The results reflect the findings on the quantitative and thereafter qualitative research method findings. The qualitative analysis was mainly deductive and the topics/themes were developed from the quantitative method findings. The focus group discussion therefore, expanded and gave deeper and useful insights into the questionnaires. Therefore, quantitative and qualitative results are presented concurrently.
Questionnaire and focus group discussions
The small-scale farmers, consisted of males (n=57) and females (n = 4). Majority of the respondents were between the ages of 35 – 55 years (49.2%), followed by over 55 years (44.3%), and lastly 18 – 25 years (6.6%). They had varying levels of educational backgrounds, majority of the respondents only had primary level education (39.3%), high school (31.1%), university/college (9.8%) and no education (19.7%). Most of the respondents were unemployed (62.3%), employed (11.5%), self-employed (3.3%), and pensioners (23%). Most of the respondents (93.4%) graze their animals on communal pastures, 4.9% on private land, and 1.6% on trust land. Their herd sizes are 11 – 50 cattle (56.7%), 10 or less (26.7%) and above 50 (16.7%).
The veterinary officials (n=15) were composed of animal health technicians (46.7%), senior animal health technicians (20%), and veterinarians (33.3%). All the respondents (100%) had either an animal health diploma/degree or a degree in veterinary science. Majority of the respondents (66.7%) had more than ten years’ experience in their jobs as veterinary officials. All respondents (100%) work in areas where cattle are one of the main livestock species of importance.
The following findings were obtained for the six themes which are summarized in Table. 3.
- Awareness of the diseases and their control measures
In terms of BR, majority of the farmers (63.3%) stated that they knew about a disease called brucellosis (also called “abortion disease”). Correspondingly, majority of respondents (75.4%) stated that they also knew about a disease called tuberculosis (called ‘TB’) and associated signs. In the FGDs, most respondents demonstrated good knowledge of the clinical signs of the bTB, particularly relating to debilitation, coughing, weight loss in animals, and characteristic lesions on post mortem. With regards to BR, some participants confirmed that they heard about the disease called brucellosis in cattle; and the disease was called, “isifo sokuphunza” in local language (meaning “abortion disease”), although some participants that mentioned that they had not heard of the disease before.
“I heard one of the animal health technicians, talking about it.” (P4, May 2021).
“As far as I know, apparently this ‘abortion disease’ of cattle can also affect people. So, it is a dangerous because of that. It can cause miscarriage in pregnant women. Someone told me that it is a disease that causes abortions. I don’t know how this disease causes abortions.” (Farmer 7, May 2021)
“People can get the disease from drinking milk from a sick cow. It’s even worse that if a cow has aborted, the farmer starts milking the cow and using the milk. And that’s where I think the biggest danger is.” (Farmer 8, May 2021)
The farmers knew there were situations where an animal looked healthy but when tested by the veterinary officials, were found to have the disease. There was a strong view that the disease was relatively new in the area and was first seen in the past 5 – 10 years
“I know about the disease. From what I know, it makes cattle very sick and they also cough a lot. If you cut the animals open, inside their body cavities, you find small nodules that look almost like river sand”. I know about the disease.” (Farmer 1. May 2021)
The veterinary officials (100%) knew about BR and bTB and knew that both were controlled diseases in the country. They were able to correctly mention abortions as a major sign for BR; and identified coughing and debilitation as the most common signs for bTB. In the FGDs, the participants demonstrated good knowledge of both diseases, the modes of transmission and control principles.
“Abortions are also not caused by brucellosis. So, if the farmers report aborts, the AHT can also investigate and teach farmers about other causes of abortions e.g. poor feeding, poor condition, etc.” (Official11, May 2021)
During the FGDs, the officials demonstrated good knowledge of the different methods of controlling BR and bTB, the similarities in the control methods.
“Test and slaughter is an effective method tuberculosis control” (Official 2, May 2021)
“Quarantine and movement restriction is an important element of tuberculosis control” Official 8, May 2021)
In terms of BR, a significant majority of farmers (98.2%) agreed that vaccination is a good method for controlling BR. In terms of bTB, most of the farmers (91.8%) also believe that vaccination is a good method of controlling bTB. They believe that BR and bTB can be eradicated if the government can provide them with vaccines or medicines. They mentioned that the government is not providing them with the vaccines. Most of the respondents (68.9%) stated that their cattle have never been vaccinated against BR.
