• Like
Rural Poultry Projects In Kerala
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Rural Poultry Projects In Kerala

  • 20,368 views
Published

Review of Rural Poultry Projects in two Panchayaths of Thrissur in Kerala

Review of Rural Poultry Projects in two Panchayaths of Thrissur in Kerala

Published in Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
20,368
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
590
Comments
0
Likes
9

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. 1 THE RELEVANCE OF BACKYARD AND SMALL SCALE POULTRY PROJECTS TO SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOOD IN TWO PANCHAYATHS IN THRISSUR DISTRICT Deepa G Menon THESIS Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the course APPRECIATION PROGRAMME ON SUSTAINABILITY SCIENCE (Programme Code: APSS) AN IGNOU INITIATIVE FOR OUR SUSTAINABLE FUTURE IN COLLABORATION WITH M S SWAMINATHAN RESEARCH FOUNDATION, CHENNAI 2009
  • 2. 2 Indira Gandhi national Open University, Maidan Garhi, NewDelhi
  • 3. 3 The relevance of backyard and small scale poultry projects to sustainable livelihood in two Panchayaths in Thrissur District
  • 4. 4 CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY This is to certify that the project report entitled “The relevance of backyard and small scale poultry projects to sustainable livelihood in two Panchayaths in Thrissur District” submitted to the Indira Gandhi National Open University, Maidan Garhi, New Delhi – 110068 in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the programme is an original work carried out by Deepa G Menon with enrolment no 093569130 under the guidance of Dr P Anitha. The matter embodied in this project is genuine work done by the student and has not been submitted either to this University or to any other University / Institute for the fulfilment of the requirement of any course of study. Date:25/05/09 Name Address & Designation of the student Name and Address of the Guide Deepa G Menon Dr P Anitha Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Department of Poultry Science, Centre for Advanced Studies in Kerala Agricultural University, Poultry Science, Mannuthy, Thrissur, Kerala Kerala Agricultural University, Mannuthy, Thrissur, Kerala
  • 5. 5 Acknowledgements I would like to express my deep and sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. P Anitha Associate Professor Department of Poultry Science, College of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, Mannuthy. Her understanding, encouraging and personal guidance have provided a good basis for the present thesis. I wish to express my warm and sincere thanks to Professor E Nanu, Dean, College of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, Mannuthy for permitting me to join this course. I am deeply grateful to my Professors Dr. A Jalaludeen and Dr. P A. Peethambaran, Centre for Advanced Studies in Poultry Science for their detailed, constructive comments and important support throughout this work. I owe my most sincere gratitude to Dr U S. Ramachandran, whose ideals and concepts have had a remarkable influence on my entire career. I am thankful to Dr P D Suresh, Dr Baburaj,Dr Joy George, who gave me untiring help during my work. I warmly thank my colleagues Dr. Anish D, Dr Geetha R, and Dr. Radhika for their valuable advice and friendly help. The extensive discussions around my work and interesting explorations in operations have been very helpful for this study. My warm thanks are due to Ambili, a good friend and colleague who was kind enough to help and support me.
  • 6. 6 My sincere thanks are due to the official referees for their detailed review, constructive criticism and excellent advice during the preparation of this thesis. I also wish to thank Dr. Baburaj, Dr Sethumadhavan, Dr Joy George, for their continued support and guidance has been of great value in this study. During this work I have collaborated with many colleagues for whom I have great regard, and I wish to extend my warmest thanks to all those who have helped me with my work. I owe my thanks to my family members, my sons Roshan and Aaryan. Without their encouragement and understanding it would have been impossible for me to finish this work. My special gratitude is due to Mr. Musa Isaacs and Mr. Farook Qureshi for their constant encouragement and affection.
  • 7. 7 Sl No Table of contents Page 1. INTRODUCTION 11 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 19 3. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY 29 4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 31 5. RESULTS & DISCUSSION 36 6. RECOMMENDATIONS 75 7. CONCLUSION 79 8. SUMMARY 81 9. REFERENCES 84 10. APPENDIX 86
  • 8. 8 LIST OF TABLES Table no Title Page 1 Year-wise Estimate of Egg production 13 2 Profile of Thrissur District 17 3 Observed frequencies and percentages 36 of Variables studied among farmers 4 Production performance of standard 48 birds 5 Observed frequencies and percentages 51 of variables among integrators 6 Details of poultry projects in 58 Panchayath-I 7 Details of poultry projects in 61 Panchayath-II 8 Economics of backyard poultry units 67 9 Economics of broiler production 69 10 Ratings of constraints faced by poultry 70
  • 9. 9 farmers 11 Constraints felt by broiler farmers 71
  • 10. 10 LIST OF FIGURES Table no Title Page 1 Family size of the respondents 37 2 Experience of the respondents in 38 poultry rearing 3 Details of pullets distributed in the last 58 five years 4 Details of pullets distributed in the last 62 five years in Panchayath-II 5 Split up of cost of production in 68 backyard units 6 Ratings of constraints faced by poultry 70 farmers 7 Ratings of Constraints felt by broiler 71 farmers
  • 11. 11 Preface This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the course Appreciation Programme on Sustainability Science submitted to Indira Gandhi National Open University. The matter embodied in this project is genuine work done by me and has not been submitted to this University or to any other University / Institute for the fulfilment of the requirement of any course of study. This thesis is the final work of my study of done in collaboration with the Department of Animal Husbandry, Local self governments, Government of Kerala. It serves as documentation of my project work, which has been made from my detailed discussions with veterinarians, poultry farmers, kudumbasree members, trainees, entrepreneurs, and subject matter specialists. The study has been a part of my job as a scientist at the Centre for Advanced Studies in Poultry Science, Mannuthy. The thesis consists of ten chapters which cover various aspects of rural poultry production scenario in some Panchayaths of Thrissur district. My supervisor on the project has been Dr P Anitha of the Centre for Advanced Studies in Poultry Science, Faculty of Veterinary & Animal Sciences of Kerala Agricultural University. The thesis has been made solely by me and there has been an attempt to provide in this work, references to similar studies done elsewhere.
