owners. In other words, the program is designed to take land form indigenous land owners and create a safe haven for them in some places where they would enjoy special government protection. This means that even when they become a nuisance to their hosts they will be protected by the Nigerian Police, armed forces and security. The inexplicable failure of the federal government and these agencies to stem the impunity of these nomads creates doubts as to the real motives of the proponents of this incomprehensible policy.

As proposed, the program is to be a “temporary measure until the nomadic herdsmen ‘can be persuaded to accept a more sedentary lifestyle’’. The questions therefore are:

How long will be the temporary stay of the Fulani amongst their Edo and other hosts? History has shown that the Fulani has not changed his ways in several centuries. He will not change now and so his temporary stay will actually not be “temporary”. Indeed the large scale migration of people of the same kin for economic sustenance, designed, facilitated and protected by the State and Federal government cannot be any but permanent.

The nature of the Fulani herdsmen who have been migrating across the country in the last few years have repeatedly shown that they cannot leave peacefully amongst the Edos. Not when their act enjoys State backing.

Brief facts about the Fulanis, nomadic cattle herdsmen and the cattle trade

For the records, the Fulanis are one of the over four hundred ethnic nationalities that constitute the Nigerian State. But unlike most other Nigerian ethnic nationalities the Fulanis enjoy a nationality that transcends the Nigerian State. While many are settled in other African countries, like the Gambia, Chad, Niger Republic, Togo, Mali, the Cameroons, their nativity is to be found largely in Guinea, Senegal, Cote D’ivoire, Burkino Faso.

In Nigeria, there are 2 categories of Fulanis: the non-Nigerian Fulanis; and the native Fulanis.

- The non-Nigerian Fulanis are non-Nigerian migrant nomadic shepherds hired by the native Fulani and other Nigerians to cater for their livestocks. Many of these non-Nigerian Fulanis herdsmen do not speak any native Nigerian language and the cattle they tend belong to influential native Fulanis and northern elites who do not own personal pastoral farms.

Many non-Nigerian Fulanis are encouraged to remain in Nigeria and take up citizenship which is facilitated by the Nigerian Fulanis. Part of the process of naturalization and assimilation is the nomadic education program of the federal government and a 2014 ‘Grazing Reserves Bill, of Senator Zainab Kure which were meant to organize, socialize and assimilate these largely uneducated non-Nigerians.

- The Nigerian or native Fulanis, on the other hand, who though are not Hausas have adopted the native Nigerian Hausa language, and have lost their native ‘Fulfulde’ language. These Fulanis are located mostly in North-West axis of Nigeria some of whom settled in that part of Nigeria before the 1804 Jihad of Uthman Dan Fodio; and some others who settled in various parts of northern Nigeria sequel to the jihad.

The leadership of these Fulanis is found in first class traditional and religious thrones in most parts of northern Nigeria except in states like Yobe & Bornu and now in Zamfara State which in 1999 established new emirates to which indigenous Hausa Emirs were installed. In all other places the emirates are their exclusive preserve.

Educated, urbane and highly socially mobile they constitute majority of the elites of northern Nigeria; and are the 1st choice occupants of visible government, political, traditional and religious thrones in North-west and central Nigeria. Powerful, rich and cultured, these Fulanis wield very strong civil and political power at the federal level.

Facts about the Fulani’s cattle and the cattle business

- The Cattle, an important part of this discourse, are not owned by the controversial nomadic cattle Fulani herdsmen.

- The cattle were traditionally tended under the care of pastoralists; who are non-Nigerian hirelings.

- Most of the grazing reserves hitherto established in Northern Nigeria have fallen into the hands of affluent northern elites who acquired them as private property.

- The Fulanis hardly sell, slaughter or consume their cattle which are considered as assets and means of storing and measuring wealth

- A better proportion of the cattle livestock consumed by Nigerians are not of the flock owned by the Fulanis in farms, quartered in grazing reserves or driven by the nomadic Fulani herdsmen. Rather most of the livestock consumed locally are those sourced by cattle traders, who are largely Hausas and other Nigerian livestock merchants. These are sourced from various cattle markets within the fringes of Nigerian borders and sold in local markets. These are the common consignments found in haulage trucks on Nigerian highways.

