Assessment on dairy goat management practice in the Korahey Zone, Somali, Ethiopia

ABSTRACT

The characterization of dairy goat management practices in the Korahay Zone, Somali Regional State, was the aim of this study. The woredas and respondents were selected purposefully. Parameters, such as feeding management, housing, watering, healthcare, breeding and selection methods, were collected. A semi-structured questionnaire was used to collect data. The collected data were analysed using the statistical package for social science (SPSS) version 20. According to the result, natural pasture (22.5%, 45% and 42.5%) is the main feed source and free-ranging (92.5%, 100% and 100%) is the commonly practised feeding system (p 0.05) for goats in Shegosh, Kabridahar and Shilabo, respectively. Ponds and boreholes were the main water sources for goats. The majority of respondents in study areas practised uncontrolled breeding systems (p 0.05), due to goats’ grazing together, insufficient breeding buck and lack of awareness (p 0.05). The confirmation of the buck was ranked as the first important criterion for the selection of breeding bucks in selected districts. However, the size and appearance of the doe in the Shegosh and Kebridahar districts and better milk yield in the Shilabo district were the first-ranked criteria for the selection of breeding does. Therefore, it is recommended that government attention be provided to pastoralists in goat management.

KEYWORDS:

• Dairy
• management
• pasture

Introduction

Goats are kept by pastoralists in pastoral and agro-pastoral production systems that are found in arid and semi-arid agro-ecological zones, frequently in mixed flocks with sheep, and are allowed to freely graze or browse in the rangelands (Tesfahun et al. 2017). Goats have unique abilities to adapt to harsh tropical environments better than other ruminants and exist on all continents (Dubeuf et al. 2004). Goats are prolific breeds and achieve sexual maturity at an early age of 10–12 months (Bhattarai 2012). The global dairy goat population was estimated to be 218 million in 2017, while goat milk volume was estimated to be 18.7 million tons in the same year (Miller and Lu 2019). That covers around 2% of global milk production (Mahmoud 2010). Goat milk production is gaining great consideration due to the need for functional food, the nutritional interest of goat milk, and increased demand for goat milk products as a result of an increasing human population (Yangilar 2013), its health and therapeutic properties, and looking at alternatives to bovine milk (Nayak et al. 2016).

Goats are utilized for milk production by many producers in most pastorial (Fikru and Gebeyew 2015) and some crop-livestock production system areas (Gebreegzabher et al. 2016). The role of goats in the economies of developing countries and their contribution to the livelihoods of many resource-poor small-holder farmers cannot be overemphasized (Owen et al. 2005). The milk production potential of Ethiopian indigenous goats has not been adequately studied, and most of the studies are done on-station. In pastoral areas like the Korahey Zone, goats are important components of the farming system, which benefits smallholder farmers by generating cash income as well as milk. Despite this, at the study sites, the research conducted was inadequate on dairy goat production management. Therefore, it is crucial to systematically describe the management systems to plan and design appropriate research and improvement interventions that are relevant to goat production management. This study aimed to characterize dairy goat management practices in the Korahay Zone, Somali Regional State, Ethiopia.

Materials and methods

Description of the study area

The study was conducted in selected districts of the Korahey Zone, which is located in the Somali Regional State. The Korahe zone is found between 6°28′-7°68′-N Latitude and 43°53′–45°oo′ E longitude. Korahay zone had a total population of 312,713; of these, 177,919 were men and 134,794 were women (CSA 2007). The zone's climate is characterized as tropical and semi-arid, with temperatures ranging from 23 to 36°C and it receives an average rainfall of 127 mm. The area has a bimodal rainfall pattern with two main rainy seasons, the first of which is ‘Gu’, which occurs from mid-April to the end of June. The second rainy season, ‘Deyr’, occurs from early October to late December.

Sampling method and sample size

Both purposive and random sampling methods were employed to select a sample of households (HHs). The Shilabo, Shegosh and Kabridahar districts were purposefully selected based on the population of goats (those three districts have a rich goat population) and also on the willingness of the people to rear goats. Based on the above criterion, the populations (owning goats) were purposefully selected. Then a cross-sectional survey was conducted before the main survey to identify the distribution and kebeles with more potential goat breeds in the study districts. Based on the cross-sectional survey and secondary information gathered from zonal and district levels of agricultural and pastoralist offices, six kebeles were selected. Accordingly, a total of 120 household heads (sample size) were selected randomly (20 households from each kebele).