“I think the disease can be eradicated if the government can provide us with the vaccines to protect our animals from getting the disease.” (Farmer 8, May 2021)
“I think vaccination helps prevent my animals from getting the disease. It is better than having to treat sick animals. (Farmer 9, May 2021)
In terms of bTB, the officials indicated that there was a need state to seriously look into vaccination as a tool for control of bTB in future. All veterinary officials (100%) indicated that cattle do get vaccinated against BR in their areas of work. During the FGDs, the officials mentioned that there is sometimes lack of willingness of the farmers to bring animals for vaccination and believe this could partly be attributed to concerns related to safety of the S-19 brucellosis vaccine in pregnant animals.
“One of the challenges is that because some animals may be pregnant when brought to the diptank, we always ask the farmer whether their animals are pregnant or not. So, farmers then become worried that the vaccine may negatively affect the pregnancy status of the animals …”. (Official11, May 2021)
“Maybe it's time we also open a conversation about possible vaccinations against TB in cattle or buffaloes. I know it that National Department there may not want to hear about. I know in Spain that they have had some success with vaccination in wild animals. Therefore, perhaps vaccination can assist in potentially eradicating the disease. The current experimental vaccines could perhaps provide some hope.” (Official 4, May 2021)
In terms of BR, majority of the farmers (80.3%) of the indicated that their cattle have never been tested for BR. In terms of bTB, 42.6% of the farmers indicated that their cattle also have never been tested for bTB. However, the farmers (75.4%) indicated that they would not buy cattle from a herd known to have BR and 92.9% of respondents agreed that all cattle must be tested for BR. During the FGDs, most farmers mentioned that they felt it was necessary for their cattle to be tested for BR and bTB. The farmers were of the view that all farmers must be required to have their animals tested by bringing animals to the diptank for testing.
“I think it is important to test animals so that we can know which ones are sick and which one are healthy. That’s important for me as a cattle owner.” (Farmer 2, May 2021)
“The problem is we don’t get given the feedback on the tests once they have been done. I think after doing research or testing our animals, the government must come back, gather us together and give us feedback on the test results and the way forward. Sometimes they do the test and 6 months or even a year passes without us being told of what the outcome is or solution should be.” (Farmer 1, May 2021)
The farmers agree that enforcement of rules when it comes to testing can lead to eradication of the disease. Most of veterinary officials (80.0%) also agree that buffaloes must be tested for BR and only 20.0% did not agree. The veterinary officials stated that one of the challenges with testing was that it is voluntary (not compulsory). The officials also reported that they feel that testing is done simply ‘to tick boxes’ as there no consequence or further action if animals test positive. It was clear that the participants were frustrated and felt powerless about inability to take steps and enforce the culling or removal of animals.
“So, in order to eradicate the disease, there has to be enforcement or law that says that all animal owners must bring their cattle to the diptank for treatment in order to be able to eradicate the disease.” (Farmer 10, May 2021).
“The current scheme is geared only to commercial farmers […] It did not focus on all farmers, including communal farmers.” (Official8, May 2021)
“…. But in truth, the quarantine is only on a piece of paper, and nothing happens in practice. But I say that it's under quarantine for what it's worth. It's just because it's a piece of paper in terms of practical control. There was an area where animals tested positive. There was nothing happening that we could do because they say there is no money for vaccination. The Government vet was involved, but all he could was just to put the place “under quarantine” in terms of the paper work.” (Official2, May 2021)
During the FGDs, the veterinary officials mentioned the cost and supply of equipment was one of the obstacles to effective testing of animals. Most participants (68%) mentioned that the testing for bTB was labour intensive and the bringing back of animals back for reading of the tests was problem. They said more testing is focused on commercial farms as some of those farmers are exporting. The cost of bTB was mentioned to be prohibitive for extensive testing. The participants mentioned that there were challenges with availability and standards of training in reading and interpretation of tests
“I think the one big thing about TB control is that is that the equipment is expensive. So, if you're going to do the comparative test, it's damn expensive.” Official 2, May 2021)
“The biggest challenge is to get the farmers to complying with bringing the animals for skin test reading after 72 hours. There is very low compliance and I’m not sure what they are not interested in bringing them back. Maybe they feel it is too much work.” (Official 6, May 2021)
“Doing the interpretation of a skin test is another massive challenge…...It's easy if everything's perfect and no swelling, but the moment you start getting skin reactions, that becomes a challenge of interpretation…whether it is positive or negative?” (Official 2, May 2021)
The farmers (50.8%) stated that their cattle have come into contact with wild animals. The farmers (54.1%) indicated that there are no proper fences separating wildlife from their cattle, and some of their animals graze inside the game reserves. In the FGDs, they mentioned that there is a lot movement of animals in the area due to purchase and movement of animals from different areas. The veterinary officials also mentioned there was no effective movement control in the province. The officials felt that cattle should be treated the same as buffaloes when it comes to disease control.
