Tuesday 9 November, 2010
SUPPORTING THE PROMOTERS OF THE GREEN REVOLUTION
kilimokwanza@guardian.co.tz
WHO CARES?
xxxxxx
Authorities pay more attention to safety of cement than human food
The Guardian KILIMO KWANZA
Tuesday 9 November, 2010
EDITORIAL
2
inside
I
T is almost a cliché to say that taking things for granted and failing – or refusing – to take remedial or preventive action when such action would come in handy can have catastrophic consequences.
Yet how many times do people take things for granted and fail – or refuse – to act when their intervention or lack of it could mean the difference between life and death? And wouldn’t it amount to an inexcusably lame excuse to defend our sins, be they of commission or omission, as but part of human nature? The list of issues, practices or incidents where tragedy has struck or things have otherwise gone out of hand just because people had ample opportunity and every reason to forestall danger but kept by the fence is near endless. The age-old blatant misuse or persistent rejection of industrial fertilisers and pesticides in some cotton-growing areas in Tanzania is one of the cases that readily come to mind. It is a sad story indeed in that, while these inputs are meant to boost production and farmers’ incomes, some of the same farmers abandon them, pour them down the drain or turn them to the wrong causes – including poison fishing! There is also the case of the cultivation of vegetables in highly polluted river valleys such as Dar es Salaam’s Msimbazi and pumping the obviously hugely toxic produce into the vegetable markets scattered all over the city of four million. Botanists, medical doctors, environmentalists, journalists, human rights activists and various other experts have for decades elaborated on the viciousness with which wreak havoc on the health of consumers and, by extension, the urgent need there is for the relevant authorities to intervene and the public to be on the alert and preferably look for safer options. But to what end has this been? To be honest, it has throughout remained business as usual just as repeated alerts on the health and other risks of misuse of drugs and cosmetics have fallen on deaf ears. We are now faced with the problem of the packaging of agricultural produce having been infiltrated by all manner of fraudsters, including conmen who cleverly re-use sacks or bags and other containers that actually
Artwork
& Design: KN Mayunga
ought to burnt or otherwise disposed of simply because so recycling them means packing food and other crops in contaminated containers. Indications are that the government and its various wings, in this particular case including the likes of the Tanzania Bureau of Standards, the Tanzania Food and Drugs Authority, the Health and Social Welfare ministry, the Industry, Trade and Marketing ministry and the Weights and Measures Agency, the police and other law-enforcement agencies, are fully briefed on these seriousness of these problems. We wonder, then: Why are no concrete measures being taken to clear this mess, at least for the sake of the health and general well-being of our people? Yes, the government may do wonders in implementing policies genuinely aimed at educating and sensitising the citizenry into greater commitment to land so that it grows into a truer asset in terms of investment opportunities. Yes, the government may have made laudable efforts over the years – undeniably with massive support from development partners – towards making our cash and crop farming, livestock, fishing and beekeeping sectors buoyant industries in their own right. But we must all admit that, as a nation, we have just begun the long and tortuous walk to real success in agriculture. Indeed, the government has previously admitted that the status of Tanzania’s livestock sector belies the fact that the country boasts the third or fourth largest herd of cattle in Africa. This is in itself too much of headache for us to tolerate or entertain the problems we are witnessing in the packaging of our agricultural produce, as shown above and elaborated on elsewhere in this supplement. We can, should and must end this mess. The sooner we do so, the better.
MECHANISATION
3
Banks should offer credit for purchase of JKT tractors
Banks should offer credit for purchase of JKT tractors
This is not packaging, it is courting disaster!
The Guardian KILIMO KWANZA
Tuesday 9 November, 2010
Are concrete walls now more important than human beings?