Method of data collection

Semi-structured questionnaires and formal interviews were used to gather information from the selected households. The questionnaires were an open type of reason for castration, housing, herding practice, season of castration and closed type for other data. Interviews with key informants and group discussions through respective selected focal persons in each district were the major data sources of this study. The data were also collected from selected respondents on the method of breeding and selection practices, identification of traits preferred to select bucks and does, husbandry, and management practices in March–May, 2021.

Data analysis

The data collected from each study site were checked for any errors and corrected during the study period, coded, and entered into the computer for further analysis by Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 20.0 for Windows, 2013). Moreover, the analysed results were presented by using major descriptive statistics like percentage, mean and standard error which are compared using one-way ANOVA. While the means for the quantitative traits are compared using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test and the values are considered significant at P < 0.05.

The indices are calculated as follows: The sum of (3 for rank 1 + 2 for rank 2 + 1 for rank 3) given for an individual reason divided by the sum of (3 for rank 1 + 2 for rank 2 + 1 for rank 3). Effective goat population size and inbreeding coefficient were calculated by using the following formula below: NB: This is for an unequal number of males and females. $1/N_e=1/4N_m+1/4N_f$ $\mathrm{\Delta }F=1/8N_m+1/8N_f$where N_e = effective population size, N_m = number of breeding males and N_f = number of breeding females, ΔF = coefficient of inbreeding/F = value ranges from 0 to +1/.

Results

Management of dairy goat

Feed source and feeding management

The major feed sources, feeding systems and feeding methods for goats in the study area are presented in Table 1. Natural pasture, forage trees, maize, sorghum and, to some extent, food leftover were also mentioned. The proportion of households, who used natural pasture as a major feed source, was higher in the Shegosh, Kebridahar and Shilabo districts. According to the current result, free-range browsing is the major feeding system in the Shegosh, Kebridahar and Shilabo districts with 92.5%, 100% and 100%, respectively (Table 1). A separate method of feeding in the Shegosh district and mixed with sheep in the Kebridahar and Shilabo districts were the most common feeding methods for dairy goats.

Table 1. Feeding system, feed source and the method of feeding (%).

	Woredas
	Shegosh	Kebridahar	Shilabo	X^2	P-value
Feed sources %				73.235	0.00
Sorghum	2.50	0.00	0.00
Maize	10.0	0.00	0.00
Forage tree	0.00	5.00	12.5
Natural pasture	22.5	45.0**	42.5
Food overleft	2.5	0.00	0.00
Sorghum and Maize	12.5	0.00	0.00
Sorghum, Maize and forage	12.5	12.5	17.5
Maize, food overleft and forage	12.5	15.0	7.50
Natural pasture and forage	5.00	10.0	10.0
Maize and Natural pasture	10.0	5.00	2.50
Natural pasture and food overleft	10.0	7.50	7.50
Feeding System (%)				6.154	0.045
Free range	92.5	100.0*	100.0
Teasered at home	7.50	0.00	0.00
Free range in the fenced area	0.00	0.00	0.00
Method of feeding (%)				27.429	0.00
Separately	75.0	25.0	20.0
With Sheep	25.0	75.5	80.0**

* and ** values across the rows are significantly different at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively.

Feed supplementation

Goats have a wide range of plant species, browsing and good feed searching habits. The feed shortage was reported as one of the constraints in all study areas. Based on the survey results, about 85%, 50% and 32.5% of respondents in Shegosh, Kebridahar and Shilabo, respectively were provided additional supplementation such as maize, sorghum and food leftover based on availability (Table 2). However, 15%, 50% and 67.5% of respondents in Shegosh, Kebridahar and Shilabo, respectively were not supplementing their goats.

Table 2. Supplementary feed and feed type.

	Wereda
	Shegosh	Kebridahar	Shilabo	χ^2	P-value
Feed supplementing (%)				41.201	0.000
Yes	85.0**	50.0	32.5
No	15.0	50.0	67.5
Supplementary feed types (%)				28.71	0.004
Maize	20.0	20.0	26.7
Sorghum	10.0	20.0	0.00
Food overleft	2.5	20.0	13.0
Maize and sorghum	27.5	5.00	33.3
Sorghum and Feed overleft	10.0	0.00	13.3
Maize and Feed overleft	7.50	35.0**	13.3
Maize, Sorghum and Feed overleft	22.5	0.00	0.00

* and** values across the rows are significantly different at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively.