  • 12. 12 INTRODUCTION
  • 13. 13 1. INTRODUCTION Poultry provides employment to about 1.5 million people and contributes about Rs. 350 Billion to the National GDP. Though poultry development in the country has taken a quantum leap in the last three decades, the growth has been mainly restricted to commercial poultry. Rural backyard poultry, contributing nearly 30% to the national egg production, is the most neglected one. This is in spite of the fact that their poultry eggs and meat fetch a much higher price than that from commercial poultry. For the poorest of the poor and the landless, the major issues are food security and risk spreading through subsidiary income. Backyard poultry requiring hardly any infrastructure set-up is a potent tool for upliftment of the poorest of the poor. Besides income generation, rural backyard poultry can improve food self-sufficiency. Small- scale poultry production has the potential to stimulate economic growth of resource poor households. Poultry rearing can enhance household food security and contribute to poverty reduction through provision of supplementary food, income and employment. Poultry production in Kerala remains largely as a backyard venture with virtually no modern units. These backyard birds have low to medium productivity. There is, however, a market demand of 5063 million eggs in the State against the availability of a meager 1197 million eggs. The State food security project aims to enhance Egg
  • 14. 14 production in the State from the base level of 1196 (Million Nos.) to 2395 (Million Nos.). Its implementation requires coordination and integration of government departments, local governments, and several other institutions. Increasing the productivity of small-scale farmers will improve the availability and nutritional content of food, and enhance food security generally among the poor. There are a number of community groups and individuals engaged poultry production projects. This research will focus on finding out how the projects are functioning, their socio economic status, profitability, constraints and strategies that can be employed to improve their success. The per capita availability of egg in Kerala is very low at 72 eggs/ year and that of poultry meat is at 0.9 kg/year against the world average of 147 eggs and 11 kg poultry meat /year, which is the level recommended by the National Institute of Nutrition. The Census figures indicate that the chicken and duck population in Kerala reduced to half over a period from 1996 to 2003. However, there has been a significant improvement in the population of other species of poultry especially quail and turkeys. An overall 47% reduction in the poultry population was observed during the period. One of the biggest problems is the non- availability of land. Kerala is already placed in India among the most thickly populated States. The agricultural land is also on the decline, which translates to a higher cost of feed
  • 15. 15 ingredients. There are no feed companies in Kerala which make specific poultry feeds. Therefore, many a times, feed has to be procured from other States. The availability of quality chicks is another problem in Kerala. Moreover, the cost of labour compared to neighbouring States is another constraint. For poultry farmers, loan/credit facilities are far from satisfactory. Furthermore, small poultry units lack insurance coverage. Over and above, Government has imposed a 12.5% Value Added Tax. Low production potential in the stocks maintained by the backyard farmers and small holders is yet another problem. However, the up gradation has to be gradual as the birds need to retain their hardiness, required for their scavenging nature and survivability in harsh rural conditions. Proper feeding and other managemental aspects will also help improve the productivity of the birds. ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA The Department being the nodal agency for poultry activity provides a nucleus for the implementation of schemes like SGSY (Ministry of Rural Development) as per their requirement. This Department has taken up in association with Indian Council of Agricultural Research a targeted program for up-gradation of low-input technology birds Poultry Development activities in the State aim at increasing the production of egg, production and distribution of chicks and good quality poultry meat, impart training on Scientific Poultry Rearing and Management,
  • 16. 16 encouraging unemployed youth and members of weaker sections of society to take up poultry rearing and gain self employment, assisting women to start backyard poultry units etc. To carry out the development activities there are nine poultry farms, one Broiler Farm, One Duck Farm, One Central Hatchery and two Intensive Poultry Development Blocks under the Department. Table 1 Year-wise Estimate of Egg production Sl. No. Year India % change over Kerala % contribution previous year of Kerala 1 2001-02 38729 5.72 2002 5.2 2 2002-03 39823 2.82 1347 3.4 3 2003-04 40403 1.46 1277 3.2 4 2004-05 45201 1.87 1197 2.9 5 2005-06 46166 2.13 1196 2.6 6 2006-07 50663 9.74 1199 2.4 Source: Economic Survey and Department of Animal Husbandry In a country like India where the average level of nutrition is very low, chicken and eggs, which are not expensive, can contribute considerably towards improving diet as a source of animal protein. As per estimates available, the per capita availability of egg is very low at 41 eggs /year and poultry meat is 0.9 kg/year against the world average of 147 eggs and 11 kg poultry meat /year. Government of India has set a target for achieving production of over 52 billion eggs by 2011-12, at a growth rate of 4.3 per cent.
  • 17. 17 Poultry farming for egg production relaying on purchased feed are uneconomic in Kerala. Poultry rearing on commercial lines is therefore largely confined to broiler production. The egg production which reached 2054 million in 1999-2000 is continuously showing declining trend and in 2005-06 it reached a lower level of 1196 million recording a drastic fall of 41.75per cent. During 2006-07 the situation is changing and a 0.25% increase over the previous year is recorded and egg production increased to 1199 million Nos. The per capita availability of egg based on production during 2003-04 is only 39/ year and from 2004--05 to 2006-07, it further declined to 36/year. The per capita consumption of egg during 2006-07 is 66/year. The gap is filled by importing eggs from neighbouring State. An alarming factor to be noted in this regard is that over the last three years the domestic production of egg is declining to a lower level than that of 1984 - 85. The decline in poultry population and hike in cost of feed were the major reason for the decline in production. During 2006-07, 1021 million numbers of eggs is imported to the State. The export during the year is 4.3 million numbers Backyard poultry system has good potential in the state. Around 8-10 lakh chicks are being introduced every year in the state. Apart from Animal Husbandry department and Kerala Agricultural University, KSPDC, a few NGOs and private farms are also involved. But the system is yet to develop to the required extent. The
  • 18. 18 functioning of the department farms is to be strengthened to foster the backyard poultry system. On the contrary, in India as a whole it was transferred into a vibrant scientifically organised industry. BROILER PRODUCTION Poultry production has undergone rapid changes during the past decades due to the introduction of modern intensive production methods, new breeds and improved preventive disease control and bio-security measures. Nearly 10-15 Private hatcheries, working as satellite hatcheries contribute to the local production of chicks and chicken meat. Approximately 40000-50000 direct employment is generated through broiler production. Apart from this, around 30000-40000 MT of chicken meat, which includes broilers, layer chicks, broiler and layer parent, culls etc. is being imported from neighbouring states. PEOPLES PLAN CAMPAIGN The State of Kerala flagged off the people’s plan campaign in 1997. Poultry projects are being implements right from the start of the campaign. The greatest challenge to any Government is alleviation of poverty in the rural areas of the State. Kerala State Planning Board, initiated a 'Peoples' Campaign' in order to improve the Panchayaths and municipal bodies to draw up the Plan Schemes within their respective areas of responsibility. Following are the objectives of the campaign