3
Deadly animal virus warning for Southern Africa
6
B
By Kilimo Kwanza Reporters
Wallace Mauggo Editor
8 To have your organisation promoted in Kilimo Kwanza, Call: 0787 571308, 0655 571308 0754 571308
OTTLENECKS in accessing credit facilities from local banks are hampering the purchase and transportation of tractors across the country, in time for the impending planting season. This is fermenting an unnecessary crisis that could cripple the country’s agricultural output in the next harvest season. “It is critical that these tractors reach the farmers before cultivation starts,” the Project Manager for SUMA JKT, Lt. Col. Felix Samillan has said. The total number of tractors in use in Tanzania is only about 8,000 and yet in order to achieve food self sufficiency,
we need to have at least 20,000 working tractors. To fill this gap, the country is importing over 2,000 tractors every year for the next ten years. However, at the moment hundreds of tractors are stuck at the SUMA JKT sales yard in Lugalo, at Mwenge, Dar es Salaam; even as farmers prepare for the December cultivation without the much needed mechanization. More tractors are expected to be offloaded at the Dar es Salaam port anytime. “Credit facilities by local banks to individuals and district councils interested in purchasing the tractors will ensure that they reach the farms in good time,’ the project manager said. At the moment many individuals and district councils interested in purchasing the tractors face gridlocks in accessing credit from their banks. These bottlenecks means that this
BoT governor Benno Ndulu
country may now fail to translate its need for working tractors into a reality. It is critical therefore that district councils and individual farmers get access to credit especially for the purchase of farm implements for agrarian green revolution Kilimo Kwanza. “We also remain committed to ensure that these tractors remain affordable to all farmers across the country,’ Lt. Col. Samillan said. To ensure that farmers get the tractors at the lowest rate, SUMA JKT has in place strict conditions for bulk purchases intended for resale. Bulk buyers therefore have to resell the tractors at a price that doesn’t exceed TSH 19m and TSH 21m per tractor, depending on the type of tractor. Some of the tractor traders have found these conditions difficult to implement. SUMA JKT recently acquired hun-
dreds of tractors on credit from India to support the country’s agricultural efforts in Kilimo Kwanza. The institution now asks that banks and other financial institutions extend credit to the district councils and individual account holders who have expressed their interest in purchasing the tractors. We hope that a quick introduction of credit facilities by the banks will ensure that the much needed mechanization reaches our farmers before cultivation starts in December. This will also serve as a clear demonstration of our local banks’ support for Kilimo Kwanza. Now that the electioneering period is over, may the government stakeholders in Kilimo Kwanza also be reminded that its now time to turn our attention to the real work of building this nation.
The Guardian KILIMO KWANZA
4
POLICY
Tuesday 9 November, 2010
The Guardian KILIMO KWANZA
Tuesday 9 November, 2010
POLICY
5
Right time to review role of the core Ministry of Agriculture he Fourth Pillar of Kilimo Kwanza is supposed to provide the paradigm shift to the strategic framework for the green revolution. The framework is almost wholly to be constructed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Cooperatives. It is the most important pillar to examine, especially at this moment in history when the national leadership has just received a fresh mandate to lead the country. For when the Kilimo Kwanza revolution was launched on August 3rd 2009, all the key implementers had been involved in its articulation. The launch was a public formality by which time they were supposed to have hit the ground running. The Agriculture ministry, being the core ministry for agriculture, was best placed to lead the development of this pillar. It ought to have been the best developed pillar so far, since it is in the hands of those who did not require persuasion or sensitisation. The pillar focuses specifically on which crops, how and where they should be produced for the quickest strategic benefits in terms of increasing food production and revenue earnings both from the domestic and external markets. This obviously was knowledge that was already in the possession of the Agriculture authorities and it was a matter of rolling it out to the other implementers and the public. The agriculture ministry is believed to have spent the past 15 months laying down the strategic framework through the prescribed actions that included moving new pieces of legislation, setting up advisory teams, identifying areas for specific crops of strategic value for food and industrial purposes as well as taking steps to boost their production. The ministry was required, starting August last year, to identify priority areas for strategic food commodities for the country’s food self sufficiency, as well as modalities for production of crops that can transform agriculture quickly with minimal financial and technological requirements, growing domestic and external markets demand and employment creation potential. This should have started 15 months ago and Tanzanians expect it to be at a highly developed stage. To attain these, the ministry was specifically required to start putting in place arrangements for production of strategic commodities such as maize, cassava, rice,
