97

The impact of Darfur conflicts onthe future of communal

grazing in North Darfur State.

والية يالمشاع ف يدارفور على مستقبل الرع يف اعاتالنزأثر

شمال دارفور

By: Ismail. M. AhmedIsmail¹. Osama. E. Yassin², Elgili .M³ and

Ibrahim.A. Elnour4

1- Dept. of Animal production, College of Natural Resources and

Environmental Science, ElFashir University, Sudan, E-mail:

abuareege@gmail.com, mobile: 0912829694 FAX +2497314211, P.Box:125

ElFashir, Sudan

2- Dept. Of animal Production, College of Animal Production and Technology-

Sudan University of Science and Technology

3- Dept. of Developmental Studies, College of Animal Production and

Technology- Sudan University of Science and Technology

4- Dep. Forestry and Pastures Science, College of Natural Resources and

Environmental Science, ElFashir University, Sudan

:مستخلص

ةذحملتتتي ذذ0200إىلذي نيتت ذذذ0202أجريتتهذهتتلدذاسةايفتتلفذةذاستت أفذوفتت ذأ تت رذذذذذذذ

ليطذاسضت ذللتأذأ ترذاسعاالتاجلفذاةايتلذذذذذذذستذاملاحللذواسك ولذذةذواليلفذمشالذداف ذ هةفذت

جمعه ذذو ذختللذامللظظتلفذذذاسبياناجلذامليةانيلذفذ.ذذةذداف ذللأذنظامذاسرليذاملشاعذسلماشيل

يفتت باناجل ذاذسألشتتصا ذاملععتتيلذذاسرةيستتيلذووتت ذذذعشتت اةيلاسوذنظتت ذاملبتتا لجلذ اسعيعتتاجلذذذ

ذاسنان يتلفذذذ عتلذظللته ذ ايفت لذذذذاسبيانتاجلذامم ذ.ذ اإلضافلذإىلذاملعل واجلفذاس ذمجعهذوفت ذاملاتاد

نتتلجلذاينوتتنذ تتا ذذاالذاسةايفتتلذت يتتلهذإستتيذأ .ذإلظاتتا ذاس يتتيسظاتتاةيلذذاحلاوتتلذاإل

اسعاةقذاسرةيسذسرلايلذاملاشيلذويفب بذفبةذ بريذذةذو يفطذلةدذاحلي اناجلذاس ذمتلكهتاذذ

إذذوهة دذاس ظالذامل مسيذذسلماشيلفذ".أسذسأليفرأذ55أسذسأليفرأذذإىلذذ729وف ذفذ"ذيفرأذاين

لفذذعتتا ذظر تتتذوتت ذاسرلتتاأذيستتلك ذوستتتااجلذوعيعتتلذةذوعتتاأقذاسةايفتتل ذأ ذذذذذذذفبتتطذذ%47ذأ

وفت ذذ%ذذ97وت فل ذوأيفت صةامذذاين ذونظتامذاحلتا أذظستبذذذذذذاسعظامذاس بليتة ذالذ.ذاملاشيلف

02

%ذذ70بذاهلتت ا ذ عستتبلذذةتتضتتافلذإىلذرااجلذاسرلتتيذاملشتتاعذ اإلداملستت بيبلذ تتا ذأظتتةذوهتتةذ

نسته ذ شتةأذ علت ذذذذذأو باياذاحملايي ذحي اجهتاذاملاالت ذذذذ %72واس ليقذاملبكرذ عسبلذ

طذاسرلتتيذةذوع بتتلذذنتت.ذذسلبيتتكذ ماتتةذسلتتةخ ذذ%ذ09ونستتبلذ%ذذ99ته ذ عستتبلذذحلي انتتا

يتب ذأظتةذل اوت ذاساتراعذ تلذذذذذذأيفايفتا ذللتأذاسرلتيذاملشتاعذواس ليتقذاستل ذذذذذذذأاسةايفلذيع مةذ

