Master Plan Milk Chain

8/11/2019 Master Plan Milk Chain

1/152

UPD TINGTHEM STERPL N

OFTHEMILKCH ININRW ND

23,April2009

By

DMSDEVELOPMENT &

MANAGEMENT

SOLUTIONS

Research & Consulting Chambers

DRAFTREPORT

REPUBL IQUE OF RWANDA

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL RESOURCES

PADEBL


2/152

Page2of152

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS&ACRONYMS..........................................................................................................5

1. BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

1.1. RwandaContext....................................................................................................................7

1.2.

Milk

Chain

..............................................................................................................................

7

1.3. Methodology.......................................................................................................................10

1.3.1. Datacollectionandanalysis................................................................................................11

1.3.2. Reportwriting......................................................................................................................12

2. UPDATING THE MASTER PLAN OF THE M I LK CH A I N I N RWANDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3

2.1. Introduction.........................................................................................................................13

2.2. Situationofthelivestocksubsector....................................................................................13

2.2.1. Livestockareas....................................................................................................................13

2.2.2. Livestocksystemsandpatterns..........................................................................................17

2.2.3. Importanceinthepeasantproductionsystem...................................................................19

2.2.4.

Organisationof

the

activities

of

the

subsector

...................................................................

20

2.2.5. Veterinaryandanimalproductionservices........................................................................20

2.2.6. Supplyanddemand.............................................................................................................21

2.3. Features,strengthsandweaknesses..................................................................................27

2.3.1. MilkProduction...................................................................................................................27

2.3.2. Research,supervisionandextensionservices....................................................................35

2.3.3. DairyTechnologies..............................................................................................................42

2.3.4. UHTMilk..............................................................................................................................46

2.3.5. Processingofmilkanddairyproducts................................................................................50

2.3.6. Marketingofmilkanddairyproducts.................................................................................61

2.3.7. Marketingofmilkbasicprinciples.......................................................................................64

2.3.8. Consumption.......................................................................................................................66

2.3.9. Formationofpricesandprofitmargins..............................................................................67

2.3.10. Socialandenvironmentalissues.........................................................................................68

2.3.11. Roleofwomeninthedevelopmentofdairycows.............................................................79

2.4. Orientations,policiesandstrategies...................................................................................80

2.4.1. Constraintsandmeasurestobetaken................................................................................80

2.4.2. StrategicChoices.................................................................................................................82

2.5. ProposalProject..................................................................................................................84

2.5.1.

Justificationof

the

Project

...................................................................................................

84

2.5.2. ProjectObjectives...............................................................................................................85

2.5.3. DescriptionoftheProject...................................................................................................86

3. BUSINESS PLANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4

3.1. TraditionalsDairyPools.......................................................................................................94

3.2. ProposalDairyPools............................................................................................................94

3.3. MilkCollectionCenter.........................................................................................................94

3.4. SalesCenterforMilkandMilkProducts...........................................................................105

4. CONCLUSION AN D RECOMMANDATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

5. BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

6.

ANNEXES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

120


3/152

Page3of152

LIST OF TABLES

Table1:ConstructedMilkCollectionCentres....................................................................................9

Table2:Milkcollectioncentresunderconstruction........................................................................10

Table3:Cattlepopulationbyend2008...........................................................................................13

Table4:Cattlepopulationbybreed.................................................................................................14

Table5:

Cattle

Population

per

Production

Zone

..............................................................................

14

Table6:EvolutionofCattlePopulationinProductionZoneofNgoma...........................................15

Table7:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingCowsinProductionZoneofNgoma..............................15

Table8:EvolutionoftotalmilkproducedinProductionZoneofNgoma.......................................15

Table9:EvolutionofmarketablemilkproducedinProductionZoneofNgoma............................15

Table10:EvolutionofCattlePopulationinProductionZoneofNyirangarama..............................15

Table11:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingCowsinProductionZoneofNyirangarama................16

Table12:EvolutionoftotalmilkproducedinProductionZoneofNyirangarama..........................16

Table13:EvolutionofmarketablemilkproducedinProductionZoneofNyirangarama...............16

Table14:EvolutionofCattlePopulationinProductionZoneofKarongi........................................16

Table15:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingCowsinProductionZoneofKarongi...........................16

Table16:

Evolution

of

total

milk

produced

in

Production

Zone

of

Karongi

.....................................

16

Table17:EvolutionofmarketablemilkproducedinProductionZoneofKarongi..........................17

Table18:EvolutionofCattlePopulationinProductionZoneofRusizi...........................................17

Table19:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingCowsinProductionZoneofRusizi..............................17

Table20:EvolutionoftotalmilkproducedinProductionZoneofRusizi........................................17

Table21:EvolutionofmarketablemilkproducedinProductionZoneofRusizi.............................17

Table22:ProgressionofGrossDomesticProduct[MillionsofRWF]..............................................19

Table23:EvolutionofprospectsintheoriticaldemandofMilkProducts.......................................21

Table24:Evolutionofsupplyofmilkcomparedtonationalneeds.................................................21

Table25:TechnicalestimatedparametersofstatisticsrelatedtoMilkChain................................22

Table26:TechnicalParametersofevolutionofcattleandmilkproduction...................................23

Table27:

Cattle

Population

per

Province.........................................................................................

23

Table28:Breedratioofcattlepopulationperprovince..................................................................24

Table29:BreedratioofcattlepopulationperCattleProductionZone..........................................25

Table30:Totaldailymilkproductionperprovince[L]....................................................................25

Table31:Marketabledailymilkproductionperprovince[L]..........................................................25

Table32:Marketabledailymilkproductionperprovinceandpercow[L].....................................25

Table33:EvolutionofCattlePopulationatnationallevel...............................................................26

Table34:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingCowsatnationallevel.................................................26

Table35:Evolutionoftotalmilkproducedatnationallevel...........................................................26

Table36:Evolutionofmarketablemilkproducedatnationallevel................................................26

Table37:Productionandimportationsofmilk19992007.............................................................27

Table38:

Breed

Ratio

of

cattle

population

per

province

.................................................................

32

Table39:CowspurchasedthroughBPRloans.................................................................................34

Table40:EvolutionofcattlepopulationinProductionZoneofNyanza.........................................53

Table41:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingcowsinProductionZoneofNyanza............................53

Table42:EvolutionoftotalmilkproducedinProductionZoneofNyanza.....................................53

Table43:EvolutionofmarketablemilkproducedinProductionZoneofNyanza..........................53

Table44:EvolutionofcattlepopulationinProductionZoneofGishwati.......................................56

Table45:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingcowsinProductionZoneofGishwati..........................56

Table46:EvolutionoftotalmilkproducedinProductionZoneofGishwati[L]..............................56

Table47:EvolutionofnumberofmarketablemilkproducedinProductionZoneofGishwati[L].57

Table48:EvolutionofcattlepopulationinProductionZoneofNyagatare....................................57

Table

49:

Evolution

of

number

of

lactating

cows

in

Production

Zone

of

Nyagatare

.......................

57

Table50:EvolutionoftotalmilkproducedinProductionZoneofNyagatare[L]...........................57


4/152

Page4of152

Table51:EvolutionofmarketablemilkproducedinProductionZoneofNyagatare[L]................58

Table52:Quantityofmilksold[MillionsdeL].................................................................................59

Table53:EvolutionofcattlepopulationinProductionZoneofInyange........................................60

Table54:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingcowsinProductionZoneofInyange...........................60

Table55:EvolutionoftotalmilkproducedinProductionzoneofInyange.....................................60

Table

56:

Evolution

of

marketable

milk

produced

in

Production

Zone

of

Inyange

.........................

60

Table57:Preferenceofurbanconsummersofmilkproducts.........................................................66

Table58:Reasonsforpreference....................................................................................................66

Table59:Placeswhereconsumed...................................................................................................67

Table60:InyangeWastewaterAnalysisResults..............................................................................74

Table61:ExistingMilkCollectionCentersin2008andtheircapacity............................................90

Table62:MaterialandequipmentforaMCC..................................................................................96

Table63:SourcesoffinancingfortheMCC.....................................................................................97

Table64:OfficeMaterialforMCC...................................................................................................97

Table65:PersonnelEmolmentsforMCC[RWF]..............................................................................97

Table66:EstimationoffixedAssetsforMCC[RWF].......................................................................98

Table

67:

Working

capital

requirements

for

MCC

...........................................................................