legumes, fish, meat, diary products, wheat, bananas, potatoes, sorghum and millet. The same ministry was also required to have introduced the blending of cassava in both maize and wheat milling. The ministry was also expected to put in place arrangements to finance the production of cotton, sunflower, sesame and palm oil. The ministry was also specifically required to identify priority areas and modalities for production of horticultural crops. This was supposed to be achieved through putting in place arrangements for the production of high labour intensive crops requiring limited investment. The crops also have potential for significant foreign exchange earnings and contribution to national economic growth, such as onions, mangoes, bananas, grapes, avocados, pineapples, tomatoes, vegetables and spices. They were also expected to identify areas and modalities for production of crops with high value addition potential such as fibres and bioenergy. This too, officially started 15 months ago in August 2009 and we should by now have seen specific actions by the ministry to increase the production of sisal, sugar cane, oil seeds and sweet sorghum. The agriculture ministry was also to establish a strategic advisory team on paradigm shift. The team was supposed to be constituted in December 2009. It was supposed to incorporate the private sector and advise on areas where various activities in the paradigm shift would be undertaken. It was also the ministry’s responsibility to spearhead legislation for a contract farming system. This was supposed to be fast tracked by the ministry which would then carry out sensitisation and capacity building for contract farming. This was obviously supposed to have been put in place by the last parliament on the proposals of the Agriculture ministry. The success of Kilimo Kwanza also hinges on the adoption of these following elements;
1- The country must embrace irrigation and stop relying on unreliable rainfall especially in the era of climate change because; a) Irrigation will triple agricultural output. On average, anywhere in Tanzania, farmers will have one or two more planting seasons and can plant different crops. b) Irrigation can be done anywhere in Tanzania because fresh water abounds either in rivers, lakes or underground sources.
c) Underground water in the country lies at an incredibly shallow 10 metres in many places, and can be reached at a very small cost d) Even places with rainfall can do better with irrigation because they will still be able to plant their non-traditional crop off season and enjoy the advantages of crop diversification e) Irrigation also means controlling water flow, which means reducing erosion, logging etc f) Advanced irrigation techniques like the drip method can combine other functions like fertilization and pest control all flowing from one tube, one drop efficiently.
(SUMAJKT)
The cultivation season is here !!
Make the right choice
2- Land in Tanzania must be surveyed and registered. Today only about 10% of the land is surveyed. This means most farmers/peasants are farming on land that they do not own legally – that is they have no registered interest in it. All land owners must get a register able interest in their land by acquiring titles. The value of a piece of land that gets a title multiplies about ten times overnight. If a million titles for an average 5 hectare plots were issued, the assets value of the country would grow by a billion dollars overnight. But more importantly registration gives the land an identity as recognised assets, thus enabling the registered proprietors of these pieces to enter into contracts including securing loans. Securing institutional finance is the only way most farmers can move to the next step. 3- Farmers must start using fertilisers. Tanzania on average uses 9kg of fertiliser per hectare per year, which is laughable. Some countries use up to 500kg/ hectare. Natural fertilisers (organic) must be embraced as well. This country is endowed with nitrogen fixing trees that can easily be planted on farms reducing dependence on inorganic industrial fertilizers. Organically grown food also fetches higher prices on the global markets.
4- The warehouse receipts system must be developed to lift peasant farmers away from primitive subsistence agriculture. The system should enable the farmers to avoid selling their produce in a hurry at knock down prices, and also involve them in the modern economic systems where their wealth is accountable and measurable in data form. With the spread of the mobile phone use, there is no better time than now to advance the Tanzanian farmer to the next level.
