Handling and Hygienic Production Practices of Goat Milk in Degahbur District of Jarar Zone, Somali Regional State, Ethiopia ()
1. Introduction
Milk is the lacteal secretion of the mammary glands of a mammal and plays an important role in human nutrition throughout the world where it promotes growth and maintenance of body tissues [1]. It is the most complete food product of animal origin providing more essential nutrients (protein, energy, vitamins and minerals) in significant amounts than any other single food [2].
Milk from good hygienic production practices and the udder of a healthy dairy animal contains very few bacteria. But poor hygiene introduces additional bacteria that cause the milk to spoil very quickly. To ensure that raw milk remains fresh for a longer time, good hygiene practices are required during milking and when handling the milk afterwards [3].
Poor hygiene, practiced by handlers of milk and milk products, may lead to the introduction of pathogenic micro-organisms into the products [4]. Hygienic practices are the major factors to produce safe and quality products for consumption with minimum microbial contamination, and thereby reducing loss of products and improving the position of smallholder milk producers in marketing of quality milk and milk products [5] [6].
Mishandling and disregard of hygienic measures by milk handling personnel may enable spoilage microbes to come into contact with milk and in some cases to survive and multiply in sufficient numbers to reduce the shelf-life of milk and cause spoilage of milk before it reaches its final destination [7] [8]. High spoilage is reported frequently in milk coming from lowland regions due to high ambient temperatures prevalent in the area combined with lack of cooling facilities as well as transport, scattered distribution of producers and long distance to markets, which make it difficult to deliver milk (especially raw milk) to urban centers [9] [10]. The hygienic levels exercised during milk handling practices also influence the levels of contamination of raw milk with pathogenic bacteria as well as the types of pathogens present in raw milk and expose consumers to serious milk-borne public health risks like typhoid, paratyphoid, tuberculosis, dysentery, gastrointestinal illness and others [11].
Moreover, unhygienic practices performed during production and postharvest handling expose goat milk contamination with harmful microorganisms, and cause spoilage of milk before it reaches its final destination points as well as pose public health risk to consumers [12]. The risk of milk including goat milk contamination with harmful micro-organisms is high for milk produced in developing countries like Ethiopia as their milk production practices is traditional type which lacks appropriate hygienic measures [13]. The risk is high in lowland regions especially in pastoral and agro-pastoral areas of tropical regions. This is mainly due to high ambient temperatures prevalent in the area combined with a lack of cooling facilities, scattered distribution of producers, long distance to markets and lack of transportation [14] [15].
Therefore, detail investigation of handling and hygienic production practices is very important to identify existing hygiene related problems in order to reduce the risk of public health as well as to improve the livelihood of smallholder farmers by engaging them in quality milk production and handling of dairy products in the district. However, there is a limited study undertaken so far to assess handling and hygienic production practices of goat milk in Degahbur district of Jarar Zone. Therefore, this study was carried out to assess handling and hygienic production practices of goat milk in Degahbur district of Jarar Zone, Eastern Ethiopia.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Description of the Study Area
The study was conducted from January to August 2020 in Degahbur district of Jarar Zone, Somali Regional State, Ethiopia (Figure 1). It is located at 8˚13' North of longitude and 43˚34' East latitude at the distance of about 160 km south
of Jigjiga town. The altitude of the district is 1044 meters above sea level. It has mean minimum and maximum temperatures of 11˚C and 33˚C, respectively. The mean annual rainfall and humidity of the area range from 300 to 400 mm and 31% to 36%, respectively. The rainfall pattern is erratic and has uneven distribution. The farming system in the area is primarily pastoralists, who mainly keep livestock, particularly goat, camel, cattle, and sheep; and to some extent crop (like sorghum and maize) production is also practiced in the district. According to CSA [16] the total human population of the district is estimated at 150,000 of whom 85,000 are men and 65,000 are women.
2.2. Study Design
A cross-sectional study was undertaken to collect relevant information on handling and hygienic production practices of goat milk in Degahbur district, Ethiopia.