98

Table68:DetailedPlanoffinancingforMCC[RWF]........................................................................99

Table69:RawmaterialsforMCC[RWF]........................................................................................100

Table70:Maintenance&RepairsofMCC[RWF]..........................................................................100

Table71:InsuranceCostforMCC[RWF].......................................................................................100

Table72:ManpowerCostsforMCC[RWF]...................................................................................101

Table73:PlanfordepreciationofassetsforMCC[RWF]..............................................................101

Table74:DistributionofoperationcostforMCCinRWF[Year5]................................................101

Table75:ActualPricesforMilkProducts......................................................................................107

Table76:MaterialandequipmentforMVC..................................................................................108

Table77:OfficematerialsforMVC................................................................................................108

Table78:PersonnelEmolment[RWF]...........................................................................................109

Table79:EstimationoffixedassetsforMVC[RWF]......................................................................109

Table80:WorkingCapitalrequirementsforMVC[RWF]..............................................................110

Table81:DetailedFinancingPlanforMVC[RWF].........................................................................110

Table82:MaintenanceandRepairs[RWF]....................................................................................111

Table83:InsuranceCostforMVC[RWF].......................................................................................111

Table84:PersonnelEmolmentforMVC[RWF].............................................................................112

Table85:PlanfordepreciationofassetsforMVC[RWF]..............................................................112

Table86:DistributionofoperationcostsforMVCinRWF[Year5]..............................................113


5/152

Page5of152

ABBREVIATIONS&ACRONYMS

AIV AidesInfirmiersVtrinaires

BAD BanqueAfricainedeDveloppement

BL

Bassin

laitier

BOD BiochemicalOxygenDemand

BPR BanquePopulaireduRwanda

BRD BanqueRwandaisedeDveloppement

C DegrCelsius

Ca2+

IonCalcium

CAPMER CentredAppuiauxPetitesetMoyennesEntreprisesauRwanda

CCL Centredecollectedulait

CH4 Mthane

CO2

Dioxydede

carbone

COD ChemicalOxyenDemand

CSS CreditandSavingServices

CVL Comptoirdeventedulaitetdesproduitslaitiers

DMS Development&ManagementSolutions

EA EnvironmentalAudit

EDPRS EconomicDevelopmentandPovertyReductionStrategy

EIA EnvironmentalImpactAssessment

EIA EnvironmentalImpactAssessment

EPQD

EasternProvince

Quality

Dairy

FAD FondsAfricaindeDveloppement

FAOFoodandAgricultureOrganisation[OrganisationdesNationsUniespour

lalimentationetlagriculture]

FGA FacilitdeGarantieAgricole

FRW FrancRwandais

FSP FdrationduSecteurPriv

g Gramme

GDP GrossDomesticProduct

GoR

Governmentof

Rwanda

HPI HeifterProjectInternational

ISAR InstitutdesSciencesAgronomiquesduRwanda

km Kilomtre

kW Kilowatt

L Litre

LAAICO LibyanArabAfricanInvestmentCorporation

LVNR LaboratoireVtrinaireNationaleduRwanda

LWF LutherianWorldFederation

m

Mtre

MCC MilkCollectionCenter


6/152

Page6of152

mg Milligramme

MINAGRI MinistredelAgricultureetdesressourcesanimales

mm Millimtre

MVC MilkVenderCentre

MVK

Mairiede

la

Ville

de

Kigali

NOx Compossnitreux

O2 Dioxygne

ODM ObjectifsdeDveloppementduMillnaire

OMS OrganisationMondialedelaSant

PADEBL ProjetdAppuiauDveloppementdelElevageBovinLaitier

PAPSTA ProjetdAppuiauPlanStratgiquedeTransformationdelAgriculture

pH PotentielHydrogne

PIB ProduitIntrieurBrut

PPCB

PripneumonieContagieuse

des

Bovins

RADA RwandaAgricultureDevelopmentAuthority

RARDA RwandaAnimalResourcesDevelopmentAuthority

RBS RwandaBureauofStandards

REMA RwandaEnvironmentalManagementAuthority

SACR SendACowRwanda

SO2 Dioxydedesoufre

SS SuspendedSolids

t Tonne

TVA

Taxesur

la

valeur

ajoute

UHT UltraHauteTemprature

USAID UnitedStatesAgencyforInternationalDevelopment

USD DollarAmricain

VK VilledeKigali


7/152

Page7of152

1. BACKGROUND

1.1. RwandaContext

Rwanda is a landlocked country with no access to the sea, located between Central Africa and

EasternAfrica.

It

is

known

as

the

country

of

a

thousand

hills,

and

it

has

a

surface

area

of

26

338

Sq

km. With a population of 9.3 million inhabitants, Rwanda has one of the highest population

densitiesintheworld:353inhab./Sqkm.

Agriculture employs 78.8% of the activepopulation (EICV2 data) and contributes 36% [of which

90%isbylivestockproduction]totheGDPofthecountry.Rwandaisclassifiedamongcountriesof

"Low Human Development" index with a GDP per capita of 370 USD. The GDP growth rate is

estimated at 8% and the total expenditure and net lending amounted to 386,5 billion RWF in

2006.

Thepoliticalregimeisrepublicanwiththreepowers:Executive,LegislativeandJudiciary.

TheExecutivePowerisvestedinthePresidentoftheRepublicandtheCabinet.Themembersof

cabinetare

all

selected

from

political

organizations

on

the

basis

of

their

seats

in

the

Chamber

of

Deputieswithoutexcluding thepossibilityofappointing tothe Cabinet othercompetent people

whodonotbelongtoanypoliticalorganization.

TheLegislativePowerisexercisedbyabicameralParliamentwhichconsistsof80membersinthe

ChamberofDeputiesand26membersintheSenate.

TheJudicialPower isexercisedbytheSupremeCourtandothercourtsandtribunalsestablished

bytheConstitutionand/orlaws.

Thecountryisadministrativelysubdividedinto4deconcentratedProvincesplustheCityofKigali,

furthersubdividedinto30decentralizedDistricts(LocalGovernments).

The1994

genocide

in

Rwanda

destroyed

almost

all

economic,

legal

and

social

infrastructures

and

ledthecountryintoquasitotalruin.

After this period, the country had to be reconstructed in all sectors. This rehabilitation, among

otherthings,requiredthesettingupofanadequatelegalframeworktomanagethesituationof

postgenocideandwar.

The documents of the Vision 2020 and the Economic Development and Poverty Reduction

Strategy[EDPRS]highlightthechallengesthatRwandafaces.Amongthese,PADEBLisparticularly

concernedbythecountryseconomicgrowththroughitscontributiontofoodselfsufficiencyand

povertyreduction.

1.2. MilkChain

UnderVision2020andtheMilleniumDevelopmentGoals(MDG),theGovernmentofRwandahas

placed poverty at the heart of its concerns because it is really a development limiting factor.

Indeed, the depth and the gravity of poverty affect both the rural (65.7%) and urban (14.3%)

areas.Whilefocusingonpositive indicators(increasingGDPbymorethan6%),theGovernment

has set for itself the following objective under the National Strategy for Poverty Reduction: To

reduce poverty by half by 2015. The success of this strategy will be achieved through the

following:

(1)

Development of the rural sector, particularly the technological transformation of

agriculture through intensification, rational management of natural resources and

promotionofnonagriculturalemployment;

(2)

Transfer

of

productive

assets

to

the

underprivileged

in

the

society,

particularly

the

unemployed,thewomenandtheyouth,availingthemwithgreaterlandsecurity;


8/152

Page8of152

(3) Developmentoftheagriculturalsectorthroughincreasedproductivity,withmoretrading

activitywhichwillgeneratebetterrevenues.

AlthoughithasrecordedaslightincreaseinitscontributiontoGDP,theshareoflivestockinthe

national economy is still low and almost nil in the external trade. According to FAO/WHO

standards

for

Rwanda,

the

diet

requirements

of

the

population

are

2

100

kilocalories,

59

g

of

proteins and 40 g of lipids/head/day. The livestock subsector is supposed to contribute 10% of

protein requirements, representing 6 g/head/day of which3.1 g of milk, 2.2 g of meat, 0.5 g of

eggsand0.2goffish.Proteinintakeis4g/head/day,representingadeficitof2g/head/day.This

deficiency leads to protein malnutrition with harmful consequences on the health of the

population (sensitivity to disease, inefficiency at work), especially the vulnerable categories

(women and children). This situation of protein malnutrition, poor participation in the national

economyandenvironmentaldegradationimpedesthecountryssustainabledevelopment.

At the local level, nationalproduction is far from meeting the demand in animalproducts. As a

result of a very high population growth, the number of consumers has increased rapidly. Also,

individual ration of animal proteins, which is already insufficient, decreases as the population

increases.Consideringitscurrentgrowthrateof2.9%whichisexpectedtostabilizeataround2%

by2020,thepopulationwillbearound14millionbythatyear.

Inordertomeetthepopulationrequirements inanimalproteins intheyear2020, livestockwill

needtoproduce483693tonsofmilk,83291tonsofmeat,38546tonsofeggs,17362tonsof

fishand11363tonsofhoney.

The aim of the current strategies is to improve the existing livestock genetically instead of

increasing their population, and the recent introduction of GIRINKA one cow for every poor

familyfitsquitewellinthiscontext,andthisprogrammeisexpectedtoyieldgreatimpact.This

strategy, through which the Government intends to fight poverty and food insecurity, targets

more than 600 000 households and is already operational. By 2020, the cattle population will

decreaseand

settle

at

the

acceptable

stocking

level

of

about

505

816

heads.

The

significance

of

thisstrategyisthatitrespectsthepotentialitiesononehandandthat,ontheother,theresultsin

termsofproductionwillexceedtheproteinrequirementsofthepopulation[increasedmilkand

meatproduction].Withapopulationconsistingof80%offarmerstoday,thenumberoffarmers

willdecreaseinfavourofthesecondaryandtertiarysectors.

By2020Rwandawillbeacountryfreelyflowingwithmilkandhoney:

Stock farming will avail 6 g of proteins/head/day, representing 10% of protein

requirementsofthepopulationasacontributiontofoodsecurity;

ThecontributionofstockfarmingtoGDPwillbe8%atleast;

The

subsector

will

contribute

to

foreign

exchange

earning

through

the

export

of

animals

andanimalproducts,particularlymilkanddairyproducts.