ستلس ذتتةخ ذذذ.ذنسه ذو ذجانبذو تلذاسرلتاأذواملتااللذاملست بري ذوت ذجانتبذ خترذذذذذذذأاسرلاأذ

رالتتيذويفتتلالجلذاملاشتتيلذلتتزمذنظتتامذاملتتااعذذذاينيفتت نماذاحلكتت ويذوايفتتا ذةذ ستتلذاملذ

.يف براذاينوضاعذذةذداف اسرل يلذذو ذاسضروأذمبكا ذال

Abstract

This study was carried out during the period from October 2010 to

June, 2011 in Malha and Kuma Localities, North Darfur State to

highlight the impact of ongoing conflicts on livestock communal

grazing. Field data were collected through observation, structured

interviews with random samples of key informants persons and filling

questionnaires, as well as information gathered from secondary

sources. Collected Data was analyzed by SPSS to descriptive

statistics. The study revealed that, insecurity was the main handicap of

livestock grazing that, caused sharp reduction in number of livestock

owned from an average of 407 heads per household to 55heads per

household. Seasonal migration of livestock was also threatened and

only 34% of pastoralists in the study areas follow specific animal

routes during livestock movements. The traditional system of land

tenure and use as Hakora system according to 69% of respondents

was one of communal grazing constrains in addition to illegal

enclosures (zarayebElhawa) has percentage of about 42%, early free

grazing on cultivated area (taliq) at percentage of 40% and crops

00

residues are hardly needed by farmers at percentages of 67% as

feedstuffs for their animals and 26% for sale as source of income.

Hence, livestock grazing pattern in the study area is mainly dependent

on communal grazing which becomes one of the conflict factors

between pastoralists themselves on one side and between pastoralists

and sedentary farmers on the other. Thus, the interference of

governmental and private sectors investments, to improve, pastures

and animal breeds, through animal ranches are so important for peace

settlement in Darfur.

Keywords: Routes, Pastoralists, Transhumances, Nomadism, Free

Grazing

Introduction

Greater Darfur region mainly consists of four main climatic zones:

high rainfall savannah in the southern part with an average rainfall

(400- 800mm) per year, low rainfall savannah which located in the

Northern part of High rainfall Savannah with an average rainfall (200-

400mm) per year, semi- arid occupies the area between low rain fall

savannah and the desert. This area characterized by high fluctuations

of the rainfall (100- 300mm), and the Desert Zone which is

characterized by very low or no rainfall and high temperature

occupying the Northern part of the region.(Fadul2006),(Abdalla2008)

.These diverse climatic zones make the region a center of livestock

communal grazing. According to Elnour (2012) there are three types

of animal production systems in Darfur represented by Nomadic

system, semi nomadic and sedentary system. Each type has its pattern,

00

advantages and disadvantages. Communal grazing systems are defined

as systems where communal grazing areas are the principal feed

resource base for livestock, where crop residues are grazed and where

animals are kept in a kraal or paddock at night. (Communal livestock

grazing system is mainly found in semi-arid, sub-humid and mountain

areas with a low population density, (Nilsson2001). According to

Abdalla(2002) most of livestock in Sudan graze on traditional grazing

systems through extensive system (communal grazing system), which

is characterized by the common pastures and water resources and

allowed to be used by every livestock owner and who can move to

whichever place to search for pastures and water sources.Fadul(2006)

reported that livestock production in Sudan in general and Darfur in

particular is based on communal grazing and use of crop residues by

all the community freely.

In Darfur, majority of livestock is owned by the

pastoralists.Ajeebet al (2010) reported that in Darfur, pastoralism is a

subsistence (economic) way of life adopted by nomads over years for

better utilization of the available communal natural resources (fodder

and water). There are two forms of pastoralism: 1) Nomadism: in

which nomads follow a seasonal migration pattern with their families;

they have no permanent settlements and they are usually self-

sufficient in terms of food and other necessities. 2) Transhumance: the

nomads follow a cyclical pattern of short migration distances. They

usually complement livestock herding with farming around their

encampment. Fadul (2011) reported that, Livestock raising in Darfur

04

is the first livelihood strategy to the nomadic and pastoralists and

second livelihood strategy for over 90% of sedentary farmers and

urban. Therefore no doubt to say that, all Darfurian are pastoralists

and livestock husbandry is the only difference between them.