Watering system

The major water source in the study areas is indicated below (Table 3). The study concluded that the pond was the major water source in Shegosh (47.5%) and Kebridahar (55%) whereas the borehole was the major water source in Shilabo (45%). But, in all study areas, water shortage was the main problem goat keepers reported. Most respondents in Kebridahar (48.5%) and Shilabo (52.5%) districts reported that goats watered once in two days. Most respondents in the Shegosh and Shilabo districts reported that water in the areas is salty, whereas in the Kebridahar district, most respondents report indicates water supplied to goats is clean and salty. Also, about 27.5% of respondents in the Shegosh district reported that water supplied to goats is clean and salty; but, it was reported that water quality is turbid and salty in the Shilabo district (27.5%).

Table 3. Water source and watering frequency.

Categories	Wereda
	Shegosh	Kebridahar	Shilabo	χ^2	P-value
Water source (%)				24.46	0.006
Borehole	22.5	42.5	45.0
Pond	47.5	55.0**	17.5
River	10.0	0.00	12.5
Pipe water	5.00	0.00	2.50
Pond and spring	5.00	2.50	7.50
Bore hole and pond	10.0	0.00	15.0
Watering frequency (%)				9.074	0.336
Freely available	0.00	2.60	0.00
Once a day	5.00	12.8	15.0
Once in two days	37.5	48.7	52.5
Once in three days	45.0	25.6	22.5
Once in four days	12.5	10.3	10.0
Water quality (%)				70.196	0.000
Clean	10.0	42.5	0.00
Turbid	2.50	5.00	0.00
Salty	40.0	2.50	62.5**
Smelly	0.00	5.00	2.50
Turbid and salty	20.0	0.00	27.5
Clean and salty	27.5	40.0	5.00
Salty and smelly	0.00	5.00	2.50
Distance to water point (Mean ± SE) km	1.625 ± 0.12	1.6 ± 0.093	2.0 ± 0.18

* and ** values across the rows are significantly different at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively.

Housing and herding system

As indicated in Table 4, most of the respondents in the study areas give shelter to their Goats. The housing system practised by most households was separate, which is imperative for protecting against zoonotic, important diseases.

Table 4. Housing system and herding practice (%).

	Wereda
	Shegosh	Kebridahar	Shilabo	χ^2	P-value
Day-time housing (%)				7.962	0.019
Separate house	60.0	67.5	87.5*
Thorn enclosure	40.0	32.5	12.5
Night-time housing (%)				0.721	0.697
Separate house	95.0	90.0	92.5
Thorn enclosure	5.00	10.0	7.50
Kid housing with adult (%)				15.64	0.000
Yes	37.5	32.5	2.5
No	62.5	67.5	97.5**
Why separately house kids? (%)				10.41	0.034
For safety	10.0	5.00	2.50
To prevent suckling milk	30.0	47.5	65.5*
For safety and to prevent suckling milk	60.0	47.5	32.5
Herding Practice (%)				2.68	0.262
Goats of HH run as the flock	65.0	72.5	55.0
Goats of ≥2 HH run as the flock	35.0	27.5	45.0
HH mix their goat (Mean ± SE)	1.741 ± 0.86	2.273 ± 0.273	1.58 ± 0.12

* and ** values across the rows are significantly different at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively.

Health care

Disease prevalence and access to veterinary services in the study district are indicated in Table 5. Disease prevalence across the three woredas was different as diarrhoea and parasite were the major diseases in Shegosh whereas parasite was the more prevailed disease in Kebridahar and Shilabo (Table 5).

Table 5. Disease prevalence and vaccination.

