Mecanismo de Acción 3-5

In view of the above, challenges encountered during the FTLRP were manifest in the fact that the majority of beneficiaries including women acquired land through active participation during FTLRP. Figure 25 show that 30 per cent women participated in the

95

FTLRP hence they had to walk long distances in excess of 15 kilometres from their CAs to the farm although some were pregnant and/or had health problems. With lack of financial resources, hiring, feeding and paying people to clear the land was a challenge because the land was a jungle of thorny trees at the time of land allocation. The farm is located a relatively dry area and water was a problem to those actively participating in the land invasions.

Figure 25: Challenges encountered during FTLRP

The initial problem during farm invasion was from the farm manager who was hostile and harassed people to the point that one woman indicated that her husband was detained and was later rescued by war veterans. While the government actively supported land invasions, war veterans allocated land based on first come first serve basis. Although the farm manager was hostile in the initial stages, he eventually caved in and assisted those who invaded the farm with water because this is a drought-stricken area with serious water problems. A total of 66 per cent respondents felt there were no serious problems encountered during the farm invasion. Those who were allocated land, one of the major problems was to clear the thorny trees in preparation for building dwellings and cultivated land.

Challenges encountered after the FTLRP included: insufficient grazing land, shortage of water, conflicts due to overlapping land and mining permits, family or kinship conflicts, lack of sufficient government support, problems with government officials and local leaders and customary laws not aligned to secular laws.

Inhabitants of the Sub-division A of Clonmore Farm complained that grazing land was far for livestock, about 12–15 kilometres, because people in the villages to the north of the

96

farm abandoned their old fields and invaded the grazing lands forcing livestock to graze in faraway places to the north. To compound the problem, the invasion of grazing lands reduced the size of grazing land and its carrying capacity for the livestock forcing them to travel long distances to get proper and adequate pastures.

The area is in a drought-prone zone hence water shortages were prevalent. The main source of water for both domestic and livestock were boreholes but because they were over utilised, they broke down frequently, forcing people and livestock to walk long distances. During the dry season, livestock walked even longer distances to get water from faraway places and were likely to get lost or stolen. Livestock thus drunk water in places that were in excess of 10 kilometres away during the dry or drought season.

Mining emerged as one of the lucrative off-farm income, generating economic activity due to widespread discovery of small-scale gold deposits. There were fierce contestations for mining rights and women faced serious challenges to access mineral deposits because this depended on getting mining permits and having appropriate management skills. Women also faced widespread police harassment and disputes with local people especially men. These problems were caused by overlapping permits between land ownership and mining rights. Women keeping the land for their relatives were worse off because they had problems with the owners of the land if they mined the gold mineral. Mining also brought the problems of gulleys and dongas because people dug mines and neglected to rehabilitate the land once the minerals were exhausted. The Mining Company operating in one of the villages replaced the borehole with tap water and the Mining Company ration water to surrounding households forcing people to go for as many as three (3) days without water. Police were also a problem because they harass people for mining licences and seize their mining proceeds and women were worse off during these harassments.

There were a number of family related problems that were being encountered by women in the new settlements because historically under customary law, the person who inherited was the heir (indlalifa in Ndebele or mudyi wenhaka in Shona) and usually this was the first boy in the family regardless of age. He was supposed to take the responsibility of his deceased father and take care of his mother and siblings. He could however decide not to care for them. This traditional practice has since been superseded by the Administration of Estates Amendment Act Number 6 of 1997 which allows the surviving spouse in a customary marriage/union and family to inherit. This law applies to those married under the Customary Marriage Act chapter 5.07 (formally Chapter 238), if the deceased and surviving spouse lived a customary law lifestyle prior to death and lived together as husband and wife. Some of the problems included one instance where the husband passed on but pension could not be processed for the widow because the husband’s family didn't want to help with processing of the death certificate. In another instance the husband died and the widow had problems registering the stand in her own name because the stand was in the mother-in-law's name. Yet in another case, when the husband died relatives wanted to repossess the stand but the case was resolved in Mberengwa by the DLC and Ministry of Lands and she was processing the change of ownership of the stand into her own name on

97

the permit. One widow explained that her house burnt down and she had no one to assist her to rebuild it. Some women lamented that their extended families did not assist with cattle rearing or to farm or help them plough the land including support with inputs like building materials, farming equipment, cattle, food and seeds.

The majority of single women lamented lack of sufficient government support because land allocation was based on participation. In some cases beneficiaries discovered that their stands were stolen by others who colluded with government officials. Some beneficiaries felt that government needs to ensure fairness on land allocation. Beneficiaries also pointed out lack of government support and access to inputs like building materials, farming equipment, cattle, food, fertilizer and seeds. They also felt that there was limited government support with resources specifically targeting women. Single women complained that the government was not providing targeted welfare support with food and seeds, including farming. Many people lacked farming resources and support from government and development partners. Cooperatives and payment in kind (which is called food-for-work) was required to sustain single women during drought periods because in most instances they didn’t have partners who helped them. Lack of water and farming equipment strained women as they failed to maximise their outputs because they spent much of their time travelling long distances to fetch water and collect firewood. Lack of government support in clearing of allocated land and invasion by wild animals also a strained women and much of the land remains under-utilised. Some women had to lease cattle (Muraga) for cultivating but the terms were not favourable to women. Some of the women were unfortunate because their livestock died and had to struggle during the farming season because of lack of farm equipment hence they failed to effectively work on their allocated land. Due to lack of financial support from government to pay fees for children of single women, some of their children were dropouts from school, forcing them into gold panning at very young ages (below the legal age of employment). Government focused its support on vulnerable households especially the elderly and indigent households through welfare that included farm equipment, seeds and crop markets and did not target women. There were problems during re-pegging of stands resulting in many single women complaining that their stands were reduced in sizes.

Some women beneficiaries indicated that they were having problems with government officials and local authorities especially headmen who they accused of reducing the size of their allocated stands. Women complained that some men were getting stands because they were government officials or employees, and also felt men were still discriminating against them on various aspects and activities, hence the need for protection from local officials. One woman indicated that her mother gave her the land but the headman and government officials colluded and registered the stand in someone else's name.

Some of the single women reported that they had health problems such as swollen legs; blindness and accident induced health problems hence they found difficulties performing certain tasks without assistance. This results in food shortage and lack of adequate harvest

98

as they could not engage in income generating activities hence they were appealing for assistance.

Customary laws and gender biases were still affecting women because some of the single women indicated that they were discriminated on gender basis because their stands didn’t have stand numbers and their pleas for this problem to be resolved were not being considered. Also the sizes of some of the single women’s stands were reduced by headmen after their husbands died. Some of the single women indicated that their cattle were stolen and they were not getting any help in this regard from local leaders.

Figure 26: Challenges encountered after FTLRP

Figure 26 illustrate that 46 per cent of women felt there were no serious challenges after the FTLRP maybe because they were excited at getting land, 26 per cent reported challenges with access to inputs, services and farm equipment because they were eager to maximise their production, 8 per cent complained about lack of government support, 7 per cent reported challenges with customary law, and 12 per cent reported other challenges that included kinship and family related problems.