Unfortunately stone aged husbandry system (communal grazing free

movement) is the denominator system practiced by all pastoralists in

which livestock move through certain pass ways called animal tracks

(routes).Helen et al (2009) stated that eleven migration routes are

traditionally used by the Northern Rizaygat in the Darfur region.

These extend from Wadi Howar and Wakhaim in far north, to Jabal

Marra and Rehid El Berdi in West and South Darfur States

respectively.Fadulet al (2011) reported that, animal routes and grazing

means free or communal grazing,is based on usage of crop residues

freely by all the community.

The importance of this study can be summarized as a critical study

for communal grazing in the future , because the conflicts broke the

traditional links between the pastoralists communities and sedentary

farmers communities on which the communal grazing is based. Hence

this study aimed to highlighten the impact of conflicts on traditional

mechanisms for continuity of communal grazing and to investigate

constraints that handicap communal grazing in Malha and Kuma

localities in North Darfur.

Material and Methods:

The study was conducted in North Darfur State (Kuma and

Malha) localities as a part of the areas known by pastoralist area, in

the period from October 2010 to June 2011.

07

200 households of pastoralists were selected randomly to carry

out the study and the data collected through;

1) Focus Group discussion; three group discussion for men and

one group discussion for women in each locality were conducted

2) Key informants interview with native administration, herders

union, veterinary officers and agricultural union.

3) Filling of 200 household questionnaires on random basis.

4) Review of the former reports and studies on livestock grazing

and population in Sudan in general and Darfur in particular.

The data collected was concentrated on the number of livestock

owned by the household before and during conflict, type of livestock

raising, pattern of livestock movement and the routes in addition to

herders who follow specific animal route during their movement.

Collected Data was analyzed by Statistical Package for Social

Science (SPSS) to calculate frequencies, descriptive statistics and

significant differences by Analysis of variance and T-test

Results and Discussion

1-Population of livestock in North Darfur State

The total population of livestock in North Darfur is estimated at

29,778,130 heads, distributed as 8,639,918 heads for cattle,

11,005,137 heads of sheep, 9,206,879 heads of goats and 9,261,96

heads for camels, in accordance to annual growth rate, 3.2, 3.3, 2.5

and 2.3 for cattle, Sheep, goats and camels, respectively depending on

the latest animal survey in Sudan in 1976 (Ministry of Animal

Resources North Darfur 2011). During the field work survey, key

05

informants persons interviews and focus group discussion it appeared

that the process of estimating the population of livestock in the Sudan

adopted on 1976 animal survey in a large country with variable

climates and the late security disorder conditions, it is hard to give a

reasonable estimate of the size of livestock especially in North Darfur.

This is possibly due to:

a. Drought of 1983/1984 created climatic changes that lead to:

*Livestock mortality, being great in cattle and sheep and few in

camels.

*Shift from cattle grazing in most households to sheep and camels

grazing as in many areas in far north of North Darfur State as

happened at Ain-besaro North Malah, because cattle do not take stand

more than two days without drinking water compared to camels and

sheep. In addition sheep become better economic source and camels

can withstand harsh environments more than cattle.

b. Darfur conflicts which resulted in massive loss of livestock, and

helped in changes of livestock grazing types from camels to sheep in

many areas (e.g. around Meleet and Kuma).All this makes the process

of estimating the livestock population in Sudan in general and Darfur

in particular depending on survey of 1976 un- reasonable. Therefore

real comprehensive livestock survey is necessary and urgent because

livestock represents the cornerstone of Sudan economy.

2- Numbers of livestock owned by households

Table -1: shows that, the average numbers of the animals, owned

by investigated households, were 407±182.1 and 55±3.1 before the

09

recent Darfur conflicts and after the conflicts respectively, with

significant differences.