  • 19. 19 • To evolve economic planning with peoples' participation and mobilization of local resources in the development process by involving stake holders. • To effect substantial relaxation of beauracratic control and thus the empowerment of people. One of the important features of people's planning is that the major thrust of the Panchayaths has been focused on productive sectors mainly agriculture and other activities followed by social sectors and infrastructures. THRISSUR DISTRICT PROFILE Thrissur is the cultural capital of Kerala State. Profile of the District is depicted in Table 2 below. The district lies between 100 101 X 100 461 latitude and 760 541 longitude in the central part of Kerala and is surrounded by (a) Arabian Sea on the West (b) Coimbatore District of Tamil Nadu and Palakkad district of Kerala in the east (c) Malappuram and Palakkad district in the north and (d) Ernakulam and Idukki district in the South. It has an area of 3032 Sq km. The land holding is predominantly marginal. The district has moderate infrastructural facilities. It has a busy railway station and is well connected to other districts and states. Two national high ways NH 47 and NH 17 passes through the district. The economic development of the district in the recent past has been more conspicuous in the tertiary sector. The flooding NRI remittance has helped development of new town
  • 20. 20 ships and growth centres at different parts of the district. The district has a well-developed bank network Canara Bank, the lead bank of the district has been doing exceedingly well as the leader. Among the public sector banks SBT, SBI and Canara bank have a major presence. Thrissur is an industrially and commercially developed district. The district has basic infrastructure facilities and as per the latest census the district has a population of 29.74 lakhs of which, 71.8 percent live in rural areas, the district has 92.56% literacy rate and a high percentage of skilled persons. Table 2 Thrissur Districts’ Profile
  • 21. 21 Table -2 District Came Into Existence 1 st JULY 1949 District Head Quarters Thrissur Geographical Area 3032 Sq.km Parliamentary Constituencies 3 Assembly Constituencies 14 Taluks 5 Villages 254 Corporation 1 Municipalities 6 District Panchayath 1 Block Panchayath 17 Grama Panchayaths 92
  • 22. 22
  • 23. 23 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
  • 24. 24 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Studies in Bangladesh by Rahman and Hossain, (1995) showed that an intervention with poultry production created a relatively small decline in the overall poverty with the proportion of extreme poor declining from 31 to 23% and the moderate poor stagnating around 29%. `Todd, (1999) and Dolberg, (2001) opined that poultry activity is to be considered as a learning process for the beneficiaries, but it has to be realised that one activity alone is not sufficient to lift a family out of poverty. The opportunities called as the enabling environment must be available for the beneficiaries to establish a small poultry enterprise, to minimize the risks and to take up other income generating activities. Jensen (2000) observed that about 70 % of the rural landless women are directly or indirectly involved in poultry rearing activities. He found that homestead poultry rearing is economically viable. The poultry sector could be one of the most productive sectors if these women are properly trained, supported with credit and other necessary inputs and made to operate under supervision of extension workers. Poultry rearing is suitable for widespread implementation as it is of low cost, required little skills, is highly productive and can be incorporated into the
  • 25. 25 households work. Poultry is the only activity in which a large number of landless women can participate. In the small-scale poultry units, which support the landless, production per bird may be low, but distribution of benefits will be more equal and have great human development impact. Poultry rearing is a culturally acceptable, technically and economically viable. Moreover, the ownership of poultry is entirely in the hands of women. Mack et al (2000) opined that in order to increase egg and poultry meat production there is a need for increased investment guided by policies and institutions that promote equitable, sustainable, and environmentally friendly long- term outcomes. As Backyard poultry make an important contribution to poverty mitigation, it should be considered as any strategy to improve rural livelihoods. Right policies and investment, well designed and participative development programmes can overcome the constraints faced by the smallholder poultry producers. These intensive production methods place high demands on proper health, hygiene and management and require only a small, but very skilled labour force. This type of production has also been adopted in developing countries but the scope of adoption has been limited due to the high inputs and skills required. The progress in industrial poultry production methods has however had little effect on subsistence poultry production methods in rural and peri-urban areas, where inputs into disease control remain minimal. Although this is
  • 26. 26 true in general, there are some geographical hot spots where industrial poultry production and small holder village poultry systems have both massively grown in close geographical proximity, notably in Thailand, Indonesia, and China. Del Ninno et al., (2001) described in their paper that rural poultry production will not protect poor people in Bangladesh against the natural disasters that hit the country from time to time, but it can help them build up their asset base. Jensen and Dolberg (2002)advocated for using poultry as a tool in poverty alleviation. An enabling environment must be established by providing access to feed, vaccine, vaccinations services, micro-finance, marketing and other inputs and services. A village group, composed of members of socially equal status, is an excellent entity to disseminate improved technology, a cost-effective entity to disseminate extension messages, and a secure entity for disbursement of loans. Karlan, (2002) opined that an enabling environment would give all the villagers access to poultry farm input supplies and services; pave the way for disbursement of micro-credits in a cost-effective way; facilitate easier formation of associations through formalised village livestock groups; help people acquire the skills that are required for a business set-up ., form
  • 27. 27 the basis for a marketing organization for farm products and can be used by other NGOs, having the same target groups, to implement other development activities. Dolberg (2003) reviewed poultry as a tool in poverty alleviation focusing on experiences from Bangladesh but survey and project work that has been undertaken in India. Animal husbandry and agricultural departments’ extension programmes are hardly known or used by most poor people for whom the poultry work is relevant. The work in Bangladesh is closely linked to the presence of NGOs and their capacity to reach out to poor people. Micro-credit has been an important component in the interventions that the NGOs undertake and it is difficult to distinguish between the benefits from micro-credit and the benefits from poultry production in Bangladesh. In India, there are many NGOs that are much closer to people than the government extension services, but few of them have any poultry expertise. in some States, the commercial sector has a strong presence. He stresses that project ‘models’ need to be adapted to the conditions prevailing in different countries. Gondwe et al (2003) found that rural poultry is raised and utilized by about 80 percent of the human population, primarily situated in rural areas and occupied by subsistence agriculture. Different poultry species are raised, mostly
  • 28. 28 indigenous to the area, except chickens, where traces of Black Australorp breed can be identified The paper describes a community-based project that aims to contribute to food self- sufficiency among smallholder farmers through promotion and improvement of poultry species in an integrated system without changing the cultural and farming system Distribution of flocks by age groups was in favour of old birds (over 52 weeks) in chickens and ducks and growers (20-30 weeks) in pigeons. This showed that farmers keep their birds for a long time. The proportion of chicks and ducklings less than ten weeks old was small. This suggests high mortality rates caused by diseases and predators. This age group is vulnerable and needs care. In pigeons the number of squabs is low since this is the group that is mostly consumed. Growers, mature and old pigeons are used for breeding. Inbreeding within flocks is probably occurring because of the lack of a cockerel-exchange system and record-keeping. The major constraints to poultry production were outbreaks of Newcastle disease among chickens in the months of September to December every year; predators that fed on pigeons, chickens and ducks; and poor housing and prolonged weaning periods for chickens and ducks. There is also haphazard sharing of breed stock among relatives, friends and others, within the village rather than between villages. Poultry in rural areas could play a role to contribute to the nutritional status of the people in these areas.
