Uganda Pastoral Code, March 2007

3 downloads 0 Views 4MB Size Report
Chartre with the Pastoral Code adopted in Mauritania found that: 'Mali's Chartre reveals ... authorities'), spanning from regulating marketing to building schools, ...

Review of Uganda Pastoral Code (dra5 March 2007)

Saverio Krätli

CONTENTS Technical report





1

Commented Pastoral Code dra5



10

Edinburgh 2012









THE UGANDA PASTORAL CODE DRAFT MARCH 2007 Saverio Krätli

Most of this document (4,600 words out 6,400) is a plain translation of the Pastoral Chartre of Mali (RM 2001). The main differences consist in a few changes in the section on definitions and the addition of section 3 (articles 47 to 68). The section of definitions borrows, to a lesser extent, also from the Pastoral Code of Mauritania (RIM 2000). There are several places where the difference from the original result from incorrect translation. In the other cases, the departure from the original has been taken as especially significant to the Uganda Pastoral Code (from now on UPC) and therefore given particular attention in the review. The Pastoral Chartre is one of a number of similar laws adopted across West Africa over the last decade (for example in Mauritania, Burkina Faso and Niger). From a pastoral perspective, the Malian document is found to be better than, for example, the Pastoral Code in Burkina, and a leap forward from the previous legislative void which, quite literally, left pastoralists in noman’s land. In particular, the analyst attentive to the pastoralists’ perspective have appreciated the visibility given to mobility as a crucial characteristic of pastoralism. Nevertheless, the Malian law, as opposed for example to the Pastoral Code of Mauritania, is found to remain anchored in a ‘technocratic vision’ (Hesse and Thébaud 2006) and possibly not the best example available for the drafting of a Pastoral Code in Uganda. The Pastoral Code of Mauritania is much stronger on the issue of mobility, stating that ‘pastoral mobility is protected under all circumstances and can only be limited temporarily and for reasons of the safety of animals and crops, and this in accordance with the provisions of the law’ (RIM 2000: Art 10, quoted in this translation in Hesse and Thébaud 2006: 15). Law scholars comparing the Mali Chartre with the Pastoral Code adopted in Mauritania found that: ‘Mali's Chartre reveals a less liberal approach than the [Mauritanian] Code. The Chartre places more reliance on state authorities by making actions and permissions dependent on agents of state agencies. The Code by contrast acknowledges that the rights which herders request are already vested in them in principle, the state simply lends its authority to their protection (Wabnitz 2007). Even so, the translation of the Malian document in the UPC manages in several occasions to bend the original meaning further in the technocratic direction, turning originally descriptive statements (in the French wording) into prescriptions, rights into obligations (or the arbitrary decision of the authorities) and, overall, governing into policing. My recommended amendments (and questions) to the text of the UPC are in the commentary. Given their large number, it is easier and more effective to read them in relation to the context they refer to. However, it remains open to speculation what political chances this document

!1

might have to become law in Uganda, given that it is largely the translation of a law from another country (especially in light of the recent events in Mali). The answer to this question will determine whether to invest in improving the current draft or rather mobilise efforts towards a radical re-writing, maybe this time using a broader basis of inspiration, including cutting-edge understanding of pastoral systems, and the experience with this kind of law in other countries, that was not available at the time the Pastoral Chartre was drafted. Before introducing the observations specifically emerged from this review, it is also pertinent to recall the critical analysis of the Pastoral Chartre itself, a synthesis of which is in the box below.

A note on the sections on marketing (articles 47 to 68). These two long sections are not in the Malian document, but have been added. The quality of the text is notably different. The articles make suggestions (often to ‘the Government’ and ‘the authorities’), spanning from regulating marketing to building schools, restocking, promoting sedentarisation and validating indigenous knowledge. Most of these suggestions suffer from many of the problems highlighted and addressed in the review of the Uganda Rangeland Management Policy (Krätli and Hesse 2011). In order to minimise repetitions, my commentary only gives feedback on the most significant problems. The absence of a comment should not be read as an indicator that the text is unproblematic. Although some of the suggestions scattered through the articles are worth developing— and this is certainly the case for the general principle that livestock marketing should be part of the concerns of the UPC or any pastoral code as it is undoubtedly part of the practice of pastoral activity—it is my view that nothing in these two sections is law material ‘as it is’. The issue of governing livestock marketing, even within the limits of relevance of a pastoral code, requires more thinking than a focus on policing pastoralists (on marketing, mobility for marketing and animal health), securing taxes and trying to increase offtakes. Finally, some information on how to read the commentary. The text in the UPC that is not present in the Malian document has been turned from black to blue and—in order to make it visible also in photocopy—highlighted in green. My commentary is on the left side of the page.

Below is a more detailed feedback on key aspects of the document, starting from an examination of problems with the opening section on definitions (Article 3). This section includes strategic themes and messages for advocacy.

1. A UPC should include a sound and up-to-date definition of pastoralism As the document is about pastoralism, the definition of pastoralism is critical. The distinction between transhumant and nomadic pastoralism found in the Malian document does not seem

!2

BOX 1: Weakness in the Pastoral Chartre of Mali • The judicial definition of what constitutes rational and productive ‘pastoral landdevelopment’ is remains anchored to the ways land is used for farming and by farming communities. There is no recognition of the positive actions of pastoralism through the simple transformation of biomass into animal products, the regeneration of the soil through manuring, or the dispersion of seeds through the combination of selective feeding and mobility—preserving and increasing the biodiversity that is characteristic of pastoral ecosystems. • Unelected bodies largely composed of civil servants—distant in their professional background and experience from the logic of production characteristic of pastoral systems—have the power to withdraw access to pastoral land if they consider it is not being put to good use. • The law weakens rather than strengthening pastoralists’ tenure rights, particularly over high-value resources such as the relatively more fertile lands in the drylands, that are critical to the economic and ecological sustainability of pastoral systems. • A highly sectoral approach to natural resource management, in absence of an overarching piece of legislation that integrates land tenure issues with natural resource management (especially including water). Access to grassland is determined by a blend of commonproperty and individual rights over the wells located on it. Water rights are therefore crucial to manage grazing lands sustainably. The appropriation of water points, or the creation of private water points on common lands, is being used as a strategy for elites to de facto privatise common property resources. • Interfacing access to pastoral resources with complex, bureaucratic and technical procedures controlled by the State and/or local government, disempowers pastoral communities and undermines, rather than securing, the economic and ecological sustainability of pastoral systems. • Many of the legal provisions if fully implemented will reduce livestock mobility and encourage the privatisation of the commons as local elites (including those from pastoral groups) or ‘new actors’ (civil servants, merchants, politicians) use the law to register exclusive rights to water and land. (Based on Hesse and Thébaud 2006)

relevant to the Ugandan context. The emphasis on ‘wandering’, added in the UCP, is incorrect and out of date with the current understanding of pastoral systems. The reference to ‘natural resources’ is itself problematic as the pastoral rangeland ecosystems as we know them now are substantially the result of centuries of pastoral activity: from selective pressure on vegetation to manuring by livestock whose mobility and feeding behaviour is tied in with management and breeding practices—the same problem with the definition of ‘pastoral resources’ (this point is addressed more in detail in Output 1 of the COPACSO review of the draft Uganda Rangeland Management Policy, from now on URMP, Krätli and Hesse 2011). My recommendation here is to drop the distinction between transhumant and nomadic and, instead, adopt a more substantive

!3

and up-to-date definition of pastoralism such as: ‘Pastoralism is a way of life based primarily on raising livestock, particularly small ruminants, cattle and camels. Pastoral livestock production systems are mostly found in areas characterized by marked rainfall variability, and associated uncertainties in the spatial and temporal distribution of water resources and grazing for animals. Pastoralists have developed specialised management systems which are welladapted to these difficult conditions. Crucial aspects of pastoralist specialisation are: 1. the economic role played by livestock strategic mobility and selective feeding; and 2. the development of flexible resource management systems, particularly communal land management institutions and non-exclusive entitlements to water resources’ (based on AU 2010 and COMESA 2009). 2. A UPC should include a fine-grained definition of pastoral mobility Several key terms in this document are defined with reference to mobility, but pastoral mobility is not defined. Here is a recommended definition of pastoral mobility—based on state-of-the-art scientific understanding of pastoral production systems (as also recognised in AU 2010): Pastoral mobility: There are several kinds of mobility, with different functions, within every pastoral system. All pastoral mobility is ‘strategic’, in the sense that is towards a previously identified place and via a carefully planned itinerary. The main kind of pastoral mobility is functional to enhance animal production through optimising nutrition under unstable environmental conditions. Such main kind of mobility is a specialisation to take advantage of the characteristic heterogeneity, in time and space, of rangeland environments, where key resources such as nutrients and water for livestock can be relied upon in the form of unpredictable and short-lived concentrations more than in a uniform and stable distribution. Other functions of mobility are often combined with this main one, addressing particular aspects of the production systems such as the need to avoid insecurity and severe drought, or to serve a marketing strategy at certain times of the year’. 3. A UPC should define pastoral routes in relation to their use in the pastoral system The notion of ‘pastoral route’ is linked to the European tradition of transhumance, where livestock is moved between eco-zones at particular seasons (for example from lowlands to highlands during the Summer). This kind of movement is really a hinge between periods of production, almost as moving rural workers between two fields or employees between two office buildings. The ‘pastoral routes’ used in these contexts are really ‘routes’ in the commons sense, of a link from one place to another. With regard to dryland pastoralism, this view can be misleading. Once given proper consideration to the understanding of pastoral systems as based on mobility (see definitions of ‘pastoralism’ and ‘pastoral mobility’ above), it is evident that mobility and production in pastoralism should not be addressed as distinct activities. Livestock in pastoralism is not moved between areas of production and mobility along pastoral routes is not a suspension or a hinge between periods of production. This is particularly evident in the fact that livestock traders in both East and West Africa, use pastoral strategic mobility to fatten their animals on the hoof while marching them to the terminal markets during the wet season (Dirani et al 2010, Thébaud and Corniaux 2011). If pastoralism is a system for fattening