Table-1: Animal population (in hundreds) before and after

conflicts

Issue Before the conflicts After the conflicts

Total 407±182.1 55±3.1*

Camels 168.4±27.7* 11.46±6.2*

Sheep 230±92.3* 9.27±2.17*

Goats 173.5±123.2* 27.8±12.1*

Cattle 9.5±7.01 1.63±0.6

*Significant ≤o.o5

Source: Fieldwork, (2011)

The sharp reduction of the numbers of animals from 407 heads for

household to 55 heads (about 86.5% of the animals have been lost)

due to looting and distress selling. Even those who managed to save

their livestock were not able to keep them. Finally they have been

forced to sell them even at low prices to provide food or because they

were not able to provide pastures for them.Fadul (2006) mentioned

that in North Darfur due to successive millet harvest failures, the

people trade between animals and millet, the staple food in the region

where one sheep of six months for 1.5 sacks of millet and one year

male goat for 0.8 to 1 sack.

09

3-Typesof Livestock owned by the households before the conflict

in the Study area

Figure (1) shows that about 40% of the pastoralists’

households in (Malha and Kuma) raised sheep and goats, 25%

raised cattle, sheep and goats together and 20% raised camels and

sheep, whereas 15% raised camels only. Thus the main types of

the livestock, raised by the pastoralists before the conflicts were

sheep and camel with total percentage of about 45% and 35% for

sheep and camels respectively this is because camels and sheep

are well adapted to the semi-aried climate which is dominant in

the northern parts of Northern Darfur especially the areas of

Malha and Kuma, sheep usually drink water every 5 days and 10

days during summer and winter respectively, whereas camels

drink every 10 to 20 in summer and winter respectively. Also

Camels can feed on shrubs that are not palatable for other

livestock types.

The lowest percentage of animal type was 25% for

households owned cattle, because cattle cannot stay without

drinking water more than two days. Therefore grazing cattle,

gather around water points which resulted in pasture deterioration

as observed around boreholes in Kuma and Malha areas.

00

Figure (1): Types of livestock owned by the Household

before conflict

4-Type of the livestock raised by the studied groups during the

conflicts

During the ongoing conflict many household of the pastoralists,

specially nomads in North Darfur lost their livestock specially camels

and sheep. Figure, (2 ) shows that types of livestock raised during the

conflicts detailed as follow; 50% of households raised goats,

followed by sheep with percentage of 34% households, sheep and

goats9% and percentage of owning camels only 7%. The camels

raising was sharply dropped, according to key informant persons and

focus group discussion due to: a) looting during conflicts or distress

selling because many household were not able to keep their camels

specially women headed households. b) Keeping camels in certain

areas around the territories of homeland of the tribe due to the tensions

07

between neighboring tribes. This could be seen obviously in Kuma

locality, whichis inhabited by, Ziadyyia nomadic tribe. This tribe used

to graze mainly camels and sheep in cyclic grazing turns from June to

August/ they move to south of railway around: Tolo, Jabir to

Babanosa in Kordofan. During September to October/ they return to

areas around their homeland.During winter they used to migrate to

extreme north to Juzzu area.But now all animals are kept inside their

homeland territories which resulted in outbreak of camel’s disease,

shortage of pasture high competition over water resources and pasture.

The ultimate results are loss of animal’s, reduction in animal

production and deterioration of rangelands lead to shifting from camel

grazing to sheep grazing which is economically better and easier in

management compared to camels.

Figure (2) Type of livestock raised by the household during the

conflict

72

The high percentage of household raised goats at (50%) because

goats is the first line of household food security in Darfur as affirmed

by the study of pastoralist food security in north Darfur and conducted

by Fadulet al, (2011). Moreover, women headed households are the

main goat rearing households. This is because goats are easier to

manage by women in addition that goats raising requires small capital

for starting.

5-Communal grazing and pattern of livestock movement and

routes in the study area.