  • 29. 29 Bujarbaruah and Gupta (2005) reported that a flock size ranging from 25-250 birds are reared across the country under the village poultry system. They have low production potential with only 40-80 eggs per year but are less susceptible to most of the common diseases requiring less veterinary care. In order to meet the deficiency gap in poultry meat and egg sectors, adequate and sustained efforts will have to be made to improve the production efficiency of the rural poultry which has been responsible to produce 40% of meat and 44% of egg requirement in the country. Average productivity from around 75% of the indigenous poultry population is 60-70 eggs per year per bird. The distribution of desi birds per square km is 71 with an average holding of 2.59 indigenous birds per family i.e. a production of 2.59 X 65 eggs = 168 per family per year. With an average family size of 5.5 in the region and projected requirement of 90 eggs per person per annum (50% of WHO recommendation), the requirement per family is 5.5 x 90= 495 i.e. a deficiency of 327 eggs per family. For the development of the region through family poultry, the need therefore is to increase the production potential of the indigenous birds through improvement measures like Sound and systematic breeding programs with improved breeds developed for backyard purpose. Slow but steady replacement of the existing indigenous birds with lower production potential with improved breeds like Vanaraja / Giriraja was recommended.
  • 30. 30 Mapiye and Sibanda (2005), in a study carried out in Zimbabwe revealed that on an average, each household had a flock size of 30 ± 6 chickens. Chickens that received full feed supplementation had highest flock sizes, hen and chick numbers. About 40.5 % of deaths recorded were due to predation, 30.2% due to disease, 8.8% due to accidents, 8.6% due to parasites and 12.9% due to unknown causes. Although 88% of the households were male-headed, women owned 95% of the chickens. Female-headed households had higher chicken flock sizes and lower mortalities than male-headed households. Women dominated in feeding (43.5% of the households), watering (51.2%) and cleaning (37.2%). Men mainly dominated in shelter construction (60%). Housing, feeding and health systems were identified as opportunities, and predation, diseases and chick mortality as constraints to the expansion of village chicken production. Adequate disease control, reduction of chick losses, improvement of husbandry practices and implementation of gender sensitive projects were recommended. Rai et al (2005) studied the poultry production in Andaman and Nicobar Islands and found that majority of eggs in the market come from hens kept in semi-intensive or backyard systems in rural areas. Poultry keeping has a pivotal role in the economy of rural farmers. Of late there has been an increasing awareness among the farmers to adopt diversified agriculture, including livestock and poultry. Poultry flock size in the villages varies from 10-50. Women,
  • 31. 31 assisted in some cases by children, play key role in this sector, and they are main owners and managers of family poultry production. The birds are reared either under free-range system or backyard or semi intensive system. The owner sometimes provides supplemental feed like rice, wheat and paddy. The amount of food provided to the birds depends on the financial status of the farmers and egg laying capacity of the birds. Constraints analysis of backyard poultry in Erode, a district of TamilNadu done by Baskaran et al(2005), it was observed that the farmers predominantly had medium level (31-38) of constraints, while inferior number of respondents had low (< 30) and high (> 39) level. The results of correlation analysis revealed that out of 11 socio-economic characteristics, education, experience in backyard poultry farming, possession of backyard poultry birds and contact with extension agency had significant negative relationship with the constraints faced by backyard poultry farmers. Further, the regression analysis revealed that all the 11 socio-economic characteristics put together contributed to the extent of 81.20 per cent towards constraints level which was found to be highly significant (P < 0.01) and the characteristics namely, occupation, experience in backyard poultry farming, possession of backyard poultry birds and contact with extension agency had significant negative influence on constraints level among the respondents
  • 32. 32 Krishna Rao (2005) recorded that poultry are inseparable from mankind and in the rural scenario they do not need any land, are easy to manage, regularly lay eggs, disease resistant and well adapted to the harsh environment. With better nutrition, their egg production can be stepped up substantially. Only a good Night Shelter need to be provided to them. With all these attributes poultry farming in the rural environment can be a powerful tool for poverty alleviation and social justice. To the rural poor this can be Rainless Harvest with egg production and stock multiplication proceeding unhampered irrespective of rain or drought. It is women that are largely involved in poultry farming. In every village market and fairs poultry and eggs are major commodities. Huq and Mallik (1998) found that rural women in Bangladesh use poultry as a tool in poverty alleviation and concluded that poultry development has potential for capturing the inequitable distribution of income and employment in rural areas. Women could operate and manage broiler, layer and duck farms efficiently with a high return on the investment. Poultry production on a smaller scale like in the are useful to improve the native backyard poultry under scavenging and semi-intensive systems, where women traditionally play the most important role. Lack of quality feed supply, Lack of vaccines especially RD, Infectious Bursal Disease (IBD) and Marek’s disease, Low price of dressed
  • 33. 33 broilers and eggs were pointed out as the constraints faced by them. Singh and Jilani (2006) conducted a study in Garhwal, Himalayas with sample size of 100 backyard poultry farmers and found that most farmers belonged to old age category, having medium family size, low annual income and high social participation. Among the constraints perceived non- availability of day old chicks/lack of suitable germplasm, Infrastructure facility, high price rate of day old chick, lack of technical know-how, non-availability of vaccine and medicines, Government policy and credit facility of farmers were ranked as most important. The total improvement of this sector needs proper planning, creation of adequate infrastructure and monetary support. To make backyard poultry rearing a profitable venture the farmers should be adequately trained in scientific poultry rearing. Mandal et al (2006) studied the Backyard poultry farming in Bareilly district of Uttar Pradesh, India and found that the respondents were predominantly young, had low level of education, belonged to Muslim religion and were from the medium sized nuclear family. Agricultural labour was the major occupation; they had marginal land and medium livestock holding with more than 6 years of poultry farming experience. The average flock size was 5 birds and they reared birds in free-range/backyard system with little supplementary feeding. The production level was very low. Natural hatching
  • 34. 34 was the main source of chicks. No systematic care was taken with regard to the diseases and vaccination of the birds was also not carried out in any of the villages surveyed. Direct marketing was prevalent in the area although middlemen existed. The major constraints identified were high incidence of poultry diseases, lack of suitable germ-plasm and attack by predators. Choprakarn and Wongpichet(2007) reviewed the information on indigenous chickens in Thailand, describing the production systems, management, conservation and utilization. Their production systems have been sustainable and about 6 million households, or 50 percent of Thais, keep poultry at home. Each family produces 30–50 birds of marketable size annually, which represents 100– 120 million birds for the country as a whole. These chickens kept as one cockerel and three to five hens per household. Flock size varies through the year, as it depends on the hatching rate, the availability of natural feed, the effects of endemic diseases, and the amount of time that the farmers have available to take care of their birds. Periods of seasonal change are critical times of high mortality; about 30–70% of birds in a flock die annually. About 50–70 % are raised for home consumption; the rest are for sale to provide cash income. Few are used for cultural and religious activities.