FARMTRAC IS YOUR RIGHT CHOICE
P.O. Box 1694, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Mob +255 0717 993 874 • 0715 787 887 • 0784 281 842 Email: agrtractors@yahoo.com
xxxxxx
T
By Guardian Reporter
• Reflecting on pillar number four
National Service Corporation Sole
6
L
By Makuna Chirimi
Tuesday 9 November, 2010
FOOD SECURITY
AX standards in grain packaging and transportation contribute to the huge post harvest losses that occur in the country every year. By admission of players in the packaging industry, the quality of packaging of grain in the country has deteriorated drastically due to lax regulation, stiff competition and cheap but often poor quality imports mostly from China. “Ten years ago the weight of one polypropylene sack was 170gms. Currently it is between 100gms and 125gms which is inadequate to survive the rigours of the journey from farm to market,” a packaging industry player revealed. One measurement used for the quality of packaging material (paper, cloth, sack or otherwise) is in grams per square metre/ centimetre (gsm). This is a measure of the density of the material, the basic underlying principle being a higher grammage material makes a better quality and more durable package. In the absence of proper regulation and lax enforcement of existing laws, manufacturers of packaging material are raking in billions in unregulated profit by producing sub-quality packaging. The issue of grain packaging in the country is a mixed bag with farmers, transporters, middlemen, manufacturers of packaging material, the Weights and Measures Agency (WMA) and the Tanzania Bureau of Standards (TBS) each playing a role. The Weights and Measures Agency (WMA) is charged with ensuring consumer protection through weights, measures and measuring instruments with grains being one of the products whose packaging must comply with the Weights and Measures Cap 340 (R.E 2002) and its cognate regulations. Taking into considerations its obvious financial and staffing limitations, the WMA is doing a commendable job in eliminating the problem of uncontrolled overfilling of grain sacks (lumbesa) that was denying farmers of fair earnings. But the enforcement of packaging standards goes beyond weight. It is often said that Tanzania can double its agricultural output simply by eliminating post harvest losses. At the moment however over 40% of our food harvests never reaches the kitchen or dining table. Most of it never even leaves the farm in the first place. There is dire need for proper standards for harvesting, packaging and delivery of food to market or for storage. Of focal concern is the packaging of grain from farm to market or end user (be it manufacturer or consumer). Casting a glance at the existing standards regime, one would be forgiven for thinking that the packaging of cement is better regulated than packaging of grains. Perhaps it is in silent cognizance of this that a radio advertisement by a local cement company claims that cement is now the central basic human need, one above food, shelter and clothing. How can we possibly value something that goes into walls more than something that goes into our own bodies, you ask? The Tanzania Bureau of
The Guardian KILIMO KWANZA
Tuesday 9 November, 2010
FOOD SECURITY
Are concrete walls now more important than human beings? a nominal holding capacity of 50kg of cement. Check and indeed this is the weight indicated on all our local cement bags. The actual content of the cement bag is sometimes 46kg, but that is an embarrassing anomaly that the Tanzania Bureau of Standards, the cement producers and the cement industry should quickly address. Ideally sacks of grain should also indicate the weight of the contents. But whatever small regulation exists on the weight of sacks of grain is not even being enforced. A visit to village markets and grain collection points reveals that grain is often stored and packaged in appalling conditions, including it being dumped out in the open and directly onto the bare ground. A “debe” bucket is then used to fill the grain into sacks that are then amateurishly ‘sealed’ with hand woven nylon or sisal thread and loaded onto waiting lorries. No one weighs the filled sacks and there is no marking on the sacks to indicate the weight of the sacks. Sellers and buyers operate on the basis of assumptions based on the size of the sacks. Little enforcement
Standards (TBS) is the national organization mandated with setting the national standards of all the products. Being the national standards body, the government has empowered TBS to introduce and execute product certification schemes to ensure that only quality products are available and in use within the Tanzanian market. TZS 538:1999 – Packaging and Labeling of Foods is a seven page document that is supposed to guide the entire food industry in Tanzania on packaging of food before delivery to the point of sale. This Tanzania Standard for example is responsible for the form and quality of packaging maize takes from the moment it enters a patchy sisal sack at the farmer’s hut on its journey to the local market and later to the manufacturer and consumer. Everyone who is directly involved in the packaging of food is supposed to receive guidance from this shallow document. Be it the individual farmer, the small village women’s group in a donor funded dried fruit and vegetable start up, or a multi billion dollar SubSaharan scale flour miller, assorted confectionaries manufacturer or wine and beer distillery. This Tanzania Standard makes some well meaning if simplistic and amusing assertions. For example on the re-use of packing containers in clause 4.9 the standard declares that “No food packages shall be reused except glass which shall have to be hygienically treated before use to meet the quality requirements prescribed in the respective Tanzania standards.” Really? Tell that to the young men seen everyday washing used sacks in the polluted Msimbazi river, under the
Magomeni bridge in Dar es salaam. The “washed” sacks are widely used in food packaging across the country. It is also common knowledge that all over the country grain sacks are re-used until the day they tear or burst. Are the regulators asleep on this one? There is only one clause that refers to packaging of food in sacks. Clause 4.3.3 of the food packaging standards states that sacks (sisal, cotton, paper and jute) shall be woven or constructed in such a manner that it can contain and/or protect the product from spoilage and other environmental hazards. The standard makes no mention of the general or intrinsic properties of the sacks. Its simplicity implies that anyone is free to package grain or any other type of food into any kind of sack as long as the sack does not directly affect the quality of the product and is able to keep its contents intact, even if barely so. A sack is not just a sack. The ladies and gentlemen at TBS know this very well. What kind and type material is