Inthelightofthestrategicadvantagesofvariousproductionsandsystems,milkappearstobean

essentialcommodity.Asarichandcompletefood,milkplaysasignificantroleinthefightagainst

malnutrition and underfeeding. In addition, this chain generates employment and revenue. It is

forthisreasonthattheinvolvementofpartnersinthischainisagreatopportunityfortheoverall

developmentofthecountry.

Thechosenpolicyoption isgenetic improvementthroughthe introductionofperformingbreeds,

mainlyartificialinseminationandthedisseminationofimprovedsires.ForMINAGRI,PADEBLisa

majorplayerinthisendeavor.Itscontributioninimprovingfoodsecurityandpovertyreductionis

significant.

Specifically,

it

aims

at

meeting

the

domestic

demand

in

milk

and

cattle

meat

and


9/152

Page9of152

improve producers incomes. To achieve these aims, the project executes the following

objectives:

To organise, train and equip grassroots producers to enable them to participate in the

implementationandinternalizingoftheproject;

To

improve

the

genetic

potential

of

the

local

cattle

through

crossing

with

high

performing

breedsinordertoimproveproductivity;

Toprovideappropriateveterinaryservices;

Toimprovelivestocknutritionandtherationalmanagementofgrazingland;

To build and operationalise infrastructure for the collection, cooling and trading of milk

anddairyproducts;

Tobuildcapacityfornationaldepartmentsinvolvedintheimplementationoftheproject.

ThroughPADEBL,AfDBhasalreadylaunchedandfinancedactionsupstreamanddownstreamof

the milk chain. Upstream actions concerned activities aimed at increasing milk production and

organisingproducers,

while

downstream

activities

consisted

of

interventions

regarding

mainly

the

promotionofmilkmarketingthroughtheestablishmentofcentresforthecollectionandcooling

ofmilk.

The following two tables provide information about milk collection centres which have already

beenbuiltandthoseunderconstruction:

Table1:ConstructedMilkCollectionCentres

Province District Sector Cooperative/Association Site Financing

East Nyagatare Matimba Tuzamurane 1.Matimba PADEBL

Rwimiyaga KirebeKamatezirakamwa

Giramataisangano

2.Kirebe

3.Gacundezi

PADEBL

PNUD

Karangazi

Terimberemworozi

AbarwanashyakaMilk

Supplers

RwabiharambaFarmers

coop.

Musenyi

4.Mbare

5.Ruhuha

6.

Rwabiharamba

7.Musenyi

PADEBL

PADEBL

PADEBL

PADEBL

Nyagatare Rwempasha

Ville

8.Rwempasha

9.Nyagatare

Town

Nyagatare

District

Kayonza Gahini Rwisirabofarmerscoop. 10.Nyamiyaga PADEBL

Murundi Mubarifarmercoop 11.Buhabwa PADEBL

Kirehe Nyarubuye Giramata 12.Nyarubuye PADEBL

Bugesera Mayange CODECOL 13.Mbyo HandicapIntern.

South

Kamonyi

Gacurabwenge

Amizero

14.

Rugobagoba

PADEBL

Mugomero Coop.yaboroziba

Mugomero

15.Mugomero RSSP

Ruhango Kinazi Umuhuza 16.Kinazi PADEBL

Kabagari Turengeraborozi 17.Buhanda PADEBL

Nyanza Nyagisozi Giramatamworozi 18.Rurangazi PADEBL

North Gicumbi Byumba IAKB 19.Kageyo PADEBL

Byumba GIRAMATA 20.Gicumbi

Town

DRB2

Kajevuba 21.Kajevuba HandicapIntern.

Musanze Kigombe Zirakamwa 22.Musanze

Town

PADEBL

West Rubavu Kanzenze Zirakamwatwicundire 23.Mizingo PADEBL

Kigali

City

Gasabo

Kabuga

24.

Rugende

Handicap

Intern.

Kicukiro COABOMU 25.Giporoso COABOMU


10/152

Page10of152

Table2:Milkcollectioncentresunderconstruction

Province District Sector Cooperative/Association Site Financing

East Gatsibo Rwimbogo Rwimbogozirakamwa 1.Rwimbogo PADEBL

Kiziguro KoperativeyaborozibaKiziguro 2.Ndatemwa PADEBL

Kayonza Rwinkwavu Koperativeyaboroziba 3.Rwinkwavu PADEBL

Rwamagana

Kigabiro

DukundamatungoKigabiro

4.

Kigabiro

PADEBL

Rubona Koperativeyaboroziba 5.Rubona PADEBL

West Rubavu Kanama KoperativeyaborozibaNkomane 6.Nkomane PADEBL

Nyabihu Muringa KoperativeyaborozibaMuringa 7.Muringa PADEBL

Arusha KoperativeyaborozibaArusha 8.Arusha PADEBL

Koperativeyaboroziba

Nyiragikokora

9.Nyiragikokora PADEBL

Rubavu KoperativeyaborozibaGitwa 10.Gitwa PADEBL

Rusizi Nyakarenzo KoperativeyaborozibaRusambu 11.Rusambu PADEBL

Karongi Rubengera Koperativeyaboroziba

Rubengera

12.Rubengera PADEBL

South

Kamonyi Kayenzi KoperativeyaborozibaKayenzi 13.Kayenzi PADEBL

Muhanga Nyamabuye COEPROMU 14.Nyamabuye PADEBL

Nyanza

Busoro

Koperativeyaborozi

ba

Busoro

15.

Busoro

PADEBL

North Musanze Kinigi Agiragitereka 16.Kinigi PADEBL

1.3. Methodology

In August 2008, the Projet dAppui au Dveloppement de lElevage Bovin Laitier [PADEBL]

contracted DMS [Development & Management Solutions], a Rwandan research and consulting

company,to update the current master plan forthemilk chain in Rwanda. As per the Terms of

Reference, the purpose of the exercise wasto study andcome out with proposals to overcome

the constraints within the segments of the milk chain, relating to the collection, conservation,

processing,tradingandmarketingofmilkandmilkproducts.

Asalso

indicated

in

the

Terms

of

Reference,

the

contracted

firm

was

asked

to

provide

business

plansforthemilkprocessingplantsat:

Gishwati;

Nyanza;

Nyagatare;and

Kigali.

The project was financed through the Fonds Africain de Dvelopment [FAD] (Project ID: n

F/RWA/AGR/DEV.SUP/01/36).

Theassignment

was

carried

out

by

DMS

Consultant

Team:

Dr.

Carpophore

Ntagungira,

Specialist

ofAgroeconomy,Mr.PhilipRushigajiki,SpecialistofLivestock,Mr.PaulinNgirumpatse,Specialist

of Rural Development, Mr. Silas Sililo Sinayobye Kamanzi, Specialist of Milk Technology, Ms.

Coletha Ruhamya Uwineza, Specialist of Environment, and Mr. Fiacre Kamanzi, Specialist of

Databases, responsible for overall coordination, quality control and compilation of reports. The

methodologyemployed is described insection below. Essentially the team wasselectedto give

themosteffectivecombinationofexperience,skillsandknowledge.

Field work commenced on 27 October 2008 that is, the gathering, recording and analysis of

information from PADEBL and its partners and stakeholders, according to the contract, this

process was to culminate in a large consultative workshop involving participants from across

Government,

the

private

sector

and

other

stakeholders

which

was

supposed

to

take

place

sometime after submission of the draft report. Before the submission of the final report, a


11/152

Page11of152

presentation of the draft report to PADEBL staff was planned on 22nd

December 2008. A final

report incorporatingallthecommentswasplannedtobefinalisedandsubmittedtoPADEBLon

29thDecember2008.

Theabovesettimeframewasnotfulfilleddueto:

A copy of master plan which was to be updated reached the team on the 24th

November 2008

whilethe

team

started

our

work

on

the

15th

October

2008,

lack

of

this

document

delayed

field

visitsandduetothattheteamwentbacktothefieldwherewespenttwoweeks.Inadditionto

thatthemasterplanwas inhardcopyandhencewewereobligedtowriteitoutsothatweget

thesoftcopy.Oneweekwasspentforreading,writingandunderstandingthisdocumentbythe

team.Thisexplainswhythedraftreportwasnotreadytill30th

Jan2009.

1.3.1.

Datacollectionandanalysis

The information required to complete this assignment was to be gathered from a range of

sources, both written and oral. Written sources included both formal publications by PADEBL

and the government, including legal and regulatory texts and informal working papers,

proceduralmanuals,andotherinternaldocuments.Alistoftheprincipaldocumentsconsultedis

includedat

the

end

of

this

document.

OralinformationderivedmainlyfromindividualinterviewswithPADEBL&RARDAstaff,partners

andvariousstakeholders.AlistofpeoplemetisattachedatAnnex10.

ConsiderableweightwasputontheuseofinteractiveandparticipativediscussionswithPADEBL

&RARDAstafftosupplementinformationdrawnfromdocumentsandindividualinterviews.

Itwasfeltthatsuchanapproachwouldmaximisetheinvolvementandparticipationofstaffinthe

process,easingthewayandincreasingthechancesforimplementationofsubsequentpaper.At

the same time, however, it was recognised that individuals would necessarily have their own

distinctiveperspectiveontheissuesunderdiscussion,andthatconflictingpointsofviewwereto

be

expected.

It

was

therefore

important

that

no

single

piece

of

information

be

taken

merely

at

facevalue;asfaraspossibleevidenceoneach issuehasbeensoughtfromanumberofsources

and the findings correlated and triangulated against each other, in an attempt to obtain an

objectiveandwellbalancedview.

