Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
Mulu Demlie1, Mitiku Eshetu2, Samson Leta3 1Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture, Oda Bultum University, Chiro, Ethiopia 2Department of Animal and Range Science, College of Agriculture, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia 3Department of Veterinary Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia
The objectives of the study were to assess milk production performance and production constraints, milking and processing practices in urban and peri-urban areas of Gondar district, Northern Ethiopia. A total of 6 potential Kebels (Peasant associations) were selected purposively, namely Sayena -sabiya, Azezo Teklehaymanot and Mariam Deber from Peri-urban and Maraki, Ledeta and Gebrial Ketema from Urban areas. About 180 respondents who have dairy cows and produce milk were selected randomly from the total households. The average milk yield of local and crossbreed cows was 2.32 and 7.99 liters per cow per day, respectively. The major constraints of milk production in the study area were feed shortage, shortage of land, disease, low milk yield of local cows and lack of market access. About 82.78% of respondents practiced milk processing in to different milk products. In general, in Gondar district the demand for milk and milk products consumption was high but the milk yield of dairy cows cannot satisfy this demand, due to shortage of feeds and other related factors. Therefore, further work is needed to improve feed resources available to alleviate feed shortage in the study area.
Keywords: Processing, Production, Urban and peri-urban INTRODUCTION
Ethiopia has the largest livestock population in Africa, with an estimated population of 60.39 million cattle, 31.30 million sheep, 32.74 million goat, 2.01 million horses, 8.85 million donkeys, 0.46 million mules, and 1.42 million camels and 56.06 million poultry. Out of the total cattle population, the female cattle constitute about 54.68% and 45.32% male with 98.24% local breeds, 1.54% hybrid and 0.22% exotic breeds. A total cow milk production for the country was about 3.1 billion liters with the average lactation period of about six months and average daily milk yield per cow is about 1.37 liters (CSA, 2018).
In Ethiopia, milk production systems can be categorized into rural household, urban and Peri-urban production systems (Kassa, 2019). Urban and peri-urban systems are market oriented and make use of the high demand for milk
and milk products in urban areas. Rural household dairy production system includes pastoralists, agro-pastoralists, and mixed crop-livestock producers. The system is not market oriented and most of the milk produced in this system is only for home consumption. The level of milk surplus is determined by the demand for milk by the household and its neighbors, the potential to produce milk in terms of herd size and production season, and access to a nearby market (Mebrate et al. 2019).
*Corresponding Author: Mulu Demile, Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture, Oda Bultum University, Chiro, Ethiopia. E-mail:
[email protected] 1Co-author: Mitiku Eshetu, E-
mail: [email protected] 2Co-Author: Samson Leta, E-mail: [email protected]
Vol. 6(2), pp. 405-416, September, 2020. © www.premierpublishers.org. ISSN: 2167-0432
International Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension
Research Article
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
Demile et al. 406
Milk and milk products are economically important farm commodities and dairy farming is an investment option for smallholder farmers. Milk is used for rearing calves and children, and the surplus is soured for making different fermented milk products. The major ones include: Ergo, Ayib, butter, Nitirkibie (melted butter or ghee), Arera (defatted sour milk, a by-product of butter-making and a raw material for Ayib-making) and Aguat (whey). Most of the milk produced in the country is accordingly processed on-farm using traditional technologies that are generally not effective and efficient (Tsehay, 2001). Milk production is an important part of the farming system in north Gondar Zone in general, and in Gondar district in particular. The area has potential for milk production and milk products. Even if the area has potential for production of milk and milk products, slim is known about the existing dairy production and processing practice. In order to design relevant research that outfit to the area, it is essential that researchers understand the existing situations. For the research to be effective and to meet the need of the farmers and to devise appropriate development interventions, identification of problems and understanding of the existing dairy production and processing in the area are vital. Furthermore, inquiry regarding the feasibility of the emerging dairy cooperatives and identifying the problems and opportunities for the success of these cooperatives is an important area of study that need due attention. Handling, processing and marketing of cow milk in urban and peri urban area of Dangila Town was reported by Bekele et al. (2015), Production, Processing and Handling of Cow Milk in Dawa Chefa District, Amhara Region was reported by Kefyalew
et al. (2016) and production, handling, traditional processing practices and quality of milk in Bahir Dar milk shed area was reported by Asaminew (2007).but still there is the gap in the Amhara region in general and in Gonda`r district in particular. Therefore; the objectives of this finding were to assess cow milk production and processing practice in Urban and peri-urban areas of Gondar district. MATERIALS AND METHODS Description of the Study Area
The study was conducted in Gondar district, north Gondar Zone of Amhara Regional State, which is located 730 kms Northwest of Addis Ababa, it is a city and separate Woreda in Amhara Regional state, Ethiopia. It is located at12°36′N Latitude and 37°28′Elongitude with an elevation of 2133 meters above sea level. Gondar district contains 12 urban and 11 peri-urban Kebels. The annual average temperature is 19.1°C and average monthly temperatures vary by 4 °C. In the winter time records indicate that the temperature during day reach 27.3°C while it falls to10.7°C during night. During summer average high temperature is 23°C, while the average low temperatures is 13°C. Total annual Precipitation averages 1161 mm. The predominant production system in these areas is mixed crop-livestock farming and cattle are the most important livestock species reared in the area. Gondar had a total population of 207,044, of whom 98,120 were men and 108,924 women (CSA, 2009).
Figure 1: Map of study area
Study area
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
Study Population
The target sample population was the households who own milking cows and produce milk. The livestock population of the district is estimated to be 29,987 cattle, 12,299 sheep, 4836 goats, 5816 donkeys, 613 horses and 116 mules (Gondar Agricultural office, 2016).
