Marketing channels for weaners in Omaheke depended on the number of animals marketed.When farmers marketed on a large scale, they usually sold to established agents such asAgra and Karoo Ochse, or directly to Meatco, the meat processing company. Godfrey soldweaners once or twice a year to Agra or Karoo Ochse, while his grown cattle were sold toMeatco only once a year. Although located close to the Epukiro communal area, he didnot sell livestock there as the prices were generally lower than in Gobabis. Only in times ofemergency did he resort to selling in the communal area.Transporting livestock to markets was a major problem for many farmers. If they did notown a truck, they had to hire transport. Transport costs impacted negatively on sales,especially if a farmer sold only a few weaners (e.g. 10) at a time. An alternative to hiringtransport was to contact marketing agents such as Agra, which would send its own trucksto collect the animals if the number of animals offered by several farmers in an area washigh enough. But the farmers still had to cover the transport costs, which were only slightlyless than the costs of hiring transport individually.4.2.3 DiversificationDespite the agro-ecological conditions restricting options for successful diversification inboth Omaheke and Hardap, some AALS farmers still attempted to diversify, with varyingsuccess. An option available to farmers in Omaheke only is rainfed cultivation of maize andsome other crops. Whether to plough or not depends on the rains. Bernard and his family,for example, ploughed approximately 7 ha whenever the rainy season looked promising.They planted mainly maize and beans, and had their own mill to produce mealie-meal fortheir farm workers and own consumption as well as for sale.Godfrey also ploughed some land and planted maize and beans. Until his tractor brokedown, he used it for ploughing, but it was a very costly machine to run, so instead he tookto using mules to plough, which is much cheaper. Hiring a tractor from a neighbour costsapproximately N$4 000 for ploughing 1.5 ha.The most lucrative market for Bernard’s mealie-meal and beans was the adjacent Epukirocommunal area, located only 32 km from his farm, whereas Gobabis is 142 km away. Byselling in Epukiro he saved on transport costs and was therefore able to sell his produce atmuch lower prices than buyers have to pay in Gobabis. There is also much more competitionin Gobabis than in the communal area. The situation was very different for cattle, with pricesin Gobabis being better than those paid in the region’s communal areas. Therefore, Bernardand his family sold their livestock through established agents in Gobabis rather than in thecommunal area.In Hardap, Kristof sought to diversify his farming operations, partly in response to regulardrought. In his initial years as an AALS farmer, he had to confine his agricultural productionto goat farming only, although he owned sheep and cattle as well. In 1996 he was forcedto sell all his cattle due to the drought. When the market for karakul weakened, he startedto cross his karakul sheep with dorper sheep to concentrate on mutton production. A66 ● Livelihoods after land reform: <strong>Namibia</strong> <strong>country</strong> <strong>report</strong> (2010)
comparison of his livestock numbers in 1992 and 2008 shows that the ratio of goats tosheep had remained more or less the same, but the number of cattle was down virtually tozero. When he moved onto the farm with his family in 1992, he had 570 goats, 320 sheepand 65 head of cattle. At the time of this interview in early 2008, he had 414 goats, 251mixed sheep and just 4 head of cattle. He was about to purchase a few more head of cattlewith the aim of concentrating on cattle and goat farming, rains permitting.Kristof also explored agricultural production options other than livestock production. Hestarted growing vegetables, but this proved to be an intensive activity which he could notentrust to somebody else. As he could not be on the farm permanently, his crops failed, so hestopped this activity altogether. In view of the regular periods of drought, he had thoughtthat it might be feasible to farm with pigs in combination with growing vegetables, and hepurchased some pigs, but when he stopped growing vegetables, he had nothing to feed thepigs, and pig farming was not profitable if their feed had to be purchased, so he stoppedfarming with pigs.For Tobias in Hardap, goat farming was the most important agricultural activity. He alsohad some dorper sheep, acquired a few cattle and later cultivated a small vegetable gardenfor own consumption. He also intended turning one part of his farm into a wildlife area togenerate additional income. In his view, the advantage of farming with game was that gamesurvived drought whereas livestock died. He had applied to the Ministry of Environmentand Tourism to support him in this regard, and was confident that he would be able togenerate an income from game, e.g. through commercial hunting.Despite a general awareness of the advantages of farming with game, no AALS farmer in thesample had ventured into this line of production. The reasons for this may include the factthat farms have to conform to minimum standards for keeping wild animals, and mostAALS beneficiaries are unable to incur and sustain the costs of this conformation.Goat farming in Hardap.Livelihoods after Land Reform: <strong>Namibia</strong> <strong>country</strong> <strong>report</strong> (2010) ● 67