  • 35. 35 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY
  • 36. 36 3. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY In spite of the progress in agriculture, India still faces a big challenge in job creation and maintenance of food security and women’s role in farming is still inadequately acknowledged. With increasing urbanisation and sky-rocketing of land prices everywhere due to population explosion and allied factors back-yard poultry units have vanished to a great extent from the middle-class and lower middle-class and lower middle-class people leaving poultry largely in the hands of rural poor in single digit numbers only who can only maintain these birds through a system of foraging and scavenging. To these deprived sections of our society Poultry constitute instruments of social justice and measures for poverty alleviation. It is estimated that 78% of India’s economically active women are involved in agriculture. Across the poor farming communities, care of animals is the women’s domain, but not in the rich families. Rural poultry sector contributes nearly 30% of the national egg production in India and is the most neglected one. The rural households normally maintain the desi birds under scavenging or semi-scavenging conditions. During the past three decades, the popularity of scavenging chicken has reduced drastically due to low production of the native chicken used in this system.
  • 37. 37 Against this background of poultry ownership there are only two major groups of Poultry keepers, the economically advanced commercial farmers and the economically poor rural farmers, labourers etc., who supplement their meager income by raising a few desi chickens. It may therefore be appropriate to term the poultry raised by the urban elite as Urban Poultry and the poultry raised by the rural poor the bulk of which belong to the desi group as Rural Poultry. Government of Kerala has implemented several poultry projects in the past and especially after the advent of the peoples plan campaign. It is expected that such projects will continue to be implemented in the future. There is the need to evaluate the success of these projects and to suggest measures to improve them. In this context a study has been undertaken to critically examine the after effects of poultry distribution projects in two important Panchayaths in Thrissur District. Along with this, an evaluation of integrated poultry units (broilers) prevalent in many parts of Thrissur will also be done to get an idea about their performance and feasibility. This study will provide information on the profitability of these projects will act as a stimulus to attract more entrepreneurs to this field. Opinion of experts in this field will be collected to enlist the main problems faced by
  • 38. 38 poultry farmers and also the pitfalls in the programmes taken up previously. The findings of the study will help the local level planners to critically evaluate the projects implemented in past and restructure the future poultry projects as needed. This will result in better profitability and streamlining of poultry production in the District. The outcome of the study will be improved food security, more sustainable use of natural resources and increased income for the rural poor.
  • 39. 39 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
  • 40. 40 4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Keeping in mind the limitations of the various ongoing schemes and taking into account the need to have a deeper insight into the requirements of the rural poultry sector with focus aimed at the poorest of the poor the study was completed in two important Panchayaths of Thrissur District. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 1. To analyse the situation of poultry rearing in the two Panchayaths 2. To evaluate the poultry projects implemented in the two Panchayaths during the past 5 years. 3. To determine the socio-economic development registered if any consequent to these projects. 4. To investigate the profitability of backyard and small scale poultry projects. 5. To determine the constraints faced by the poultry farmers. 6. To develop strategies to improve the success of poultry projects. METHODOLOGY
  • 41. 41 Structured interview schedule was used to conduct the situational analysis of the two Panchayaths. Thirty households in the two Panchayaths were covered under the study. The households were selected at random. The variables as perceived by the rural poultry owners were recorded in the schedule prepared for the purpose of the study. The rank position of the constraints was decided on the basis of frequency distribution against each constraint. Data available with the Veterinary, Local self governments and Rural Development Departments were collected and evaluated. Ten experts in the field and ten small scale poultry production unit owners were identified and information was gathered from them. A total of 30 respondents were selected from the two Panchayaths by purposive sampling technique. Data collected through personal interview was categorized and tabulated. The data was then subjected to standard statistical analysis by finding the mean. Correlation and multiple-linear regression analysis by taking the total constraints score as the dependant variable and the chosen socio- economic characteristics of backyard poultry farmers as independent variable.