!4

livestock ‘on the move’ (more efficiently and reliably than it could be done by staying in one place), than ‘pastoral routes’ should be seen as conflating with pastoral production. Reducing ‘pastoral routes’ to simple routes for moving livestock between areas of production is the result of a sedentary perspective—in which what matters happens before and after moving— and fails to capture the fundamental logic of pastoralism. While appearing to support mobility, this understanding of ‘pastoral route’ in practice re-constructs pastoralism as a sedentary activity in the body of the law and therefore, inevitably, leads to hinder its capacity to operate. 4. A UPC would need to include a formal definition of the local authorities involved The term ‘local community’ is key to the understanding and interpretation of several articles in the UCP, but not formal definition of ‘local community’ is given in the text of the Code. In the UCP, the term ‘local community’ translates the French ‘collectivité territoriale’. However, while the French term refers to a judicially defined ‘moral person’ of decentralised governance 1, the term ‘local community’ lacks the same precision and has no formal role in the decentralisation framework in Uganda. As a consequence, all the articles in the UCP that refer to ‘local community’ (sometimes ‘local communities’) lose the precision they had in the Malian document, remaining vague and therefore subject to arbitrary interpretation. Perhaps a better choice, closer to the meaning of ‘collectivité territoriale’. could have been ‘local councils’ (or ‘rural local councils’), the term with which local governments and administrative units in postdecentralisation Uganda are collectively know. In Article 28 of the UPC, ‘collectivités territoriales’ is translated as ‘local settled communities and villages’. 5. A UPC should include a fine-grained definition of ‘pastoral resources’ based on state of the art scientific understanding of pastoral systems Although pastoralism is defined in the UCP by producing through mobility, the definition of ‘pastoral resources’ does not follow from this fundamental characteristic and, instead, is a simple list of static assets. A more advanced and pertinent definition of pastoral resources would look at them as relationships rather than material assets: the relationship between certain users, a certain part of the world, and a certain system of production. So for example a good pasture area is not, as such, a resource to a pastoralist. It is the possibility to access it in a timely way, and therefore the existence of the given pasture area within a coherent system of knowledge management and land-tenure institutions that makes it a pastoral resource. At the very least, this more sophisticated perspective would include the pastoral routes main and local, and the possibility (if regulated) of adapting them to the unstable environment pastoralism operates with. With a more substantive definition of pastoralism, such as the one recommended above, also the notion of pastoral resources would become more detailed and more pertinent to the operational logic of pastoral systems. There are four categories of resources crucial to the successful running of pastoralism as defined above: 1. the specialised reproduction herd; 2. the 1

The term ‘Collectivités Territoriales’ refers to all the administrative and political entities defined on territorial basis. They are characterised by: 1. A formal designation, a specific population and a well delimited territory; 2. an elected Council and Assembly; 3. its own resources; 4. specific competences defined in the law; 5. the possibility to act as a ‘moral person’ (judicial person), with administrative and financial autonomy.

!5

expert labour; 3. timely access to the series of short-lived concentrations of nutrients characteristic of unstable environments like the rangelands; and 4. specialised pastoral institutions. As they are all necessary, a thorough definition of pastoral resources for the purpose of ‘defining the fundamental principles and the general rules governing the practice of pastoral activities’ should address them all. 


i. The specialised reproduction herd (or flock) is defined by its capacity to perform well under the conditions of pastoral production strategies over periods of time spanning at least one decade (to include a long drought). As pastoralism uses mobility and the livestock’s capacity for selective feeding, a good reproductive herd is a socially organised population combining physiological adaptation with behavioural traits and learned skills.
 


ii. Expert labour is defined as the pastoral competences and skills necessary to successfully run the pastoral system over a period of time spanning at least ten years (to include a long drought). Pastoralism is a full-time highly specialised activity involving the management of high levels of risk in unforgiving conditions. It takes a lifetime to learn it and even within pastoral groups only a minority of individuals have the capacity to handle the situations of greatest difficulty.
 


iii. Pastoralism’s specialised adaptation consists in exploiting concentrations of nutrients that are short-lived and largely unpredictable. In practice, this means not only gaining access but—equally crucial—securing correct timing: when nutrients for livestock peak and no one else is competing for them (as competition and stress abate feed intake in livestock). With few important exceptions (dry season grazing reserves) concentrations of nutrients do not happen always in the same place or at the same time, therefore they count as a pastoral resource only in combination with the capacity for timely mobility. In other words, the true ‘pastoral resource’ is not simply ‘good pasture’ but rather ‘the capacity to access good pasture at the right time’.
 


iv. Pastoralism is a social enterprise that rests on a complex structure of institutions: from the gathering of intelligence prior to a migration, to the circulation and reproduction of specialised knowledge, starting from the teaching of the new generations; from the management of land and water in ways that allow for flexible and dynamic adaptation to the unstable environment, to the deeply rooted cultural values and social ties that build the ‘character’ necessary to people operating with high levels of risk and often finding themselves in the position to take painful but necessary decisions. 
 The undermining of any of all of these fundamental elements of pastoral systems results in systemic adjustments that are often difficult to predict and that may force households of producers to act outside the pastoral internal logic of ecological sustainability.

!6

6. A UPC should rest on a broader legal framework integrating land tenure and natural resource management, especially water. The ownership of public water points on pastoral land is critical to the control of the land itself and should therefore be with the same communities who control the land: not the land on which the water point is found, but the rangeland that is served by the water point during the dry season. There is no effective control of pastoral land without the control of water. Establishing the ownership of public water points on territorial basis is potentially problematic, especially as the Uganda National Land Policy establishes the control of pastoral land not on territorial basis but ‘with designated pastoral communities’ (MLHUD 2011: Art. 62.i). The same approach should be taken with regard of public water points on pastoral land. If water development in pastoral areas is to be functional to support pastoralism (rather than promoting competing production systems on its place) the control of public water points must be with pastoral communities and within a legal framework designed to serve the way water is used within specialised pastoral production strategies. 7. A UPC should support pastoral mobility in its own terms. A legal framework to acknowledge the complexity and internal logic of pastoral mobility and govern its practices is necessary and desirable for all concerned parties. In drafting a UPC, great care should be taken to engage with and secure pastoral mobility. This should be done in discussion with pastoralists themselves, and on the basis of the state-of-the-art understanding of the functions of mobility in relation with the economic and ecological sustainability of pastoral systems. It is crucial to capture in the making of the law the ‘mobility-as-intensification’ perspective of producers (i.e. a strategy for enhancing resilient animal production in unstable environments) that is at the core of pastoral systems. This would give a UPC coherence with the AU Policy on Pastoralism. Without a strong and lively representation of pastoral producers’s perspective firmly built into the process, the view of ‘mobility-as-a-problem’ (or as lesser evil) that is still deeply rooted in the administration can be expected to make the drafting of the UPC drift (as in the case of the present document) towards policing and technocratic control.

!7

REFERENCES

African Union 2010. Policy Framework for Pastoralism in Africa: Securing, Protecting and Improving the Lives, Livelihoods and Rights of Pastoralist Communities, Department of Rural Economy and Agriculture, African Union, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. http:// www.celep.info/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2011/03/policy-framework-forpastoralism1.pdf COMESA 2009. Policy Framework for Food Security in Pastoralist Areas. Consultative Draft, December 2009, Comprehensive African Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) Pillar III, Addis Ababa. http://www.comesa.int/lang-en/component/content/article/326comesa-drafts-policy-framework-for-food-security-in-pastoralist-areas-pffspa Cotula L. (ed.) 2006. Land and water rights in the Sahel, Tenure challenges of improving access to water for agriculture, IIED Issue paper 139, International Institute of Environment and Development, London, http://pubs.iied.org/12526IIED.html Dirani O. H. el, M. A. Jabbar and B. I. Babiker 2010. Constraints in the market chains for export of Sudanese sheep and sheep meat to the Middle East, International Livestock Research Institute, Addis Ababa, http://mahider.ilri.org/handle/10568/7 Ellis J.E. and Swift D.M. 1988. Stability of African ecosystems: alternate paradigms and implications for development. Journal of Range Management 41 (6): 450-459. Hesse C. and Thébaud B. 2006. Will Pastoral Legislation Disempower Pastoralists in the Sahel?. Indigenous Affairs 1: 14-23. http://www.drylands-group.org/Articles/1202.html IIED 2011. Pastoralism and Policy in East Africa. Trainer's Manual, International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), Resource Conflict Institute (RECONCILE), MS Training Centre for Development Corporation (MS TCDC) and Feinstein International Center (Tuft University), London. IUCN 2011. Supporting Sustainable Pastoral Livelihoods: A Global Perspective on Minimum Standards and Good Practice. Second Edition March 2012 (published for review and consultation through global learning fora), IUCN ESARO office, Nairobi. https:// cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/manual_for_min_standards_low_resoultion_may_2012.pdf Krätli S. and Hesse C. 2011. Review of Uganda Rangeland Development and Management Policy. Output 1: Technical Report, IIED and COPACSO, Edinburgh. Little D.P., McPeack J., Barret C.B. and Kristjanson P. 2008. Challenging Orthodoxies: Understanding Poverty in Pastoral Areas of East Africa, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=999623 MLHUD 2011. Uganda National Land Policy. Final Draft, Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development, Kampala. http://ulaug.org/new/wp-content/uploads/Uganda-LandPolicy-Final-Draft-30-March-20112.pdf Ocaido, M., R. T. Muwazi, and J. Opuda-Asibo, 2009. Financial analysis of livestock production systems around Lake Mburo Nation Park, in south western Uganda. Livestock Research for Rural Development 21(5).

!8

République du Mali 2001. Portant Charte Pastorale du Mali, Loi n. 01-004 du 27 Fev 2001. http://www.sgg.gov.ml/Journal0/L01-004.pdf République Islamique de Mauritanie 2000. Loi n. 2000-044 Portant Code Pastoral en Mauritanie, 26.07.2000. Journal Officiel de la République Islamique de Mauritanie. http:// www.droit-afrique.com/images/textes/Mauritanie/Mauritanie%20-%20Code %20pastoral.pdf Scoones I. (ed.) 1995. Living with Uncertainty: New Directions in Pastoral Development in Africa, Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd, London. Steinfeld H. 2012. Global Environmental Challenges. Presentation for the ILRI-World Bank Consultation on the Global Livestock Agenda by 2020, Nairobi March 2012, FAO, Rome. http://www.slideshare.net/ILRI/global-environmental-challenges Thébaud B. and Corniaux C. 2011. Le Commerce du Bétail en Afrique de l'Ouest. Module d'Animation et de Formation, Partie 2: La mise en marche, Project d'Appui à la Productivité de l'Elevage dans les systèmes agropastoraux, Associates in Research and Education for Development (ARED), Dakar. Wabnitz H-W. 2007. The Code Pastoral of the ISlamic Republic of Mauritania. Return to the Sources: Revival of Traditional Nomad’s Rights to Common Property Resources, http:// ssrn.com/abstract=906985