Sampling and Sampling Procedure
Before commencing the actual study, preliminary survey was conducted to gather information relevant to the study. Both secondary and primary data sources were used. Primary data sources were household heads and dairy cooperatives in the study areas. The secondary data sources were taken from Agricultural offices, from Gondar woreda and other relevant sources. The sampling units were households keeping lactating dairy cows. Based on the preliminary study a total of 6 potential Kebels (Peasant associations) were selected purposively based on cattle population i.e kebeles which has high cattle population were selected. From peri-urban 3 Kebels (Peasant associations) were selected namely, Sayena-sabiya, Azezo-tekelehayemanot and Mariyam- Deber and 3 kebels (Peasant associations) from urban namely, Maraki, Ledeta and Geberial ketema kebeles; 30 respondents were selected from each kebels. A total of 180 respondents who engaged in cattle production were selected randomly from the six selected kebels with a simple random technique and individually interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. List of households of the selected Kebels were obtained from Kebele officers, and Agricultural extension officers. Data Collection
Data collection was conducted from September to November 2016. Semi-structured questionnaire was used to collect the primary data. The secondary data were collected directly in the recorded documents. The survey was focused on milk production performance, milk processing and constraints of milk production in the study areas.
Statistical Analysis
Data collected during the survey were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 16 (SPSS). The analyzed data were presented in the form of descriptive statistics like tables, figures, mean, percentage and frequency.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Household Characteristics Table 1 shows household characteristics in the study area. The mean family size per household in the study area was 6.17 persons. The mean family size per household
observed in our study is greater the value (5.26) reported in Yabello district of Oromia region, Ethiopia (Ahmed, 2013). However, the mean household size observed in this study is less than values found by Asaminew (2007) and Gatwech (2012). The majority of the respondents’ ages was in the range of 46-60 years, which was greater than average age (40.74 years) of respondents in Gambella (Gatwech, 2012). Most (68.9%) of the households were illiterate followed by read and write (31.1%).The educational status of respondents in the study area was illiterate and read and writes with the proportion of 68.90 and 31.10%, respectively. Ahmed (2013) reported similar educational status of respondents in Yabello district of Oromia region, Ethiopia.
Table 1. Family size, age category and educational status of household
Variables Urban (N=90)
Peri-urban (N=90)
Overall mean (N=180)
Family size(mean)
6.51 5.82 6.17
Age distribution (%)
15-30 yr of age 15.60 7.80 11.70
31-45 yr of age 26.70 28.90 27.80
46-60 yr of age` 35.60 40.00 37.80
>60 yr of age 22.20 23.30 22.80
Educational status of HH
Illiterate % 47.80 90.00 68.90
Read and write % 52.20 10.00 31.10
N=number of Respondents; yr=years; HH= Household
Herd Structure
The mean cattle holdings per household in the study area were 15.55 as presented in Table 2. The mean cattle number in this study was greater than the number and composition of cattle owned by the smallholders the value (13.03) reported in Sululta and Wolmera districts (Mustefa, 2012). Table 2. Herd size and composition per household
Type of cattle
Urban(N=90) Periurban(N=90) Overall mean (N=180)
N Mean±SD N Mean±SD
Pregnant 70 2.27±1.89 51 1.88±0.88 2.11
Lactating 90 2.38±1.36 90 2.07±0.96 2.22
Dry cow 14 1.43±0.51 32 1.75±0.88 1.65
Heifers 60 1.83±0.80 63 1.98±0.83 1.91
Bull 39 1.92±2.07 68 1.49±0.76 1.64
Oxen 8 4.00±2.92 74 2.19±0.78 2.37
Female calve
60 1.65±0.84 65 1.37±0.57 1.50
Male calve
80 1.46±0.72 74 1.42±0.59 1.44
Total 16.94 14.15 15.55
N = number of respondents; SD = Standard Deviation
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
Demile et al. 408
Husbandry Practices
Labor and cattle husbandry
Table 3 shows the division of labor among family members with respect to cattle husbandry in urban and peri-urban areas. In urban areas, hired labors were mainly responsible for herding cattle whereas in peri-urban areas herding of cattle was mainly done by children. In both areas milking was done by both men and women. This is
consistent with the practice in other parts of the country (Asaminew, 2007; Solomon, 2004; Alganesh, 2002) where female members of the household undertake milking. On the other hand, processing and sale of dairy products was mainly the jobs of women in both areas. Sale of live animals was mostly undertaken by men, but stall feeding of animals were performed mostly by children and hired labor in both areas
Table 3. Responsibilities of family members in animal production in urban and peri-urban of the study area (percentage of total respondents).
Responsible family members
Activity Men % Women % Children % Hired labor %
Urban area(N=90)
Herding 8.88 3.33 34.44 53.33
Milking 45.56 43.33 6.67 4.44
Processing - 90 4.44 4.44
Barn cleaning 2.22 35.56 48.89 13.33
Sale of dairy product 26.67 66.67 6.67 -
Sale of animal 94.44 5.58 - -
Stall feeding 15.56 3.33 51.11 30
Peri-urban area(N=90)
Herding 13.33 4.44 51.11 31.11
Milking 34.44 24.44 11.11 30
Processing - 98.33 1.67 -
Barn cleaning 4.44 30 23.33 42.22
Sale of dairy product 12.94 72.94 7.06 7.06
Sale of animal 97.78 2.22 - -
Stall feeding 25.56 4.44 23.33 46.67
N=number of respondents Feeds and feeding
The major feed resources for dairy cattle in the study areas were grazing, hay and crop residues. Generally, residues from cereals such as, teff straw, barely straw, wheat straw, maize stover and sorghum stover form the basal diets of the animals (Table 4). Majority of the urban and peri-urban dairy farmers in the study area use combinations of different feed resources based on availability. In the urban areas, the dominant feeding system was stall-feeding (zero grazing) whereas the majority of the respondents in peri-urban areas use semi-grazing system. This result agrees with the report by Ike et al. (2005) where 95% of dairy farms in the urban and 92.1% of peri-urban farms use zero grazing and semi-grazing respectively in and around Awassa town. This indicates that there is shortage of land in urban areas for the production of natural pasture for grazing purpose. The use of improved forages is not satisfactory in the study areas.
