 |
     |
  |
|
|
|
| of crop farming and cattle raising, and finally the establishment of four 200 ha. ranches for herders who were
to settle within ranch boundaries." (Oxby 1985 p.221 from Hunting Technical Services 1979 p. 85 ff.) (*18)
However, in 1983, the only livestock development work of any significance being carried out in the region was an
ox-plough project, aimed primarily at encouraging and instructing crop farmers to use work oxen. (See below) (*19) Ironically, one important consequence of the KIADP's activities, to date, has been the severe restrictions imposed, in some of the areas in which they operate, of dry season pasturage. As part of the KIADP's development plans farmers are encouraged to double-crop their rice swamps with, for example, groundnuts in the dry season. (*20) As I have indicated, in many areas these rice swamps are used by Fula to provide dry season pasturage for their cattle, and also an area to live in themselves. The full extent of this "development" is not yet clear, but the loss of dry season pasture is a serious deprivation. (The KIADP is authorised to develop 600 acres of swamp land and 10,000 acres of upland in the six chiefdoms covered by the project.) The charge has been made that KIADP activities are driving the Fula away from the project area. And there has even been a call for the re-introduction of a settlement-scheme, from one of the Senior Yogomaia Fula elders. (*21) The project staff are aware of the problem, but for the present time agricultural extension continues at some cost to the herder. (*22) As part of the programme, crop farmers are provided with barbed-wire fences, to protect their crops from cattle damage. (*23) The fences not only provide an effective barrier against the cattle, but also a visual expression of the fact that land ownership rights still rest in the hands of the agricultural population and their chiefs. By contrast, I observed that, even in areas of high cattle population density, upland farms owned by non-Fula were often left unfenced. I remarked upon this to several Fula and non-Fula. The response usually expressed by the crop farmers was that it was up to the herder to control his cattle. A few Fula, however, expressed anger and dismay at the local farmers' behaviour and one or two ventured to suggest that such farmers could gain more by allowing cattle-damage to take place and then sue the herder, than by taking adequate, albeit time-consuming, precautions. (See above) Opinion on this matter appears to be divided within the administration itself. At a meeting, held in 1984 to discuss cattle-damage to KIADP crops, the Veterinary Officer expressed his dissatisfaction over the way in which the cattle owners had been treated by the KIADP. The herders had been heavily fined for the mere entry of their cattle into KIADP farm plots. No proper assessment of actual damages had been carried out, he observed. By contrast, the Agricultural Officer argued that it would be unfair for the farmer alone to be responsible for fencing. "It is the cattle and not the farm that move", he observed. (*24) As a general observation, there does not yet appear to be a clear policy on this, or for that matter, any of the major issues relating to the herder-farmer conflict over the question of land rights. Local arrangements between farmer and herder, then, continue to be made on an ad hoc basis; the herder relying on the maintenance of good social relations with the farming community, to secure land for his family and his herds. It should be emphasised that at the local level, farmer-herder relations remain cordial. However, agricultural extension has, I fear, placed these relations under strain in recent years. (*25) |
|
138 |
| v. Some notes on The Musaia Ox Unit. Work oxen have been used in Koinadugu District since the late 1920's when Agricultural Officers were sent to Kankan in Guinea, to learn the principles and practices of oxhandling. By 1931, it is reported that 17 farmers were ploughing 133 acres in the Northern Province. The majority of these farmers were Paramount Chiefs. During the Second World War, in spite of problems of equipment, staff and spare parts, ox traction "survived" in Sierra Leone. A report in 1946 notes how the farmers "have persisted in their efforts and some have purchased ploughs from French territory. By 1946 some 30 ploughs were in existence of which nineteen were actually in use and the area ploughed was estimated at 170 acres of upland and 100 acres of swamp". (Quoted in Waldock et al., 1951, p.56) However, the introduction of a Mechanical Cultivation Scheme in 1952, greatly limited the growth of a work oxen project which had begun around the same time. In 1952, 5 pairs of oxen were trained at Musaia Livestock Compound, a research station which had been opened four years earlier. The Agricultural Officer in charge of the compound issued an invitation "to train oxen free of charge if anyone wants to send the animals for about one month". In 1953, 15 pairs of oxen were trained, but the following year, Musaia Station started its activities with mechanical cultivation. In 1959 it was reported that there was little interest in ox ploughing due to the presence of tractors. (Thomas 1983) The Musaia Ox Unit is regarded as one of the major successes of the KIADP programme. The unit, which was established in 1980, covers five chiefdoms: Fulasaba Dembelia, Sinkunia, Sulima, Mongo and Warra Warra Yagala. However, most of the ox owners lived along the Guinea border, which had, subsequently, become the focus of the project's extension work. I was neither familiar with