Grazing Reserves

The matter of Grazing Reserves has been a great cause of worry and cause of strife, unrest, violence and acts of genocide against aboriginal ethnic nationalities and communities, particularly, in States in northern Nigeria;

- This has been a cause of concern, silent discourses and disquieting controversies;

- It is popular in the northern part of Nigeria where over 600 Grazing Reserves were created from 1965, when the Grazing Reserve law was promulgated, by the defunct government of Northern Region;

- Some of these grazing reserves are homes to migrant Fulanis who trace their indigeneship to the communities where the reserves are located;

- Some of these grazing reserves have been acquired by powerful northern elites as private farms under the Land Use Act;

- During the 7th National Assembly, Zainab Kure, a senator from Niger State proposed a Bill for the establishment of Grazing reserves across the nation. Thereafter, some proponents of the policy in the Federal public service initiated several administrative processes to facilitate its implementation. These include several unpublished meetings between federal and State officials of requisite ministries and MDAs.

The Grazing Reserve Bill turned out to be a very unpopular one, going by the extent of criticism and opposition to it. It is simply unconscionable.

Why the Grazing Reserve policy is unpopular

1. Institutionalization of crises and national insecurity

The Grazing Reserve policy involves the use of political fiat and administrative powers to expropriate the traditional ownership rights of aboriginal communities. It is a policy that enables and facilitates the use by governments of the instrument of State power to expropriate indigenous peoples and communities of their prized ancestral heritage. It is largely responsible for the incessant communal conflicts in North-Central Nigeria as indigenous communities are constrained to move southwards in search of arable lands. This is what provoked Alhaji Sani Ahmed Yerima, former governor of Zamfara State, to make the extreme outburst that; “Wherever you find two or more Fulanis there is trouble”, in reference to the activities of these nomadic herdsmen.

- It undermines the right and interest of people whose identity and heritage is defined and denominated by land.

- It involves the displacement of established communities by non-Nigerian migrants, through the influence of their powerful local kinsmen;

The Grazing Reserves policy has unwittingly conferred right on nomadic herdsmen, to amongst others;

Invade and forcibly take-over
the fertile agricultural, historical lands as well as the traditional homesteads of the indigenous communities within their places of interest, across the nation;
ii. Create grounds for communal conflicts arising from the acts of the herdsmen who are neither subject to the local civil or political authorities; nor amenable to local cultural values of the hosting communities;

iii. Dilute the cultural and religious homogeneity of communities thereby suppressing their capacity for effective resistance;

2. Unconstitutionality, economic disempowerment, environmental degradation and institutionalization of poverty amongst indigenous communities

By the provision of Section 14(2)(b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, welfare and security of citizens constitutes the primary purpose of Government.

The proposed Grazing Reserves policy offends the above constitutional provisions. It is unjust, unpatriotic, oppressive, suppressive and poverty inductive. It is an economic deprivation policy that has over time compelled indigenous communities in the extreme northern States, to abandon their individual traditional land holdings, and cultural and traditional stead, to migrate to other communities, as their lands are ‘invaded’ or taken over under the protection of State.

This policy which has created grave disaffection and ethnic conflicts, is largely responsible for the many unresolved crises and a major contributor to the endemic poverty, amongst the aborigines of northern Nigeria.

Poverty, environmental and social implications

This inexplicable, nepotistic and unpatriotic policy will;

- Impoverish the host communities and others displaced from the lands

- Diminish the economic capacity and potential of affected communities

- Degrade the environment by deforestation activities of ravaging herds of cattle which consume all vegetation, including nursery economic trees, thereby creating serious imbalance in the eco-system;

- Result in serious negative environmental and ecological problems along grazing routes and in grazing reserves. This is largely responsible for soil erosion in some Southern States and desertification in the north;

- Raise serious question on the integrity of some of our national policy and commitment to some global matters, such as Climate Change.

Grazing Reserve policy, International Law & Convention

Grazing Reserve policy;

- Is contrary to the declaration of the rights of indigenous peoples as adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on the problems faced by indigenous people in several areas, as it;

- diminishes the collective rights of indigenous minority peoples, as well as their rights to identity, culture, language and other issues, and;

- seeks to frustrate the aspirations of indigenous people to exercise control over their way of life and economic development and to maintain and develop their identities, lands and religion, within the frame work of the States in which they live as indigenous people, and;

- it is contrary to the provisions of Section 16 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, which forbids the selective and discriminatory promotion of the economic interest of a minority group or a few against other Nigerians. This Section provides, amongst others, that; “The State shall, within the context of the ideals and objectives for which provisions are made in this Constitution –

(a) Harness the resources of the nation and promote national prosperity and an efficient, a dynamic and self-reliant economy

(b) Control the national economy in such manner as to secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equality of status and opportunity;

(2) The State shall direct its policy towards ensuring –

(b) That the material resources of the nation are harnessed and distributed as best as possible to serve the common good;

- (c) That the economic system is not operated in such a manner as to permit the concentration of wealth or the means of production and exchange in the hands of few individuals or of a group”.