Feed shortage occurred both in dry as well as in wet season; however, the shortage was severe during the dry
season (Table 5). Out of the total respondents, 81.67%
Table 4. Feed resources (percent of total respondent) in the study areas
Feed resources Urban (N=90)%
Peri-urban (N=90)%
Overall mean (N=180)
Both Crop residue and hay
66.67 8.89 37.78
Only Hay 2.22 - 1.11
Only crop residue 25.56 - 12.78
Both hay and improved forage
1.11 - 0.56
Natural pasture, hay and crop residue
4.44 85.56 45.00
Crop residue, hay, improved forage, natural pasture
- 4.44 2.22
Both natural pasture and crop residue
- 1.11 0.56
N=number of respondent
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
encountered seasonal food shortage in the study areas. To overcome the seasonal shortage of feed, communities have developed their own coping mechanisms. The respondents practice feed conservation in the form of hay and also store stack of crop residues and by feeding different palatable leaves, such as chebeha (Ficus
thonningii), wanza (Cordia Africana) and other palatable trees. In this study area about 85.56% of respondents give supplementation for their dairy cows. Agro-industrial by product (wheat bran, bean bran, oil seed cake and brewery grain) and local beverage by product (Attela) were the feed which were supplemented. Cattle housing, facility and cleaning practices
Housing conditions and facilities in the barn are shown in Table 6. The majority of the respondents in both areas keep their cattle in a separate house. However, in peri-urban areas, Cattle are also kept in the same house together with the family members. The purposes of housing in the study areas were to protect cattle from extreme weather conditions and from theft. Cattle housing systems found in this study were similar with the housing system reported by Zelalem (2010) and Asaminew (2007) who reported that 80.4% of the respondents used house type barn in central highland of Ethiopia. The study conducted by Saba (2015) indicated that all of the farmers in the Adea Berga and Ejerie districts of West Shoa Zone used housed type barn for their cows and milking in the house. Table 5. Problems associated with feed resource in the study areas
Description Urban(N=90) %
Peri-urban (N=9)%
Overall mean (N=180)
Do you encounter feed shortage?
Yes 76.67 86.67 81.67
No 23.33 13.33 18.33
When occur(months)
Wet season 27.54 43.59 35.57
Dry season 72.46 56.41 64.44
Do you supplement?
Yes 87.78 83.33 85.56
No 12.22 16.67 14.45
N=number of respondents Cattle housing, facility and cleaning practices Housing conditions and facilities in the barn are shown in Table 6. The majority of the respondents in both areas keep their cattle in a separate house. However, in peri-urban areas, Cattle are also kept in the same house
together with the family members. The purposes of housing in the study areas were to protect cattle from extreme weather conditions and from theft. Cattle housing systems found in this study were similar with the housing system reported by Zelalem (2010) and Asaminew (2007) who reported that 80.4% of the respondents used house type barn in central highland of Ethiopia. The study conducted by Saba (2015) indicated that all of the farmers in the Adea Berga and Ejerie districts of West Shoa Zone used housed type barn for their cows and milking in the house. Table 6. Cattle housing and facilities in the barn in the study areas
Variables Urban(N=90) %
Peri-urban(N=90) %
Overall mean(N=180) %
Barn type
Separate house
63.33 63.33 63.33
Fenced barn
36.67 33.33 35.00
Family house
0 3.33 1.67
Facilities in the barn
Feed trough
0 18.89 9.45
Both water & feed trough
77.78 12.22 45.00
No facilities
22.22 68.89 45.56
N=number of respondents In the present study all of the respondents did not use bedding material (Table 7). Clean, dry and comfortable bedding condition is important to minimize the growth of pathogenic microorganisms. Practices that expose the teat end to these organic bedding sources, wet and muddy pens increase the risk of occurrence of mastitis and milk contamination (Ruegg, 2006). About 9.45% of the respondents clean the barn three times a day, while 36.67% and 53.89% the respondents clean the barn two times and only once per day, respectively. According to Saba (2015), most of the respondents (65%) in Adea Berga and Ejerie Districts of West Shoa Zone removed manure daily, while 35% removed three times a week. Abebe et al. (2012) reported that about 47% of the respondents clean their barn three times a week in Gurage Zone, Ezha district. Maintaining the sanitary condition of milking area is important prerequisite for clean milk production (Zelalem, 2010). In this study about 21.11 and 62.22% of the respondents in urban and peri-urban areas, respectively
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
Demile et al. 410
milk their dairy cows outside of the barn. According to Godferey (2013) farmers milk their cows in open air that could exposure milk to contaminants from the environment. Mbabazi (2005) also reported that farmers milking their animals from undesignated poorly maintained milking shades/parlors predispose milk to contamination and spoilage.
Table 7. Bedding, frequency of barn cleaning and milking area of cows
N=number of respondents Calf rearing
Calf feeding, weaning and management practices in urban and peri-urban areas of Gonder district is shown in Table 8. The majority of the respondents practiced partial pre-weaning feeding in the study area. However, 11.67% of the respondents reported that they practiced bucket milk feeding before weaning. Azage et al. (2001) reported that in the traditional production systems where indigenous cattle types are used, suckling should be a means of calf rearing method, which has to be encouraged. Another report by Gebre Egziabher et al. (2000) indicated that calf suckling resulted in higher milk yield and long lactation length of the dam, higher pre-weaning gain of the calf, and higher weaning weight. The overall average weaning age of local calves was 9.8 months while for crossbred calves the average weaning age was 6.7 months. The overall mean weaning age reported for local calves in the present study is similar with that reported by Ike et al. (2005) who reported 9.7 months for local calves in the urban and peri-urban area of Awassa, Ethiopia. For the crossbred calves the values were 6.7, this figure is higher than the report of Ike et al. (2005) who indicated 5.65 months for crossbred cows in urban and peri-urban farms of Awassa.