the sack made from? What are the material qualities? How much does it stretch? Is it waterproof? How much weight or load can it hold or support before bursting? What are its tearing qualities? These are just some of the important questions that come to the fore in packaging. Take cement for example. Cement, like grain is packaged in sacks and yet there are two existing standards for packaging cement in the country. TZS 743: 2003 – Paper sacks for cement – Specification, and TZS 623:2004 – Textiles - woven sacks for packing cement – High density polyethylene propylene – Specification. Each of these documents is 5 pages long and contains a wide range of information on the specifications for cement sacks. The information ranges from basic descriptions and sketch drawings of the different types of sacks used, to specific information on the minimum width and density of each tape of thread used to weave the cement sack. Each document contains technical details like the set tolerance
limits of the sacks, tearing resistance levels, tensile strength, energy absorption, bursting index, breaking loads of the fabrics and the internationally approved scientific methods of testing for these qualities. In addition the two cement packaging standards make reference to no less than 13 other individual Tanzania Standards that are necessary for the proper interpretation of the standards. These references include descriptions and methods of measurement of empty cement sacks, tests for determination of tensile properties, grammage, sampling and tests for moisture content of the sack material, determination of number of threads per centimeter and length and width of woven and knitted fabrics. Compare this to single clause 4.3.3 of the food packaging standards which only states that sacks (sisal, cotton, paper and jute) used for packaging of food shall be woven of constructed in such a manner that it can contain and/or protect the product from spoilage and other environmental hazards. This simple statement is what governs the packaging and transportation of over five million tonnes of grain in the country each year. It makes no mention of the intrinsic qualities of the sacks or other packaging material used. There is no reference to other standards that should be used to evaluate the quality and suitability of the packaging. No mention of the dimensions of the sacks. Nothing is said on product sampling and testing. Nothing. On the contrary the Tanzania Standards for packaging cement even stipulate that cement bags should have
means there is little or no adherence to any of the WMA specifications for transporting grain, resulting in losses across the board. Grain losses due to poor packaging, and revenue losses for the farmer and possibly the buyers too. Furthermore the mandate of WMA is legally limited to ensuring the accuracy of weights, measures and measuring instruments. This is the regime of mass and volume as opposed to quality of products or goods which is managed by the Tanzania Bureau of Standards. If the Tanzania Bureau of Standards (TBS) is unable to ensure that there is a proper standard for the packaging of grain and different types of farm produce then the Weights and Measures Agency and other enforcers cannot really do anything. Sack manufacturers, transporters and middlemen are happily exploiting this loophole to make ripe pickings. The current quality of packaging used for grains and fresh produce is often barely sufficient to hold the contents of the sacks on the journey to the market. These sacks do little to protect the grain from the weather and other
potential hazards. No wonder many grain farmers and traders suffer huge losses at the market, especially during the wet season. A visit to any grain market or silo in Tanzania reveals bursting at the seams, filled to the brim sacks piled mountain high and in plain view of standards officials. The material used to make the sacks is visibly feeble and thin, so much so that the contents often peep at would be customers though the grain pimpled semi-opaque material. One has to simply poke a finger against the sack to bore a hole through it. Furthermore the hand woven nylon strings used to seal the mouth of the sacks do little to prevent spillage. Little wonder rats and weevils are having a party. “As you can see many of these sacks already have holes in them. Many of these are just from normal handling of the sacks by porters,” a grain trader at the Tandale market in Dar es Salaam said. The market is a primary grain granary for the country’s economic capital. Traders at the market revealed that the situation is much
worse during loading, unloading and transport where many sacks burst resulting in huge losses. The weights agency has in the past defended the poor packaging of grain on transit to manufacturers, arguing that this is because the grain is transported in bulk. This practice however denies the farmers fair revenue in much the same way as lumbesa. The current situation of lax regulation means that while food manufacturers respect competition and customer pickiness to package their final products in fairly attractive and good quality packaging, there is little or no thought given to how the fresh produce reaches the manufacturer or market in the first place. An urgent review of the existing regulation on packaging of food and especially grains needs to be undertaken. This review should specifically focus on packaging of grain while on transit to the market. The Ministry of Agriculture knows that a grain of maize is very different in size, shape, weight and other physical properties to a grain of sorghum, just as
7
a husked grain of rice is different from an un-husked grain. The current specification for packaging food does not take into consideration such differences. Never mention that an overwhelming majority of grains are currently packaged and transported in sacks. Perhaps this time around the TBS should also include the food ministry in the Food Divisional Standards Committee and Technical Committees that reviews this inadequate standard. More important though is that proper regulation be accompanied by tight enforcement. A check of the cement industry for example reveals that none of the packaging products currently in use conforms to the existing TBS standards. Some players in the cement industry even claim that the existing TBS standards are old, obsolete and are set and driven by vested business interests. It would be foolhardy therefore to have good grain packaging standards without proper enforcement to ensure that farmers, transporters, manufacturers, exporters and importers of grain conform to these standards. The Tanzania Bureau of Standards should come to the fore and put in place and enforce proper standards for packaging of food and especially grain. Without doing this then all well meaning efforts put into Kilimo Kwanza will continue to go to waste.