Some facts and questions

- The Nigerian federation is constituted by an estimated population of over 160,000,000 people of over 400 ethnic nationalities with diverse cultural values and orientation; and dispersed in 36 States; and 774 local Governments/Area Councils.

- Nigeria has a 3-tier political structure of a Federal, State and Local Governments; with distinct and sometime overlapping duties and responsibilities. The conduct of businesses is not part of the duties of the Federal Government.

- The Nigerian Constitution forbids the use of State power to promote or advance personal or sectional interest; or to promote the control of business or concentration of wealth in the hands of few or a section.

- The proponents of the Grazing Reserve policy recognize the fact that it is an unpopular program. Therefore, the implementation has been shrouded in secrecy and promoted by seeming subterfuge, as it is cleverly shielded from transparent interrogation and open debate.

Why would the Federal Government which ought to promote the corporate interest of the diverse Nigerian peoples display such obvious and naked partisanship and commitment to;

i. A policy which benefits only a fraction of less than 5% of the Nigerian population, majority of whom are non- Nigerians.

ii. A policy which promotes the preservation, consolidation, multiplication and concentration of wealth in the hands of a privileged few;

iii. The implementation of an economic policy which is not mutually beneficial to the Nigerian people.

It is imperative to note, that while the Federal Government has deployed its enormous resources to stem the activities of cattle rustlers, curiously, it has been inactive against the pervasive criminality and incessant acts of genocide against communities by herdsmen.

Concerns

It is curious to know that those who ought to be speaking are silent. These are the politicians; governors, legislators and members of the civil society. To the discerning, this is not surprising. One may ask?

- At a time of resource mobilization and concerted agitation for economic diversification; why are Northern Governors and elites not advocating or interested in the management of this vital and rich economic resource and means?

- Why are southern governors, whose lands are erosion prone; and less than 40% of the entire Nigerian land mass, quiet and undisturbed?

Timing of the policy;

This is ominous.

- It is at a time when the nation is passing through stress. Many would rather consider the controversial initiative as a minor or tolerable irritation, as economic concerns constitute the major preoccupation of the generality of the Nigerian people, for the time being.

- It is at a time the erstwhile visible and vocal elites are battling with corruption cases and integrity questions have thereby lost their voices.

Cattle rearing: Global best practices;

The migrant pastoral model of cattle rearing is a model that has failed hence this attempt to take other people lands and give to the cattle Fulanis. But it might be pertinent to examine other models such as the EU countries that today enjoy a glut. These countries have thus banned the importation of dairy and dairy products and are instead looking for places to dump dairy and its products. Russia, Uruguay, Australia, Argentina, etc. have other successful practices which Nigeria can learn from. So,

i. Why is the Nigerian government reluctant in abandoning the failed pastoral model and adopting the tested and sustainable global best practices, in livestock management?

ii. Why can’t these migrants be persuaded to accept a more reasonable, mutually beneficial and sustainable policy or program?

iii. When has public policy initiatives become dependent on consent of a people without established rights?

iv. We believe that your government should, instead of gifting Edo State and to migrants, should initiate, encourage and develop successful alternative models such as ranching amongst its indigenes, if Edo State must depend on beef for their diet

v. What would be the place of your leadership in posterity and in the hearts of the victims of this policy; who are for the time being unaware of the current debate and plans to take over their prized heritage?

The silver-lining

Nigeria is at the moment under the leadership of Muhammadu Buhari. Though a Fulani by ethnic nationality, Mr. President ‘belongs to nobody; and belongs to all Nigerians’. He it was who in 1984 inspired the patriotic zeal of many Nigerians by the famous quote; “Nigerians have no other country they can call their own”.

Most of our ignorant, illiterate and naïve countrymen know no other place they can call their own other than their communities, where the resources for their sustenance are domiciled. We owe it a duty to protect this interest against the activities of resource grabbers. You were in the vanguard against the privatization of public assets, in less ominous circumstances. For Edo State providence has imposed leadership responsibility on you to preserve the traditional, cultural and economic heritage of the people.

It is time to walk the talk.

Your compatriot,

Godswill Iyoha Iyoke, Esq.