Temitayo Olumofe
In the heart of Nigeria’s countryside, the quiet rhythm of rural life is often interrupted by a sound that signals trouble: the lowing of cattle straying into fields of ripening crops. For generations, herders and farmers have shared these lands, but in recent years, their coexistence has become increasingly fraught. Tensions flare when cattle trample maize or yams, and livelihoods hang in the balance. It’s not just about animals and agriculture—it’s about families, traditions, and survival.
On January 24, 2025, the Ondo State government was forced to intervene after cows allegedly destroyed crops worth N265 million on the farmlands managed by the Owena Dam Farmers Association. The crisis, which threatened to spiral into violence, was a stark reminder of the high stakes involved in the ongoing debate over anti-grazing laws.
Anti-grazing laws, also known as anti-open grazing laws, are designed to prevent herders from allowing their cattle to roam freely across farmlands. These laws aim to stop the destruction of crops, reduce violent clashes, and create clear rules for land use. The movement gained momentum as conflicts over land and resources escalated between nomadic pastoralists and sedentary crop farmers, especially in Nigeria’s Middle Belt and southern states.
As one study explains, “Grazing laws have been implemented by several Nigerian states in response to escalating violent conflicts between cattle herders and crop farmers in the country. Specifically, starting in 2016, 13 Nigerian states…enacted what is known as ‘Anti-Open Grazing Laws’ (AOGLs), commonly referred to as ‘grazing bans.
These laws typically prohibit livestock from grazing in certain areas or during specific periods, aiming to protect crops and allow grasslands to regenerate. States like Benue, Ondo, and Ekiti have been at the forefront of this legislative push.
For many farmers, the laws are a lifeline. “We have lost too much to these cows—our food, our income, our peace,” said a farmer from Ondo State after the January incident. The destruction of 25% of the association’s farmlands was not just a financial blow; it was a threat to the community’s food security and future.
Supporters of anti-grazing laws argue that they are necessary to protect farmers’ investments and ensure food security. Crop destruction by cattle can wipe out an entire season’s work, leaving families destitute. With agriculture forming the backbone of rural economies, any threat to crops is a threat to survival.
As Adetunji Adeleye, Commander of Amotekun Corps in Ondo State, put it, No individual is above the law. Our agency is responsible for ensuring compliance with government policies, particularly those related to open grazing. We operate within the law and do not tolerate false narratives instigating conflict.
Clashes between herders and farmers have resulted in thousands of deaths and widespread displacement in recent years. By setting clear boundaries and rules, anti-grazing laws seek to reduce these violent encounters. In Benue State, for example, the government formed a 10,000-strong security outfit to enforce its anti-grazing law, hoping to stem the tide of violence.
Unregulated grazing can lead to overgrazing, soil erosion, and land degradation. Proponents argue that anti-grazing laws encourage more sustainable land use, protecting the environment for future generations.
The Public Lands Council and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association in the United States have praised efforts to strengthen controls on grazing, describing proposed regulatory updates as “a long-overdue correction”. Their Nigerian counterparts echo similar sentiments, emphasizing the need for order and accountability.
For pastoralists, cattle herding is not just an occupation—it’s a way of life passed down through generations. Anti-grazing laws threaten this tradition by restricting their movement and access to pasture. The Coalition of Pastoralist Associations in Nigeria has condemned what it calls “divisive strategies that aim to destabilise pastoralist communities”.
A report by Nigeria’s Ministry of Livestock underscores the importance of pastoralism: “Pastoralism and agro-pastoralists provide over 80% of the country’s meat and 90% of its milk, compared to just 10% from commercial ranches”. Restricting open grazing, critics argue, risks undermining a vital part of the national food supply.
Research suggests that rather than reducing violence, anti-grazing laws may simply shift the problem elsewhere. “Our findings indicate limited effectiveness of AOGLs in curbing herder-farmer conflicts, suggesting instead a displacement of conflicts. It also appears that the laws have led to a slight increase in overall conflict within the states implementing them,” according to a recent academic study.
When herders are pushed out of one state, they often move to neighboring areas, potentially sparking new disputes. This displacement can also heighten tension between communities and make it harder to find lasting solutions.
Enforcing anti-grazing laws is easier said than done. In many cases, security agencies lack the resources or local knowledge to monitor vast rural areas. As one observer noted, “These enforcement measures have failed to stop either transhumance or the accompanying violence”.
There are also concerns about fairness and due process. Herders have sometimes accused security agencies of targeting them unjustly, while farmers complain of slow or inadequate enforcement.
Pastoralist groups argue that the laws are discriminatory and ignore the realities of rural life. “Resolving these disagreements is important. Pastoralists across Africa are vital for meeting national food needs…their increasing vulnerability to issues from vigilantism to mobility restrictions threatens the long-term sustainability of this critical livelihood system and ancient way of life,” warns a coalition of pastoralist associations.
The January 2025 incident in Ondo State highlights the complexities of enforcement. After the destruction of N265 million worth of crops, the state’s Amotekun Corps quickly summoned both herders and farmers for a meeting. The aim was to prevent violence and promote dialogue, but the underlying tensions remained.
Adeleye, the Amotekun Commander, emphasized that detaining herders and their cattle was lawful and intended to facilitate dialogue. “We operate within the law, and do not tolerate false narratives aimed at inciting conflict,” he said.
Yet, these efforts have not always succeeded in preventing further incidents. In Benue State, despite the creation of a large security force, open grazing and violence have persisted. Some critics argue that without addressing the root causes such as land scarcity, poverty, and climate change, laws alone cannot solve the problem.
Experts suggest that a more comprehensive approach is needed. This could include:
Ranching and Modern Livestock Management: Encouraging herders to adopt ranching, where cattle are kept in enclosed areas, could reduce conflicts. However, this requires significant investment in infrastructure, training, and support.
Community-Based Solutions: Local mediation and conflict resolution mechanisms have shown promise in some areas. Bringing herders and farmers together to negotiate land use agreements can build trust and prevent violence.
Government Support: Both farmers and herders need access to resources, credit, and technical assistance. The creation of Nigeria’s Ministry of Livestock was hailed as a step in this direction, though its effectiveness remains to be seen.
Environmental Restoration: Sustainable land management practices can help restore degraded pastures and reduce competition for resources.
Some policymakers advocate for a national approach to grazing regulation, rather than a patchwork of state laws. A Bill currently in Nigeria’s parliament seeks to ban open grazing nationwide, reflecting the deep divisions over the issue.
Meanwhile, in the United States, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is preparing to overhaul its grazing regulations for the first time in decades, focusing on “strengthening controls to prevent unauthorized grazing” and better addressing environmental impacts. The debate there, as in Nigeria, centers on how to balance the needs of ranchers, farmers, and the environment.
The debate over anti-grazing laws is about more than legal codes or economic interests—it’s about finding a way for different communities to share the land and thrive together. As one Ondo farmer put it, “We just want to farm in peace, and for our children to have a future”.
The path forward will not be easy. Laws can set boundaries, but real progress will depend on dialogue, compromise, and a willingness to see humanity on both sides of the divide. As Nigeria and other countries grapple with these challenges, the lessons learned here could help shape a more peaceful and prosperous future for all.