P. O. Box : 912, Arusha, Tanzania. Tel: +255 27 253 92 59, 250 46 79, 250 63 68, Fax: +255 27 254 50 13 Email: sales@minjingumines.com
xxxxxx
The Guardian KILIMO KWANZA
The Guardian KILIMO KWANZA
ANIMAL DISEASES
Deadly animal virus warning for Southern Africa
The Guradian Kilimo Kwanza Advertisers Diary 1.
2.
3.
Cattle at risk The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has warned Malawi, Zambia and Mozambique, which share a border with Tanzania, to step up detection of a deadly animal virus which causes Peste des petits ruminants (PPR), a contagious respiratory disease. PPR broke out in Tanzania in early 2010, threatening over 13.5 million
goats and over 3.5 million sheep. "The Southern African countries must not vaccinate but step up alert systems," said Jan Slingenbergh, who heads FAO's Emergency Prevention System for Transboundary Animal and Plant Pests and Diseases. "Vaccination is like throwing a blanket over the disease, it will make it hard to detect an infection."
Southern Africa has so far been spared PPR which occurs in Middle Eastern countries and parts of Central and South Asia, and has also affected western, eastern and central parts of Africa. "The disease, depending on the strength of the strain, can kill within days or not affect the infected animal at all", explained Slingenbergh. Irin
4.
SUMAJKT P.O. Box 1694, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Mob 0717 993 874, 0715 787 887 0784 281 842 Email: agrtractors@yahoo.com
Tanzania National Business Council (TNBC) P.O. Box 3478, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Tel: +255 22 21 22 984-6 Fax: +255 2129433 Email: tnbc@tnbctz.com Website: www.tnbctz.com DAWASCO P.O.BOX 5340 Dar es Salaam, Telophone 22-2131191/4,Fax 22-2110931, Emergency 255-75644266, Email:customercare@dawasco.com, Web:www.dawasco.com
Private Agricultural Sector Support Trust (PASS) Mazimbu Street, TTPL Building, First Floor, P.O. Box 146, Morogoro, Tanzania Phones: 023 260 3752, 2603758, 260 3765 E-mail: pass@pass.ac.tz Website: www.pass.ac.tz
AGRITAN
2Z Series Rice Transplanter
6 ROW RICE (PADDY) SEEDLING TRANSPLANTERS AVAILABLE FROM OUR STOCK IN MOROGORO SPECIAL INTRODUCTORY OFFER WITH SPARES AND WARRANTY ONE YEAR TSH5,950,000/=
PLEASE ENQUIRE
T R A C T O RS L I M I T E D A G RI T A N
P.O. Box 212, Mazimbu Road (Former Heavy Plant Yard), Morogoro, Tanzania. Tel: Mr mwapili: +255-784-421606, Mr Nsekela: +255-786-150213, Fax: +255-27-6246882 Email: Mwapili@gmail.com, mohamed_nsekela@yahoo.com Website: www.pptl.biz/tractorsltd
xxxxxx
8
Tuesday 9 November, 2010