Zimpapers Logo

Obert Chifamba, Agri-Insight

THE coming in of Cotton Company of Zimbabwe (Cottco) as a sponsor in cotton production seems to have saved the rocking lint industry’s ship from possible sinking, amid indications that private sector support has waned significantly.

Unconfirmed reports say private sector sponsors have dropped from a high of 18 at one time to less than 10 at the moment, which is not healthy for the industry, as an influx of them stimulates competition and competency.

Cotton farmers should remember that their health is critical, especially when they handle chemicals during pest and weed control. — Picture: Kudakwashe Hunda

While the majority of contractors have reportedly blamed their withdrawal on the need to avoid losses, it is possible that they may have failed to stand the heat, after the Government roped in Cottco to rescue farmers from unscrupulous private sector players that were preying on them year-after-year.

It may also make sense to argue that farmer-friendly policies by Government may have crowded these private sector players out of the scene, as the loopholes they had been exploiting to fleece farmers have been plugged.

If it is a matter of unfriendly policies, I am sure the Government will pick it out and review them so that the private sector can return to the fray and work with the farmers.

A committed involvement of the private sector will lessen the burden on Government and allow it to redeploy resources to other sectors and boost development and production too.

The exciting thing about the 2019-20 cotton crop is that it is doing well, especially after the recent rains that have brought back smiles on the faces of most farmers and stakeholders.

Of course, it is still too early to talk about this year’s hectarage, as the Government’s crop and livestock programme is underway throughout the country, but stakeholders are already expecting a good harvest.

Though harvesting and marketing of the crop are still months away, it is critical to remind producers of a few but important things, which they seem to forget every season.

Quality is important and as its promotion and maintenance start way before the marketing season begins.

In most cases, lint gets contaminated during picking, as most growers do not care to shut out foreign bodies from entering the produce despite them being trained to do their activities properly.

Some seek to increase the weight of their lint by deliberately including foreign bodies in the bales.

Of course, things will always come to a head when such chicanery is discovered during marketing.

This practice has in the past resulted  in farmers getting poor grades for the crop.

It is prudent for farmers to do their own preliminary grading of the lint to get a rough idea of the grades which their crop will fetch at the market.

This helps eliminate the possibilities of rude shocks if their crop performs poorly at the market.

And while this diligence is going on, farmers should remember that their health is critical, especially when they handle chemicals during pest and weed controls.

The biggest problem every year has been side marketing!

Attracted by better prices, farmers have in most cases thrown honesty out of the window and sold produce to buyers that would not have sponsored the production of the crop, igniting lengthy legal battles that have always ended with the farmers having property attached.

In this case, farmers have been shooting themselves in the foot, as all contractors are not comfortable doing business with dishonest people.

But charity begins at home.

Most private sector contractors have been accused of giving farmers raw deals, as they have reneged on contractual obligations and offered farmers packages less than what they would have agreed on at the signing of contracts.

Such contractors have sadly been reported to be tormenting farmers, pushing them to make wholesome repayments yet some of the services included in the contract would not have been provided.

The signing of contracts requires both parties to be honest with each other and when it comes to prices, which in most cases have been a source of discontent, farmers and contractors may need to work together and come up with reasonable figures guided by international codes of pricing.

Contractors should give farmers the opportunity to reveal their costs of production and factor that in when fixing prices to promote viability that allows continued production of the white gold.

Contractors have in most cases stuck to prices decided internationally, but seem to forget that the cost of production for most, if not all, crops have always been higher compared to our regional or international counterparts because high input and service costs have rendered most cropping activities unviable.

It is folly to compare the impact of cotton prices on our farmers against global farmers as most of the developed countries, the bulk of which are involved in the fixing of the prices have subsidies for their farmers,
which makes production costs affordable .

The low prices their crops fetch on the market leave farmers with reasonable profits.

It is laudable that Government has introduced free cotton inputs through the Presidential Free Input Scheme and has offered attractive prices compared to other crops.

Disgruntled farmers have since dumped tobacco because of prices and the sanity Cottco brought.

Free inputs have benefited resource-constrained farmers while the prices Government is offering have made cotton farming attractive.

It will not be surprising to see cotton farming returning to yesteryear levels, thanks to this intervention by Government.