	Wereda
	Shegosh	Kebridahar	Shilabo	χ^2	P-value
Diseases prevail (%)				27.27	0.018
Diarrhoea	15.0	15.0	17.5
Parasite	22.5	22.5	25.0
Sheep pox	2.50	0.00	0.00
Anthrax	0.0	10.0	10.0
Coughing	5.00	20.0	2.50
Diarrhoea and parasite	27.5	20.0	5.00
Diarrhoea, parasite and Coughing	17.5	7.50	32.5
Diarrhoea and Coughing	10.0	5.00	7.50
Access to Vet. Service (%)				73.06	0.000
Government	25.0	15.0	60.0**
Private vet.	50.0	0.00	2.50
Shop/market	25.0	50.0	30.0
Local herbalist	0.00	2.50	0.00
Government and private vet.	0.00	32.5	7.50
Distance to vet. Service (Mean ± SE)	1.675 ± 0.12	2.95 ± 0.11	2.25 ± 0.12

* and ** values across the rows are significantly different at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively.

Breeding practice

Mating system

The study indicated that most respondents in study areas practised an uncontrolled random mating system, in which bucks from either their flock or neighbours were used for mating (Table 6). The mating system is natural and year-round, which favoured the inbreeding of goat populations in small flock sizes.

Table 6. Mating system.

	Wereda
	Shegosh	Kebridahar	Shilabo	χ^2	P-value
Breeding/mating system (%)				3.72	0.156
Controlled	7.50	20.0	22.5
Uncontrolled	92.5	80.0	77.5
Reason of uncontrolled mating (%)				24.9	0.015
Goat graze together	17.5	21.2	0.00
Lack of awareness	15.0	24.2	9.6
Insufficient breeding buck	2.50	0.00	0.00
Shortage of grazing land	7.50	9.10	0.00
Goats graze together, insufficient breeding buck	25.0	27.3	22.6
Lack of awareness, insufficient breeding buck	15.0	3.00	19.4
Goats graze together, lack of awareness, Insufficient breeding buck	17.5	15.2	48.4*

*Values across the rows are significantly different at P < 0.05.

Selection criteria for breeding buck and doe

The selection of breeding goats and selection criteria used for male and female goats are presented in Table 7. Across all the surveyed districts conformation of bucks was ranked as their first important criterion for the selection of breeding bucks. However, the size/appearance and milk yield of the doe as the first to second and second to first in different districts. In the Shegosh and Kebridahar districts, size/appearance is the first rank, and better milk yield is the second criterion. However, Shilabo district, better milk yield was the first ranked, and size/appearance was the second-ranked criteria for the selection of breeding doe. This might be due to the farmers being focused on family diets like milk.

Table 7. Selection criteria of dairy goat.

Selection criteria	Index
	Wereda
	Shegosh	Kebridahar	Shilabo
Buck
Appearance/conformation	0.408333	0.411765	0.372549
Colour	0.233333	0.203209	0.063725
Horns	0.008333	0.074866	0.00
Adaptability	0.008334	0.010695	0.009804
Growth	0.0875	0.02139	0.161765
Age	0.00	0.00	0.019608
Libido	0.0125	0.058824	0.22549
Ability to walk a long distance	0.00	0.04278	0.044118
Pedigree	0.241667	0.176471	0.102941
Doe
Size/appearance	0.4125	0.322222	0.294117
Colour	0.166667	0.066667	0.039216
kid survival	0.020833	0.022222	0.04902
kid growth	0.020833	0.033333	0.039216
age at first sexual maturity	0.025	0.00	0.044118
kidding interval	0.108333	0.166667	0.063725
twining ability	0.00	0.044444	0.04902
milk yield	0.125	0.233333	0.40196
ability to walk a distance	0.020834	0.011112	0.009804
Pedigree	0.10	0.10	0.009804

Index = Σ of [3× number of households ranked 1st+ 2× number of households ranked 2nd+ 1× number of households ranked 3rd] given for particularly valued feed source divided by Σ of [3× number of household ranked 1st+ 2× number of households ranked 2nd+ 1× number of household ranked 3rd] summed for all valued feed source.

Effective population size and inbreeding rate

The effective population size and inbreeding rate in Table 8 indicate goats in the study areas were not susceptible to inbreeding. Even though the inbreeding rate in the study areas was insignificant, the inbreeding rate in the Kebridahar district was relatively more than that of the Shegosh and Shilabo districts. This is because the number of breeding males in Kebridahar was less than breeding males in the Shilabo and Kebridahar districts. A severe inbreeding rate causes less genetic performance and disease resistance. This and inbreeding reduce variability in the population and make difficult improvement by selection. Thus, as much as possible, controlling the inbreeding rate is important to avoid or reduce its effect.