“I think there’s a lot of movement of animals because people buy and sell animals all over the place (Farmer 11, May 2021)
“…I think movement of cattle can contribute in the spread of the disease.” (Farmer 4, May 2021).
“We do not have any control over the movement of animals. Most of the time we are not even aware that animals are moving or not.” (Official 4, May 2021)
“I think through controlling movement of animals, that’s where we can control the disease.” (Official 6, May 2021)
“According to me, there’s no logic in dealing with the two species, cattle and buffaloes, differently. If you impose measures on one species, then you need to impose the same measures on the other. Because what is really the point to differentiate them? (Official 2, May 2021).
Only 33.3% and 31.1% of farmers agreed that cattle with BR and bTB, respectively, must be culled to stop the disease. In the FGDs, some farmers seemed not to prefer that all cattle be killed when infected with BR and/or bTB. However, all farmers confirmed that they do not trust that the government will compensate them when their animals get culled for either BR or bTB. The farmers indicated they had no problem with culling of the animals that are sick, as long as they get compensated. However, the veterinary officials stated that they had cases where animals tested positive, and nothing could be done about the situation. They mentioned that even though the BR control policy, says, that infected animals must be removed or culled, they did not have the capacity to enforce that. This situation, the participants mentioned is very frustrating.
“We love our animals, and again we don’t trust that government will compensate us when we they cull our animals.” (Farmer 3, May 2021)
“I do not have a problem with the Government taking or destroying the animals, but the Government must pay me back for my animals. The challenge is that the Government tells us that they do not have money to do compensation. The whole thing falls flat because there’s no exchange for the animals that they want to take.” (Farmer 1, May 2021)
“I don’t think culling can work, if it doesn’t go together with compensation. Any culling has to go together with compensation, for it to be successful.” (Official 10, May 2021)
“We don't even know the procedure of how it works? We haven’t even seen it. This issue does not even get discussed in management meetings. It is a taboo topic. …. there is no SOP on compensation. You are not even allowed to talk about compensation to the farmer. Because there’s nothing that will be done to compensate the farmer. (Official 4, May 2021)
The farmers (96.5%) believe that the farmer, animal health technician and veterinarian must work together to control BR or bTB which was echoed by 93.3% of the veterinary officials. The farmers mentioned that in instances where the government cannot provide medicines, they are willing to buy the medicines provided they are advised on what to buy. The farmers mentioned that they are not getting adequate training and advice from the government officials and therefore the government should educate them about the disease and its prevention.
“I think whilst we are waiting for the government to provide medicines, at least in the meantime, they must give us a list of medicines that we can buy ourselves in order to help ourselves. The problem is that the government is not telling us or giving us the list of medicines that we need to get. We do not know what to buy. Such knowledge will empower us get the medicines ourselves.” (Farmer 10, May 2021)
“The government has the solutions to many of these diseases and the farmer has to work with them to get the answers.” (Farmer 4, may 2021)
One of the challenges raised by veterinary officials (78.0%), was that farmers did not routinely report diseases related to sub-clinical conditions where the signs of disease are not overt or obvious to the farmer. Therefore, farmers tend to focus only on diseases that are more visible and dramatic, and report only those. They felt there is a need for more scientific research and expansion of knowledge on the dynamics of the disease in areas as susceptible species, transmission and control methods.
“I think it's because visually when you look at the animal, it doesn’t look sick and the animal is not dying. So, the moment animals start dying, then the farmers will report. But that animals walking around being infected, but he doesn't see the disease see physically, there's something wrong with this animal. So, it doesn't bother him.” (Official 3, May 2021)
“It can be eradicated if there’s more scientific knowledge in terms of on susceptible species, transmission methods, and morbidities. I think currently there's not enough knowledge to be utilized in the effective control of TB.” (Official 5, May 2021)
The farmers (46.4%) do not believe that the current methods for control of BR are effective, 35.7% are not sure, and only 17.9% agree the methods are effective. They believe that the disease has been in the area for long and that most farmers do not have information about of the disease. However, most of the respondents (55.9%) agreed that BR can be eradicated in their farming areas, 15.3% did not agree and 28.8% were neutral. Reasons provided were that participants trusted the expertise of the veterinary officials and the capacity of government to assist them. During the FGDs, the farmers mentioned that the government is not committed in assisting them with disease and that communal farming set-up does not enable effective disease control.