  • 42. 42 Variables studied with respect to rural poultry farmers (a)Gender (b)Family size (c) Occupation (d)Experience (e)Flock Size (f)Management Practices (g)Feeding system (h)Flock Health (i)Diseases (j)Production particulars (k) Preferences of beneficiaries (l)Self help groups (m)Cost of production Descriptive research was used in the study of integrated poultry units so as to obtain a complete and accurate description of the schemes and the problems there in. Items of observation would include • Description of the project • Cost of production • Problems faced • Profitability Socio economic development in terms of improvement in the following variables was also evaluated. • Increase in income • Improvement in the skills • Trainings received
  • 43. 43 • Job satisfaction • Improvement in the nutritional status of the households
  • 44. 44 RESULTS & DISCUSSION
  • 45. 45 RESULTS & DISCUSSION The results are expressed as answers to six major objectives and depicted below followed by a brief discussion of the same. 5.1. Situation of poultry rearing in the two Panchayaths 5.1.1 General overview Most of the households rear village chickens under scavenging system mainly as a source of income (39%) and food (36%). It could be seen that women own and mange most of the flocks (54%). But chicken meat is only consumed when important guests visit the family. Most farmers (59.5%) prefer chicken with brown plumage color mainly because it sells faster at the market. 5.1. 2 Variables observed are depicted in the Table 3 below Variables Category No. of Percentage respondents Gender Male 11 36.67 Female 19 63.33 Family size <4 14 46.66 5-7 11 36.67 >7 5 16.67 Major Others 29 96.67 Poultry Rearing 1 3.33 Occupation Experience in <1 3 1.00 years 2-5 11 36.67 >5 16 53.33 Flock Size <5 5 16.67 6-10 15 50.00 >10 10 33.33 Table. 3 Observed frequencies and percentages of variables
  • 46. 46 5.1.2.a Gender It could be seen that a good majority of the respondents (63.33%) were females where as only 36.67% were males. The person in charge of the poultry unit in these houses was identified as the respondent in all of the cases. 5.1.2.b Family size The data revealed that 46.67% of the respondents had a nuclear family with a family size less than four, whereas 36.67 % had a family size between five and seven. A 16.67 % lived as a joint family with family size above 7. The graph representing family size of the respondents is given as Fig 1 . Family size of the respondents 50 46.67 40 36.67 30 Series1 % 20 16.67 10 0 <4 5-7 >7 Number of individuals Fig 1 Family size of the respondents 5.1.2.c Occupation A vast majority (96.67 %)of the respondents considered poultry rearing as a subsidiary occupation. Though most of the respondents belonged to the farming community, with
  • 47. 47 agriculture as their major means of livelihood, only one farmer did not have any other means of livelihood. 5.1.2. d Experience The study revealed that 10.00 % of the respondents were having less than 1 year experience in poultry farming. A 36.67 % of the respondents had 2-5 years experience, whereas a majority (53.33%) had more than 5 years experience. Years of Experience in Poultry Farming 10.00 53.33 <1 2-5 >5 36.67 Fig 2 Experience of the respondents in poultry rearing 5.1.2. e Flock Size Average flock per household was eight birds with a sex ratio of four hens for one cock in around 60% of the households evaluated. Scavenging space is the criteria behind the decision of flock size. About 16.67 % of the households reared less than 5 birds, 50.00 % reared less than 10 birds and 33.33% reared more than 10 birds. Most of
  • 48. 48 the families (63.33 %) did not hatch eggs using a broody hen. Chicks were brought at day old stage and above in 36.67% of the households. Pullets and male birds were also purchased as growers below 2 months of age. At least one broody hen was always kept to maintain the flock. Rarely did they hatch eggs regularly. Some (19 %) households did not have a cock. About 65% of the families opined that they purchased chicks only from reliable sources or through the local veterinary hospital/ dispensaries. 5.1.2. f Management Practices Most of the farmers housed the birds in their backyard. A temporary shelter was constructed in all the households to provide shelter to the birds. Around 70 % of the households made shelters with wooden planks. None of the households were following intensive system of management. All the respondents were using semi- intensive system of housing. Around 42% of the respondents were aware of homestead cages. No bedding material is provided in the poultry houses. Some have the habit of using cane baskets to protect and cover the birds. Few farmers have built pakka poultry houses but are mostly with inadequate spacing. Chicks when hatched were not given any artificial warmth. They are left with the mother hen under a bamboo basket at night. Most of the farmers let out chicks only after at least 10 days of age. In most of the houses there were not more than two broody hens. The birds are let out from as early as 7 am in the morning, and they are permitted to roam around till 6 pm
  • 49. 49 generally. Owners were not aware of the floor space requirements. 5.1.2. g Feeding Practices Seventy-three percent of the farmers give supplementary feed to chicken. There is no regular time for feeding of poultry though they are fed daily in most of the households. There is no proper idea about the nutritional requirements of poultry. When 63% opined that birds should be fed less than 25 g of feed every day, 30% opined that it should be between 25 and 50 g. About 7 % were of the view that this should be around 100g. Few farmers (23.33 %) give shell grit to improve the shell quality of eggs produced. The birds in backyard survive well on kitchen waste, coconut grating, insects, pests, wild seeds, grains, grasses and other vegetations. The supplemented feed consist of cooked rice, kitchen wastes, vegetables, rice bran, dried fish, commercial feeds, flour and milling wastes lacking in vitamins and proteins. More than 75% of the farmers were supplementing carbohydrates alone. There is no regular provision of protein sources to these chickens. The total quantitative supplementation varies from 2.00 to 3.30 kg per week given mainly during harvest time. On an average this expenditure comes to 20 to 33 rupees per week. Chickens are given water in all the households mainly by women. Water is also provided in basins inside the poultry shelters. These containers are seldom removed for cleaning and sanitation. Water is simply refilled when the level goes down. Few
  • 50. 50 household (13.33%) had the practice of giving feed supplements (mineral mixtures, B-complex vitamins etc). No regular deworming was in practice and usually the medicines were got from the local veterinary dispensary. Farmers also had the habit of purchasing medicines from the local medical shop without prescriptions. 5.1.2. h Flock Health The mortality rate is often more than 50% rising to 100% in most of the households. Around 72% of the house hold reported disease incidences and mortality rates. Thirty percent of the farmers had noted a mortality of 100% over the past five years. Ninety-eight percent of the farmers treat sick chicken with diverse types of drugs including traditional medications. About 12.7 % were reported to use traditional methods, 66.9% used modern drugs including anti-biotics, and 68.9% vaccinated chicks while 14.5% used pesticides to control external parasites. 5.1.2.h.1 Diseases The most worrying disease symptoms are respiratory distress, white, greenish diarrhea, blood in droppings, closed eyelids, mucus exudates from the nostrils and mouth and gaping. Pox is a common incidence in almost all of the households. Few farmers reported that the cross bred birds distributed had poor immunity and seldom lived beyond 2 years. Some farmers also reported that some poultry developed dermatitis
  • 51. 51 problems and bumble foot, which were difficult to be cured. Farmers of the opinion that coloured birds have better livability. The death rates were found to be higher among chicks immediately after purchase, followed by birds above two years of age. The causes of mortality in chicks were predators (42.6 %), disease (31.3%), and accidents (26.1%). From the symptoms described by farmers, it is probable that Newcastle disease (ND), Infectious Bronchitis (IB), Fowl Pox, Chronic Respiratory distress, Coccidiosis, Fowl Typhoid and Pullorum Disease may be prevalent in the backyard poultry. Most (93.33%) of the households bury dead birds while the rest throw dead birds into pits, which are eventually picked up by scavengers. 5. 1.2.h.2 Vaccinations. All of the households had vaccinated their birds during the - RD vaccination programme under Assistance to States for Control of Animal Diseases of the Panchayath. Some farmers utilized the vaccines supplied by the Veterinary dispensaries during the rest of the periods. There is no practice of any vaccination other than against Ranikhet Disease.