!9

THE DRAFT THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

Final Draft Not For Citation

The Uganda Pastoral Code

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE ANIMAL INDUSTRY AND FISHERIES P.O BOX 102, ENTEBBE UGANDA

January 2007

_____________________________________________ 1 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

January 2007

Chapter 1. General Provisions ................................................................................................. 3 Section 1. Purpose and Scope ................................................................................................ 3 Chapter 2. Definitions ............................................................................................................ 3 Chapter 2. General Principles for Exercising Pastoral Activities ........................................ 6 Section 1. Livestock mobility ............................................................................................... 6 Section 2: Environmental protection and sustainable use of pastoral resources............. 6 Section 3: Right of access to pastoral resources ............................................................. 6 Section 4: Contribution to the fight against desertification ............................................ 6 Section 5. Quality of life and environmental monitoring .............................................. 7 Chapter 3. Livestock Movement ........................................................................................ 7 Section 1: Internal livestock movement ......................................................................... 7 Section 2: Livestock movement across international borders ......................................... 9 Chapter 4. Access Rights to Resources and Services in Pastoral Areas............................ 10 Section 1. Access to pastures ....................................................................................... 10 Sub-section 1. Resources in pastoral areas and communal grazing lands .................... 10 Sub-section 2. Resources in cropped areas .................................................................... 12 Section 2: Access to Water ........................................................................................... 13 Sub-section 1: Natural water points ............................................................................... 13 Sub-section 2: Manmade water points ........................................................................... 13 Section 3 Access to trade markets ............................................................................... 15 Sub-section 1 Livestock and trade markets .................................................................. 15 Section 4 Access to extension, animal health and production services, and indigenous knowledge 17 Sub-section 1 Community participatory extension services ......................................... 17 Sub-section 2 Animal health and vaccination services ................................................. 18 Sub-section 3 Restocking programmes ......................................................................... 18 Sub-section 4 Promoting agro-pastoralism and pastoralism ......................................... 20 Sub-section 5 Optimizing indigenous knowledge (IK) among pastoralists.................. 21 Chapter 5. Protection of Pastoral Areas and Safeguards for Pastoral Livestock Keepers’ Rights 21 Section 1. Protection of Pastoral Areas ........................................................................ 21 Section 2: Pastoral Development and Safeguards for Pastoral Rights of User ............. 23 Section 3: Protection of Pastoral Livestock Tracks ...................................................... 24 Chapter 6. Decentralised and Participatory Management of Pastoral Resources ............. 24 Section 1. Role and responsibilities of local communities ........................................... 24 Section 2: Role and Responsibilities of Pastoralists’ Organisations............................. 25 Chapter 7. Local Conflict Management ........................................................................... 26 Chapter 8: Reducing Violations ........................................................................................ 27 Section 1. Recording of Violations and Legal Proceedings ......................................... 27 Section 2. Violations and Sanctions ............................................................................. 27 Chapter 9: Miscellaneous and Final Provisions................................................................. 28

_____________________________________________ 2 2 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

January 2007

Chapter 1. General Provisions Section 1. Purpose and Scope Article 1: This code provides the general principles and rules to govern pastoral activities in Uganda, in order to preserve and promote pastoralism within sound and sustainable overall rural development. Article 2: The code concentrates on the rights of pastoralists with regard to livestock movements and access to pastoral range resources. It emphasises the responsibilities of pastoralists and other stakeholders, especially sustainable utilization of the natural resources, environment preservation, and peaceful co-existence and respect for other people’s properties. Chapter 2. Definitions Article 3: The following important definitions shall be applied to assist Uganda pastoral code interpretation: A pastoralist is a person that keeps herd(s), the driver or herder. The pastoralist’s main income is derived from livestock farming based on a mobility system aimed at exploiting rangeland pasture and water resources. Pastoralism is the type of animal husbandry that consists of ensuring the provision of food for animals through permanent or seasonal mobile livestock utilisation of natural resources. Transhumant pastoralism is the cyclical and seasonal migration of animals under the care of their herders through known stock routes in order to use the pastoral resources of a given area. Within these specified areas, pastoral mobility should be guaranteed and may only be temporarily restricted because of security to the people, animals or crops as required by law. Nomadic pastoralism is the moving of livestock (cattle, sheep, goat, camel, horse and asses) by nomads or wanders in search of pastures and watering points for their animals.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [1]: Originally: ‘this law defines the fundamental principles and general rules governing the practice of pastoral acrivities’. The difference is subtle but important. In the French wording the emphasis is on formalising into a juridical framework the practice of pastoral activities. In the UCP, the emphasis is on control (e.g. the shift from ‘defining’ to ‘providing’ the principles: defining is principally a descriptive action while providing is prescriptive). The same shift is also recognisable in Article 2. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [2]: This phrase is from the Pastoral Code of Mauritania, Art 1. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [3]: This phrase is an altered translation of the central statement in Art 1 of the Mali Pastoral Chartre: ‘The present law consecrates [in the sense of conferring the highest degree of validity] and specifies [clearly identifies] the essential [basic] rights of pastoralists, especially in matter of livestock mobility and access to pastoral resources’ . Note how the strong statement opening the Malian document (‘the law validates the rights of pastoralists in matter of mobility’) becomes a simple description of what the law is about, the validation of rights being dropped. The Malian document consecrates pastoralists’ rights, the UPC concentrates on them. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [4]: This phrase has been moved from Art 1 in the Mali Pastoral Chartre.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [5]: There is no definition of ‘pastoral mobility’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [6]: This statement does not seem to belong to a section of definitions. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [7]: The word ‘wanders’ is not in the Malian document and only further pulls the definition away from reality: cf the Africa Union policy on pastoralism talking of ‘strategic’ mobility (AU 2010). The distinction between nomadic and transhumant pastoralism is from the Malian document and not so relevant to Uganda. Besides, livestock mobility is a key strategy in all forms of pastoralism. Cf themes1 and 2 in my opening section.

_____________________________________________ 3 3 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

January 2007

Pastoral resources encompass the complex of natural resources needed to feed and nourish animals. The resources mainly consist of surface and under ground water, herbaceous or aerial pastures (leaves and fruits of trees and shrubs growing within pastoral spaces), swamps and wetlands, salt quarries where they exist. Pastoral resources are, by law, common resources except for those that are located on private properties, whether these are collective or individual. Pastoral lands cover the areas with pastoral resources, public animal treatment and vaccination places, and corridors that enable livestock to access pastoral resources. Pastoral land is a collective and inalienable area reserved for pastoralist activities, and any form of exclusive ownership of pastoral land is illegal. Pastoral organisations are groups of pastoralists who get an income from transhumant livestock farming. Their objective is to promote pastoralism. Irrespective of their legal status, the organisations can be formed at the national, regional, community, village or encampment level. They can serve as consultation and coordination structures to defend pastoralists’ interests and/or promote Government of Uganda (GOU) or local community policies.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [8]: This point has been added and its meaning is unclear. What law? ‘Common’ in the sense of ‘open to all Ugandans’, or in the sense of ‘common property regimes’ (which are not open to everybody)? This point appears to clash with the Uganda National Land Policy (UNLP) Articles 54-56, which states that common property resources ‘are often situated on land owned privately by individuals and communities’.

Pastures are the complex mix of natural resources, but mainly vegetation, utilised habitually to feed and nourish ruminant animals.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [9]: Given that the system is defined by mobility, pastoral routes are ‘pastoral resources’ in their own right, not simply links between static resources. See theme 3 in my opening section.

Right of access to pastoral resources is the assurance of freedom of passage to natural resources that are given to pastoralists. The right includes all public and private facilities needed to allow passage so that the animals may use the pastoral resources, in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

Comment [10]: The meaning of ‘pastoralist’ in this document has already been defined. Beside, it is defined as ‘based on a mobile system’, therefore not restricted to ‘transhumant’.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [11]: Natural resources are ‘given’ to pastoralists? Or rather, it is the right to access that is given to pastoralists? Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [12]: As the avalability of good quality pasture depends on erratic preciptations, the location of this kind of pastoral resources is largely unpredictable. Therefore the ‘right to access’ them must be wider than the right to use official or demarcated pastoral routes/tracks and includes the right to open new routes or simply the right of passage along new itineraries. Mobility serves the function of interfacing the instability of rangeland environments. If the itineraries of pastoral mobility are locked, the function of mobility cannot be served anymore.

_____________________________________________ 4 4 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

January 2007

Right of use of resources is the autonomy given to pastoralists to exploit, for their own or that of their animals’ benefit, the resources in pastoral lands, within normal limits as legally recognised and protected. Pastoralists are responsible for guarding their animals at night. Sedentary livestock farming is taken to mean animal pasturing activities in areas surrounding crop fields in villages. Pastoral tracks are the official trails demarcated for the movement of animals within a given area or region. Rest areas are areas where herds are stationed or stay along transhumance tracks or routes. Stakeholder, in the pastoral areas, is anyone who benefits from its resources either through use or ensuring that it is properly utilised and conserved. Wetlands are commonly also known as seasonal or central permanent swamps.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [13]: This definition is a blend of phrases borrowed from the Malian document and the Mauritanian Pastoral Code. The original definition in the Malian document reads: ‘Pastoral rights of use: the complex of the rights to exploit natural resources for pastoral use, as recognised and protected by the law’. The original does not mention ‘normal limits’ and what is ‘recognised and protected by the law’ are the pastoral rights of use.The Mauritanian document (Art 7) reads: ‘The right to use resources is the the autonomy granted to the pastoralist to use, for his own benefit or the benefit of his animals, all resources of the pastoral space in accordance with existing laws and regulations’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [14]: The word ‘demarcated’ has been added. The Malian document distinguishes between ‘local pastoral routes’ and ‘transhumance routes’, the second being ‘routes designated to the movement of livestock between two or more given localities’. The definition of pastoral route should be based on the definition of pastoral mobility (cf theme 3 in my opening section). Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [15]: As the definition of ‘transhumance route’ (present in the Malian document beside that of ‘pastoral track’) has been dropped, this specification seems now out of place.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [16]: Not in the original document and quite puzzling: anyone using resources in the pastoral areas, wehether a pastoralist of not, is to be considered a ‘stakeholder’? Seems to clash with the above definition of pastoral land as ‘collective and inalienable area reserved for pastoralist activities’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [17]: More than wetlands, there should be here a clear definition of ‘pastoral grazing reserves’, as relatively more fertile areas of pastoral land that where pasture can be found even when is missing everywhere else, and that are therfore crucial for the survival of the system and the sustainable utilisation of the pastoral land as a whole.

_____________________________________________ 5 5 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

January 2007

Chapter 2. General Principles for Exercising Pastoral Activities Section 1. Livestock mobility Article 4. In the process of undertaking their pastoral activities, pastoralists have a right to move their livestock in order to exploit recognised pastoral resources. Article 5. Animals may be moved about anywhere in Uganda, however, restricted areas, including forest reserves, wetlands and wildlife sanctuaries, private properties and cropped holdings, and those classified as off limits for grazing together with quarantine control zones declared by the animal health department must be respected.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [18]: This section should include measures to safeguard mobility, not only though giving pastoralists the right to move, but also through regulating ongoing processing that are hindering this right (including the multiplication of ‘restricted areas’). As now, the section is only about controlling mobility.

Livestock may be moved into the territories of neighbouring countries but this must obey the rules of existing agreements between the two nations affecting transhumance. The movements must also respect the temporary measures put in place by the countries concerned at any time.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [19]: This word has been added. As ‘pastoral resources’ are defined in Article 3, it appears to be unecessary.