Table 8. Pre-weaning feeding and weaning practice sin the study areas
Urban(N=90) Peri-urban(N=90)
Descriptions % % overall mean
Pre-weaning feeding
Bucket feeding 23.33 76.67
- 11.67
Partial Suckling 100 88.34
Weaning age (month)mean
Local calves 8.76 6.59
10.89 9.83
Crossbred calves 6.86 6.73
N=number of respondents
Milk Production Performance
Average milk yield of local and crossbreed cows per day in the study area were 2.32 and 7.99 liters, respectively (Table 9).The reported average daily milk yield of local cows in the present study is lower than the value reported by Getu et al.(2009) and higher than the value reported by Mustefa (2012) which were 2.5 and 1.88 liters in Wolmera and Sululta district, respectively. The reported average daily milk yield of crossbreed cows in this study is lower than 11.9 and 11 litters/day reported by Getu et al. (2009) and Saba (2015), respectively. In Dangila town the mean daily milk yield of local breed cows in urban and peri-urban farms were 2.45 and 2.03 liters, respectively; while daily milk yields of cross bred cows in the urban and peri urban areas were 6.00 and 5.77 liter, respectively (Bekele et al., 2015). The overall average lactation length of local and crossbred cows in the study area were 7.98 and 9.13 months, respectively. The overall average lactation length of local and crossbred cows in the current study is lower than the result reported by (Adebaby, 2009) who reported 9.8 and 10.1 months for local and crossbred cows in Burie district, respectively. However, the average lactation length of local cows is greater than the lactation length that indicated by Mustefa (2012) which were6.35 and9.72 months for local and crossbred cows in Sululta, and 6.16 and 9.68monthsin Wolmera district, respectively.
Constraints to Milk Production The major constraints of milk production in the study area were feed shortage, shortage of land, disease, low milk yield of local cows and lack of market access in their order of importance (Table 10). Therefore, to ease these problems integrated work should be done with the farmers, the extension workers and veterinarians from the Zonal and Woreda Offices of Agriculture and the researchers. Similar constraints are reported in other parts of the country (Dekamo and Kassa, 2016; Derese (2008).
Variables Urban (N=90)%
Peri-urban (90)%
Overall mean(N=180)
Bedding - -
No bedding 100.00 100.00 100.00 Frequency of cleaning barn
Once a day 35.56 72.22 53.89
Twice a day 46.67 26.67 36.67
Three times a day
17.78 1.11 9.45
Place of milking
In the barn 57.78 28.89 43.34
In the milking room
21.11 8.89 15.00
Out side 21.11 62.22 41.67
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
Table 9. Milk yield and lactation length of cows
Variables Urban(N=90) Peri-urban(N=90)
Overall Mean(N=180) N Mean±SD N Mean±SD
Milk yield(lt)/day
Local breed cow
17 2.94±1.01 46 2.09±.78 2.32
Crossbred cow
73 7.95±3.19 44 8.07±4.59 7.99
lactation length in months
Local breed
17 7.59±0.71 46 8.13±1.22 7.98
Crossbreed
73 9.16±2.33 44 9.07±1.11 9.13
Lactation milk yield (lt)
Local breed
17 669.44±193.88
46 509.75±238.62
555.41
Crossbreed
73 2184.66±1104.86
44 2195.85±1211.24
2188.46
N=number of respondents; SD=Standard deviation
Table 10. The major constraints of milk production in the study areas
Factor Urban (%) (N=90)
Peri-urban (%) (N=90)
Overall mean (%) (N=180)
Disease 28.9 42.7 35.80 Feed shortage 24.4 11.2 17.80
Low milk yield 15.6 23.6 19.60
Lack of market
4.4 16.9 10.65
Shortage of land
26.7 5.6 16.15
N=number of respondents
Milking Practices
In this study area all of the respondents practiced hand milking. About 100 and 92.22% of the respondents in urban and peri-urban areas, respectively milk their cows two times a day, while 7.78% of the respondents in peri-urban area milk their cows only in the morning Table 11. Majority of respondents reported that they wash hands and vessels before milking. However, dipping of milker’s fingers into the milking vessel and moistening teats of the cows to facilitate milking is practiced in the study area. This practice may allow microbial contamination of the milk from the milker’s hand and thus should be discouraged. About 4.45% of the respondents in the study area did not wash their hands during milking, However in Adea Berga and Ejerie Districts of West Shoa Zone, about 69.4% of dairy producers washed their hands before milking while the rest 30.6% did not wash their hands (Saba, 2015).The milker is an important source of milk contamination. Therefore, keeping good personal hygiene and milkers
should be in good health during milking operation (Zelalem, 2010). To ensure clean milk production cleaning of the udder of cows before milking is one of the most important hygienic practices. This is important since the udder of the milking cows could have direct contact with the ground, urine, dung and feed refusals (Zelalem, 2010). In this study about 44.45% of respondents practice udder washing. On the contrary Abebeet al. (2012) reported that all respondents did not use udder washing before milking in Gurage Zone, Ezha district. But Haile et al. (2012) showed that 82.5% of the small size farm owning households in Hawassa city practice pre milking udder. In Shashemenia town71.79% of the household milk producers wash the teats and udder of the cows before milking (Teshome, 2013).In addtion the other study conducted by Mulisa et al. (2011) reported that 58% of small dairy farms and 85.7% of medium dairy farms in Bishoftu town cleaned the udder of the cow with warm water. Milking in dry condition significantly reduces bacterial count. It is because no surplus water remains on the surface of the udder to drip into the milk and due to less chance of discharge dirt and bacteria from udder, teats and hands into milk (Islam et al., 2009). Wallace (2009) reported that thorough cleaning of the udder followed by drying with a clean cloth was effective in reducing the number of bacteria in milk contributed from soiled teats. In the current study, the use of towel to clean the udder of cows is very limited (Table 11). The use of individual towel and following essential cleaning practices during milking is important for the production of quality milk (Zelalem, 2010). However, in this study about 85.56% of households did not use towels for udder drying while only about, 5% of the households used common towel. Containers used for milking and processing of dairy products
Table 12 shows the different containers used for milking and processing of dairy products in the study area. Gourd is the major container used for milking and churning in the study area. The gourd used for different purposes differ in size. The small size gourd used for milking is called girera (traditionally “kill”)while the larger size gourd used for churning is called “gurna”.Plastic containers are also used for milking in the study area (Table 12).Majority (57.23%) of the respondents in the study area use plastic container for milking. The majority of the respondents both in urban and peri-urban area use gourd churn.