The livestock grazing and routes of communal grazing are those

areas wherepasture and crops are shared by all as mentioned by Fadul

(2006), the main animal routes of the nomads and transhumance in the

two localities (Kuma and Malha) from south to north and vice versa

according to the key informants Abdallajuzzu and Abu-Elkhier(2010)

are as follow :Tolo - Abuhimera borehole-Um-elhusien(gibaish) -

Eastern kuma - Sari mountain Um-Hegieleege -Mariega -Um

Dagour -MalhaWakhaim -Wadi-Howar.

These can be emphasized by what had been mentioned by Helen

et al (2009) who stated that eleven migration routes are traditionally

used by the Northern Rizaygat in the Darfur region. These extend

from Wadi-Howar and Wakhaim in the far north, to Jabal Marra and

Rehid El Berdi in West and South Darfur states, respectively. But

after the last conflicts of Darfur the situation has been changed as

shown in figure: 3: which explains that, 65.7% of the respondents

mentioned that they do not follow specific animal routes during

70

livestock movement on their searching for pastures and water

resources and most of them in Kuma. On the other hand,34.3% of the

pastoralists mentioned that they follow specific animal routes during

herds movement and most of them in Malha because Malha locality

which is inhabited mainly by Meidoub Nomadic tribe, has a vast

grazing land on their own homeland and it is bordering the Juzzu

plants areas around Wadi-Hawar and Wakhayim in far northern parts

of North Darfur. Therefore the tension between the two neighboring

nomadic tribes has more influence on Ziadyyia in Kuma compare to

Midob,because they restricted the camels and sheep grazing inside

their homeland territories in the areas between Um-elhusien in south-

eastern parts to Nussub in northern boarders with Miedoub.According

to focus group discussions and key informants, this is the main reason

of reducing animal production capability and deteriorations of

pastures and disappearance of palatable grasses such as 1) Baghial:

(Blepharislinarfolia) 2)Ikrish: (Pappaphorumspp). 3)Bayiat:

(Commeliniakotschyi) 4) Rabaa: Zalyapentandra and replaced by

other grasses with low nutritive value as Haskaneet

:(Cenchrusbiflurs) BanoEragoristisasperaGaw:(Aristida -

mutabilis) and Nada (Cidacordifolia)

Pattern of livestock migration in the study area before the

conflicts in: a) Kuma: according to key informant persons;

Between June and July livestock move from Damars (around

Ziaddyia tribe home land) toward south to areas at Tulu, Jabir

70

and sometimes to south Nyala railway to Riazghat home land

(so called Shougara trip)

Between September and October returns to areas around their

(Dar) homeland which called Marga( getting out).

Noshouq trip between December and January where they move

towards Juzzu areas far north of North Darfur state to areas of

Wadi-Hawar and Wakhayim.

The return trip to their dammar between March and April to

settled around water sources till the time of shougara

Figure (3) Herders following specific Animal routes during

livestock movement

Competition over water resources and outbreak of camels'

diseases as repeated widely through key informant persons and focus

group discussion at home of NazirJuzzu (2011) and emphasized by

Fadul (2011) in rapid assessment of livestock in North Darfur

74

in(2011). Improvement of rangelands has become a necessity in

Malha and Kuma through seed broadcasting of desirable species

especially in the Nussub area between Malha and Kuma where

accumulation of large animals occurred with increasing water

sources.The rapid growth of donkeys as a result of displacement

becomes a real threat to rangelands, cultivation and drinking water as

well. According to Umelhussien borehole keeper in Kuma locality,

about 400 to 450 donkeys come to drink every day.