Article 6. Pastoralists have the most responsibility to watch over and control their livestock while they are on the move. They must as well ensure that other persons’ property is respected at all times. Section 2: Environmental protection and sustainable use of pastoral resources Article 7. Pastoral activities in Uganda must be carried out while recognising the need to protect and preserve the nation’s environment.

Article 10. Exploitation of pastoral resources is undertaken while respecting the rights recognised for the different land users and owners, and in compliance with rules and legislations set for protecting the environment and proper natural resource management.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [20]: … and maybe ‘national activities’ should be carried out while recognising the need to protect the pastoral environment’? There is no competition between ecological interests and pastoral interests in the rangelands. The inner logic of pastoral systems is ecologically sustainable (AU 2010; IUCN 2011). When pastoral households turn to ecologically unsustainable activities it is usually because dysfunctionalities have been introduced into the system distorting it. The best way to protect and preserve the rangelands is to help pastoralism to operate according to its inner logic, lifting the obstacles to do so rather than introducing new ones.

Section 4: Contribution to the fight against desertification Article 11. Pastoralists as individuals, together with the various pastoralist organisations or groupings, should give full support to environment protection and the fight against desertification. By cooperating and working in partnership with local authorities, suitable technical services, GOU lead agencies for the protection of the environment wetlands forests and wildlife, and other users, pastoralists must contribute to the preservation of Uganda’s natural ecosystems and their productive potential.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [21]: The present formulation defines pastoralists’ right by subtraction rather than substatively: a right that goes as far as it does not clash with anybodyelse’s right. After almost a century of pastoral marginalisation and unfavourable policies this does not seem enough to guarantee equity nor to close the way to further loss of pastoral resources.

Article 8. Utilisation of pastoral resources for feeding and watering animals must be carried out in a sustainable manner, with an interest to preserve the rights of present and future Uganda generations. Section 3: Right of access to pastoral resources Article 9. Pastoralists have a right to exploit pastoral resources to feed their animals.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [22]: This is important, but should be expanded to cover all kinds of pastoral resources, not only feed/pasture (cf theme 5 in my opening section).

_____________________________________________ 6 6 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

January 2007

Section 5. Quality of life and environmental monitoring Article 12. Development projects need to be designed and implemented considering the need to preserve pastoral resources as an essential component of that particular population’s living environment and the quality of life of the people including the pastoralists. Therefore, an environmental impact assessment study should be conducted whenever the implementation of a project, a programme or a plan may lead to total or partial suppression or disappearance of pastoral resources and biodiversity. Article 13. Pastoralists and other users of land in rural areas, need to give their support monitoring of the natural environment, especially where this relates to implementation of an early warnings system and the fight again bush fires and pollution (air soil and water).

Chapter 3. Livestock Movement Section 1: Internal livestock movement Article 14. Livestock in Uganda may be moved for purposes of marketing and production including sedentary (settled), transhumant, and nomadic pastoralism.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [23]: The Malian document reads: ‘Development projects should [prescriptive rather than descriptive] be designed and implemented keeping into consideration the necessity [objective rather than subjective] to preserve pastoral resources as an essential component of people’s surroundings and quality of life’. [where ‘people’ is, in my understanding, ‘pastoral people’]

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [24]: This was a problematic point even in the Malian document for at least 3 reasons: 1. Environmental assessments are concerned with the environment, not with ‘pastoral resources’ as such. A project may be innocuous to the environment while severly underming the relationship (see above) within which such environment becomes a pastoral resource. 2. whether a programme is expected or not to lead to the total or partial suppression of pastoral resources is the finding of the assessment, not what determines whether such assessment is needed or not. 3. The article lacks any indication of what should then follow the impact assessment. The first part of this article implies that, in case the impact assessment found that a programme will effectively lead to ‘total or partial suppression of pastoral resources’, the programme would have to be stopped. This has been added. In the Malian document Article 12 is solely concerned with ‘pastoral resources’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [25]: As rangeland management science has fully recognised the ecological utility of controlled bush fires in the drylands, this article should be more specific and read ‘uncontrolled’ bush fires. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [26]: This should read ‘sedentary livestock farming’ (cf Art 3). Now, it reads as if it meant ‘sedentary pastoralism’, which is a contradiction in terms as pastoralism is defined (in Art 3) by being mobile.

_____________________________________________ 7 7 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

January 2007

Article 15. Moving animals on foot shall be undertaken through properly identified and recognised pastoral tracks. These will consist of local pastoral tracks in the immediate territory and transhumance tracks en-route to exploiting distant resources within and outside of Uganda. Article 16. Local communities and administration authorities shall be responsible for overseeing the management of identified pastoral tracks in collaboration of pastoralists’ organisations or associations and in consultation with all stakeholders. The same local administrations are responsible too for demarcating (delineating) and marking the tracks where none presently exist, their rehabilitation (maintenance) and upgrading, and redefinition and closure when this becomes necessary e.g., after resolving a water or land use conflict. Pastoral tracks shall be monitored by staff of the local or district government animal production department in liaison with local area (LC1 or sub-county) councils, pastoral organisations where these exist and other key players. Article 17. Encroachment of or placement of obstacles to an existing recognised track or the development of a new unauthorised pastoral track is prohibited.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [27]: The Malian document reads: ‘is done’, which is descriptive rather than prescriptive as in the UPC version.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [28]: This specification—absent in the Malian document—de facto makes the pastoral right to mobility useless for the purpose of pastoral production (cf theme 5 in my opening section). Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [29]: This translates, in my view incorrectly, the French ‘collectivités territoriales’ [cf theme 4 in my opening section]. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [30]: This is a problem already existing in the French wording: clearly the local authorities can be involved in the creation of new pastoral routes only under the guidance of pastoral producers who are supposed to be using them. Besides, Art 16 and Art 17, place these pastoral routes under the responsibility of at least 5 sets of actors: created, managed, maintained, upgraded and closed by local authorities, monitored by technical staff (both groups usually with a poor understanding of the pastoral system); the management overseen by local communities, pastoral associations and ‘all the stakeholders’; maintained by pastoralists and pastoral organisations; monitored by pastoral organisations… A recipe for a void of responsibility? Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [31]: The original article in the Malian document says something completely different: ‘Any form of occupation, damage or cultivation of a pastoral route, and any form of obstruction along the route is strictly forbidden. The original makes no mention of prohibiting the development of new track, authorised or not. The difference is possibly due to a misunderstanding of the French ‘mise en exploitation’ [cultivate], but one in a direction that is telling of the general culture of policing underpinning the debate around pastoralism in Uganda. The same issue also in articles 18 and 19 (UPC).

_____________________________________________ 8 8 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

January 2007

Pastoralists or their organisations must ensure that lands set aside for pastoral tracks are utilised in accordance with their intended use. In addition, pastoralists must share in the maintenance of these tracks in collaboration with local community authorities and within the rules agreed by all to for the purpose. Article 18. The use of designated pastoral tracks is a right and an obligation to be observed by all pastoralists. Moreover, without exception, pastoral and transhumance tracks must be utilised during the cropping seasons. But, local administration authorities can, depending on prevailing environmental conditions but without prejudice to the pastoralists’ liability in the event of damages caused to other people’s property, set periods during which the use of the tracks may merely be recommended. Article 19. Pastoralists have the right to access designated GOU animal rest areas where they exist, and within the guidelines set up for the purpose. The occupation of such areas in a manner that contravenes the original aim or may inhibit movement or stopovers of pastoralists on the move is forbidden. Article 20. Herds on the move or migrating herds must be under the care of enough keepers. Furthermore, when requested by authorities, the herders should show valid animal movement permits and animal health documents as proscribed by Uganda’s laws and the animal health department. Article 21. Local authorities, working in liaison with all resident land users, must spell out the security arrangements for herds on the move through the region under its jurisdiction. Article 22. In order to formalise and regulate transhumance movements in Uganda and check banditry, the local communities, in collaboration with relevant and appropriate traditional chiefs, crop and livestock farmer organisations (like POKATESA) and other interested partners like local government technical services (vet and agriculture) staff, RDCs and ISO staff, shall meet and establish a clear transhumance calendar. This may be repeated each year. The movement calendar shall indicate the maximum periods for the departure and return of nomadic livestock from one locality to another. Whenever possible it shall indicate the number of pastoralists, number of herds and approximate number of animals expected to move. Whenever possible too, herders shall be given Identity Cards (IDs) entitling them to enjoy protection and any privileges and incentives, and tracking en route. Eventually their animals shall also be individually tagged. The information in the calendar must be properly communicated (by RDCs and CAO through the radio etc) to pastoralists affected, and local government administrative authorities and GOU security agencies for enforcement. Section 2: Livestock movement across international borders Article 23. Current regional integration policy allows the movement of Uganda herds for purposes of international transhumance to neighbouring countries, except when subject to specific measures that may periodically be prescribed by the countries concerned.

_____________________________________________ 9 9 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

January 2007

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [32]: The Malian document here uses the term ‘veiller’ [‘see that’, ‘watch out’, ‘keep an eye on’] meaning that they are responsible for pointing out (to the authorities) cases of violation of the law protecting pastoral routes (as in Article 17 of the Malian code, not the modified version in the UPC). It cannot be the responsibility of pastoralists to ‘ensure’ that law protecting pastoral routes is respected, but, as it should be stated in this article, it is the responsibility of the local authorities.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [33]: The Malian document does not speficies ‘designated’ but simply states that ‘the use of pastoral routes is both a right and an obligation for all pastoralists’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [34]: As for Article 18, the Malian document does not specifies ‘designated’ nor restricts the ‘rest’ to the animals, nor mentions other forms of restriction or ‘guidelines’: ‘Pastoralists have the right to access the resting areas freely. It is forbidden to occupy these areas in ways that might hinder the flow or the stationing of pastoralists on the move along the route’.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [35]: The Malian document makes no mention of ‘formalising’ or ‘regulating’ pastoral movemens. The objective of the transhumance calendar is not to control pastoral movements but rather to provide a framewok for coordinanting transhumance and agricultural activity in order to minimise frictions between the two systems—mainly by making sure that pastoralists’ livestock is not kept in agricultural areas during the period of farming and do not arrive or return before the fields have been harvested. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [36]: None of this policing measures is present in the Malian code.

