Stray, unmarked livestock a death trap on Mzansi’s roads

Why do cows still cross the road? Dr Siphe Zantsi, an agricultural economist with the Agricultural Research Council (ARC), unpacks the real risks that stray animals pose on rural and township roads.

---

South Africa has an alarming rate of road accident fatalities. According to the Automobile Association of South Africa, South Africa’s road deaths are on average 14 000 people per year. This is higher than the world average and is also higher than the African average. The biggest cause is human behaviour which includes numerous factors.  Stray animals are also a significant contributing factor to road accidents in South Africa, especially on roads passing through rural communities or townships.

Most of the stray animals are domestic animals: dogs, cattle, horses, donkeys, sheep, goats and pigs. But, why do we have a problem of domestic stray animals if they have owners and we have an Animal Identification Act, 2002 (Act No. 6 of 2002) that is binding and compulsory? 

In terms of this act, every stock owner must mark their animals with a registered brand mark for traceability. In most parts of the country, roads are fenced and there are rangers, but the road accidents caused by stray animals are still a matter of concern.

I recently drove around Mthatha and Gcuwa in the Eastern Cape, and this trip reminded me of how much of a problem the large number of stray animals is on our roads. One easily notices something when they’ve not seen it for a while.

I have lived in the Eastern Cape for most of my life, and it was the norm to see animals on the road or a dead body of a dog on the side of the road. But this time, seeing stray animals on the road bothered me. 

I feel that the conversation on stray animals and the Animal Identification Act needs to be raised from the dead.

Dr Siphe Zantsi

Livestock are not branded

My visit to the Eastern Cape was for a farmer survey, particularly on stock theft. I was struck by farmers who told me that they did not mark their animals with a registered brand mark because they’re worried that if their animals could be hit by a car on the road, they will have to pay the damages to the driver.

Also, an animal health technician that I spoke to in Mthatha estimated that only 5% of stock owners have marked their animals with a registered brand mark, which is a disturbing observation given the severity of stock theft and the number of stray animals on the road.  

What was said by the farmers and the animal health technician got me thinking and concerned. I wondered how many farmers don’t mark their animals because of the same reasons? And if the Animal Identification Act of 2002 is compulsory, why has only a small share of farmers marked their animals with a registered brand mark? 

---

Related stories

• Farming vs. housing: Rising demand for land in former homelands
• Farmland vs. housing: Balancing SA’s land reform tug-of-war

---

Is the Animal Identification Act just for show?

One could understand that government does not have enough resources, but to enforce this act, we can work with the resources that we already have at hand. For instance, almost every communal farmer depends on government subsidised vaccination for zoonotic diseases like anthrax, rabies, and for dipping their animals to control ticks.

Farmers who have not marked their animals must not benefit from these services because they don’t obey government regulations. Would that be an unfair condition or discrimination that might get the government into trouble?

Has the government made substantial efforts to enforce this act since it was passed in 2002?

Back to the real cause of stray animals. From what the few farmers said, it suggests that people don’t want to take and accept responsibility for being animal owners, yet people are dying on the road and sometimes people who are relatives of the stock owners. The fencing for the national roads is in most instances erected but the very same community members cut it because they want shortcuts for crossing the road, while some are stealing the fence.

Communities do not want to own developments made for them by the government – the development is always “the baby of the government”. Do the animals killed on the road belong to the government?  It is high time that communities take agency for their own safety and development.

Asking the hard questions

I’m also wondering what happened to the impounding of stray animals on the road? I remember that few decades ago there was a process of some sort where stray animals would be taken away to safe area and owners would have to pay a fine to claim their animals. Although this was not strictly adhered to, it made a difference suggesting that it has a potential to make a meaningful difference if strictly implemented.  

Lastly, the shortage of grazing land and the fact that most grazing lands are not fenced are certainly other factors at play here. In the years of Betterment Planning Schemes (1930s) and decades later, communal rangelands were fenced into camps, allowing rotational grazing, also limiting the movement of animals into unwanted places.

Although this happened at a cost of some villagers culling their animals, it helped to preserve natural resources. Could this be possible now that communal rangelands have shrunk significantly? In my view, these should be some of the questions on the rural and agricultural development agenda.        

READ NEXT: Black dairy farmers build legacies, but face market crisis

• Dr Siphe Zantsi is an agricultural economist at the Agricultural Research Council. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of Food For Mzansi.

Sign up for Mzansi Today: Your daily take on the news and happenings from the agriculture value chain