Viewsandcommentshavenotbeendirectlyattributedtoindividualsinthisreport;sothatpeople

feelabletospeakasfreelyaspossibleabouttheirexperience,itwasimportantthatassurancesof

anonymitybeabletobegivenifnecessary.Atthesametime,clearrecordsofalldiscussionsand

of documentary sources have been kept by the Consultant Team, so that in case any of the

findingsarequeriedthereisadefiniteaudittrailofevidencetobeconsulted.

Most importantly, during the course of the data collection, the Consultant Team did a working

tour inthefourCattleProductionZones(namelyGishwati,Nyanza,NyagatareandKigali)and in

alldistrictsofRwandatocollectinformation.Theinputfromthemhasbeenincorporatedinthis

document.

The table below was designed and translated into kinyarwanda and used to gather information

whichconstitutedthedatabasedeveloped.

Akarere

Umurenge Inka

nyarwanda

Inka

zibyimanyi

Inka

zinzungu

Inka

zikamwa

Amalitirozikamwa

kumunsi

Umurenge1

Umurenge2

Umurenge3

/

Umurengewanyuma


12/152

Page12of152

Thistableismeantforthecollectionofquantitativeinformationonthelivestocksituation.

Annexes 12 to 15 provide the questionnaires respectively for Primary Producer, Milk Collection

Center,MilkProcessorandBeneficiaries&Investorsindairyinputs.

1.3.2. Reportwriting

Afterthelongprocessofdatacollectionfrom27th

Octoberto12th

December2008,thefollowing

taskswerecarriedoutinordertofinalisethereport:

Analysethedatacollected,drawfindingsandidentifytheproblemsandpriorityareasper

segmentofmilkchain;

Updatethemasterplanforthemilkchain;

DevelopthebusinessplanforthefourCattleProductionZones;

Raise the main points to give proposals in relation with thenational orientations within

themilkchain;

PreparetheIncomeStatementforeachcattlelayeringareas;

Draftthereport.


13/152

Page13of152

2. UPDATINGTHEMASTERPLANOFTHEMILKCHAININRWANDA

2.1. Introduction

Through PADEBL, the Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (MINAGRI) is seriously

committedto

the

promotion

and

the

development

of

the

milk

chain

and

to

the

programme

One

cowforeverypoorfamily.Inthisconnection,severalprojectsandprogrammesareunderwayin

thecountry,particularlyinthemaindairyfarmingareas.However,someconstraintsstillremain,

particularlyinthesegmentsofthemilkchainrelatedto:

thecollection;

theconservation;

theprocessing;

thetrading;and

themarketing.

Inorder

to

overcome

these

various

constraints,

PADEBL

project

launched

a

study

for

updating

the

master plan of the milk chain, a common concern for both MINAGRI and AfDB, as confirmed

duringthemidtermreviewofPADEBLprojectinApril2006.

2.2. Situationofthelivestocksubsector

2.2.1. Livestockareas

Themilk subsector inRwanda hasmade great progressafterthewar and the 1994genocide. A

large number of cows were killed, but the return of Rwandans from exile with a substantial

numberofcattlecontributedtotherevivalofdairyfarming.Subsequently,theGovernmentand

individuals made great efforts to import pure or improved dairy breeds. In recent years, many

initiativeswereundertakenbytheGovernmentandthedevelopmentpartnersaswellasprivate

investorsandacattlerestockinghasreachedasatisfactorylevel.

ThecurrentGovernmentprogrammeknownasOnecowpereverypoorhouseholdintendsto

distribute dairy cows throughoutthe country, particularly in the poorest areas. All these efforts

havegreatlycontributedtotheincreaseofthecattlepopulationinthecountry.

Table 3 below shows cattle population distribution in the country. Eastern province has the

highestpopulation,followedbyWestern,Northern,SouthernandKigaliCityindescendingorder.

Table3:Cattlepopulationperprovincebyend2008

Province

Localbreed

Crosses

Pure

breed

Total

%

Total

East 376566 61823 27694 466083 39%

West 123615 43014 15322 335462 28%

North 138142 22870 7794 181951 15%

South 260170 61777 13514 168806 14%

KigaliCity 22984 9086 10523 42593 4%

GrandTotal 921477 198571 74847 1194895 100%


14/152

Page14of152

Table4:Cattlepopulationbybreedbyend2008

Value %

Localbreed 921477 77%

Crossedbreed 198571 17%

Purebreed

74

847

6%

Total 1194895 100%

The cattle population is composed of 77% of local breeds, 17% of crossbreeds and 6% of pure

breedsasshownintheprecedingtable.

According to the December 2008 census carried out by the study mission, the total cattle

population is slightly higher than the estimates by MINAGRI for 2007. Indeed, MINAGRI had

estimatedthatthetotalpopulationwould be 1147000heads in 2007,showinga difference of

47,895heads.

Inaddition,basedonthesenumbers,thecattlepopulationwhichwasestimatedat645848heads

in1997hasincreasedalmosttwofold,representingagrowthrateofnearly76%in11years.

ThishighgrowthrateistheoutcomeoftheeffortsmadebytheGovernmentanditspartnersto

restocktheherdswhichweredecimatedmostlybythewarandthe1994genocide.Theseefforts

ledtoimprovedfoodsecurityandpovertyreductioninsomezones.

Nonetheless,thiscattlepopulationexceedsbyfarthestockingcapacityoftheavailable landfor

cattlekeepingsincestudieshaveshownthatRwandacouldaccommodateonlylessthan700000

headsofcattle.

Another significant finding is the change that has occurred in the genetic makeup of the cattle

population inRwanda.Outofatotalof1194895headsofcattle,198571cows,or17%,areof

improvedbreed.Thestudynotesalsothe introductionof74847purebreedheadsofcattle,or

6%of

the

total

population.

Table5:CattlePopulationperProductionZone

CattleProduction

Zone

LocalBreed Crosses PureBreed Total

Absolute

Number%

Absolute

Number%

Absolute

Number%

Absolute

Number%

Nyagatare 218309 24% 40419 20% 17543 23% 276271 23%

Nyanza 198438 22% 50138 25% 10986 15% 259562 22%

Inyange 163812 18% 33682 17% 21538 29% 219032 18%

Gishwati 115003 12% 45884 23% 16783 22% 177670 15%

Ngoma 103873 11% 14802 7% 5188 7% 123863 10%

Nyirangarama

52118

6%

5

643

3%

1

400

2%

59

161

5%

Karongi 36188 4% 3586 2% 396 1% 40170 3%

Rusizi 33736 4% 4417 2% 1013 1% 39166 3%

GrandTotal 921477 100% 198571 100% 74847 100% 1194895 100%

Theanalysisofthefiguresinthistableshowsthatthecattlepopulationisfoundaroundthemain

traditionalareassuchasNyagatare,Gishwati,NyanzaandKigali.Thesehighconcentrationcattle

areasweretraditionallycharacteristicsasdairyfarmingareas.

A dairy farming area is anarea with high concentration of milk production. Inthis area there is

spiritofmilkproduction.Moreover,theproblemsoflivestockexperiencearesharedandtheyare

solvedtogether.


15/152


16/152

Page16of152

Table11:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingCowsinProductionZoneofNyirangarama

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Local 15766 15450 14495 13747 13037 12363 11725 11119 10545 10000 9484 8994 8529

Crosses 2031 7930 17310 21974 23770 25712 27814 30086 32545 35204 38081 41193 44559

Pure546

2

469 7

047

10

873

11

762 12

723 13

763 14

887 16

104 17

420

18

843

20

383 22

049

Total 18343 25849 38853 46594 48568 50799 53301 56093 59194 62624 66408 70570 75137

Table12:EvolutionoftotalmilkproducedinProductionZoneofNyirangarama

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Local 5912 5794 5436 5155 4889 4636 4397 4170 3954 3750 3556 3373 3198

Crosses 3839 14988 32716 41532 51343 55539 60077 64987 70297 85547 92537 1000 99 10 8279

Pure 2129 9628 27485 42406 52928 57254 61932 66993 72468 88841 96101 1039 54 11 2449

Total 5912 5794 5436 5155 4889 4636 4397 4170 3954 3750 3556 3373 3198

Table13:EvolutionofmarketablemilkproducedinProductionZoneofNyirangarama

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Local 3547 3476 3261 3608 3422 3709 3517 3336 3163 3000 2845 2698 2559

Crosses 2304 8993 19629 29072 35940 44431 48062 51989 56238 68437 74030 80079 86623

Pure 1278 5777 16491 29684 37050 45803 49546 53594 57974 71073 76881 83163 89959

Total 7129 18246 39382 62365 76412 93943 101125 108919 117375 142510 153756 165941 179141

KarongiDairyFarmingArea

Table

14:

Evolution

of

Cattle

Population

in

Production

Zone

of

Karongi

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Local 36188 35222 31519 29891 28348 26883 25495 24178 22929 21745 20622 19557 18547

Crosses 3586 22703 50142 64033 69265 74925 81048 87671 9483 5 1 02585 110968 12003 6 12 9844

Pure 396 6318 20251 31699 34290 37092 40123 43402 46948 50785 54935 59424 64279

Total 40170 64243 101912 125624 131903 138901 146666 155251 164713 175114 186524 199016 212671

Table15:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingCowsinProductionZoneofKarongi

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Local10

947

10

728 10

065

9

545

9

052 8

584 8

141 7

721 7

322 6

944

6

585

6

245 5

922

Crosses 1291 7226 16639 21249 22985 24864 26895 29093 31470 34042 36824 39833 43088

Pure 154 2097 6720 10519 11379 12309 13315 14403 15579 16853 18230 19719 21331

Total 12392 20051 33424 41313 43416 45757 48351 51216 54372 57838 61639 65797 70341

Table16:EvolutionoftotalmilkproducedinProductionZoneofKarongi

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Local 4105 4023 3774 3579 3394 3219 3053 2895 2746 2604 2469 2342 2221

Crosses 2440 13658 31448 40160 49648 53705 58094 62841 67976 82722 89482 967 94 10 4704

Pure 602 8177 26208 41025 51205 55389 59915 64811 70108 85948 92972 1005 69 10 8787

Total 7147 25858 61431 84765 104247 112314 121062 130548 140830 171274 184923 199705 215712


17/152


18/152


19/152

Page19of152

4.Dairylivestockonranchesorbigfarms

Thissystemisrarelyusedduetoinsufficientvastgrazingland.Afewfarmsarefoundespeciallyin

theEasternProvince,aroundKigaliCity,andtheGovernmentfarmsatSongaandRubonainthe

SouthernProvince.