Similarly, the entry of herds from neighbouring countries onto Uganda territory for purposes of transhumance are authorised subject to reciprocity and in conformity with bilateral and regional agreements into which Uganda is obligated. Article 24. In the course of practising international transhumance, pastoralists from Uganda must obey the host country’s legislation(s) relating to the use of protected conservation areas, and areas classified or designated as ‘off limit’ for grazing. They also need to respect the local rules of the animal health department in that country. The movements of transhumant psatoralists across national boundaries shall be formalised within the guidelines spelt out in Article 22. Article 25. Uganda pastoralists that must undertake international transhumance have to restrict themselves to the transhumance tracks of the countries concerned. Livestock in international transhumance must be under constant and prudent watch of a satisfactory number of herders. And, the keepers are obliged, whenever requested, to submit administrative and animal health documents as provided for in applicable laws and bilateral and regional agreements. Article 26. Animals in international transhumance have to enter the host countries only through the designated entry points provided for this purpose by bilateral and regional agreements. Information pertaining to where these entry points are located shall be conveyed to pastoralists by the local administrative authorities. The information shall also be made available to the relevant border police posts for enforcement. But it is also the responsibility of pastoralists to become aware of these restrictions and requirements before they embark on across the border herd movements. Uganda shall encourage the monitoring of international transhumance by promoting and holding regular dialogue meetings between local government administrative staff and border security staff concerned.

Chapter 4. Access Rights to Resources and Services in Pastoral Areas Section 1.

• •

Post-harvest regrowth Watering



Livestock rest areas

pastures points

Article 28. Access to pastures within non-classified forest areas is free and is not subject to tax or collection of fees. Likewise, no tax or fee shall be collected for using transhumance tracks and livestock rests areas.

_____________________________________________10 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

0

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [38]: In the Malian document ‘sufficient’ [objective] rather than ‘satisfactory’ [subjective]. While a ‘sufficient number’ can be defended for example on the basis of standard practices (say one herder every between 50-60 head of cattle), the use of the term ‘satisfactory’ in this context leaves the pastoralist completely vulnerable to the arbitrary decision of law enforcement.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [39]: In the Malian document ‘ensures’ [a clear assumption of responsibility] rather than ‘encourage’.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [40]: In the Malian document, this heading reads: ‘Right of Access to Pastoral Resources’

Access to pastures

Sub-section 1. Resources in pastoral areas and communal grazing lands Article 27. Resources in pastoral areas and communal grazing lands may consist of: • Herbaceous and aerial

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [37]: The same article in the Malian document is more comprehensive, concerning all pastoralists in international transhumance (therfore also non-Ugandan pastoralists in moving in Uganda): ‘Pastoralists in international transhumance must respect the law of the hosting country, particularly with regard to conservation areas, gazetted or offlimits areas, and control measures for livestock health’.

January 2007

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [41]: Is this different from the ‘pastoral land’ defined in Article 3? If yes, a definition should be provided. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [42]: There is no reference to this in the Malian document. This reference here implies that some areas of pastoral land and communal grazing might be under cultivation…?

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [43]: In the Malian document ‘resting areas’, without restriction to livestock.

The passage of livestock through the territory of local settled communities and villages or the private property of landowners should not unnecessarily exceed the technically required and/or legally prescribed time lengths and durations. The modalities of transhumance shall be established by a central GOU policy and law to enable local authorities enact by-laws for its proper implementation and enforcement.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [44]: In the Malian document: ‘collectivités territoriales’. This expression here is used to translate the French ‘collectivités territoriales’ (cf theme 4 in my opening section).

Herbaceous and aerial pastures and other resources in pastoral areas can be utilised by any pastoralist. This must nonetheless be within the rules set to govern environmental protection and natural resource management. Article 29. The cutting or harvesting of grass and its storage for use as hay to meet domestic livestock nourishment needs shall be free on public or state land but shall be negotiated on private property and holdings. Article 30. Access to post-harvest fodder regrowth on public land is also free to pastoralists after the crops and grains have been harvested and collected. Where necessary this will depend on a date set by local administration authority in consultation with the cropped land user communities. Article 31. Where communal grazing land is identified, access to such facilities shall be open to all. But the animals of local community members having customary rights over the grazing lands shall have the priority access right to the resource, subject too, to the pastoral rights of user. Access to communal grazing land may on the other hand be subject to a tax or fee collection as decided upon and regulated by the appropriate area local communities.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [45]: The harvesting of grass in the rangelands is a very problematic practice (ecologically, politically, economically) that should be closely regulated. Besides, where is the article that protects pasture on pastoral land from being harvested (if with the exception of extraordinary situations of need by pastoral households and within limits)? The intention to prevent conflicts between farmers and pastoralists remains a pie in the sky as long as fields are fiercely protected by the law while pastures is for anyone to take. Moreover, pastoral land is by definition (Art 3) ‘collective and inalienable […] any form of exclusive ownership […] is illegal’. Therefore, why is there a reference to ‘private property and holdings’ here in this section about ‘Resources in pastoral areas and communal grazing lands’? (refs to private property and holdings are present also in Article 28)? Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [46]: If taken literally, this article introduces de facto open access to pastoral land. In reality, the same article in the Malian document says something different. The open access implication here in the UPC is the result of a problem in translation. Articles 31 to 33 in the Malian document is about a highly valued fodder particular to certain wetlands in Mali, the ‘bourgou’. The places where this fodder grows, called ‘bourgoutières’, are object of ancient and complex management institutions. The translation of ‘bougoutières’ with ‘communal grazing land’ in the UPC is incorrect. As the bourgoutières are a characteristic of Mali, articles 31, 32 and 33 have no reason of being in the UPC.

_____________________________________________11 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

1

January 2007

Article 32. Local communities are responsible for managing the communal grazing lands under their jurisdiction, in collaboration with identified area pastoralist organisations. Local grazing management committees, preferably involving some pastoralists, may be instituted for this purpose where deemed necessary. Article 33. Local communities, working in close collaboration with other interested parties must set up regulations for the proper management of the communal grazing lands under their jurisdiction. This shall be imperative relative to the opening and closing periods for utilising the resources in the communal grazing areas. Regulations shall spell out conditions for non-priority access by livestock from other locations and exploitation of any hay water and other resources therein for sale. In addition, if it is considered necessary, the local community may stop the commercial exploitation of their grazing lands such as from mining etc. Article 34. Finally, just as for communal grazing land in Article 32, access of pastoral livestock to wetlands in their area is free and shall not involve the collection of tax or fees. The local pastoral communities and authority may regulate the commercial exploitation of wetlands. The local authorities may also deter the commercial exploitation of these facilities if this would compromise the ability of pastoralists to meet their own needs. Sub-section 2. Resources in cropped areas Article 35. After crops have been harvested, the field(s) may be opened to livestock grazing. The animals of local community members have priority access rights to post-harvest fields. Local communities shall regulate the conditions for non-priority access of livestock to harvested field residues.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [47]: Regarding the problem of translating ‘collectivités territoriales’ with ‘local communities’ (here, in article 33 and several other places in the UPC) cf theme 4 in my opening section). Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [48]: Bourgoutières in the Malian document

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [49]: The Malian original document clearly states ‘in collaboration with pastoral organisations’, not ‘preferably’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [50]: Bourgoutières in the Malian document. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [51]: Bourgoutières in the Malian document.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [52]: Bourgoutières in the Malian document. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [53]: Bourgoutières in the Malian document. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [54]: ‘Terres salées’ (salt licks) in the Malian document. This article is originally about salt licks, not wetlands. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [55]: Salt licks in the Malian document.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [56]: Although resulting from a twist in translation, this is a potentially problematic point. Wetlands in pastoral areas are trypically dry season grazing reserves, hence of utmost importance for the sustainable running of the pastoral system for two main reasons: 1. they allow to find pasture even when pasture is missing anywhere else (are therefore crucial ... [1] Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [57]: In the Malian document, ‘collectivité territoriale’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [58]: In the Malian document, ‘collectivités territoriales’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [59]: To crop residues on harvested fields.

_____________________________________________12 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

2

January 2007

Article 36. Access to harvested fields shall open on a date set each year by the local community for the resources areas under its jurisdiction. This shall be in consultation with the crop producers and pastoralist organisations. Crop owners or farmers who wish to collect and store their crop residues for their private use must do so before the access date set by the local community authority, after which the resources shall be available to other users. Article 37. Access to fallow lands is free to all pastoralists and is not subject, unless otherwise agreed between the contracting parties, to the collection of any tax or fee. Equally, the grazing of livestock on areas reserved for agricultural purposes (like hay production) may only take place after clear understanding among the various local users. Section 2:

Access to Water

Sub-section 1: Natural water points Article 38. Access to the natural water resources like streams, rivers, ponds and lakes located on public land for watering the livestock, is free. It is not taxed and no fee is charged. Article 39. Pastoralists must however utilise water resources carefully without waste, and shall respect the rights of other users (including domestic purposes) of the same water resources. Local communities may, in collaboration and with the participation of pastoralist organisations and in consultation with representatives of other users, implement a water utilisation plan in order to rationalise and organise the exploitation of the watering resource. Article 40. Where natural water points are modified to serve as pastoral water points, the pastoralists have the priority right of access. However, after the modification has been done, access to the modified water points may be subject to the payment of taxes or fees even by the pastoralists depending on local administrative understanding made with the knowledge and, preferably, the participation of the pastoralists.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [60]: This would have to be done in coordination with the authorities responsible for setting the transhumant calendar. In the Malian document, ‘collectivité territoriale’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [61]: In the Malian document, ‘collectivité territoriale’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [62]: In the Malian document, this phrase reads very differently: ‘the utilisation of pastoral land for agricultural purposes [i.e. the farming of pastoral land] must be the result of a collective decision by all the different users of the pastoral land in question’. My impression is that the difference is the result of a misunderstanding of the French. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [63]: The creation of new water points does not seem to be regulated. Water points in pastoral areas give control to pasture, therefore control of water points and of course the creation of new ones are inextricable from land tenure.

Article 41. Denial or hindrance of animals to access public water points by growing crops, setting up barriers or other obstacles in the way is prohibited. A penalty is charged if passage is denied by owners of lands surrounding or touching upon public water points that are supposed to serve the watering needs of livestock. Sub-section 2: Manmade water points Article 42. Privately constructed traditional wells, deep wells, dams, cement-pipe wells and boreholes are the property of those who construct them. The owners are responsible for their maintenance and management. Access to privately owned water installations must be with the prior agreement of the owners.

_____________________________________________13 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

3

January 2007

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [64]: The Malian document does not mention a penalty, but say that all owners of land adjacent to public water points are subject to an easement of way for livestock watering [French: ‘Une servitude de passage est imposée aux proprietaires des fonds riverains des points d’eau publics pour les besoins de l’abreuvement des animaux’]. Therefore, in case the public water point borders privately owned land, the landlord has the obligation to allow access to the water (i.e. not waiveble by paying a penalty).

Article 43. Man-made but public traditional wells, deep wells, dams, cement-pipe wells and boreholes are the property of the local communities on whose land they are constructed. They are managed and maintained by the local communities in consultation with and with the participation of all users concerned. Article 44. Public wells, deep wells, dams, cement-pipe wells and boreholes management committees shall be set up for the purpose. Committees shall represent of all key users.

Article 45. Local communities shall set up and regulate the conditions to access to public wells, dams, cement-pipe wells and boreholes. Access to these resources requires prior authorisation by the management committee. And, access right may be based on the collection of a tax or payment of a fee to maintain the facility.