this area, nor did I have first hand experience with the work of the ox unit. Outside of the Musaia compound, which I visited on a couple of occasions, I saw a team of work oxen but once; ploughing a KIADP swamp close to the KIADP headquarters in Kabala. I knew one Fula who owned a pair of oxen. He lived in Kabala, but his large farm lay near to the Guinea border. Work oxen did not figure greatly in my field research. Nonetheless, during 1984 it was estimated by KIADP that 154 pairs of oxen, operating in the project area, had ploughed 1900 acres of swamp and upland. The project staff were confident that the ox programme would continue to expand. However, I feel that project workers tended to over-estimate the potential of ox-ploughing. In reality, the work oxen can only make a partial contribution to increasing agricultural production. As noted above, the Ox Project was highly localised. Indeed, it was concentrated in the region where ox ploughing was feasible. Ndama cattle are small, and can only manage a light workload. Swamps are often too deep for the oxen to work in, and in many areas, particularly the bolilands, "seasonally flooded depressions", (Cole 1968 p.42) land is too hard and dry to be ploughed by oxen. (Paul Richards: Personal Communication). Furthermore, use of oxen on upland farms is often prevented by trees and tree stumps. (*26) In brief, I was told that "the project trains farmers to train their cattle as work oxen". The training is done over a six week period, and is preferably carried out at the farmer's own site. Ploughs and shares, which are presently imported by the project are sold, rather than hired, to the farmers. Other items, for example cattle yokes, are now available locally. Loans and advice are provided by the project to help with the initial purchase of the oxen. Nonetheless, for the farmer, the decision to purchase a |
|
139 |
| pair of oxen, is risky. There is no insurance protection. The project does inoculate the oxen it trains against
Blackquarter, Anthrax and Haemorrhagic Septicemia (HS). However, vaccination does not prevent theft; tame work
oxen are easily led astray. The project advises farmers to purchase oxen at about 2«-3 years old. They are then castrated, if they have not been already. Cattle are sometimes bought at a younger age but, I was told, could only manage a light workload. Strain through over-work is a major cause of illness among the oxen. Nonetheless, farmers are encouraged to hire out their oxen to friends and neighbours, to provide themselves with extra revenue. The manager of the unit envisaged the widespread acceptance of work oxen in the region, as the first step towards establishing a "mixed farming economy", which he held as an ideal. He regarded specialisation, particularly in cattle husbandry, as a poor alternative, both economically and ecologically. The manager was keen to draw my attention to the fact that Fula and non-Fula were involved in the scheme. He saw the ox programme as a way of creating cooperation between communities. However, results of a pilot survey carried out by the KIADP, reveal a very high representation of Fula "ox-owners". (*27) Many of these ox-owners are, of course, also herd owners. And although the survey does not indicate the size of this category, it is noted that some Fula have trained young animals from their own herd. In these cases, it appears that the oxen are used during the rainy season, then returned to the main herd when the ploughing has been completed. The oxen are then retrained the following year. The survey shows that most Fula, who have restricted access to swamp, were using work oxen for upland farming; especially for funde (finger millet) and groundnut (which is generally regarded as a "woman's crop"). Upland rice is usually grown in the first year after the fallow period. I was told that the density of the stumps which remain after an initial clearing of land, makes it difficult to plough until subsequent years. iv. The Fula-Yalunka War: A change of context. Since the turn of the century, the actions of successive administrations have served to concretise, in the minds of the population, each ethnic community's domain. For example, the role and influence of each Paramount Chief has been formalised, standardised and restricted to a clearly demarcated administrative area. (*28) And, whilst local ethnic heterogeneity still persists throughout Koinadugu District, chiefdom areas are usually spoken of as "belonging" exclusively to one or other ethnic group. Sengbe is a Kuranko chiefdom, Warra Warra Yagala is Limba, Sulima is Yalunka. And so on. There are no Fula chiefdoms within Sierra Leone. It appears that the situation formerly was more fluid, and that more general ethnic identities were less relevant to either politics or administration. (cf. Brown, 1972a) Today, the "fuzzy edges" of ethnicity have been redrawn. Indeed, they are currently highlighted by a national political system that encourages, and increasingly depends upon, "the ethnic vote". (*29) This has led to serious problems, particularly in Koinadugu District. Political constituencies are made up from an agglomeration of chiefdoms. So, for instance, Koinadugu North constituency is made up from Sulima and Sinkunia, both "Yalunka" chiefdoms; Koinadugu East is made up from Sengbe |
|
140 |
| and Mongo. These are both "Kuranko" chiefdoms. Inevitably, in the minds of the electorate, Koinadugu
East should be represented by a Kuranko, Koinadugu West, by a Yalunka. The political legitimacy of a Member of
Parliament, is thus judged by a fusion of ideas that relate both to chieftaincy and national politics. In some