Generally,

this

system

requires

much

investment

and

can

be

more

cost

effective

while

requiring

lesshumanresources.Nonetheless,ithasbeenobservedthatinmanycases,theownersofthese

farmsarenotprofessionalbreederswhomonitordailythemanagementconcernsoftheirfarms.

Ontheotherhand,thesearepeoplewhohaveotheroccupations,leaving ittotheherdsmento

managetheirfarmstothedetrimentofefficiency.

2.2.3.

Importanceinthepeasantproductionsystem

The national economic accounts do not enable one to understand separately the weight of the

milk chain in the national economy. According to the available data, the contribution of the

livestock to the gross domestic product accounted for 2.4% in current prices in 1997, or about

11.5billionRWF.

Agriculturecontributesgreatlytothegrossdomesticproductanditssharehascontinuedtogrow,

ranging between 37% and 41.3% in 2006. During the same period, the share of livestock in

agriculturewasaround6%asshowninthetablebelow.

Table22:ProgressionofGrossDomesticProduct[MillionsofRWF]

Priode 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Agriculture(includeLivestock) 228.7 251.4 277.0 277.4 367.3 441.7 515.7 654.6

Livestock 15.9 15.9 17.6 20.6 21.0 24.3 25.7 28.5

TotalGrossDomesticProduct 608.4 676.1 741.9 781.5 955.2 1137.9 1327.1 1583.0

Source:NBR

Cattle keeping plays also a very important role in the peasant production system for several

reasons, both economic and social. Cattle is at the same time a source of manure, income and

savings,andiswidelyusedalsoduringsocialevents

ForcropdairyfarmerswhoarethemajorityinRwanda,livestockisasourceofverymuchneeded

fertilisers considering the insufficiency and the cost of inorganic fertilisers. Thus, the fertility of

cultivated soils which is affected by continuous degradation due to erosion depends greatly on

organicfertilisers,amongwhichmanureisafirstratechoice.Anotherfeatureoflivestockisthat

itprovidesregularincomeandisaregularsourceoffood.

A cattle breeding is also of particular importance to the Rwandan peasant in that the animals

representa

standing

saving

which

can

easily

be

mobilised

in

the

case

of

need.

Animals

are

thus

a

sourceofsignificant incometomeet somebasicneedssuchasschoolfeesforthechildren,the

purchase of production inputs, meeting the primary needs of the family, etc. They are less

sensitive to climatic hazards than food crops and cash crops, and they represent a convenient

meansofmeetingurgentneedswhennecessaryandcontributetotheaccumulationofcapital,as

thecasemaybe,whichcanbereinvestedintheothersectorsofproduction.

Finally, in addition to being a source of food in the form of onfarm consumption, animals are

often given or received as gifts in the form of dowry during wedding ceremonies, without

mentioning livestock products which are given or received during feasts or visits by parents or

friends.

Itshould

also

be

mentioned

that

the

breeding

of

certain

animals

uses

harvest

remains

and

other

householdresidueswhichwouldotherwisebewastedandtransformtheminusefulproductsfor


20/152

Page20of152

humannutrition.Inthisway,thebreedingofdomesticruminantsenrichesmarginallandforother

enterprises(e.g.subsistencecrops)forproducingmeatandmilk.

2.2.4.

Organisationoftheactivitiesofthesubsector

Livestock activities are managed by the Rwanda Animal Resources Development Authority

(RARDA),

an

autonomous

body

supported

by

the

Government

through

MINAGRI.

RARDA

was

established within the framework of the policy of the Ministry of Agriculture and Animal

Resources with the primary aim of increasing production, modernising agriculture and ensuring

foodsecurityandproducingsurplusforthemarket.

Assuch,RARDAisresponsibleforalltheactivitiesrelatedtoanimalproductionandanimalhealth.

Itis inchargeofplanningactivitiesandmonitoringtheirimplementationontheground.Though

the implementation of plans and strategies is under decentralised structures, RARDA has

deployeditsstaffintheprovinces,districtsandsectors.Sometimes,acattlebreedingissupported

by NGOs partners of the Government. Admittedly, the organisation introduced by the

establishment of RARDA has borne considerable success. However, the supervision of livestock

activities leaves much to be desired in that it is the same grassroots employees who are at the

same

time

in

charge

of

animal

production

and

agricultural

extension

work

in

the

narrowest

meaningoftheword,withwhatthis implies intermsof lackofspecificityandclosetargetingof

thebreedersneeds.Addtothisthefactthatthedecentralisedveterinariansareunderequipped

materiallyandevenintermsofpracticalexperience.Ontheotherhand,extensionworkrequires

thatextensionworkersshouldbeequippedwithadvancedspecialisation.

In the field of animal health and genetic improvement, the lack of high level veterinarians at

present deprives the breeders of constant support, at a time when their cooperatives and

professionalorganisationsarealmoststillintheirembryonicstages.

The distribution of inputs is inadequate for lack of operators who are actually involved in the

upstream sector of production. The reasons for this are that, on one hand, there is no solvent

marketfor

the

breeders

(whose

livestock

activities

are

not

sufficiently

productive

to

pay

for

the

services) andthat,on theother, thecost of inputs is relatively highsuchthattheremunerative

marginsobtainedareincontrastwiththebreederspurchasingpower.Asaresult,theinputsare

rareonthemarket,especiallybecausethegovernementdoesnotsubsidisethemanymoredue

to the change in the strategic development policies which implies an increasingly strong

liberalisationoftheproduction,processingandmarketingstructures.

For a long time, the processing of dairy products has been in the hands of the breeders

themselves (traditionalprocessingofbutter,ghee,curdandskimmedmilk).But inrecentyears,

plants supported and financed by the State have taken over before the private sector became

halfheartedly interested inthefield.Industrialprocessingconcernedmainlymakingpasteurised

curd,

sometimes

fresh

pasteurised

milk,

yoghurt

and

cheese.

The

performance

of

the

dairy

plants

hasnotalwaysbeenuptothemissiontheGovernmenthasentrustedtothem,and it isforthis

reasonthattherehasbeenatendencyofprivatisingthem.Atthesametime,therehaveemerged

traditionalprocessorswhoboilthemilkbeforeitsdeliveryforconsumption.Thetechniquesused

are not always well controlled although those who practise them are at present very active

operatorsonthemarket.

2.2.5. Veterinaryandanimalproductionservices

After the war and the genocide, much of the infrastructure was destroyed. Nonetheless, great

efforts have been made to rehabilitate these facilities. With the establishment of the Projet

dAppui au Dveloppement de lElevage Bovin Laitier, some of the installations have been

completely

rehabilitated

and

even

strengthened.

This

is

the

case

with

the

National

VeterinaryLaboratory,theNationalCentreforArtificialInsemination.


21/152

Page21of152

The widespread stalling zero grazing of cattle has however made some of these communal

facilitieswhichhadbeenputinplacebyMINAGRIanddecentralisedstructureslessuseful.Thisis

particularlythecasewithveterinarydispensaries,sprayingandcattletreatmentraceswhichare

still found in rural areas with high concentration of cattle, while dipping tanks have been

abandonedbecauseofmanyreasons,oneofwhichbeingthefactthatthesefacilitiesarestressful

to

cattle

which,

after

all,

often

have

to

make

a

long

journey

to

reach

them.

2.2.6.

Supplyanddemand

Total milk demand can be measured through the consumption of households, which includes

bothconsumptionathomeandoutside.

Trendprospectsintheoreticaldemand

In its reports, MINAGRI estimates the annual needs of the population based on the necessary

proteinrequirementsofthepopulationat0.04tons/year/head.Thefollowingtableprovidesthe

estimatesintonsofthetheoreticaldemandfrom2008to2020.

Table23:EvolutionofprospectsintheoreticaldemandofMilkProducts

Year Population Needsintons(TheoreticalDemand) NationalProductionintons

2008 9674975 386999 364084

2009 9955549 398222 368623

2010 10244260 409770 379642

2011 10541344 421654 416845

2012 10847043 433882 490052

2013 11161607 446464 518224

2014 11485293 459412 549312

2015 11818367 472735 583521

2016 12161099 486444 621078

2017 12513771 500551 738743

2018 12876671 515067 790003

2019

13250

094

530

004

845

922

2020 13634347 545374 906857

Source: MINAGRI

ServiceNationalderecencement;Resultsof3rd

RGHI,August2002

Author

The following table reveals that up to 2011, the national requirements still show a deficit.