Table 8. Effective population size and inbreeding rate.

Characters	Wereda
	Shegosh	Kebridahar	Shilabo
Breeding buck	5.5	5.375	4.67
Breeding does	24.15	26.9	22.2
Nm	220	187	215
Nf	966	889	1076
Ne	716.76	618.004	716.78
ΔF	0.00067	0.0015	0.0007

Castration practices

Goat-keeping communities in the study areas practise culling practices for different purposes (Table 9). Castration is one of the methods used to cull unwanted goat, but more than 50% of households do not practices castration. Castration of buck as the response of households was practised for different purposes, mainly for improved fattening and then fetching better prices. The castration age of bucks in the study area was close to the age at first mating. If castration is practised at an earlier age (especially at the age of >3 months) buck will appear like does and this will reduce its price. Thus, castration at a mature age is unconditionally recommended.

Table 9. Buck castration and reason.

	Wereda
	Shegosh	Kebridahar	Shilabo	χ^2	P-value
Castration practice (%)				4.64	0.098
Yes	37.5	25.0	48.6
No	62.5	75.0	51.4
Reason of castration (%)				29.5	0.079
Control breeding	0.00	10.0	0.00
Improve fattening	13.3	20.0	5.30
Better temperament	0.00	10.0	0.00
Fetch better price	6.70	10.0	0.00
Control breeding, Better temperament	6.70	10.0	0.00
Control breeding, Improve fattening, Fetch better price	20.0	0.00	36.8
Unwanted traits	20.0	10.0	5.20
Control breeding, Improve fattening, Better temperament, Fetch better price, Unwanted traits	13.3	0.00	26.3
Control breeding, Improve fattening, Better temperament, Fetch better price	20.0	0.00	21.1
Improve fattening, Better temperament, Fetch better price	0.00	30.0	5.30
Castration age (Mean ± SE) in month	6 ± 0.24	7 ± 0.53	5.5 ± 0.4

Production and reproduction performance of goat

The reproductive and productive performance of the goat in the Korahey district is presented in Table 10. The average market age of goats in the Kebridahar and Shilabo districts was better than that of the Shegosh district. The report indicated that does reach market age earlier than a buck. The average age at sexual maturity of goats in the study areas was earlier in Kebridahar when compared with Shegosh and Shilabo districts. About 65.0% of does in the Shilabo district have twin birth type and 55.0% of the birth type in the Shegosh district was single and twin type (Table 10). Single birth type is advantageous for better growth rate as no competition for sharing doe milk. The average kidding interval reported by respondents indicated that goats in the study areas could give birth to offspring three times per two years on average.

Table 10. Production and reproduction performance of goat.

Wereda
Parameters		Shegosh	Kebridahar	Shilabo
Average market age in a month (mean ± SE)	Buck	9.4 ± 0.38	7.23 ± 0.23	7.88 ± 0.33
	Doe	8.73 ± 0.31	6.25 ± 0.24	7.6 ± 0.24
Average culling age due to old age in a year (mean ± SE)	Buck	5.53 ± 0.16	5.28 ± 0.2	7.35 ± 0.38
	Doe	7.12 ± 0.2	8.2 ± 0.29	9.55 ± 0.33
Average age at sexual maturity (mean ± SE) in a month	Buck	9.58 ± 0.29	8.17 ± 0.23	8.93 ± 0.33
	Doe	8.7 ± 0.29	7.15 ± 0.26	8.53 ± 0.29
Average age at first kidding (mean ± SE) in a month		12.7 ± 0.23	11.8 ± 0.25	12.3 ± 0.3
Average kidding interval (mean ± SE) in a month		6.1 ± 0.15	5.9 ± 0.22	7.63 ± 0.29
Average reproductive lifetime of does in a year		8.65 ± 0.18	9.75 ± 0.29	7.8 ± 0.3
Average number of kids per doe lifetime		11.1 ± 0.23	12.5 ± 0.24	11.6 ± 0.3
Birth Types (%)		Χ^2= 21.26		P = 0.002
Single		35.0	42.5	25.0
Twin		10.0	22.5	65.0**
Triple		0.00	2.50	0.00
Single, twin		55.0	32.5	10.0