constituencies, for example Koinadugu East, where the Kuranko make up the vast majority of the electorate, the
vote-catching campaigns of prospective candidates have not proven divisive; at least at the "level" of
the local community. In Koinadugu North, however, the electorate is fairly evenly divided between Fula and the
Yalunka, with both groups claiming the majority. In this constituency, political campaigns have led to serious
disturbances, affecting towns and villages alike. (See below) Donald, who researched among the Yalunka between 1965 and 1967, notes:- "In terms of general social interaction there are two systems, one Fula and one Yalunka, which exist side by side...They occupy the same environment but exploit different parts of it. Yalunka on alluvial bottom lands and the hillsides nearby. The Fula graze their herds in the opener areas of the rolling hills." (1968, p.142) And:-" A present-day Yalunka chiefdom is multi-ethnic with two ethnic groups predominating. The Yalunka and the Fula retain fairly distinct types of social organisation with interaction between members of the two groups primarily in the areas of court activity and the cash economy". (ibid.,p.145) The extent to which the three Yalunka chiefdoms are "multi-ethnic" or more accurately, perhaps, "bi-ethnic", is underlined by the 1963 census. (See 8:1.) Over the three chiefdoms the Fula make up over 50% of the population; the Yalunka little more than 40%. The predominance of Fula has been recognised by the administration for some decades. With the introduction of the Native Administration Scheme during the 1960's, chiefdoms were divided into sections. Some chiefdom sections were entirely Fula and Fula section chiefs were appointed to them. In 1967 Sulima Chiefdom had eight Yalunka sections and six Fula sections. At the same time, Fula were appointed as tribal authorities and were able to vote for Yalunka paramount chiefs at elections. They were also given places on the Native courts; it was decided that at least two Fula would serve and that one of them would either be president or vice-president. (Donald 1968, p.143.) For politicians of both ethnic groups, the Koinadugu North constituency is of great significance. There are no Fula chiefdoms within Sierra Leone, so their search for political legitimacy and representation has, accordingly, taken place through the ballot box. However, with the notable exception of Freetown, outside of Koinadugu District the Fula are nowhere populous enough to mount a serious electoral challenge. The Yalunka number around 30,000 and are mostly concentrated within the three chiefdoms. However, Fulasaba Dembelia Chiefdom is joined with Wara Wara Yagala and Wara Wara Bafodea, two Limba chiefdoms, to form Koinadugu North West constituency. Consequently, outside of Koinadugu North Constituency, the Yalunka cannot realistically expect to be able to return a member of parliament. So Koinadugu North is the only constituency open to either group. Here, I am less concerned with the details of political competition between rival parliamentary candidates, (*30) than with the impact that a series of election contests have had on Fula-Yalunka relations and, by implication herder-farmer relations. (*31) In brief, issues concerning farmer-herder relations have now become problems of national political interest, and hence open to unsavoury exploitation. It seems unlikely that they can ever be resolved merely at the local level of farmer-herder interaction. |
|
141 |
| The convoluted impact this "development" has had at the local level is raised in the following police
report.:- "Police in especially the Sulima Chiefdom areas, Koindu, Gberia Timbako, Falaba, Limbaya etc., are
daily receiving complaints from farmers, the majority of whom are Yalunkas, that Foulah cattle farmers in those
areas have let loose their cattle which are destroying their crops. There is a threat from the farmers that if
nothing else is done to compel the Foulahs to control their cattle, another eruption of violence between the two
on this issue is imminent. Wherever farmers and cattle-rearers have co-existed there have always been some laws the strict observance of which guarantees protection from wilful destruction of the other man's property. But knowing the kind of administration prevailing in the two chiefdoms, the elders may not find it easy to enforce such laws. If the peace now prevailing in the Koinadugu North constituency should be given a chance to last, then this farmers/cattle rearers threatening relationship must be looked into most immediately and some settlement made before peace finds an outlet to escape again". (*32) The officer indicates that, between farmer and herder there is, in many areas, a great deal of fear and mistrust. However, his reference to the Koinadugu North constituency is significant; indeed, it illustrates one way in which the political arena has shifted to Freetown. (*33) The officer's report was made in 1980. However, the general elections, held two years later, precipitated widespread and bloody violence throughout much of the northern parts of Koinadugu District. Fights between Fula and Yalunka were particularly serious, and by 1984 the disturbances were popularly referred to as "The Fula-Yalunka War". It is very difficult to assess, with any degree of accuracy, the numbers killed or wounded during this period of unrest. The accounts of the "war" which I heard, were seldom recounted as matters of fact. Many involved sub-plots of intrigue and treachery, heroic and dastardly acts, and strange and unaccountable