However,startingfrom2012,therequirementsindairyproductsaremet,thesurplusincreasing

from56065tin2012to361483tin2020.Thesestatisticsmaycheerusupintheknowledgethat

uptotheyear2020,Rwandawillcertainlybeacountrywherethemilkwillflowandhoneytoo

probably!

Table24:Evolutionofsupplyofmilkcomparedtonationalneeds

Year Population National

Needs

National

Production

Importations Total

Supply

Surplus/Deficit

comparedtonational

needs

LiquidMilk

[UHT]

Powder

Milk

Milk

Products

2008 9674975 386999 364084 500 100 5 387604 23520

2009 9955549 398222 368623 250 50 5 398527 29904

2010 10244260 409770 379642 125 50 5 409950 30308

2011 10541344 421654 416845 75 50 5 421784 4939

2012 10847043 433882 490052 50 50 5 433987 56065

2013 11161607 446464 518224 446464 71760

2014 11485293 459412 549312 459412 89900

2015 11818367 472735 583521 472735 110786

2016 12161099 486444 621078 486444 134634

2017 12513771 500551 738743 500551 238192

2018

12

876

671

515

067

790

003

515

067

274

9362019 13250094 530004 845922 530004 315918

2020 13634347 545374 906857 545374 361483


22/152

Page22of152

Source: 2nd

ConferenceofinvestorsinRwanda;Presentationofthesubsectorofmilk,Kigali1315May2004

Author

In2007,Rwandaproducedabout160millionsoflitresoffreshmilkfromanestimatedpopulation

of1147000cows.Nearly62million litreswere consumedonfarmandalmost35%ofthemilk

gotspoiltbeforereachingthemarketorbeforebeingprocessed.Atthesame time,450tonsof

dairyproducts

were

imported.

Inaddition,itisobservedthattherateofmilkconsumptionperpersonishigherinurbanthanin

rural areas. This is in reality due to the fact that demand is determined by the quantity that a

given section of the population is willing to consume based on the income at their disposal. In

otherwords,demanddependson the consumers purchasing power.Now, this is lower inrural

areas than in towns. This disproportion is a sign of serious deficiency in the diet of the rural

population.

Considering that only a small part of the households consume milk, these dietary deficiencies

becomeallthemoreworrying,especiallyintheruralareas.

Milkproduction

Since the end of the war, the national supply of livestock products is essentially limited to

productionbyhouseholdsandafewcooperatives.Milksupplycanbeassessedbyitsavailability

for human consumption. Another means of assessing total milk supply is by appraising the

amountsoldformoneyorintheformofbatter,theamountconsumedonfarmandthatoffered

asgift,adjustedbystockvariations.

The following two tables provide the technical parameters used in the assessment of cattle

population,milkproduction,developmentofthecattlepopulationandmilkproduction.

Table25:TechnicalestimatedparametersofstatisticsrelatedtoMilkChain

Parameter

Breed

TotalCattle

Population

Nbrofadultcattle

population

Nbroflactating

cattleTotalMilk

Produced/day

MarketableMilk

Produced/day

Local Xl Yl=0.55Xl Zl=0.55Yl Vl=2.50Zl Wl=0.60Vl

Crosses Xc Yc=0.60Xc Zc=0.60Yc Vc=7.00Zc Wc=0.60Vc

Pure Xp Yp=0.60Xp Zp=0.65Yp Vp=13.00Zp Wp=0.60Vp


23/152

Page23of152

Table26:TechnicalParametersofevolutionofcattleandmilkproduction

Local

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Birthsratio 55% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60%

Sexratio 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%

Deathsratioofburrcalves 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7%

Deathsratioofhaifescalves 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%

Deathsratioofadultcattle 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

Ratiooffemellesinbreeding[AI] 55% 55% 55% 55% 55% 55% 55% 55% 55% 55% 55% 55%

Destocking 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%

AverageMilkProduction/day/Cow 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5

Durationoflactation[Days] 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Crosses

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Birthsratio 60% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65%

Sexratio

50%

50%

50%

50%

50%

50%

50%

50%

50%

50%

50%

50%





Destocking 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%

AverageMilkProduction/day/Cow[kg] 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8


Importations 10000 15000 5000

Racepure

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Birthsratio 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65%

Sexratio 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%




Diffusionofmales[912monthold] 100%


Destocking 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12%

AverageMilkProduction/day/Cow[kg] 13 13 13 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15


Importations

3000

7

500

5

000

Thefollowingtablesshowthecattlepopulationbytheendof2008.

Table27:CattlePopulationperProvince

Province

Local Crosses Pure Total

Number % Number % Number % Number %

East 376566 41% 61823 31% 27694 37% 466083 39%

West 123615 13% 43014 22% 15322 20% 181951 15%

North 138142 15% 22870 12% 7794 10% 168806 14%

South 260170 28% 61777 31% 13514 18% 335462 28%

KigaliCity 22984 2% 9086 5% 10523 14% 42593 4%

GrandTotal

921

477

100%

198

571

100%

74

847

100%

1194

895

100%


24/152

Page24of152

Table28:CattlePopulationperDistrict

District Racelocale Raceamliore Racepure Total Percentage

Bugesera 31905 1100 979 33984 2.8%

Burera 23734 1599 145 25478 2.1%

Gakenke 23853 3230 413 27496 2.3%

Gasabo

17585

4

221

3

977

25

783

2.2%

Gatsibo 60169 11424 4570 76163 6.4%

Gicumbi 32558 9436 3045 45039 3.8%

Gisagara 23363 3119 219 26701 2.2%

Huye 26812 6938 814 34565 2.9%

Kamonyi 43455 8847 2461 54763 4.6%

Karongi 31231 1149 44 32424 2.7%

Kayonza 56287 6267 2506 65061 5.4%

Kicukiro 1704 3872 5829 11405 1.0%

Kirehe 32359 2748 1119 36226 3.0%

Muhanga 46588 5529 947 53063 4.4%

Musanze

23006

6

673

2

669

32

348

2.7%

Ngoma 22255 4616 1095 27965 2.3%

Ngororero 20971 2269 3003 26243 2.2%

Nyabihu 18114 18965 5573 42652 3.6%

Nyagatare 151113 30165 13441 194719 16.3%

Nyamagabe 30938 1793 217 32948 2.8%

Nyamasheke 20461 3120 295 23876 2.0%

Nyanza 15393 15216 725 31334 2.6%

Nyarugenge 3695 993 717 5405 0.5%

Nyaruguru 41041 7793 3117 51951 4.3%

Rubavu 10745 5872 2174 18791 1.6%

Ruhango

32

579

12

541

5

016

50

137

4.2%

Rulindo 34991 1932 1522 38445 3.2%

Rusizi 13275 1297 718 15290 1.3%

Rutsiro 8819 10342 3514 22675 1.9%

Rwamagana 22478 5503 3984 31965 2.7%

GrandTotal 921477 198570 74847 1194895 100.0%

Table29:Breedratioofcattlepopulationperprovince

The Northern and Eastern Provinces lead in terms of the

number of local cattle breeds, followed by the Southern and

WesternProvinces,withKigaliCitycomingthelast.

Concerningimprovedbreeds,theWesternProvincecomesfirst

[certainly because of Gishwati Dairy Farming Area]. It is

followed by Kigali City and the Southern Province, with the

EasternandNorternProvincesfarbehind.

Finally, in regard to pure breeds, Kigali City is far ahead of the Western, Eastern, Northern and

SouthernProvinces.

Province Local Crosses Pure

East 81% 13% 6%

West 68% 24% 8%

North

82%

14%

5%

South 78% 18% 4%

KigaliCity 54% 21% 25%

Average 72% 18% 10%


25/152

Page25of152

Table30:BreedratioofcattlepopulationperCattleProductionZone

The opposite table shows that local breeds are

predominant in the new proposed dairy farming

areas. With regard to the classical dairy farming

areas,Gishwaticountslesscattleofthelocalbreeds,

followedby

Inyange,

Nyanza

and

Nyagatare.

Concerning the population of crossbreeds, Gishwati

leads, followed by Nyanza, Inyange, Nyagatare, and

thenthefourproposednewdairyfarmingareas.

And in regard to the population of pure breeds,

InyangeandGishwatiarefaraheadoftheotherdairyfarmingareas.

Thefollowingtableshowsthedailyproductionoftotalmilk,includingthatconsumedbythecalf,

thehousehold,friends,etc.

Table31:Totaldailymilkproductionperprovince[L]

Province

Local Crosses Pure Total

Number % Number % Number % Number %

East 284778 41% 155794 31% 140409 37% 580981 37%

West 196754 28% 155679 31% 68518 18% 420950 27%

North 93484 13% 108396 22% 77683 20% 279562 18%

South 104470 15% 57632 12% 39516 10% 201618 13%

KigaliCity 17382 2% 22897 5% 53352 14% 93630 6%

Grandtotal 696867 100% 500398 100% 379476 100% 1576740 100%

Table32:Marketabledailymilkproductionperprovince[L]

Asshown

in

the

opposite

table,

daily

milk

production

available

for

the

marketinthewholecountryisestimatedat946044litres.TheEastern

Provinceranksfirstwith37%ofthenationalproduction.Itisfollowed

by the Southern Province with 25%, then far behind come the

WesternProvincewith18%andtheNorthernProvincewith13%,and

finallyKigaliCitywith6%.