“[…] There are no camps or no fences in communal areas. We have raised the issues with government for many times, by they don’t do anything about it. This issue is really making me very angry (sighs). Where is our hope?” (Farmer 1, May 2021)
“I think the problem is that the Government does not have enough personnel to do the work. The officials are not able to cover all areas. They try to cover everyone, but it is just impossible (Farmer 1, May 2021)
“I think the biggest problem is when the owner does not take responsibility. When the animal has for example tested positive for the disease, because the animal still looks healthy the farmer still keeps it and doesn’t get rid of it or kill it. …. He sees the cow looks good despite being told that it is positive and he decides to keep the animal (Farmer 14, May 2021)
In terms of BR, most of the veterinary officials (66.6%) indicated that they do not think that the current BR strategy is effective, 26.7% unsure and only 6.7% think it is effective. Most of them (73.3%) agreed that BR can be eradicated in their areas of work, 20% did not agree and 6.7% were neutral. Those that agreed it can be eradicated based their reasons on reported successes in other countries, current expertise within Government, possible improved collaboration between farmers and veterinary officials, and possible funding by Government. Reasons for a belief that it cannot be eradicated were stated as difficulty isolating animals in communal grazing, current ineffective control strategies, lack of compensation for farmers, and lack of resources and personnel.
The Government also has to provide the resources to enable the programme to happen. This will include, in the control strategy, increasing abattoirs where infected animals can be slaughtered. Maybe providing abattoirs with PPE’s etc. There are costs in culling animals. The Government will have to provide subsidy for transportation of animals to abattoirs. I think the politicians have not seen the importance of controlling the disease.” (Official 4, May 2021)
The officials reported challenges with the implementation of disease control strategy due to each province doing its own thing. The participants indicated that the whole BR control strategy was not cohesive due to provincialization of implementation of the strategy. They explained that there was no co-ordination at inter-provincial level and also between provinces and the National Department. They mentioned that this challenge was leading to failure in the successful execution of BR control strategy. The veterinary officials in as much as they want to enforce the rules, they mentioned that they are not getting the necessary support to enable them me to do the work, without potentially running into trouble.
“Still on the Government side, the main problem is the provincialization of veterinary services. Each province does its own thing depending on its political heads or provincial administration structure. There’s no specific coordination. So, this province decides I'm not running with that and the other province decides on something else.” (Official 2, May 2021)
“One thing that I've noticed is that with democracy coming in, people have more power and can disregard what you are telling them, even if you mention that by law that this is not supposed to happen. The farmers will just tell you straight that what you are saying won't happen. And therefore, we feel powerless, as there isn't much we can do in terms of the law enforcement side of our jobs. The law enforcement as part of our job in fact does not exist. Even the police won’t accompany you if you want to enforce something.” (Official 4, May 2021)
Table. 3: Summary of findings relating to knowledge, attitudes and practices regarding BR and bTB between small-scale farmers and veterinary officials
Disease control Aspect
|
Bovine Brucellosis
|
Bovine Tuberculosis
|
Consensus
|
Differences
|
Farmers
|
Veterinary officials
|
Farmers
|
Veterinary officials
|
1) Awareness
|
Moderate to high awareness of the most common sign of disease i.e. abortions
|
High levels of knowledge of the disease and its transmission mode
|
High levels of knowledge of disease and can define signs
|
High levels of knowledge of the disease and its transmission mode
|
Generally high levels of awareness for both diseases
|
Farmers think disease new in area. Officials believe present for long time.
|
2) Vaccination
|
They believe vaccination is best method to control the disease
|
Vaccination must be used for control of the disease
|
Vaccination should be explored to control the disease, but no vaccine available commercially
|
Vaccination should be used to control the disease.
|
All agree on vaccination as effective method to control BR
|
Farmers state poor vaccinate rates. Officials state high vaccination rates
|
3) Testing
|
High percentage of cattle never tested, but agree testing is essential
|
Testing must be made compulsory for cattle
|
High percentage of cattle never tested, but agree testing is essential
|
Testing must be made compulsory for cattle
|
All agree that all animals must be tested; but disagree on current testing rates
|
No difference between stakeholders, however, officials believe more testing should be done
|
4) Movement control
|
No effective movement control in the area.
|
No effective movement control in the area.
|
No effective movement control in the area.
|
No effective movement control in the area.
|
All agree, there is no effective movement control in the area
|
No difference in views
|
5) Culling and compensation
|
Culling acceptable only if compensation is made
|
Implementation of enforcement & empowering of officials necessary
|
Cull acceptable only if compensation is made
|
Implementation of enforcement & empowering of officials necessary
|
All agree culling is effective but must be associated with compensation
|
No difference
|
6) Knowledge transfer
|
Feel not been given enough information by government officials
|
Knowledge transfer important but lack of funding and human resources
|
Feel not been given enough information by government officials
|
Knowledge transfer important but lack of funding and human resources
|
All agree, knowledge transfer has to be increased
|
Farmers believe state not doing enough in training them
|