On the contrary Minale and Yilkal (2015) indicated that about 70.68% of the respondents in Chencha district used clay pot. Dekamo and Kassa (2016) indicated that the majority of dairy producers in Kaffa and Sheka
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
Demile et al. 412
zones used traditional churning material called clay pot while the rest used wooden ‘Kill’, both wooden kill and clay pot and plastic material. As reported by Sintayehu et al. (2008) in Shashemenia– Della area, about 92% of urban producers used plastic milk utensils and about 43.3% of the rural producers used clay pot and plastics, while few (12.5%) farmers used locally made grass utensils.
In Jikawo woreda of Nuer zone, Gambella region, farmers used different types of milk handling equipment for milking and storage such as traditional milking equipment (gourd) with different types and size for churning, milking and storing of milk and milk product, plastic jar, jug and nickel (Yien, 2014). Abebe et al. (2013) reported that all farmers in Ezha district of Gurage Zone used plastic jars as milking utensil.
Table 11. Milking frequency and milking procedure in the study areas
Urban(N=90) Peri-urban(N=90) Overall mean(N=180)
Variables % %
Milking frequency
Morning and evening 100 92.22 96.11
Morning only - 7.78 3.89
Milking procedure
Washing hands and vessels
100 91.11 95.56
Do not wash hand - 8.89 4.45
Udder washing before milking
60 28.89 44.45
Do not wash udder 40 71.11 55.56
Use of towel
Use of individual towel 17.78 1.11 9.45
Use of collective towel 6.67 3.33 5.00
No use of towel 75.56 95.56 85.56
N=number of respondents Table 12. Containers used for milking and processing of dairy products in the study areas
Containers
Percent of total respondents Overall mean (N=180)
Urban (N=90)
Peri-urban (N=90)
milking churning milking churning Milking Churning
Plastic containers 87.78 18.33 26.67 - 57.23 9.17
Girera 12.22 - 73.33 - 42.78 -
Gurna - 70 - 77.52 - 73.76
Clay pot - 8.33 - 22.47 - 15.40
Churner - 3.33 - - - 1.67
N=number of respondents
Cleaning and smoking milk processing vessels The plants that are used for cleaning and smoking milk vessels are indicated in Table 13. All of the respondents practice washing the utensils used for milking and processing of milk. Most of the respondents in urban area clean the milk vessels by Ajax (household utensil washing detergent), but in peri-urban area the most common cleaning technique were warm water together with plant leaves of Dodonea angustifolia (kitikita),Calpurnia aurea (zegeta),Olea Africana (woyera),Cucumis ficifolius (Yemeder enboye),Asparagus africanus (Yesetekeste)and
finally rinsing with cold water. It has been reported that washing milk and milk products handling vessels with plant leaves as well as smoking them with tree stems is common
in different parts of Ethiopia (Haile et al., 2012). The study conducted by Yien (2014) indicated that in Jikawo woreda of Nuer zone, Gambella region, farmers usually used sponge, ashes, grass leaves, and any locally available materials to clean their milk handling equipment’s. The most common plant leaves used for washing milk vessels in urban and peri urban area of Dangila town were, bsana leaf (Croton macrostachyus) and nacha leaf depending on their availability (Bekele et al., 2015). Terminalia brownii (Abalo), Calpurniaaurea(zegeta) and Dodonea angustifolia (keteketa) were the most frequently used plant species for smoking milk vessels in the study areas. The procedure for smoking milk vessels in this study area were washed and turned upside down on a
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
burning plant to make sure entrance of smoke in to the milk vessel. Respondents mentioned that, the purpose of smoking is to facilitate fermentation, to bring good taste or aroma to the dairy product and to increase the shelf life of milk and milk products. This report is consistent with the report of Asaminew (2007) and Derese (2008) who reported similar practices in Bahir Dar milk shed area and East Shoa Zones of Oromia region, respectively.Similar to this study,about 43.2% of the producers in Hawassa used different plants such as (Eucalyptus globules, Ocimum hardiense, Rutachalepensis, Cymbopogan martini and Agave sisalena) to fumigate before and after use of milk and milk products (Haile et al., 2012).
Table 13. Plants used for cleaning and smoking of milk utensils
Urban (N=90)
Peri-urban (N=90)
Overall mean (N=180)
Amharic name
Purpose Scientific name
% % %
Abalo Smoking Terminalia brownie
95.55
38.88
67.22
Zegeta Smoking and cleaning
Calpurnia aurea
35.55
57.77
46.66
Wanza Smoking Cordia Africana
1.11 - 0.56
Woyera Smoking and cleaning
Olea Africana
3.33
3.33
3.33
Kega Smoking Rose abyssinica
3.33 3.33 3.33
Kitikita Smoking and cleaning
Dodonea angustifolia L.f.