Table33:Marketabledailymilkproductionperprovinceandpercow[L]

Province MarketableMilk LactatingCows Average/Cow

KigaliCity

56

178

14

328

3.9

West 167737 58854 2.9

South 252570 106212 2.4

East 348588 146968 2.4

North 120971 53061 2.3

Total/Average 946044 379423 2.8

Asitcanbeseen,379423cowsarelactatingwithadailyproductionaveragingabout2.8litresper

cow.KigaliCityhasthehighestratewith3.9litresperdaypercow.

Total

milk

production

shows

that

it

is

far

from

meeting

the

needs

and

the

demand

of

the

population. FAO recommends 220 litres of milk per person per year. Milk supply has been

CattleProductionZone Local Crosses Pure

Karongi 90% 9% 1%

Nyirangarama 88% 10% 2%

Rusizi 86% 11% 3%

Ngoma 84% 12% 4%

Nyagatare 79% 15% 6%

Nyanza 76% 19% 4%

Inyange 75% 15% 10%

Gishwati 65% 26% 9%

Average 80% 15% 5%

ProvinceMilkProduction

Number %

East 348588 37%

West 252570 27%

North 167737 18%

South 120971 13%

KigaliCity 56178 6%

Total 946044 100%


26/152

Page26of152

increasingatthesamerythmasthedemand,but lessthan56%ofthemilkreachesthemarket,

withthesellingpricemuchlowerthanthepricefetchedbyprocessedmilk(200RWFperlitreof

rawmilkagainst600RWFperlitreofmilkprocessedinthedairyplants).

Therearesomespecificconstraintswhichimpedethedevelopmentofthedairysector:deficient

nutritionintermsofquantityandquality,lowproductivityofcattlebreeds,shortageofveterinary

services,low

investment

in

livestock,

etc.

The

high

growth

rate

of

the

human

population

makes

thedemandhigherthanproduction.

The development of the cattle population and milk production at the national level is shown in

thefollowingtables.Milkproductionisexpressedinthousandsoflitres[x1000L].

Table34:EvolutionofCattlePopulationatnationallevel

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Local 921477 896872 802598 761144 721831 684548 649192 615661 583862 553705 525107 497985 472264

Crosses 198571 232205 241716 271262 293429 317407 343344 371401 401751 434580 470093 508507 550061

Pure 74847 89442 93400 110826 119882 129678 140275 151738 164137 177550 192059 207754 224730

Total 1194895 1218519 1137714 1143232 1135142 1131633 1132811 1138800 1149750 1165836 1187258 1214246 1247055

Table35:EvolutionofnumberoflactatingCowsatnationallevel

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Local 278747 273172 256285 24304 8 2 304 94 2 1858 9 2 072 99 1 965 92 1 8643 8 17 6809 167676 159016 150803

Crosses 71486 73911 80212 90017 973 73 1 0533 0 1 139 37 1 232 47 1 3331 9 14 4213 155998 168745 182535

Pure 29190 29681 30994 36777 39782 43033 46550 50353 54468 58919 63734 68942 74576

Total 379423 376764 367491 369841 367649 366952 367785 370193 374225 379941 387408 396703 407913

Table36:

Evolution

of

total

milk

produced

at

national

level

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Local 104530 102439 96107 91143 86435 81971 77737 73722 69914 66303 62879 59631 56551

Crosses 135108 139692 151601 1701 32 2 103 25 2 275 12 2 461 03 2 662 14 2 879 68 3 50438 379074 410051 443559

Pure 113842 115755 120877 1434 30 1 790 20 1 936 48 2 094 73 2 265 90 2 451 06 3 00487 325042 351603 380335

Total 353480 357887 368585 404704 475780 503131 533313 566526 602989 717228 766995 821285 880445

Table37:Evolutionofmarketablemilkproducedatnationallevel

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Local 62

718

61

464 57

664

63

800

60

505 65

577 62

190 58

978 55

931 53

043

50

303

47

705 45

241

Crosses 81065 83815 90961 119092 1472 27 1 820 10 1 968 83 2 129 71 2 303 75 28 0350 303259 3280 41 3 54847

Pure 68305 69453 72526 100401 1253 14 1 549 19 1 675 78 1 812 72 1 960 85 24 0390 260034 2812 83 3 04268

Total 212088 214732 221151 283293 333046 402505 426651 453221 482391 573782 613596 657028 704356

Imports

Accordingtoofficialstatistics,importsoflivestockproductsin1996werevaluedat1.374billions

RWF, representing less than 2% of the countrys total imports. Historically, almost all of these

imports were milk powder, both commercial and non commercial. Since the end of the war,

however, Rwanda has been importing significant quantities of fresh milk and ultrahigh

temperature milk from Uganda, but these imports were not distinctly recorded by the

administrativeauthorities

and

do

not

appear

in

customs

statistics.


27/152

Page27of152

To overcome these continuing difficulties and in order to give support to the operators in the

developmentoflivestock,theGovernmentsecuredfinancingfromtheAfricanDevelopmentBank

in 1999 which was invested in the development of dairy livestock through the existing Projet

dAppuiauDveloppementdelElevageBovinLaitier.It isfromthisprojectthattheprogramme

onecowperpoorhouseholdwassetinmotion.

At

the

same

time,

the

Government

has

been

encouraging

the

private

sector

to

invest

in

the

livestock subsector. Although private enterpreneurs are reluctant to get involved, the private

bankshaverespondedpositivelytotheGovernmentsinvitation.

Thisisascenariocreatesmanyopportunities.Butithasnotbeenenoughtomeetallthedemand

indairyproductsandputastoptotheirimportationasshowninthefollowingtable.

Table38:Productionandimportationsofmilk19992007

Year Productionintons Importationintons

1999 55577 1280

2000 57853 1378

2001

63484

1

687

2002 98981 1378

2003 112463 720

2004 127417 645

2005 133612 500

2006 152511 500

2007 158764 450

2.3. Features,strengthsandweaknesses

2.3.1.

MilkProduction

AgriculturalregionsandFoodresources

Rwanda can be divided in ten agricultural regions with distinct ecological features (climate,

fertility,acidityandslope).Withregardtoagriculturalregions,therearetwoversions,namelythe

18 agrobioclimatic regions proposed byGasana (1991) basedon inherent particularitiesof each

area, particularly forest formations before their transformation by human activity, and the 12

agroclimaticregionsofDelepierre(1974).InthedefinitionfoundintheAgriculturalDevelopment

StrategyinRwanda(1997),anewversionoftheagriculturalregionswasadoptedbecauseitwas

more appropriate in pedological terms, in support of the Government policy advocating the

regionalisationofenterprisesandtheirspecialisation. Infact,RwandasPedologicalMapProject

proposed 10 agricultural regions by combining together in one regional entity the traditional

regions

of

the

Central

Plateau

and

the

Granite

Ridge

on

one

hand,

and

the

MayagaBugesera

regionsontheother.Theseregionsweregroupedtogetherbecauseoftheirsimilaritiesinterms

of pedological features and soil aptitudes. This recent classification of the regions will make it

possibletodefinethemostsuitableareasfordifferenttypesoflivestocksaccordingtothetypes

ofsoil.Thefollowingarethemainfeaturesofeachoneoftheseregions.

Imbo

This region is the extension of Burundis Imbo in theplain of Rusizi (Rwanda side). Most of it is

found in the former Bugarama commune, but touches slightly the lower parts of former

neighbouring communes of Gishoma, Nyakabuye and Karengera. The whole region, which

comprisesanalluvialvalleybottom(slopelessthan6%)surroundedbyhighabruptslopes(1400

mof

altitude

with

a

slope

ranging

from

13

to

55%),

has

an

average

altitude

of

1

100

m

(the

valley

bottom is less than 1 000 m) and receives an average rainfall of 1 200 mm per year, with an


28/152

Page28of152

averagetemperatureof24oC.ThesoilsarerepresentedbyvertisolsinthevalleyofBugaramaand

basaltbasedsoilsontheheightssurroundingthevalley.Fromtheagriculturalpointofview,there

are,amongothercrops,irrigatedrice,cassava,beans,maize,groundnuts,bananatreesandfruit

trees mainly in the plain of Bugarama. Other crops can grow there given the high agricultural

valueoftheregion.Forexample,irrigatedsugarcanecangrowthere.

Thepresence

of

a

rice

processing

factory

(irrigated

rice)

would

increase

the

value

of

rice

brans,

and trading in animal products is not a problem given that the region is found in an area of

intensetradebetweenBurundiandSouthKivu.Traditionally,thisregionwhichbreedsmanygoats

issuitableforstallbreeding.Becauseoftheshortageofpasturesandthehighdensitypopulation,

thetypesoflivestockwhichcouldbeintensifiedarethoseotherthantheoffsoiltype.

Impala

This region is also found in the southwestern part of the country. The average altitude ranges

from 1 400 m in Rusizi to 1 900 m on the edge of Nyungwe mountain forest, with a slope of

between6%tomorethan50%.Rainfallvariesbetween1300m inthewestand2000m inthe

forest, and temperatures range from 22 to 19oC respectively. Basaltbased soils with a heavy

textureand

a

high

content

of

iron

oxide

have

high

agricultural

productivity

The region, which is characterised by traditional crops (beans, banana trees, cassava, maize,

sorghum) and coffee, is also suitable for tea and cinchona growing. It has a significant trade

potentialwithBurundiandSouthKivu.Itcanthereforedevelopstallfarmingofgoatsandpigsor

poultryorrabbitsalongtheRusiziBugaramaroad.