Article 46. Access to a public traditional well, dam, cement-pipe well and borehole that is expressly constructed for pastoral use purposes is open to all. Nonetheless, the pastoralists living in the area where the source is located have a priority access right to the facility.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [65]: This is an extremely important article, with the potential of being hugely problematic. Stateand donors-driven water development efforts in pastoral areas have often been undermined by being managed as open access in a context of production (pastoralism) where access to water is relatively controlled and controlling access to water results in controlling access to pasture. While entrusting these water points to discrete communities might be an attempt to disengage them from the open-access trap, doing this on territorial basis (rather than on the basis of function or group of users) might leave pastoralists (mobile) to depend for their access to pasture on water points originally built for pastoral development and now formally ‘given’ by the central government to villagers as their own property. The problematic translation of the French ‘collectivité territoriale’ as ‘local community’ makes things worse (cf theme 4 in my opening section). The Malian document only mentions ‘puits public en buse de ciment’: wells in cement rings. In ther Malian document: ‘collectivités territoriale’.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [66]: Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [67]: Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [68]: In ther Malian document: ‘collectivités territoriale’.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [69]: Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [70]: Also in this case, the meaning of the original article is changed. Malian document says: The access, for the purpose of watering livestock, to public wells in cement rings [French: buse de ciment] is open to anybody’. Besides, this article reintroduces the ‘open access’ problem. Except that ‘pastoralism’ is defined (in Art 3) by being ‘mobile’. Securing access to water (and therefore to pasture) on territorial basis ignores the way the pastoral system works (cf themes 1, 2 and 5 in my opening section), ‘serving’ it as if it was sedentary farming (therefore inevitably serving sedentary farming instead of pastoralism). Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [71]:

_____________________________________________14 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

4

January 2007

The local community can regulate access to the facility, including setting conditions for access by non-resident people and pastoralists. The community may introduce a tax or fee to be paid by all users. A facility management committee or equivalent authority shall oversee how the resource is exploited and maintained.

Section 3

Access

to

trade

markets

Sub-section 1 Livestock and trade markets Article 47. Government and the private sector shall provide marketing facilities, ease financial transactions, provide and maintain roads, and enforce appropriate quarantine restrictions to attract pastoralists to sell or batter their animals to acquire grain, and other commodities or goods they need in life. Moreover, trade markets promote contact between pastoralists, agro-pastoralists and other traders. Further, trade markets enable pastoralsits to buy animals for meat, breeding, traction, and for trading within the immediate areas and even beyond. Increased livestock trade will help to decongest over populated areas. Article 48. Government authorities must promote the type of strategies (prices, taxes, duties, market fees, banks, quarantine areas, market information, security, roads) that persuade pastoralists to sell more animals and outside traders to be attracted to the remote range areas.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [72]:

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [73]: The order of these three articles (43-45) is not the same as in the Malian document. Article 44 in the Malian document is now article 46. Articles 45 and 46 have become articles 44 and 45. In ther Malian document: ‘collectivités territoriale’.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [74]: This section and the following one, up to article 68 included, are are not present in the Malian document. Although organised in Articles like the rest of the document, these sections seem more in the form or a set of recommendations than the text of a law.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [75]: Presumably ‘barter’.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [76]: Why would pastoralists ‘buy animals for meat’? Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [77]: Do really pastoralists need to be persuaded to sell their animals? The figures we have on their GDP contribution (as acknowledged in AU 2010) indicate the opposite. Most pastoralists are already selling above their threshold of sustainability (that is they are selling their capital stock rather than its annual growth). Unsustainable marketing of livestock leads to a spiral of impoverishment which distorts production strategies in ways that underminine both the economic and ecological sustainability of the pastoral system and trigger unpredictable social dynamics. No one concerned with the common good of a nation would want that. It would be prefererable here to recommend strategies that enable pastoralists to raise their sustainabile marketing threshold while maintaining their offtake as close as possible to it—that is becoming able to sell more rather simply being ‘persuaded’ to do it.

_____________________________________________15 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

5

January 2007

[Art 48 continues]

Higher off-take rates, especially from pastoralists who think their herd has become too large to handle or who sense that the range has reached its holding capacity, should lead to better rangeland management. Consequently, correct livestock marketing strategies must be part and parcel of Uganda’s drought cycle and rangeland management systems. Article 49. In support of the above, GOU must have a long-term planning to systematically link the remote markets in pastoral areas to the overall national livestock marketing system, and eventually into the regional and international export markets. Article 50. Pastoralists that sell only properly identified animals into formal livestock markets must pay the required pre- and post sale fees as required by law. They must prove correct ownership of the animals where this helps to minimise livestock theft and banditry. They also must respect the animal health department regulations. Outside livestock traders or buyers too should have necessary permits to operate in the pastoral area markets. Traders, with a proper and varied trade license, shall only purchase animals with proper identification and support documents. They must also possess valid animal movement permits to move animals en route from the markets otherwise they are liable to penalties as prescribed by the laws.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [78]: This article is built on two arguments: 1: higher offtakes mean lower pressure on the range; 2. the old carrying capacity argument (calling ‘holding capacity’ does not change it). The second argument is out of date (for more details see Krätli and Hesse 2011). The first argument holds true only if all pastoralists sell and never buy livestock. However, this is not how things work in practice. Increased offtakes in absence of policies that effectively enable pastoralists to raise their sustainable marketing threshold are typically the consequence of large-scale impoverishment in the pastoral sector. In this situation, a significant proportion of the offtakes is represented by reproductive animals. While impoverished pastoralists sell reproductive animals, other pastoralists and absentee owners buy them and use them to accellerate the growth of their herds. This mechanism has been documented in a recent study I carried out in Sudan for Tufts University (to be published in the first quarter of 2013 as a UNEP report). Therefore in this context, higher offtakes usually mean the same or more pressure on the range, not less—also because livestock ownership becomes more concentrated and waged labour has less motivation (and on the long term less conmpetence) to invest in specialised production strategies that, if more sustainable, do increase the difficulties of the job, the risk and the workload. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [79]: But we are not told what ‘correct marketing strategie’ are, who is to establish them and on what basis... Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [80]: Same vagueness as inthe last sentence of Article 48: what are ‘properly identified animals’ etc… Besides, introducing more control and more taxes on livestock marketing does not seem to be consistent with the purpose of ‘pesuading pastoralists to increase offtakes’. This is also the case for the next bit of this article.

_____________________________________________16 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

6

January 2007

Article 51. Appropriate restrictions and market fees charged shall be set to encourage pastoralists to market their animals through the official markets. This will stimulate the relationship between pastoralists, other traders and the formal marketing system. Article 52. The private business sector shall be encouraged to open up banking facilities in areas accessible to pastoralists to encourage this form of saving instead of livestock numbers being used as the main customary means of saving. Article 53. Government and the private sector will be expected to build more schools in pastoralist areas as education is becoming a popular form of investment for pastoralists willing to sell some animals in order to get an education themselves or send their children to school. Article 54. Pastoralists taking their animals to sale markets across the national borders shall respect the host country’s legislation related to foreign animals. They must be informed about and must respect the rules of the animal health department in both countries. Article 55. Pastoralists and traders wishing to access markets in neighbouring countries should move their animals only through the designated entry points. They must check on and be aware of the security situation regarding banditry and skirmishes near the border. The drivers may need armed escort to protect their animals and themselves. Section 4

Access to extension, animal health and production services, and indigenous knowledge

Sub-section 1 Community participatory extension services Article 56. Government needs to promote participatory extension where pastoralists and agropastoralists manage and implement their extension activities. The extensionist may at first be a staff member from an NGO or GOU agency who acts as facilitator. Eventually the actual teacher is a farmer (pastoralist), the community based extensionist --CBE trained and equipped by the outside agency. Participatory extension services will develop if: 1. A group of pastoralists within an existing community organisation is encouraged to identify one individual to be trained as their CBE. The CBE trains his neighbours either individually in turns or collectively as a group on a topic of common interest (like nutrition, health, markets etc). Where a community organisation does not exist, GOU must help pastoralists to form one. 2. Local authorities can identify and facilitate the more innovative agro-pastoralist farmers (agro-pastoralists) who then serve as a good source of information and inspiration for others. 3. GOU departments and NGOs support field days, demonstrations and exhibitions for pastoralists and agro-pastoralists. 4. GOU encourages cross visits whereby a group of agro-pastoralists may visit another group to learn and share experiences. 5. NGOs attach a ‘mobile’ extension staff to live and travel with a group of migrating pastoralists. But while this may be effective, since it may be for many months, it is usually hard for extension agents and staff turnover can understandably be high.

_____________________________________________17 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

7

January 2007

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [81]: What are appropriate restictions? Restrictions of what? How are they supposed to stimulate marketing. Form and quality of the text appear to be drifting from legislating to brainstorming… But the focus remains on policing (command and control) rather than governing (defining a legal framework for the practice of pastoral activities). Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [82]: Investment in livestock is a practice much wider than pastoralism, indeed favoured precisely by many people in the ‘private business sector’! Like pastoralists, urban investors put their money in livestock because it offers by far the highest returns (beside being less visible to the tax man). Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [83]: Definitely brainstorming here. Is this supposed to be a way of generating higher offtakes? Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [84]: It is unclear what this mean, but it seems a repetition of article 24.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [85]: A repetition of article 26? Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [86]: What is this phrase for? A ‘good advice’ to pastoralists in the text of a law or the state washing hands about security? Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [87]: This section is a set of suggestions that do not seem to belong to this kind of document and, even within a policy document would need quite a lot more thinking in light of current understanding of pastoralism.

Sub-section 2

Animal

health

and

vaccination

services

Low and erratic rainfall causes spatial and temporal variations in grazing resources and forces pastoralists to move. Because they are highly dependent on their livestock, animal health and vaccination services are of major concern to them. But pastoral areas tend to be large, have limited development, poor infrastructure, can be insecure, and have small human population that is highly mobile and difficult to reach. There is about 1 veterinarian (vet) for 1,050 livestock owners in the country. This ratio rises to 1:154 if paraveterinarians (paravet) are considered but would improve to 1:43 if 3 community based animal health workers (CAHWs) were trained to support each vet/paravet.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [88]: This ‘resource-scarcity’ view of pastoral mobility is out of date (e.g. AU 2010). See themes 1 and 2 in my opening section. Cf also Krätli and Hesse (2011).