6-2: The problems facing communal grazing

Table (2) The frequency and frequency percentage of problems

facing the livestock during movement on the animal routes and

"Damars" No Problem On tracks (routes) On damars

frequencies percentage frequencies percentage

1 Insecurity 163 81.5 36 18

2 Shortage of

drinking water

19 9.5 19 9.5

3 Shortage of

pastures

18 9.0 109 54.5

4 Diseases 0 0 36 18

5 Total 200 100 200 100

Source: Fieldwork, (2011)

Table (2)demonstrates the main constrains of communal grazing

with proportions varying between moving on routes and settling on

77

damars.The most constrains occurred during movement of livestock

on routes, especially insecurity that represents 81.5% as the main

determinant of the movement of livestock on the routes. Blocking of

the animal routes in specific areas within tribe Dar had no clear

impact on livestock in Malha because it is spacious than Juzzu

areas,but the blocking of the livestock routes in Kuma has tangible

impact on livestock grazing especially camels that had declined in

numbers significantly.The recent conflict in Darfur results from

insecurity in many areas of pastoralists and tensions among tribes, led

to broad looting for camels and cattle, even those who managed to

save their livestock unfortunately were not able to find free range land

to graze their animals naturally especially camels. Therefore many

camels’ grazers shifted to graze sheep, which do not need to walk long

distances for grazing like camels and economically more beneficial

than camels

It is necessary to modernize livestock production systems through

animal ranches that provide adequate water sources and sufficient

pastures, veterinary services and education on scientific bases.

Drought is one of livestock production constrains, because pastures

growth and nutritive value depend on annual rainfall and its

distribution through the rainy season mostly from June to October.

75

6-3: Causes of conflicts and communal grazing constrains

Table (3) Frequency percentage of stakeholders who agree or

disagree to conflict in the area

Reasons

No Causes Agree% Disagree% I don't

know%

1 Communal Grazing 49 29 22

2 Agri-expansion on grazing

lands

32 41 27

3 Rapid Growth of Livestock 53 29 18

4 Illegal enclosures 42 38 18

5 Too late Harvesting 23 54 23

6 Early free grazing on

cultivation area

40 42 18

7 Farming on routes and rest

area*1

30 34 36

8 Attacking farms by animal 46 39 15

9 Hakora System*2 69 5 26

Source: Fieldwork, (2011)

Key:*1: Rest area (Sawany) an area of about 10 -15 km for Nomads

to stay for rest not more than 3-7 days during movement

*2Hakora (Dar): Tribe home land administrated by tribe top leader

Table 3 showed the main factors that led to conflicts as stated by the

respondents:

The important factors that causes the conflicts were Hakora system,

rapid growth of livestock, communal grazing, animal attacking crop

79

farms and Illegal enclosures which represented 69%, 53%, 49% , 46%

and 42% respectively as mentioned by the respondents. Date of

communal grazing: setting time for the livestock to start grazing of

“al-Talaig” (the residues of the agricultural crops, 28 February or (1st

March) of every year.

Table (3) shows the answers of the respondents to the agreement or

disagreement questions about the causes of conflicts in the study area.

Hakora system as a cause of conflicts received the highest

percentage of agreement amounted to 69%, Hakora (Plural

Hawakeer) means tribal lands ownership as reported in Doha

Document for peace in Darfur (DDPD) (2011) sometimes

called (Dar)

According to Ajeebet al (2010) most of Darfurian tribes acquired

for themselves large territories of land Called (Hakora) or (Dar) it is

regarded as the property of the entire tribes and the chief of the tribe is

regarded as custodian of the property. For the sedentary farmers, land

is allotted to each member of the tribe for cultivation purposes, while

unused land is left to form shared resources for use by both farmers

and nomads.

After the recent armed conflict in Darfur, situation differed and

there was tension between the settled tribes and pastoralists as result

of failure to respect the customs and regulations and law breaking.

Rapid growth rate of livestock with percentage of agreement at

about 53% followed Hakora system

79

Livestock attacking farms at percentage of agreement about

46%

Illegal enclosures has percentage of agreement about 42%

Early free grazing on cultivation with percentage of 40%

Expansion of agriculture on range lands has percentage of

agreement about 32%

Farming on routes and rest areas has percentage of 30%

agreement.

Expansion of agriculture on pasture lands resulting into tightness

in grazing areas and animal routes. Rapid needs of sedentary farmers

to seeking fodders for their own animals and new income sources led

them to establish fences around pasture land (illegal enclosures) to

reserves pasture grass, which became one of the conflict causes

between sedentary famers and pastoralists. Early Communal grazing

before the specific time for crops harvesting and before setting time

for the livestock to start grazing of “al-Talaig” (the residues of the

agricultural crops) also is one of conflicts issues causes.