  • 52. 52 5.1.2.h.3 Avian Influenza awareness Farmers are aware of the zoonotics importance of the disease and are concerned about the control measures. None of the households were found to adopt any of the bio-security measures. 5.1.2.h.4 Constraints to managing chicks Main constraints to chicks in the backyard were found to be the lack of feed, disease outbreaks, predators and poor management in this order of importance. 5.1.2.i Flock Production Characteristics Farmers opined that cross bred hens start laying at an age varying from 160 to 175 days. In some cases the egg production was nil. Hens lay an average of 15 eggs per clutch with an annual production varying from less than 100 to 140 per year. It could be noted that the birds are seldom kept for production beyond a period of two years. Households consume about 75 % of the eggs laid. Selling of eggs is not common among the households, though they sell eggs in the neighbourhood. Usually, the birds after laying, stay in and around the house of the owner in search of feed and come back at dusk or by the call of the owner. 5.1.2. j Preferences of beneficiaries There is a better preference for brown shelled eggs. The average price obtained for each egg
  • 53. 53 during local sales varies from 3 to 4 rupees. Farmers are of the opinion that coloured birds fetch better price when sold. The price may vary from Rs 120 to 150 per kg live weight. Some birds did not produce any eggs and were sold for meat at around 8 months of age when they attain around 2 kg body weight. All the poultry owners reported that, the price of eggs and birds varied according to season and religious festivals 5.1.2. k Self help groups Among the respondents, 70% were members of kudumbasree. Farmers believe that membership in Kudumbasree has helped them to be selected as beneficiaries of various plan schemes, increase their awareness about the plan, participate in various training programmes etc. 5.1.2.l Cost of production The farmers kept no records of the expenditure incurred in the rearing of backyard flock. So the calculation of cost of production could not be done accurately. 5.1.3 Discussion of the findings The findings reveal that poultry is kept as a means of income and food by majority of the households. This is in agreement with the findings of Gondwe et al (2003). The results of the present study indicated that a majority of the respondents were females. This is an asset
  • 54. 54 over which the poor women actually have control. This activity can therefore play an important role in poverty alleviation and also s may contribute to an improvement in the income of the household. Jensen (2000) also reported similar findings. The fact that poultry meat is consumed only during special occasions indicated that their standards of living are not especially good. A good majority of the households did not have a big family and this is again in support of the general trend in Kerala. Respondents considered poultry as only a subsidiary income source. The fact that a vast majority of the farmers had more than 5 years experience in poultry rearing indicates that this system is prevalent in Kerala for many years and is generally accepted as a viable one. The proportion of new households is a positive sign as this indicates many new families coming into this sector in the recent days. The average flock size of 8 and a male female ratio of 1:4 were reported. This is in tune with the ratio recommended by the Kerala Agricultural University for Backyard rearing. Scavenging space is the criteria behind the decision of flock size. It is a known fact that the non-availability of land is a major constraint to commercial poultry production in Kerala. The same is again a restricting factor in rural poultry rearing indicating the need for innovative techniques of poultry rearing which also takes into consideration the scarcity of land. The fewer number of families holding a
  • 55. 55 broody hen is indicative of the increasing popularity of artificial incubation and the realization of production losses owing to broodiness. Majority of the households raised cocks and this indicated that cocks are of demand among the farmers. These cocks are used for religious purposes and sold at a comparatively higher price than that of hens. There is also another positive finding that majority of the farmers did not buy chicks from unknown / road side vendors. It indicates the increase in awareness about the quality and acceptance of the chicks supplied through government agencies among the farmers. This may be due to the fact that deaths reported within a period of one month among chicks distributed through the Panchayath veterinary dispensaries / hospitals are replaced. Most of the families (63.33 %) did not hatch eggs using a broody hen and this indicates the need for hatcheries at the District level to hatch chicks as per the need of common farmers. Chicks were brought at day old stage and above in 36.67% of the households. Pullets and male birds were also purchased as growers below 2 months of age this indicates that there is scope for chick hatcheries and egger nurseries in the district. Around 70 % of the households made shelters with wooden planks which is the most economical system of housing possible in our conditions. All the respondents were using semi-intensive system of housing. Higher level of awareness about
  • 56. 56 homestead cages indicated that they can be propagated among the needy farmers. The fact that the farmers were not aware of the floor space requirements has led to inadequate space being provided. Thus it is indicated that this problem need to be focused in future. There is the need to make farmers aware of the drawback of inadequate space in poultry houses. The facts that Chicks were hatched without any artificial warmth and that they are let out from 10 days of age is owing to the higher atmospheric temperature in Kerala. The birds are let out from as early as 7 am in the morning, and they are permitted to roam around till 6 pm generally. So on an average a bird gets 8- 13 hours for scavenging. The fact that 73% of the farmers give supplementary feed indicated the high level of awareness on the importance of concentrate feeding for better productive performance in rural poultry. There is no proper idea about the nutritional requirements of poultry. This is evident from the fact that farmers give a quantity of feed which may be less than 25 g per every day or as high as 100g. Few farmers (23.33 %) give shell grit and this is essential to improve shell quality. Majority of the feed fed being carbohydrates and household wastes, lacking in vitamins and proteins, this alone is insufficient for the bird to perform to its full potential. The total quantitative supplementation varies from 2.00 to 3.30 kg per week given mainly during harvest time.
  • 57. 57 Chickens are given water inside the poultry shelters, but these containers are seldom removed for cleaning and sanitation. This practice is to be instilled in their minds as contaminated water will be a good source for spread of diseases. Few household (13.33%) had the practice of giving feed supplements, which though would increase the cost of production, are certainly found to be beneficial to the health of the birds. There is the need to stipulate regular deworming programmes through the local veterinary dispensaries. They should be instructed to use broad spectrum dewormers in the correct dosage. Farmers’ habit of purchasing medicines from the local medical shop without prescriptions needs to be curtailed as indiscriminate use of drugs would lead to the development of resistance. The mortality rate is often more than 50% after supply probably due to the stress of transportation and heat. Thirty per cent of the farmers had noted a mortality of 100% over the past five years with some outbreaks. So the disease diagnosis and surveillance system has to be fortified further to reduce economic losses to farmers. These results are similar to those reported by Gondwe et al (2003), Mapiye and Sibanda (2005). The disease symptoms reported are suggestive of chronic respiratory distress, Fowl Pox, Ranikhet disease, Coccidiosis, syngamosis, ecto- parasitism, dermatitis problems and bumble foot.