Article 57. Government needs to encourage training a cadre of CAHWs to deliver primary animal health care and vaccination services in pastoral areas. For this: 1. A group of pastoralists, within an existing community organisation identify one of them to be trained as a CAHW. To reduce costs he/she could be the CBE proposed in Article 56 in Section 1 above. 2. GOU departments and NGOs should support in the selection, training, monitoring, facilitation and supervision of the CAHWs. 3. GOU and NGOs should further develop linkages between CAHWs and private veterinary practitioners in pastoral and agro-pastoral areas to enhance the long-term economic viability of rural community based animal health delivery systems. Sub-section 3 Restocking programmes Article 58. GOU and NGOs shall support restocking efforts in pastoral areas when herds are decimated by disasters like severe droughts, disease epidemics, cattle raids or war. Restocking allows pastoralists to rebuild their herds while agro-pastoralists can become more productive, for example when they are given animals and tools for traction or cultivation. Article 59. Whenever possible GOU agencies need to strengthen the traditional approaches to restocking such as herd distribution, animal loans, shared ownership, and gradual payment of animals as dowry, contribution to the bereaved or destitute, or voluntary contributions.

_____________________________________________18 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

8

January 2007

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [89]: Besides being problematic for various reasons, this section does not seem to belong to a pastoral code. Restocking can be supportive or undermining of pastoralism depending on targeting and modalities (cf Little et al 2006).

Article 60. Among the more sedentary pastoralists, and as part of a broader rangeland development programme (including community organising, veterinary services provision, training and marketing), GOU, NGOs and other development organisations must support programmes to distribute livestock, on credit, during the ‘normal’ phase of the drought cycle. This will improve herd productivity (such as by giving out crossbred or better yielding animals to encourage keeping smaller herds, or by to introducing an alternative income source to a specific group such as women). The recipients must repay the cost to donor organisations or pass on the progeny to someone else, preferably a member of the same community. Article 61. GOU, NGOs and other development organisations need to distribute livestock or restock as grants during the ‘recovery’ phase of the drought cycle after a disaster to assist destitute pastoralists to rebuild their livelihoods and minimise their dependency on handouts. However, the animals should not be given to people without livestock management skills. Such people must be helped to acquire alternative income sources.

_____________________________________________19 1 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

9

January 2007

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [90]: What is the ‘normal phase of a drought cycle’? Drought is not defined. Pastoral drought— severe scarcity lack of pasture over more than 2 years (Ellis and Swift 1988)—does not overlap with agricultural drought—failure of harvest. Pastoralism being defined as mobile, the ‘more sedentary pastoralists’ are also the ‘less pastoralists’, that is those with a lower degree of specialisation or those who have been impoverished to the point of being uncapable of using specialised pastoral production strategies based on mobility because their herd is too small. The best measure to improve herd productivity of these groups is to help them to become mobile again, not to help them to remain sedentary. Moreover, how is ‘distributing livestock’ (restocking) going to ‘encourage keeping smaller herds’? This paragraph does not seem to have been thought through very well.

Sub-section 4 Promoting agro-pastoralism and pastoralism Article 62. Agro-pastoralism is expanding at the expense of true pastoralism as human population grows in the more favourable pastoral areas. Consequently, land for grazing will become limited. Hence, programmes intending to develop the rural areas must encourage restocking but at the same time encourage crop and forage production.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [91]: This section too seem not to belong to this document and not have been though through enough. For example: agropastoralism undermines pastoralism therefore both should be supported? Grazing land shrinks under the expansion of cultivation on pastoral areas therefore both restocking and crop cultivation should be promoted? The problems with these positions and the assumptions that support them have been addressed in detail in Krätli and Hesse 2011.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [92]: There is no definition of agro-pastoralism. In the pastoral populations I know, groups classified as agro-pastoralists are actually made out of households in which some members specialise in pastoralism and some specialise in farming. Those who specialise in pastoralism make use of production strategies that are almost identical to those used by groups defined as ‘pure pastoralists’. Consequently, it would not be in their interest (nor in the interest of the other members of their houlseholds) to undermine pastoralism. Beside large-scale investments in mechanised agriculture, there are two categories of ‘new people’ farming pastoral land: i. impoverished pastoralists who try to survive with some opportunistic farming but would rather make a living as pastoralists; and ii. farmers who had to migrate to pastoral areas, don’t have the competence for making a living as pastoralists, and who take advantage of an opportunity to farm in grazing reserves although would rather cultivate more fertile land back home. If what is meant here is that the best rangeland (namely the grazing reserves) are progressively lost to farming programmes and encroaching cultivation, especially in Uganda this is a government policy more than a spontaneus increase in the number of agropastoralists. Establishing the ownership of public water points on territorial basis (therefore giving control of water and consequently control of the rangeland to sedentary communities) is an example of this policy.

_____________________________________________20 2 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

0

January 2007

Article 63. Within the above trends, central and local government authorities need to encourage and facilitate pastoralists and agro-pastoralists to access land to grow crops, forage crops and to start intensive livestock farming activities. Article 64. In the opposite direction, even though likely to be at a slower pace, pastoralism might replace agro-pastoralism in some areas due to worsening climatic changes, especially where higher temperatures will reduce the crop growing periods. If the growing period cannot support crop cultivation, pastoralism (or game keeping, ranching and eco-tourism) will become the logical sustainable source of food production and must be supported. Article 65. More of the poor will live in the pastoral and agro-pastoral systems in Uganda. These are harsh areas. National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) efforts, including NARO, must focus also on constraints to agriculture production in the marginal dry areas of the country. There is need to breed grain varieties suited for these regions as more and more pastoralists are already consuming more grain. Sub-section 5 Optimizing indigenous knowledge (IK) among pastoralists Article 66. Because of inadequate understanding of pastoral societies, a number of well-intended interventions remain inappropriate, irrelevant and unaffordable, and fail to sufficiently impact on the welfare of pastoral communities. Meantime, pastoralists possess a rich base of indigenous knowledge (IK) and practises for dealing with hazards, manipulating and getting advantage from local resources for extension, animal husbandry, and watershed environment biodiversity and natural resource base management.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [93]: Pastoralism is the most efficient system of animal production on pastoral land. Comparisons between ranches and pastoral systems by 26 independent studies between 1974 and 1993, looking at 9 countries in East, West and Southern Africa, consistently found returns per hectare several times higher in pastoralism (Scoones 1995). In a more recent example from south-west Uganda, returns per hectare were found 6.8 times higher in pastoralism than ranches (Ocaido et al 2009). Figures recently published by the FAO indicate that human-edible protein from livestock is produced much more efficiently in countries where the sector is dominated by pastoralism (Steinfeld 2012). Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [94]: Also this section seems a handful of suggestions, with paragraphs numbered as articles, more than the text of a law. For example, the paragraph opening the section does say something sensible, but what is its role in the UPC as ‘Article 66’?

Article 67. GOU and other agencies need to support efforts that help to record and/or transfer IK and indigenous practices vested among elderly pastoralists to the younger generations. And, where this is based on local biodiversity that is threatened, to support efforts for its conservation. Article 68. GOU and other agencies should search for ways of understanding the scientific basis for most beneficial traditional practices and use the understanding to develop useful linkages between pastoralists and their neigbours and outsiders for greater and more sustainable rangelands development.

Chapter 5. Protection of Pastoral Areas and Safeguards for Pastoral Livestock Keepers’ Rights Section 1.

Protection

of

Pastoral

Areas

Article 69. Pastoral areas and resources must be preserved and protected especially where there are development projects and programmes. Development projects or programmes must allow for the needs of all authorised pastoral activities.

_____________________________________________21 2 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

1

January 2007

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [95]: We are now back to the translation of the Mali Pastoral Chartre, except the numbering of the articles has changed. Article 69 here corresponds to Article 47 in the Malian document. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [96]: The text in blue has been introduced by the translation. The Malian document says: Pastoral land and pastoral resources must be preserved and protected in the context of the projects and programmes of development. All development projects and programmes must take consideration of the needs of pastoral activities’. Again, the UPC version bends the Malian text from securing pastoralism to policing it.

Article 70. The Uganda land-use master plan must clearly provide for the demarcation and development of areas for pastoral activities. For that reason, when drawing up the national landuse plans, local communities must allow for the delineation and development of pastoral areas.

_____________________________________________22 2 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

2

January 2007

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [97]: The Uganda National Land Policy (MLHUD 2011), includes a section on the ‘Land Rights of Pastoral Communities’. There is no mention of ‘demarcation’ but there are five strategies to ‘protect the land right…’ and five to support pastoral development. The only point I can recognise as close to the issue of demarcation is 62.i: ‘Ensure that pastoral lands are held, owned and controlled by designated pastoral communities as common property under customary tenure’.

Section 2: Pastoral Development and Safeguards for Pastoral Rights of User Article 71. Pastoral development covers the habitual or prolonged undertaking of pastoral activities in a designated land area or local community territory, followed by traditional or modern equipment and/or processes aimed at environmental preservation or rehabilitation.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [98]: This incorrectly translate the French ‘mise en valeur pastorale’: ‘pastoral land-development’. The concept of ‘mise en valeur’ is very important (cf Hesse and Thébaud 2006, Cotula 2006). Cf Box 1 in my opening section. The introduction, in the Malian document, of a concept of ‘pastoral land-development’ is an important departure from the position that see land development in rural areas associated only with crop farming. This point [and the meaning of chapter 5, section 2, is lost in the UPC translation of ‘mise en valeur pastorale’ as ‘pastoral development’. Basically, this section in the Malian document says that ‘the habitual and long-term practice of pastoral activities on rangeland belonging to the state or to the local administration [collectivité territoriale], combined with traditional or modern forms of land enhancement and/or of measures towards the environmental preservation of restauration, constitutes ‘pastoral land-development [mise en valeur pastorale]’ and that ‘ascertian this pastoral land-development entitles the pastoralists in question recognition, protection and guarantee of their rights of use of the land in question […] although this does not imply any transfer of property of either land or resources’. In the Malian document, this section concerns land belonging to the state or to the local authority [French un espace du domain de l’Etat ou d’une collectivité territoriale’]. On the other hand , the Uganda National Land Policy is to ‘ensure that pastoral land is held, owned and controlled by designated pastoral communities as common property under customary tenure’ (MLHUD 2011: Art 62). In that case, Articles 71 an 72 (UPC) would concern pastoral rights of use of land not identified as ‘pastoral land’? If so, the reference to ‘pastoral land’ in Article 73 seems out of place and should, instead, say ‘on land belonging to the state or to the local authority where pastoralists have acquired rights of use’.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [99]: In the Malian document, ‘collectivité territoriale’.

_____________________________________________23 2 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

3

January 2007

Article 72. Checking and verification of pastoral development enables the pastoralists concerned to get recognition, protection and safeguards for their pastoral rights in areas concerned. However, recognition of these rights is temporary and does not necessarily assume the transfer of ownership of the land and resources in question to these people. Article 73. When there is a general interest to have a development project on pastoral land, the pastoralists losing their pastoral rights of user may, if necessary, be given collective compensation proportionate with land annexation for public purposes. The compensation should de adequate enough to account the various pastoral resources. Section 3: Protection of Pastoral Livestock Tracks Article 74. Pastoral tracks are part of the areas of responsibility of the central and local governments and must be gazetted. Article 75. Pastoral tracks require special responsibility on the part of all, especially pastoralists, to avoid any damage to neighbouring or adjoining homesteads during livestock movement.