2.22
32.22
17.22
Agame Smoking Carissa spinarum
- 1.11 0.56
Yemeder enboye
Smoking and cleaning
Cucumis
ficifolius
-
8.88
4.44
Yesetekeste
Smoking and cleaning
Asparagus
africanus -
8.88
4.44
Gerawa Cleaning
Vernonia amygdalina
-
2.22
1.11
N=number of respondents
Milk Processing
Butter making
In the study area 17.22% of the respondents did not make butter because they prefer to sell whole fresh milk, but 82.78% of the respondents made butter mostly by
churning sour milk (Ergo) which has been collected over a few days and allowed to ferment naturally. Some of (1.67%) the respondents made butter by churning the cream by electric churner. All of the respondents reported that during churning time they do not use wooden stick (locally called mesbekia) for breaking and mixing the curds of ergo, due to the high temperature of the area. This high temperature facilitates the breakage of curds and formation of butter. When sufficient amount of milk is collected, it is transferred to a churner made of gourd (gurna), clay pot or plastic container. Then the milk is churned until butter granules are formed. Finally, they open the churn, skim off the butter and washed with cold water. The gourd churn used in the area is hanged on a tripod (locally called mekehal) and swung back and forth. When using clay pot and plastic container the churn is placed on a pad on the floor and rocked it back and forth until milk fat is recovered in the form of butter. According to farmers’ practice the breakpoint, i.e., the point when butter start to form is detected by inserting a grass stick into the churn through a vent on the neck of the churn. If there are small butter grains adhering to the surface of the grass stick, the breakpoint has reached. Furthermore, the breakpoint of butter recovery is also known through change in the sound made while churning. In Kaffa and Sheka Zones, majority (47.9%) of dairy producers used traditional churning material called clay pot while the rest used wooden ‘Kill’ and plastic material (Dekamo and Kassa, 2016).The results of Bekele et al (2015)showed that clay pot is the only churning material used both in the urban and the peri urban of the Dangila district. Butter preservation
Butter preservation methods in the area are shown in Table 14. About 21.22% of the respondents preserve butter using different spices to extend its shelf life. The method used to add spice into butter is, first the butter is immersed with the watery residue of Zingebile (Ginger), Nechishinkurt (Garlic) and Abish (Fenugreek) then allowed to stay for one day. Then, it was washed with water. Finally, the remaining spices made into powder and mixed thoroughly with the butter. Butter made as such is used either for home consumption or sale. Similar practices were followed in eastern Wollega (Alganesh, 2002); in east Shoa Zone of Oromia region (Lemma, 2004) and in Bahir Dar and Mecha district (Asaminew, 2007) to preserve butter. In the study area the respondents also reported that they preserve butter by using different methods such as by putting the butter in cool place, refrigerator, by smoking and washing the milking vessels properly, but 16.76% of the respondents did not use any preservation method. As reported by Abebe et al. (2013), the major spices used for butter preservation in Ezha district of the Gurage zone
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
Demile et al. 414
were Koserete (Ocimumhardiense), Korerima (Aframomum angusti-folium), Tikurazmud (Nigella sativa) and Abish (Trigonela fenum).
Table 14. Butter preservation methods in the study areas
Method Urban(N=90) %
Peri-urban(N=90) %
Overall mean (N=180)%
Spices 23.33 19.10 21.22
Refrigerator 10 - 5.00
Put in cool place
- 12.36 6.18
Smoking and washing milking vessels
50 47.12 48.56
Put in clean container
- 4.50 2.25
Do not use any method
16.67 16.85 16.76
N=number of respondents
Ghee making and utilization
In the study area the respondents used ghee for selling and for home consumption, but about 28.88% of the respondent did not make ghee. Ghee is prepared from butter. The butter is heated over a low fire to melt. Heating and stirring continue until foam are formed and a clear liquid is obtained. After heating the butter, spices are added to import good aroma and taste. Then the clay or other container that used to prepare ghee is removed from the fire and allowed to cool. Finally, the liquid is filtered through sieve or piece of cloth into a container. Similar procedures have also been reported by other authors in Ethiopia (Kefyalew et al., 2016; Asaminew, 2007).
Different spices are used during ghee making. The different types of spices used in study areas are shown in Table 16. The major spices in this study areasthat used for ghee making were Fenugreek, Turmeric, Garlic, Ginger and Korerima. Nechishinkurt (Allium sativum), Zekakibe (Ocimum spp.), Mekimeko (Rumex a), Zingebile (Zingiber officinale) and Irid (Curcuma domestica) were the major spices used for ghee making in the urban and peri urban of Dangila district (Bekele et al., 2015). The ingredients that are used to prepare ghee in Dawa Chefa District were Aswanseed (trachyspermumami), Rue (Rutagraveolence) Turmeric (curcumadomestica), garlic (Alliumsativum), Abish (Fenugreek), cardamom (Aframomumkorerimao), ginger (Zingiber officinale) and black cumin (Nigellasativa) (Kefyalew et al., 2016).It is common in the study area that ghee is used during cooking wot (Ethiopian traditional stew) and eating raw meat.
Cottage type cheese (Ayib) making and utilization
Most of the respondents (82.22%) in the study area reported to make Ayib from cows’ milk, but some of the
respondents (17.78%) reported that they did not make ayib. In urban area 15.25% ofrespondents used cheese for both sale and consumption. Buttermilk, which is a by-product of the butter making process, is the raw material used for cottage cheese making; the buttermilk is placed on a clay pot and warmed on slow fire. After cooling, the whey is drained off. This procedure of Ayib making is consistent with the reports of many authors in Ethiopia (Lemma, 2004; Asaminew, 2007). In the current study the respondents reported that buttermilk is used for family consumption, marketing and cottage cheese making. On the other hand, the whey obtained is either used for family consumption or given to animals (such as cat, dog and calf).