2.3. Sampling Technique and Sample Size
Degahbur district was stratified into pastoral and agro-pastoral production systems. Each production system was further stratified into rural kebeles (RKs, Kebele = smallest administrative unit in Ethiopia). Then, a total of four kebeles (2 from pastoral & 2 from agro-pastoral production systems) of high goat milk production potential were purposively selected for this study. Finally, thirty goat milk producer households were selected randomly from each rural kebele. As a result, a total of 120 households were selected and involved in this study.
2.4. Data Collection
After stratification and identification of milk producer households, focused group discussions were held with key informants (such as milk producers having good experience on the subject, community leaders and experts) in each production system to generate information on demographic characteristics of goat milk producer households as well as on their goat milk production and handling practices. The resulting information was then used for the development of a survey questionnaire which was pre-tested before administration, and this was followed by questionnaire survey. Moreover, field observations were conducted to gather some information that was not addressed in the interviews and was not described properly during the questionnaire survey.
2.5. Data Analysis
The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS, version, 26.0). Descriptive statistics were used to quantitatively express the responses of the study participants with respect to their demographic characteristics as well as goat milk production and handling practices in the study area. Chi-square test was employed to examine the differences among categorical variables. The differences were considered to be significant at the level P < 0.05. The data related to purposes of keeping goats and constraints of hygienic goat milk production were evaluated using index formula.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Demographic Characteristics of the Households
Majority of the respondents in pastoral (63.3%) and agro-pastoral (88.3%) production systems were females (Table 1). The average age of the respondents was between 30-45 years of age, which accounted for 54.2% followed by 46 - 60 years of age that counted for 27.5%. Moreover, this study showed that majority of the respondents in pastoral (93.3%) and agro-pastoral (78.33%) production systems were illiterate (Table 1). This finding is in agreement with the previous study of Hassen et al. [17] who reported a higher proportion of illiteracy for this area. The role of education is obvious in affecting household income, technology adoption, demography, health and the whole socio-economic status of the family as well [18]. Moreover, lack of education and training on hygienic milk production and postharvest handling practices expose raw milk for microbial contamination [19].
The information generated though key informants interview and focus group discussion revealed that none of the households received a training on hygienic milk production procedures and standards. Thus, households need to get basic education and training on hygienic milk production procedures and standards.
![]()
Table 1. Demographic characteristic of the respondents (%).
*Means followed by different superscript letters in the same row are significantly different at P < 0.05, SD = Standard deviation.
The average family size of the respondents in the study area was 6.60 ± 2.16 (Table 1). This finding agrees with the report of Hassen et al. [17] who reported an average family size of 6.89 ± 0.30 in Degahbur district, Ethiopia.
3.2. Purpose of Keeping Goats
Goats were kept in the study area for several reasons, including income generation, milk production, meat production, social & cultural functions, and rituals (Table 2). The primary purpose of goat keeping in pastoral and agro-pastoral production systems in the study area was for income generation through sell of live animals and the cash obtained might be used to buy food, clothes and other family needs. The second main reason of goat keeping in the pastoral and agro-pastoral was for meat production followed by milk production. This finding is in line with the report of Kocho et al. [20] who indicated that goats are mainly kept for milk and meat production. Similar to this, Zereu et al. [21] indicated that the third main purpose of goat keeping in Humbo District of Wolaita Zone, Ethiopia was for milk production.
3.3. Housing and Cleaning Practices
Housing provides opportunities to protect animals from predators and theft and to keep them safe. All of the respondents in the study area housed their goat in a separate open kraal which is enclosed of thorned acacia trees. The finding is in agreement with the report of Fikru and Omer [22] in which all of the farmers in Awbare district housed their goat in an open kraal. Similarly, Legese et al. [23] reported that farmers in Shinile district used open-top fences for housing all animals. The purposes of goat housing in the study area were to protect them from predators, extreme climate at night, theft and ease the husbandry practices.