Chapter 6. Decentralised Resources

and

Participatory

Management

of

Pastoral

Section 1. Role and responsibilities of local communities Article 76. Except where provided for by law, the management of pastoral resources is the responsibility of local communities in whose administrative areas they are located. The responsibility does not necessarily give them the right of ownership of the resources under their management. Article 77. Local communities shall be particularly responsible for setting up regulations to promote sound and peaceful exploitation of the pastoral resources. Communities themesleves must then ensure that the Law is implemented in their areas of jurisdiction, in collaboration with relevant national technical service and if necessary legal and security agencies.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [100]: The Malian document does not say that the recognition of rights of use is temporary, only that ‘it does not imply transfer of property’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [101]: Gazetting the track is the only measure somehow aimed at ‘protecting’ them, in this section specifically concerned with their protection. This seems rather little. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [102]: This is a surprising article in a section dedicated to the protection of pastoral routes. In the Malian document, the article reads quite opposite: ‘The presence of a pastoral route subjects the adjacent lands with an easement meant to avoid any damage at the time of the movement of livestock’— that is, it is the legal responsibility of the owner of the land adjacent a pastoral route to take measures for avoiding damage from the passing livestock [French: Art 53: Le pistes pastorales grèvent les fonds riverains d'une servitude destiné à éviter tout dégât lors des déplacements des animaux]. The wording of this article in Malian document remains rather unprecise, especially with regard to defining the limits of the easement [servitude]: e.g. 10, 50, or 500 metres from the pastoral track? Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [103]: In the Malian document, ‘communités territoriales’: cf this point in my discussion of definitions, above. In my view, the gap between the formally defined technical term in French and its translation here as ‘local communities’ jeopardises the meaning and judicial utility of this section. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [104]: The word ‘necessarily’ has been added. The Malian document clearly states that management rsponsibility does not involve ownership. Beside, this section establishes the management (although not the ownership) of pastoral resources on territorial basis, being potentially the cause of problems as such resources are critical to the running of a production system that is defined by being mobile. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [105]: In the original text in French: ‘this law’.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [106]: Not in the original Malian document.

_____________________________________________24 2 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

4

January 2007

Article 78. Local communities shall manage pastoral resources in their area with the participation of pastoralists’ organisations and in consultation with other users of the available resources. Section 2: Role and Responsibilities of Pastoralists’ Organisations Article 79. The central and local governments and local communities shall support the creation and development of pastoralists’ organisations. They need to take steps that first, enable creation of pastoral organisations, and, second, back their legal status in order to avoid situations where responsibility is delegated but without authority. Article 80. Pastoralists’ organisations are partners of the central and local governments and local communities in areas of pastoral development. They must also be actual partners in implementing this Code. Accordingly, pastoralists shall participate in the design, implementation and monitoring of the Uganda agriculture and livestock policies in their areas. They must also get involved in projects related to livestock development and pastoral resource management in their areas. And, they need to take part in national and local consultations pertaining to livestock farming, environment protection and natural resources management in their areas.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [107]: In the Malian document: ‘of natural resources’ [as not the same as ‘pastoral resources’]. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [108]: It is not clear, in this scenario, what happens to existing pastoral institutions (as argued above, a crucial aspect of pastoral resources that enable pastoral production systems to work successfully and sustainably). What is the relationship between existing pastoral institutions and this new breed (set up topdown in a way that recalls the chiefdoms of the indirect rule more than decentralised governance).

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [109]: In the Malian document: ‘The State and local authority’ [French: l’Etat et les collectivités territoriales’]. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [110]: The Malian document here vis more specific (and the difference is substantial, saying that ‘pastoral organizations are priority partners’ of the state, local authority and the technical services in matters of pastoral development and for the implementation of the present law. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [111]: In the Malian document: ‘matters/issues’, not ‘areas’ Areas introduces an ambiguity as it can be read in a litteral sense as referring to locations with ongoing pastoral development projects, therefore restricting the original meaning of this article. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [112]: This wording curiously turns into an obligation what is actually a right in the Malian document. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [113]: Pastoral organisations or pastoralists? The two terms, especially based on how ‘pastoral organisations’ are supposed to be created, do not seem to me interchangeable.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [114]: Again, what is described as a right or an entitlement in the Malian code, here takes the language of an obligation.

_____________________________________________25 2 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

5

January 2007

[Article 80 continues]

Pastoralists can ably explain advice and make useful recommendations to central and local governments and local communities on issues related to improvement of pastoral activities, livestock farming development and environmental preservation in their areas. Article 81. There shall be efforts to grant local people genuine and uncontested authority over the management of their livelihood base. Laws enacted to operationalize this Code should oblige pastoral groups to get involved in the management of their resources in a sustainable and responsible manner. They must also be encouraged to participate in deciding how best this may be done.

Chapter 7. Local Conflict Management Article 82. It is a useful principle to resolve conflicts in pastoral areas amicably at local level through customary institutions, before starting on formal legal proceedings. Article 83. Local communities, in collaboration with other actors concerned with area natural resource management, shall contribute to preventing or limiting conflicts related to pastoral activities. They must promote within community exchanges and dialogue meetings and make sure that information is well communicated to all those concerned with the utilisation of the area natural resources. Article 84. Disputes arising from damages to crops caused by animals, or to animals caused by crop farmers, shall be settled amicably between the two. If this fails, the dispute shall be submitted to a local arbitration panel or conflict management committee.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [115]: In the Malian document this phrase referes specifically to ‘pastoral organisations’, not generally to ‘pastoralists’. Moreover, the phrase describes a right/entitlement, not a skill: ‘Pastoralists are entitled to formulate advice and recommendations to the state and local authority on any questionconcerning the improvement of pastoral activity, livestock development and environmental conservation’. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [116]: The problem of translating ‘collectivités territoriales’ with ‘local communities’ becomes particularly evident here as it results in distinguishing and opposing ‘local communities’ and ‘pastoralists’ while both might indeed overlap. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [117]: Added in the UCP, with the result of repeating the same point just made (improvement of pastoral activities = pastoral development). Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [118]: This article has been added to the translation. It sufferes from poorly articulated language. There is no definition of ‘local people’. The UPC is a law: are there more laws to be ‘enacted to operationalize this Code’? What more laws should oblige pastoralists to manage their resources? Does not this Code establish that the management of pastoral... [2] Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [119]: Added in the UPC. Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [120]: Not in the French wording and unnecessary.

Article 85. Likewise, conflicts related to the exploitation of pastoral resources shall be sorted out legally. But, preferably, the decision to resort to legal jurisdiction should also only come after failure in mediation by local conflict management committees.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [121]: Why ‘the area’? Not in the French wording.

Article 86. The local community conflict management committee should consist of:

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [122]: Added in the UPC. There is mention of exploitation of pastoral resources, but no... [3]

1. the 2. a 3. a

LC1 representative representative

Chairman of

or livestock

of

crop

Sub-Country farmers’ farmers’

Author 6/3/2017 10:07

Chief

Comment [123]:

organisations

Comment [124]:

organisations

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [125]:

Author 6/3/2017 10:07

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [126]:

_____________________________________________26 2 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

6

January 2007

4. a

representative

of

each

opposing

party.

A conflict that fails to be resolved at the local communal level shall be referred to higher levels of administration as the hierarchy dictates. Article 87. Local communities, local government administrative authorities, the Ministry of Agriculture’s technical services staff should render their support and assistance to the management of conflicts related to the exploitation of pastoral resources. Article 88. If after the arbitration is concluded, one of the sides or parties considers itself negatively affected by the panel’s decision, that party may submit an appeal with the higher legal authorities who must deliver a decision within one month of receiving the appeal.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [128]: Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [129]: Added in the UPC.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [130]: Added in the UPC.

Chapter 8: Reducing Violations Section 1. Recording of Violations and Legal Proceedings Article 89. Local community staff responsible for livestock production, and working in collaboration with staff in charge of agriculture, water resources, forestry, fishing, hunting and revenue collection and customs, and police officers are able to look for and record violations to the provisions of this Code. Recording violations involves writing a report accepted as evidence until proven otherwise. Article 90. Except where provided by law, violations of the provisions of this Code shall be prosecuted and judged according to legal procedures in the existing national penal code. Article 91. Fees paid to agents mentioned in Article 62 out of any violations transactions, seizures and fines shall be fixed by the legal texts or documents in effect at that time. Section 2.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [127]:

Violations and Sanctions

Article 92. Any person who commits one of the following acts in violation of this Code will be punished by 1 to 35 days in prison, or a fine not exceeding 1,000,000 shillings, or committed to render community service, or any combination of these penalties: 1. occupying or restricting use of a pastoral track or livestock rest area or encroaching on their right-of-way,

_____________________________________________27 2 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

7

January 2007

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [131]: ‘Local community staff’ in what organisation? The original wording does not mention ‘local community’ (nor, in this case, ‘collectivités territoriales’): ‘Sworn or authorised officials, in collaboration with those in charge of agriculture, water resources, forestry, fishing, hunting and revenue collection and customs, and police officers have legal authority to investigate and ascertain violations to the provisions of this Code’.

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [132]: The translator of the Malian document has maitained the original reference to Article 62. However, overlooking the fact that the numbering in the UPC changes after article 46 (because of the addition of the two sections on marketing as well as extra articles). This reference here should be to Article 89 (of the UPC). Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [133]: There is no sanction for cultivating on pastoral land without authorisation, or blocking a water point, or any other of the many actions defined as illegal in this law (e.g. the private approapriation of pastoral land).

2. exploiting pastoral resources contrary to established rules and norms or polluting water resources therein, 3. moving animals or livestock outside of established pastoral tracks or stock routes, 4. violating the provisions regarding periods of access to harvested fields for animal grazing Article 93. Any person that has committed one of the following acts in violation of this Code will be punished by XX days in prison, or a fine not exceeding XX shillings, or committed to render community service, or any combination of these penalties, without prejudice to damages caused to third parties: 1. damaging third party properties by allowing animals to stray, 2. violating the regulations set for controlled and sustainable use of protected conservation areas of GOU environment wetland forest and wildlife authorities, 3. undertaking a programme or project that can lead to total or partial suppression or destruction of pastoral resources by failing to conduct an environmental impact study, 4. exploiting the pastoral resources contrary to established rules or polluting water resources, 5. violating the transhumance calendar, 6. engaging in or trading in unauthorised livestock marketing, movement and banditry.

Chapter 9: Miscellaneous and Final Provisions Article 94. An act of Parliament shall set into motion the implementation of the Uganda Pastoral Code.

_____________________________________________28 2 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF)

8

January 2007

Author 6/3/2017 10:07 Comment [134]: Possible mistake n the translation. The Malian document here says: exploiting water resources contrary to established rules and norms or polluting them.