**Values across the rows are significantly different at P < 0.01.

Discussion

Feed source and feeding management

The major feed source in the Shegosh, Kebridahar and Shilabo districts was natural pasture. This result is in agreement with the previous study (Tsegaye 2009) which reported natural pasture is a major feed resource because rangelands provide the major source of feed and an extensive system of grazing is the only grazing practice for goats in Metema Woreda. Similarly, natural pasture was the predominant goat feed in the Bati, Borena and Siti districts (Gatew 2014). Browse shrubs are the common feed source for small ruminants (Kocho 2007; Desalew 2008; Fikru and Gebeyew 2015; Kebede et al. 2016; Gatew et al. 2017). In the Bale district natural pasture is the main feed resource during the wet season for goats (Belete et al. 2015). According to Diriba and Urge (2020), 70% of respondents in the Adami Tulu district use the free grazing system for goats. In line with the current result, Fikru and Gebeyew (2015), Debele and Habta (2015) reported that free grazing is the dominant goat feeding system. In agreement with the report of Fikru and Gebeyew (2015) in the Deghabour district, the practice of supplementing sheep and goats with concentrate in the current study was not common. About 55.1% of Bati area owners provide additional supplementation, such as kitchen and milling residues, local grain, and oil seed cake, for their goats (Gatew 2014). The major water source for goats in the current study area was a pond which is supported by the finding of Tesfahun et al. (2017) in the Benatsemay district of the South Omo zone. Most respondents in study districts reported that goats watered once in two days. Thus, watering the goat once in two days in the study district indicates water was a major constraint. Even though water shortage was a constraint to goat keepers water quality was not a problem for them. This is advantageous as it could not cause severe water-borne parasites and no more cost for treatment.

Housing and herding system

Farmers in the study area use different types of goat houses and most respondents shelter goats separately from other livestock and to the main house. Sheltering goat spate from the main house may reduce health problems for members of the family due to zoonotic diseases, west and bad odour of the excreta. The primary purpose of sheltering goats might be to give cover at night and guard from harsh weather conditions, predators and theft in the studied area. Most goat keepers give shelter for their goats during nighttime in the current study area and in the Degehabur zone mainly to protect goats from predators like wild dogs in the areas (Fikru and Gebeyew 2015). During daytime housing in thorn enclosures was used more compared to night in close accordance with Tesfahun et al. (2017)’s report in the pastoral area of South Omo. Most households did not house kids with their dams to protect the kids from being tampered with by adult goats and protect them from the suckling of dams as milk is used for home consumption (Seid 2019) in the Chifra District of Afar region. In most pastoral including our study area the goat flock males and females were mixed and kids were separated to protect milk suckling, kids cannot move long distances for scavenging with adult goats. In contrast to the current result, Belete et al. (2015) state that 54.2% of the respondents in the Bale zone (Mada Walabu, Sawena and Rayitu districts) mix their goats with kids. This is used to reduce labour cost, favour year-round breeding and not to use milk for house consumption.

Health management

Diseases and health care were not the main concerns and constraints of goat keeper communities. Because goats from these areas were naturally adapted (nature selection) to the environment, they could not easily be susceptible to diseases, or they are resistant to diseases. This is advantageous for goat keepers as it reduces vaccine and treatment costs. However, some survey participants claimed that in Shegosh, parasites and diarrhoea were the most common ailments, whereas, in Kebridahar and Shilabo, parasites were more common. The major sheep and goat diseases and parasites were the occurrence of internal parasites, external parasites and pasturellosis disease (Afras 2019).

Mating system and selection of breeding goat

The majority of producers in the study area practised the selection of goats for breeding and their pastoralist production system led to an uncontrolled breeding system. The main reason for the uncontrolled breeding/mating system was goat grazing together, insufficient breeding buck and lack of awareness. The free-range scavenging/extensive management system favours such uncontrolled breeding. Random and year-round uncontrolled mating is also advantageous for goat keepers in that does would not miss the imperative estrus cycle (Saico and Abul 2007). According to the findings of Gatew et al. (2017), uncontrolled mating together with small flock sizes results in severe inbreeding.