Majority of the respondents (55.8%) in the study area were cleaning goat house (kraal) once in two days; while, the remaining 24.2% and 20% of the respondents clean the kraal once in three days and daily, respectively (Table 3). The study indicated that, all of the observed kraals have no roof and constructed on earth floor, with poor drainage condition and difficult to clean and often were contaminated with mud, and urine especially during the rainy seasons. This undoubtedly results in soiling of teats, udders, flank and other body part of
![]()
Table 2. Purposes of keeping goats in the study area.
milking goats while they are lying in muddykraals, and cause the microbial contamination of milk during milking especially when udder and teats were poorly cleaned before milking.
3.4. Milking and Hygienic Practices during Milking
All respondents in the study area milk their goats in the open kraals which have no roof and walls (Table 4). This indicates that sometimes milk can be contaminated with muck and animal dung mainly the rainy season which could raise the possibility of milk contamination & spoilage.
None of the respondents practiced udder washing prior to milking (Table 4). This could be due to lack of awareness and may become possible source for the contamination of milk with harmful microorganisms. Lack of udder cleaning practices before start milking will allow entry of spoilage and pathogenic microorganisms into milk while milking and failure to wash udder before milking undoubtedly expose milk for microbial contamination [24]. Provision of milk of good hygienic quality is desirable from consumer’s health point of view.
Furthermore, the result showed that about 88.3% and 83.33% of pastoralists and agro-pastoralists, respectively, did not wash their hands prior to milking (Table 4). This is comparable with the study of Hassen et al. [17] who reported that majority of pastoralists (93.3%) and agro-pastoralists (75%) Degahbur area did not wash their hands before milking. FSA [25] indicated that milk producers should properly wash udders and their hand before start milking as such practices
![]()
Table 3. Cleaning practices of goat house (%) in the study area.
![]()
Table 4. Milking frequency and hygienic practices during milking in the study area.
highly minimizes milk contamination with harmful microorganisms. According to Kurwijila [26], using un-cleaned hands while milking highly increases the microbial content of milk. This is because such practices help pushing of visible and non-visible dirt found on improperly cleaned hand into the milking container while milking.
The study further noted that goats were milked inside their open kraals of no roofs and wall and don’t have milking barn. As a result, farmers in the study area were milked their animals in undesignated poorly maintained barn which predisposing milk to contamination and spoilage. Milking in open area may allow contaminants entry in to the milk and can be cause for high spoilage rate [27]. The milking area must minimize the risk of contamination from any source, including dust, flies, birds or other animals.
3.5. Milking Equipment, Smoking and Cleaning Practices
All of the respondents in the study area were using plastic equipment for milking and milk handling which are not appropriate and can contribute milk contaminate and spoilage (Table 5). In addition, the information generated though key informants interview and focus group discussion revealed that the recommended and appropriate milk equipment were not used in the area due to accessibility and affordability. Similar to this Omore [19] indicated since stainless steel milk containers are expensive, milk producers in Kenya use plastic containers
![]()
Table 5. Milking equipment, smoking and cleaning practices in the study area (%).
which are difficult to clean and disinfect and thus it might contribute to poor quality of milk. The leftover of milk and other dirt particles within the container may result in the contamination of milk. Omore et al. [19] also reported that lack of formal training and use of plastic containers are the main factors that contribute to the low quality of raw milk sold by producers and informal milk traders.
The use of plastic equipment is not advisable as the surface is easily scratched by the common cleaning systems, which makes it difficult to clean and provide hiding places for microorganisms. This allows the multiplication of microorganisms during the intervals between milk handling, and become potential source for microbial contamination of milk during milking and handling [19]. Aluminum cans and stainless steel equipment are the preferred milking utensils [19] [28].