Table 15. Spices used during ghee making
Amharic name
Botanical name
Scientific name
Urban (N=90) %
Peri-urban (N=90) %
Overall means (N=180)
Irid Turmeric Curcuma domestica
68.75 52.5
60.63
Korerima Korerima
Aframomum korarimao
41.67
36.25
38.96
Nechishinkurt
Garlic Allium sativum
53.17 66.25 59.71
Zekakibe Basil Ocimum spp. 22.92 20.00 21.46
Tenadam Rue Ruta graucolence
25.00 30.00 27.50
Nechiabosuda
Bishop’s weed
Trachyspermum ammi
14.58
13.75
14.17
Dimbillael Coriander
Coriandrumsativm
14.58 27.50 21.04
Keishinkurt Onion Allium cepa 18.75 23.75 21.25
Mekimeko Spinach Rhubarb
Rumex a 4.16
3.75
3.96
Zingebile Ginger Zingiber officinale
43.75 51.25 47.50
Abish Fenugreek
Trigonella foeniculum
60.42
67.50
63.96
N=number of respondents CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Milk production in urban area of Gondar district seemed to be in transition to market oriented smallholder system with some level of inputs and some opportunities for market linkage, while in peri-urban areas the milk production was subsistence type of production. Milking and processing practiced in the study area are mostly based on traditional types, performed unhygienically. Smallholder dairy farmers who have no access to well organized milk storing and processing technologies rely on traditional measures of cleaning their milking and milk processing equipment and the addition of certain plant materials to their products which shall increase the shelf life, and in turn may induces health risks.
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
In general, feed shortage, animal diseases, and low milk yield of local cows and lack of market during fastingseason were the major constraints for the development of the dairy sector in the study area. Based on the findings of this study the following recommendations are forwarded:
To improve the situation, strong extension service in feed conservation and utilization techniques and animal health management should be sought. Provision of training to the farming communities is crucial so as to improve their knowledge and skills on the management of dairy animals, and production of quality milk
Smallholders should be provided/supported with credit facility, technologies for processing of milk and market access.
Establishing milk collecting and processing unit through encouraging the dairy producers.
REFERENCES
Abebe Bereda, Zelalem Yilma and Ajebu Nurfeta. (2012). Hygienic and microbial quality of raw whole cow’s milk produced in Ezha district of the Gurage zone, Southern Ethiopia.Wudpecker Journal of Agricultural Research, 1(11): 459 – 465.
Abebe Bereda, Zelalem Yilmaand Ajebu Nurfeta. (2013). Handling, processing and utilization of milk and milk products in Ezha district of the Gurage zone, Southern Ethiopia.Journal of Agricultural Biotechnology and Sustainable Development, 5(6): 91-98.
Adebaby Kebede. (2009). Characterization of milk production systems, marketing and on- Farm evaluation of the effect of feed supplementation on milk yield and milk composition of Cows at Bure District. MSc Thesis, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.
Ahmed Mohammed. (2013). Contribution of non-timber forest products to household food security in Borana Zone, Oromia Region. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Alganesh Tola. (2002). Traditional milk and milk products handling practices and raw milk quality in Eastern Wollega. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Ali AA, Abdelgadir WS.2011. Incidence of Escherichia coli in raw cow's milk in Khartoum State. British Journal of Dairy Sciences, 2(1):23-26.
Asaminew Tassew. (2007). Production, handling, traditional processing practices and quality of milk in Bahr Dar milk shed area, Ethiopia. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Azage Tegegne., Tsehay Reda,Alemu Gebre-Wold and Hizkias Ketema. (2001). Pp.90-104. Milk Recording and Herd Registration in Ethiopia. In: An Essential Step towards Genetic improvement for Milk Production. Pastoralism and Agro pastoralism which way, forward, Proceeding of the 8th Annual conference of the Ethiopian society of Animal production (ESAP), 24-26 August 2000.Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Bekele Aysheshim, Fekadu Beyene and Mitiku Eshetu. (2015). Handling, processing and marketing of cow milk in urban and peri urban area of Dangila town, Western Amhara region.Global Journal of Food Science and Technology, 3(1):081-085.
CSA (Central Statistical Agency) (2018). Agricultural sample survey. Report on livestock and livestock characteristics (private peasant holdings). Statistical bulletin 587.
CSA (Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Agricultural Sample Survey). (2009). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Dekamo Fissaha and Kassa Tarekegn. (2016). Survey on dairy production, post-harvest handling and marketing systems in Kaffa and Sheka Zones,Bonga Agricultural Research Center. Journal of Natural Sciences Research, 6(17): 2225-0921.
Dereje Tadesse. (2005). On-farm phenotypic characterization of cattle genetic resources and their production systems in south and north Wollo Zones of Amhara Region North-Eastern Ethiopia. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Derese Teressa. (2008). Present situation of urban and peri-urban milk production and quality of raw milk produced in West Shewa Zone, Oromia Region. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Falvey, L. and C. Chantalkhana.1999. Smallholder Dairying in Tropics. International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi, Kenya. 462p.
Gatwech Tang Dup. (2012). Dairy production, processing and market system: A case study of Gambella, south west Ethiopia. MSc Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Gebre Egziabher Gebre Yohannes, Tesfaye Kumsa, Alganesh Tola and Chernet Asfaw. (2000). Effects of Suckling on Calf Pre-weaning Growth and Cow Reproduction in Horro and Crossbred cows. pp. 212-216. In: Proceeding of the 7th Annual Conference of the Ethiopian Society of Animal Production (ESAP), 26-27 May 1999. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Getu Kitaw, Liyusew Ayalew, Fekede Feyisa and Gezahegn Kebede. (2009). Liquid milk and feed value chain analysis in Wolmera District, Ethiopia, Institute of Holetta Agricultural Research Center.