Farmers have their own criteria for the selection of breeding goats, and the selection criteria used for goats are different (Yadeta 2016). For males, tail type, colour and height are given the most emphasis in selection. In the current study area, body size is the basic selection criterion for the breeding buck. This might be because larger animals, in particular, were preferred as they had a better growth rate and to improve the production and productivity of flocks through genetic makeup. In line with the current study, Gebrekidan (2018), Assen and Aklilu (2012) reported that a higher percentage of goat keepers use appearance as the main criterion during the selection of breeding bucks. The appearance of the buck is the first selected criterion in the Mada Walabu, Sawena and Rayitu districts (Belete et al. 2015) and is ranked first by Bati, Borena and Siti goat owners (Gatew 2014).

However, size/appearance and milk yield of doe as the first to second and second to first in different districts. This might be due to the farmers’ focus on milk as a family diet. Gatew (2014) reports that milk production performance were first ranked doe selection criterion in Siti pastoralists or agro-pastoralists, and size or conformation was the first in Borana pastoralist and agro-pastoralists. The most important selection criteria for does were body size, milk, twining ability and kidding interval. Whereas body size, growth rate and libido are selection criteria for breeding buck (Abraham et al. 2017).

Castration

Culling is a management practice used to improve the overall productivity of the flock, and the reasons for culling are different for different production systems and agro-ecologies (Belete et al. 2015). Castration is one of the methods used to cull unwanted goats, but more than 50% of households in the current study did not practise castration. Castration of buck practised by households was for different purposes, mainly to remove unwanted goats, improve fattening and then fetch better prices. In line with the current study, Afras (2019) reported the main reason for the castration of rams and bucks was to fatten and to avoid mating of the same flock. This report was in contrast with the finding of Dhaba et al. (2012) in the Oromia region of the Illu Abba Bora zone, which states that most respondents practice castration of their goats and sheep.

Production and reproduction performance of goat

The average market age of goats in the Kebridahar and Shilabo districts was as good as the Shegosh district may be due to management differences. The average market age of male and female goats differs, which may be a result of differing management practices and the doe's prolific nature. The current finding was in contrast with the report of Belete et al. (2015), which stated that the mean marketing age for goats in the Bale zone was 11.67 0.38 months for males and 12.33 0.4 months for females. But the average culling age due to old age was earlier for bucks when compared with does. This may give breeding bucks a chance to produce more offspring. Average age at sexual maturity in the Kebridahar, Shegosh and Shilabo districts had no significant difference compared with the reproduction performance of goats in the southern region of the former Sidama zone (Wonsho, Dale and Loka Abaya districts), where the overall average age at first mating of goats was 9.76 + 0.24 months (Assefa et al. 2011).

The average kidding interval reported by respondents indicated that goats in the study areas could give birth to offspring three times per two years on average. Goats in the Shilabo district show little delay relative to the Shegosh and Kebridahar districts. This kidding interval was not due to a lack of breeding bucks because flock structuring by separation is unknown and bucks are herded together in study areas that favour year-round mating. But management practices play a crucial role. The average kidding interval of goats in study areas was earlier compared with Metema goats, which were13.6 ± 2.44 months, as reported by Tsegaye (2009) in the Amhara region. This may be due to genetic and management differences. The kidding interval in the study district was less than that of goats in the Bale zone reported by Belete et al. (2015).

Conclusion

The result suggested that natural pasture was the main feed source for goats with free-range feeding systems in all selected study districts. Maize and Sorghum are commonly used as supplementary feed to their goats during the feed shortage season. Pastoralists have their own criteria for the selection of breeding goats and the conformation of bucks and better milk yield of doe were ranked as the first important criterion for the selection of breeding goats. Uncontrolled breeding systems because of goat grazing together, insufficient breeding buck and lack of awareness were practised in study areas. Castration is one of the methods used to cull fewer producing animals to block bucks from mating and for better body condition in the study area. Therefore, further research on the management practice of goats in different districts of the Korahey zone is necessary to recommend.

Authors’ contributions

Data collection: Wondimagegn Tadesse, Mintesnot Tafese, Halimo Abdikadir; Formal analysis: Mintesnot Tafese, Wondimagegn Tadesse; Writing original draft: Mintesnot Tafese, Wondimagegn Tadesse; Writing review and editing: Mintesnot Tafese, Wondimagegn Tadesse.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author.