All respondents in the study area were fumigating milking equipment with smoke from burning stems of specific plant species such as Sogsog (Acacia ethaica), Kadi (Blanites galabra), Kariir (Solanum carense), Wigir (Olea Africana) (Table 5). It has been indicated that smoking of milk equipment is done to develop desirable flavour in the milk (Table 5). Similarly, Hassen et al. [17] reported that majority of the respondents in Degahbur district were using smoking to improve taste and flavor as well as to increase shelf life of milk. The current finding also agrees with the finding of Abebe et al. [29] who reported that the purpose of smoking was to improve the taste and flavor of milk products, as well as to increase the shelf life of the product in Ezha district of Guragezone. Moreover, the finding also in line with the finding of Negash et al. [30] who reported that about 93.3% of respondents smoked their milk handling equipment to improve flavor and aroma of milk and milk products in mid rift valley of Ethiopia. Smoking of milking equipment with herbs is used in pastoral communities of Kenya to disinfect milking equipment, to improve the flavor of milk, and to extend their shelf life [31].
Moreover, smoking inhibits growth of microorganisms in milk as it has anti-microbial activity, and thus, increases the shelf life of the milk [32]. Similarly, Fita et al. [33] indicated that, smoking milk vessels by using burning wood chips of specific trees and shrubs has advantage of imparting a special taste and odour to the product, and disinfect the vessels, thus reducing the numbers of microorganisms and thereby extending the shelf life of the product.
3.6. Major Constraints of Hygienic Goat Milk Production
Comparably, limited awareness on barn hygienic, poor hygienic production, source of washing water, and disease and parasites were the major constraints of milk hygienic in study area. The result is in agreement with the report of Ruegg [34], who reported that practices that expose teat end to wet and muddy pens increase the risk of occurrence of mastitis and hence milk contamination with micro-organisms.
Barn hygiene, poor hygienic production practices,, source of udder washing, disease & parasites, and lack of extension service were ranked as the main goat milk hygienic constraints in the study area, respectively (Table 6). Barn hygiene (with an index value of 0.35) was ranked as the first most important problem contributing for contamination of milk in the study area.
Poor hygienic production of milk (unclean udder due to lack of washing the udder before milking, unclean hands, poor personal hygiene and health status, unclean milking containers due to lack of clean water, unclean milking sites) is more likely to cause milk-borne diseases and the natural antimicrobial factors can only provide a limited protection against specific pathogens for a short period. This is in line with Mohammed et al. [24] who reported milk-borne disease is higher when the milk is consumed in its raw state as commonly practiced by the local producers. Tollossa et al. [35] noted poor handling practices for instance unclean milking equipment as one of the major constraints of milk commercialization in Ethiopia. In addition, Yeserah et al. [36], who reported poor hygienic condition for instance unclean milking equipment as one of the major constraints of milk in Ethiopia.
4. Conclusion and Recommendations
According to the study, the majority of respondents in both production systems in the study area were illiterate, which indicates that they had a limited awareness and knowledge of hygienic milk production procedures. The goats were milked inside open kraals which could raise the possibility of milk contamination and spoilage. Majority of the respondents didn’t wash their hands and the udder of the animal prior to milking, indicating low community awareness and knowledge of hygienic milk production and handling practices. Plastic equipment which is difficult to clean and can increase milk contamination and spoilage was used for milking and handling. The main obstacles to producing hygienic goat milk in the area were poor barn hygiene and poor production procedures. In general, it can be concluded that the goat milk production and handling
![]()
Table 6. Ranking of major goat milk hygienic constraints in the study area.
Index = [(5 for rank 1) + (4 for rank 2) + (3 for rank 3) + (2 for rank 4) + (1 for rank 5)] divided by the sum of all constraints of camel production mentioned by the farmers, R = Rank.
practices used in the study area were unsanitary, which might be primarily due to the community’s lack of awareness and knowledge as well as a lack of supporting infrastructure. Therefore, the concerned governmental and non-governmental organizations should place a high priority on the improvement of hygienic practices by carrying out various relevant development interventions, such as increasing milk producers’ awareness and capacity on hygienic milk production practices, improving the health of goats, and providing the necessities for milk handling.
Acknowledgements
The authors are thankful to Jigjiga University.