6-4- Usage of crop residues as communal grazing constrains

Table-4:The frequency and frequency percentages of

respondents regarding the usages of crops residues

No Usage Frequencies Percentage

1 Animal feedstuffs 68 68

2 Selling 29 29

4 Neglected 3 3

Total 100 100

Source: Fieldwork, (2011)

70

Table (4) shows the frequency and frequency percentages of

respondent reporting the usage of crops residues. About 68% of these

respondents and 29% mentioned that they use their crop residue for

animal feedstuffs and selling, respectively.Only 3% of the respondent

stated that they neglected the crops residues used by livestock during

communal grazing. The investigated persons mentioned that 29% of

the sedentary farmers usually sell their crop residue as a source of

income, therefore crop residues are no longer left to be grazed during

communal grazing and taliq. This is incompatible with what had been

documented by Nilsson (2001) and Fadul (2006), who stated that

communal grazing is based on crops residues, therefore, communal

gazing and the taliq has become one of the causes of conflicts between

pastoralists and farmers as animal grazers sometimes leave their

livestock to graze the farms before fixed date for the harvesting and

free grazing on 7 February each year, which was approved lastly

instead of 28 February.

Conclusion

Because livestock grazing in Darfur mainly depends on communal

grazing which, became one of the conflict factors between pastoralists

themselves on one side and between pastoralists and sedentary

farmers on the other. Thus, intervention of governmental and private

sector, for improving; pastures and animals breeds, through animal

ranches is so important for peace settlement in Darfur.

77

References

1- Abdalla, S. A. (2008) Use of Controlled Irrigation for the

Improvement of Sorghum Growth and Productivity in North

Darfur.Ph.D thesis University of Khartoum, Sudan

2- Abdalla, Siding. M., (2002), Dairy Farm management (Arabic),

cited in Ismail (2013), The effect of Animal traditional system

improvement on conflict management , case study North Darfur

State. PhD Sudan University.

3- Ajeeb, A, Ibrahim E.A , Ismail M.Elsir.A, (2010), Nomadic

Population base line survey. North Darfur, Faculty of Natural

resources and Environmental science (Elfashir University) in

collaboration with International Organization for Migration (IOM)

4- Elnour, I. A, (2012), Livelihoods for Pastoralist Prospective

(Presence, Past and Future) un published paper presented in a

workshop), Livelihoods for Pastoralist and famers Prospective,

Peace Center,Elfashir University in Collaboration with Darfur

Darfur Dialogue Consultant 22- 23 December 2012

5- Fadul, A. (2006). Natural Resources for sustainable peace

.University of Peace, Africa Programme, Conference proceeding. ,

December 2006.

6- Fadul, A.A, and, Ismail M.A, (2011). Research study on

Pastoralists Food Security in North Darfur, World Food

Programme (WFP) in Collaboration with Elfashir University,

Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural

Resources.Augst2011

022

7- Nilsson, Tabias, (2001), Management of Communal Grazing

lands, a case study in Tanzania. www.Scrib.com/doc.

8- Fadul.A. (2011).Rapid Livestock Assessment Report, Livestock

Working Group Ministry of Animal Resource and Fisheries-Norh

Darfur in Collaboration with FAO Elfashir

9- Helen Young, Abdallla, A and Omer E,(2009) Livelihoods,

power and Choice, the Vulnerability of the Northern Rizaygat, in

Darfur, Sudan, Feinstein International Center.

10- MOARAF-ND, (2011) Annual report Animal, Health Unit- North

Darfur.

11- Doha Document for peace in Darfur (DDPD) (2011)

1. Key person: (2011)AbdellahJuzzu (Nazir), Head of Ziadyia

Native Administration, Kuma Locality- North Darfur State

2. Key Person (2011) Ibrahim Abu Elkhair. Head of

Pastolalits Union, Malha Locality- North Darfur State.