ShoresofLakeKivu

TheregionextendsalongtheshoresofLakeKivufromNyamashekeintheSouthtoRubavuinthe

North.Thealtitudevariesfrom1400matthelevelofthelaketo1900onthefoothillsofCongo

NileRidge,whichisattheEastborderofthisregion.Theclimateistemperatewithtemperatures

varyingfrom22oContheshoresofthelaketo19

oCinthemountains.Rainfallrangesbetween1

150

and

1

300

mm

per

year.

The

liminoclayey

superficial

soils

are

derived

from

phyllite

and

graniteinsomeplacesontheslopesofbetween13and55%.

Thisisthetopcoffeegrowingareainthecountry,buttheregiongrowsalsobananatrees,beans,

maize,sweetpotatoes,cassavaandsoyabeans.TradebetweentheDemocraticRepublicofCongo

through Lake Kivu and through border towns (Bukavu opposite Rusizi and Goma opposite

Rubavu),thepresenceofbrewersgrainsatRubavu,thepasturesinthemassifsofGishwatiareall

elementswhichcanjustifythebreedingofpigsorpoultryorrabbitsaroundthetownsofRusizi,

KarongiandRubavu,anddairycattlearoundthetownofRubavuandsheepforwoolinthehigh

altitude(fromRubavutoRusizi).

Lavasoils

This region has volcanic soils of former Rubavu and Musanze Prefectures and is bordered by

volcanoes. The altitude varies between 2 500 m at the border of the Volcanoes Park to slightly

lessthan1900mat Musanze and1600 m atRubavu.Slopesrangefrom6 to 25%and rainfall

variesbetween1300and1600mmparyear,whiletemperaturesrangefrom12to18oC.

Bananatrees,twiningbeans,peasandtobaccoaregrowninthisregion.However,Irishpotatoes

arethemaincommercialcrop.Theregionhasan importanttouristicpotential(VolcanoesPark).

Trade between this region and North Kivu and Uganda, the presence a flour milling plant at

Musanze(wheatbrans)andabreweryatRubavu(brewersgrains)justifystallbreedingofgoats

or sheep for wool, pigs, rabbits or poultry around Musanze and along RubavuMusanze and

CyanikaMusanzeroads,aswellasdairycowsaroundthetownofMusanze.

NileCongo

Ridge


29/152

Page29of152

This region stretches on the heights of the Nile Congo Ridge and encompasses from North to

South, high altitude regions of Rubavu, Musanze (former Nyamutera commune), Karongi, Rusizi

(former Kirambo and Gatare communes) and Nyamagabe. The altitude ranges from 1 900 m to

morethan2500mwithaveryvaryingsloperangingfrom2to55%.Rainfallisbetween1300and

1500mminBushiru,1400and1800mminBufundu,andexceeds2000mmontheheightsof

Nyungwe.

Temperatures

vary

from

12

to

18

o

C.

Humic

acidic

soils

developed

on

a

granite

(Bufundu,Bushiru)andschistose(Budaha)parentrock.

The regions crops are particularly those suitable for high altitude such as peas, maize, Irish

potatoesandwheat.TeaisalsosuitablefortheregionfromNorthtoSouth(Delepierresugggest

theintroductionofrapeandsunflower).Itisalsosuitableforforests(timber)

The region is characterised by mountain pasture on acidic soils which are suitable for dairy

livestock. The fact that it is far from consumption centres and main service routes allows only

enterpriseswhoseproductionwillbesentelsewhereforprocessingorwhichwillbeprocessedat

least partly on the spot, sending out finished or semifinished products. The following animal

breeding can be considered: dairy cattle breeding (Gishwati, Nile Congo Ridge) and breeding of

goatsandsheepforwool.

Buberukahighlands

ThisregioncomprisesthedistrictofMusanze(intheEastofLakesBuleraandRuhondo),abigpart

oftheformercommunesofByumbauptotheborderoftheplainsofMutara,Ndizamountains

whichstretchfromtheformerMukingicommune(Gitarama)totheextremeNorthoftheformer

Nyakabanda commune, as well as the former communes of Kigali North (Rushashi, Mbogo and

Tare).Thealtituderangesfrom1800mtomorethan2500m.Theslopesarefrom0to2%inthe

swamps,andfrom6to50%elsewhere.Averagerainfall is1200mmperyearandtemperatures

range between 12 and 18oC. Highland laterite soils which developed from the schistose parent

rockareprevalentintheregionwith,insomeplaces,quirtzitesoilridges.

The

main

crops

there

are

the

Irish

potatoes,

wheat,

maize,

peas

and

tea.

Banana

trees,

sweetpotatoes and sorghum are also found where ecological conditions are favourable, but yields

decreaseasonemovestohigheraltitude.Improvedfeedingconditionsintheregion,particularly

increasedforagecrops,wouldenhancedairycattleandsheepforwoolenterprisesaswellasstall

goatfarming.

CentralPlateau/GraniteRidge

Thisregion stretches inthecentreof the country east of the Nile CongoRidgefromtheborder

withBurunditoMusanzeandKigali,runningalongthewestofMayaga/Bugeseraregions,andin

thesouthofBuberukahighlandsandthewestoftheEasternPlateau.Theaveragealtitudevaries

from1650to1700mwithslopesofbetween13and55%.Averagerainfallisbetween1100and

1

1250

mm

per

year.

Daily

average

temperatures

vary

from

18C

to

20C.

The regions different humic soils are derived alternately from granite, gneissic granite and

quartzitemetasedimentsandquartmicaschistsinitssouthernpart,peliticorquartziterockswith

aclayeytextureinthecentralpart,andvariouspeliticrocksinitsnorthwesternpart.Theregion

is suitable for the growing of coffee, beans, sweet potatoes, sorghum, maize, banana trees,

cassava,groundnutsandsoyabeans.Marshricealsogrowsthere.

There is a dairy (Nyanza) and the region is found in the centre of the country with important

trading centres (Huye, Muhanga, Ruhango and Nyanza). The breeding of pigs, poultry and rabit

farming around the towns and along the main roads AkanyaruKigali, MusanzeKigali and Huye

Nyamagabearepractisedaswellasgoatbreeding.


30/152

Page30of152

Mayaga/Bugesera

Mayaga stretches in a narrow strip from the NyabarongoAkanyaru confluence. It comprises

former Kibayi, Muyaga communes from south to north, east of former Ntyazo and Muyira

communes, and east of former Ntongwe and Mugina communes. Bugesera includes former

communesofKanzenzeandNgendaandformercommunesofSakeandMugesera.Thealtitude

ranges

from

1

400

to

1

500

m,

and

rainfall

is

between

1

100

and

1

200

mm

per

year

in

the

southernpart,andbetween1000and1100mmperyearinthenorthernpartoftheregion.Soils

areclayeyandderivedfromschistose,buttherearealsohistosolsinAkanyaruvalley.Slopesvary

between0and2%inthemarshesandbetween2and13%elsewhere.

Rice, beans, sorghum, maize, sweet potatoes, groundnuts, cassava, coffee and soya beans are

cultivated in the region. The region is a potential producer of maize. Some of the former

communes of this region are found in the collection area of Nyanza dairy, and this makes it

possibletoconsiderdairycattlefarminginthisareaandnearKigali.Goatfarmingisalsopractised

there.

EasternPlateau

This

region

stretches

from

Kigali

to

Rwamagana

and

former

Kibungo.

It

is

an

extension

of

the

CentralPlateaubutismorearid.NyabarongoRivermarkstheborderofthetworegions,whilethe

1900mcontourlineseparatesitinthenorthfromBuberukahighlands.IntheEast,itisbordered

bytheshrubsavannaofKibungowhileNyabugogoandLakeMugeseraseparatefromBugesera.It

hasanaveragealtitudeof1500m,therainfallisbetween900and1000mmperyear.Average

temperaturesrunbetween18and20C.Soilsarederivedfrompeliticrocks.Theslopeisbetween

2 and 13% in the lower basin of Lake Muhazi, between 6 and 25% on the hills and plateaux in

KigaliEast,andbetween13and55%elsewhere.

Among the crops found in this region are beans, maize, sorghum, sweet potatoes, cassava,

groundnuts,coffee,sugarcane,rice,soyabeansandbananatrees.Livestockisalsoimportantin

thisarea.

The

fact

that

there

are

big

trading

centres

such

as

Kigali,

Rwamagana

and

Kibungo

as

well as communication routes and supply sources of cattle feeds favour the practice of the

following animal farming activities: milk cows, pigs, poultry and rabbits around the towns and

alongtheKigaliRusumoroad,rangecattleand,naturally,goatbreeding.

EasternSavannas

This region occupies the wholeeastern partof the country from Mutara to Rusumo. It includes

alsotheformerGashoracommuneofBugesera.Averagealtitudevariesfrom1250minAkagera

swamps to 1 500 m at the western border and 1 600 m at Mubari heights. Daily average

temperaturesare21oC,andrainfal is lessthan900 mm peryearand irregular.Soilsarederived

from a combination of quartziteschistose in the south of the region and in the north, they are

from

granite

parent

rock.

Slopes

vary

between

0

and

2%

in

the

shallow

waters

of

Akagera

River,

between 2 and 13% in the savannas, the eastern part

Master Plan Milk Chain

Documents