occurrences. No clear overall picture emerges from these "wondrous" accounts, and I gathered that the situation was, at the time, very confused. Under the confusion, many individuals sought to settle old scores. This created tension and conflict within communities, as well as between them. The public records, held at Kabala District Office, do not provide a much clearer picture. The file on the 1982 Elections is full of complaints and counter-complaints of "subversive activities" and "election irregularities", but there are very few eye-witness reports. Furthermore, I was told that many deaths, especially those which occurred outside the main settlements, were never even reported to the authorities. To give some idea as to the seriousness of the disturbances, a contemporary situation report on the Koinadugu North Constituency, made by the Assistant District Officer, lists over forty houses at Sinkunia, the chiefdom headquarters of Dembelia Sinkunia, which had been "either burnt down or looted". (*34) Many informants told me that the fighting was particularly fierce and prolonged around Gbindi and is alleged to have involved units of the Sierra Leone Army and soldiers from Guinea. The "war" did not reach Kabala, which by most accounts, became a Fula strong-hold. Vigilante groups set up roadblocks outside of the town, to prevent incursions by Yalunka. The most serious occurrence within the town was a shooting incident involving a Fula elder who was widely believed to be "pro-Yalunka". In general |
|
142 |
| though, Yalunka within the town do not appear to have been seriously intimidated. Some moved to stay with relatives
elsewhere, however, others sought protection from Fula friends and relatives within the town. Haja Aisaitu told
me how she had reassured a number of local Yalunka families. It was her opinion that "politics had spoilt
the country", and she was convinced that had Alimamy Jalloh still been alive in 1982, the troubles would have
been averted. By all accounts, Haja used her influence to try to ensure that no harm came to these families, who,
in Haja's opinion, were innocent parties caught up in a wider conflict. Against this, Haja was convinced that the
upheavals of 1982 were the result of an attempt "to drive the Fula from the country". The number of Fula and Yalunka believed to have died in the fighting, is commonly estimated in hundreds. As a result of the violence and the manifest "irregularities", the elections for Koinadugu North were cancelled and later suspended indefinitely. Most of the fighting had centred around towns and larger villages, but I was told that many cattle camps and small outlying villages were also victims of attack and, by some accounts, the scenes of horrific massacres. As a result of the disturbances, many Fula herders fled from the area. Some moved south-eastwards to Kono. A large number travelled towards Bafodea. On a visit to the northern market towns in 1985, I passed through a number of empty and abandoned settlements, said to have been previously occupied by Fula. By that time the situation had "cooled", and some Fula spoke of returning to the area. Others pointed out that the key political dispute had not yet been resolved, believing that further outbreaks of violence were inevitable. The violence which spilled out from the towns affected many smaller settlements. Farmers fought herders, and the herders fought farmers. But the "Fula-Yalunka War" was not caused by cattle damage. Unfortunately, outside of Koinadugu District, many informants were unable to see beyond the herder-farmer stereotypes. They interpreted the disturbances as a clash of cultures, an inevitable result of herders and farmers living in close proximity, vying over the same scarce resources. Similarly, those involved in livestock development, in my opinion, have frequently confused conflicts over land rights with the conflicts brought about by parliamentary politics and the struggles for political legitimacy. In many respects, the two issues are now interlinked and, for example, policies aimed at restructuring local land rights must take into account a number of potential political repercussions at a national level. Even so the two "contexts" are not one and the same:- In 1985, I witnessed the chance meeting of two rival politicians in Kabala market; One was Yalunka, the other Fula. Both men had travelled from Freetown, each with a small group of advisers, to attend pre-election meetings in the area. The two politicians, realising that there was no way of avoiding each other, stepped out from their respective entourages, and shook hands. Afterwards, one informant said "they smiled with their faces but not with their hearts". The issues which lie between these two men, crucial though they are to the peace and prosperity of the region, are far removed from those which concern most local Fula and Yalunka. Resolution of these politicians' differences need not involve the electorate of Koinadugu North. By contrast, disputes between farmers and herders cannot be resolved outside of the local context in which they occur. The cordial relations which exist between herder and farmer, in many of the areas I visited, (see above) reflect how successful local solutions have been to a range of potentially divisive issues. (*35) Indeed, living cheek by jowl, there are good reasons for farmers and herders to seek settlement |
|
143 |
|
through compromise. And, despite the upheavals of 1982, I found many Fula and Yalunka who were able to smile at each other with their hearts. Table 8:1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
144 |
 |
|
|