Haile Welearegay, Zelalem Yilmaand Yosef Tekle-Giorgis. (2012). Hygienic practices and microbiological quality of raw milk produced under different farm size in Hawassa, Southern Ethiopia.Agricultural Research and Review, 1(4): 132-142.
Ike, A, A Mane-Bielfeldt, Girma A and Anne VZ. (2005). Comparison of urban and peri-urban dairying in Awassa, Ethiopia. Paper presented “Rural Poverty Reduction through Research or Development and Transformation in Deutscher Tropentag, October 5-7, 2004 in Berlin.
ILCA (1990). annual report and programme highlights International Livestock Centre for Africa URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10625/29632.
Islam, M.A., Islam, M.N., Khan, M.A.S., Rashid, M.H. and Obaidullah, S.M. (2009). Effect of different hygienic
Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia
Demile et al. 416
condition during milking on bacterial count of cows’ milk. Journal of Animal Science, 38(1- 2): 108-114.
Kassa A. (2019). Review of performance, marketing and milk processing of dairy cattle production system in Ethiopia. J Dairy Vet Anim Res. 8(1):1‒9. DOI: 10.15406/jdvar.2019.08.00234
Kassa, B E. (2016). Cottage cheese production in Shashemenia and the role of rue (ruta chalepensis) and garlic (Allium sativum) on its quality and shelf life. MSc Thesis, Hawassa University. Hawassa, Ethiopia.
Kefyalew Gebeyew, Solomon Amakelew, Mitiku Eshetuand Getachew Animut. (2016). Production, processing and handling of cow milk in Dawa Chefa District. Amhara Region, Ethiopia. Journal of Veterinary Science & Technology, 7(286):4172/2157-7579.
Lemma Fita. (2004). Assessment of butter quality and butter making efficiency of new churns compared to smallholders butter making techniques in east Shoa zone of Oromia, Ethiopia. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Mebrate Getabalew, Tewodros Alemneh, Dawit Akeberegn. (2019). Dairy Production in Ethiopia - Existing Scenario and Constraints. Biomed J Sci & Tech Res 16(5). BJSTR. MS.ID.002903.
Mbabazi. P. (2005). Milk Industry in Uganda, 1st Edition, Fountain Publishers Kampala, pp 27-52.
Minale Getachew and Yilkal Tadele. (2015). Dairy production, processing and marketing in Chencha andKutcha Districts, Southern Ethiopia,Journal of Marketing and Consumer Research, 9:2422-8451.
Mulisa Megersa, Ashenafi Feyisa, Anteneh Wondimu and Tariku Jibat. (2011). Herd composition and characteristics of dairy production in Bishoftu Town Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, 3(6): 113-117.
Mustefa Abu Kuffa. (2012). Value chain and quality of milk in Sululta and Wolmera Woredas, Oromia special zone Surrounding Addis Ababa. MSc. Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Ruegg L. (2006). Role of Hygienic in Efficient Milking. WCDS advances in Dairy Technology. Department of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin 18: 285-293.
Saba Haile. (2015). Quality assessment of cattle milk in Adea Berga and Ejerie Districts ofWest Shoa Zone. MSc Thesis,Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Sintayehu Yigrem, Fekadu Beyene, Azage Tegegne and Berhanu Gebremedhin. (2008). Dairy Production, Processing and Marketing systems of Shashemenia Della area, South Ethiopia IPMS (Improving Productivity and Market Success) of Ethiopian Farmers Project Working Paper 9. ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute), Nairobi, Kenya. 62. Society of Animal Production (ESAP) held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 22–24 August 2003. ESAP,
Solomon Bogale. (2004). Assessment of livestock production systems and feed resources base in Sinana and Dinsho districts of Bale highlands, southeast Oromia. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya. Ethiopia 141p.
Teshome Gemechu. (2013). Physicochemcal properties and microbial quality ofraw cow's milk produced and marketed in Shashemeniatown, Southern Ethiopia.MSc Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Tsehay Redda. (2001). Small-Scale Milk Marketing and Processing In Ethiopia. In: Proceeding of the South-south Workshop on Smallholder Dairy Production and Marketing: Constraints and Opportunities, Anand, India. 12-16 March.
Wallace R. L. (2009). Bacteria Count In Raw Milk. Accessed on 19th June 2012 at http://www.livestocktrail.illinois.edu/uploads/dairynet/papers/Bacteria%20Counts%20in%20Raw%20Milk%20DD%202008.pdf.
Yien Deng. (2014). Assessment of hygienic milk production and prevalence of mastitis in dairy cow in jikawo woreda of nuer zone, Gambella region. MSc Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Zelalem Yilma and Ledin Inger. (2001). Milk Production, Processing, Marketing and the role of Milk and Milk Products on Smallholder Farmer’s Income in the central highlands of Ethiopia. pp. 139-154. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference of the Ethiopian Society of Animal Production (ESAP), 24-26 August, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Zelalem Yilma. (2010). Quality factors that affect Ethiopian formal milk Business; Experiences from selected dairy potential areas. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Netherlands Development Organization.
Zewdu W. (2004). Indigenous cattle genetic resources, their husbandry practices and breeding objectives in North-western Ethiopia. MSc Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia.
Accepted 27 July 2020 Citation: Mulu Demlie, Mitiku Eshetu, Samson Leta (2020). Evaluation of Production and Processing of Cow Milk in Urban and Peri-Urban Areas of Gondar District, Northern Ethiopia, International Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 6(2): 405-416.
Copyright: © 2020 Demile et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are cited.