  • 58. 58 This is in agreement with the findings of Huq and Mallik (1998), who found that lack of quality feed supply, vaccines especially RD, Infectious Bursal Disease (IBD) and Marek’s disease, low price of dressed broilers and eggs were the constraints faced by farmers. There is the need to educate the farmers on the proper disposal of wastes as well as dead birds. All of the households had vaccinated their birds during the RD vaccination programme under Assistance to States for Control of Animal Diseases (ASCAD) of the Panchayath indicates the success of this Central Government programme, conducted in collaboration with the Animal Husbandry Department. The study also shows that, the death rate was high in chicks followed by growers and adult birds and diseases contributed markedly to high flock mortalities recorded during rainy season. These results are in agreement with reports from other developing countries( Kitalyi 1998, Minga et al 1989). Dessie and Ogle (1996) recommended that diseases spread faster in large flocks compared to smaller flocks. High disease levels were probably due to exposure of chickens to the natural environment, interaction of different entities, within and among flock contacts during scavenging, uncontrolled introduction of new stocks, contacts through exchange or sale of live chickens or movement between households and villages (Mapiye and Sibanda 2005) There is the need to ensure regular supply of Ranikhet disease and Fowl Pox vaccines to the
  • 59. 59 farmers as these two diseases create havoc in the rural poultry production systems. Though the farmers were aware of contagious and zoonotics diseases, the fact that none of the households adopt bio-security measures, are a matter of serious concern. Main constraints to rearing chicks being the lack of feed, disease outbreaks, predators and poor management, if proper attention is directed towards these, their mortality rates can be brought down considerably. Chick mortality could be controlled in one of the Panchayaths by adopting the administration of anti- stress medications and glucose to them immediately after reaching the farmers premises. Cross bred hens start laying at an age varying from 160 to 175 days, which is much better than the desi hens. In some cases, the egg production was nil. This might be due to the poor nutritional status of the birds prior to the start of lay. The analysis of feeding practices indicated that in most of the households no protein source is fed to the birds. Mostly birds in lay alone have access to ample quantities of feed. Hens lay an average of 15 eggs per clutch with an annual production varying from less than 100 to 140 per year. The expected production of various crosses distributed in the District from Kerala Agricultural University is as given below in Table 4. A comparison indicated that most of the birds were performing far below the benchmarks.
  • 60. 60 Characteristics Gramalakshmi Gramasree Gramapriya Age at sexual maturity in days 160 152 150 Age at 50% egg production 180 175 180 Annual egg production (upto 72 180-200 190-200 200-225 weeks of age) in numbers Body weight at 72 weeks in kg 1.8 2 1.8 Egg weight in g 50 52-55 55 Egg Colour Light Brown Brown tinted Livability in % 95 95 95 Purpose Backyard Backyard Backyard Feeding Scavenging + 25-30 Scavenging + Scavenging + g balanced layer 25-30 g 25-30 g balanced ration balanced layer layer ration ration Table 4 Production performance of standard birds Households consume about 75 % of the eggs laid and this definitely improves the plane of nutrition at the household level. There is a better preference for brown shelled eggs owing to the age old misconcept that, they are better in the nutritional and medicinal value. The average price obtained for each egg being Rs.3 to 4 is comparatively higher indicating that there is the preference for farm fresh eggs in the District. Value addition may be resorted to at various levels to improve the returns to farmer. Those birds which did not produce any eggs were sold for meat at around 8 months of age when they attained around 2 kg body weight. All the poultry owners reported that, the price of eggs and birds varied according to
  • 61. 61 season and religious festivals like Easter, Eid etc. A good majority of the respondents were kudumbasree members and they were provided with training in poultry rearing and financial support from banks to start poultry enterprises. As the farmers kept no records of the expenditure incurred only approximates of the cost of production could be calculated. Under the prevailing conditions in Kerala, backyard system of rearing seems to be the ideal solution to improve egg and meat production and thus ensure food security. 5.2 Evaluation of Broiler Integrators in the Panchayath 5.2. 1. Socio-economic Profile of Respondents The broiler unit owners according to their age were categorized into three groups, i.e., young, middle and old. The data presented in Table below reveals that majority of the poultry owners (46.67%) belonged to the middle age group, while 30 per cent poultry owners were from older age
  • 62. 62 group and 23.33 per cent hailed from the young age group. Majority of the respondents were well educated and all of them could read and write. A majority of the respondents (50%) belonged to the schedule caste. About 56% of the respondents had a medium family size. A vast majority (83.33%) of the respondents lived as joint families. About 60% of the respondents had agriculture and animal husbandry as their major occupation. Fifty–three per cent of the respondents were marginal farmers, 33% small farmers and the rest were large scale farmers. About 43.44% of the respondents had more than 3 years experience and 33.33% had more than 8 years experience in this field. Seventy three per cent of the farmers had moderate to high level of satisfaction in their job. These farmers reared flocks of a size ranging from 1000 to 10000. Birds are housed in units of size 900 to 1200 per shed. Most of the farmers owned multiple sheds. The observations made with respect to the variables studies is given in the table 5 below. Variables Category No. of Percentage respondents
  • 63. 63 Young (less than 7 23.33 32 yrs) Age Middle 14 46.67 (32-47yrs) Older (more than 9 30.00 47 yrs) Primary 4 13.33 Education High school 9 30.00 Pre-degree 14 46.67 Graduate and 3 10.00 above Religion Hindu 16 53.33 Muslim 2 6.67 Others 0 0.00 Christian 12 40.00 Caste General 12 40.00 Schedule caste 15 50.00 Schedule tribe 0 0.00 Other backward 3 10.00 caste Family type Nuclear 5 16.67 Joint 25 83.33 Family size Small (less than 10 33.33 4 members) Medium (5-7 17 56.67 members) Large (more than 3 10.00 8 members)
  • 64. 64 Major Agriculture 10 33.33 Occupation Animal Husbandry 8 26.67 Service 2 6.67 Business 3 10.00 Labour 7 23.33 Land holding Landless 0 0.00 Marginal 16 53.34 ( 10 cents) Small 10 33.33 (25 cents) Large 4 13.33 Flock size Small <2000 6 20.00 Medium 2001- 20 66.67 5000 Large >5001 4 13.33 Experience < 3 year 7 23.33 4-8 years 13 43.34 8 years 10 33.33 Level of Low 8 26.66 satisfaction Moderate 13 43.34 High 9 30.00 Constraints Diseases 15 50.00 Waste Disposal 23 76.67 Lack of space 12 40.00 Taxation 19 63.33
  • 65. 65 Table 5 Observed frequencies and percentages of variables 5.2. 2 General rearing practices 5.2.2.1 Type of farm unit- Integration There are more than 50 farmers in the Panchayath who are involved in this type of projects. The major integrator is Thompson group. Day old chicks are supplied to trained farmers according to their potential to rear birds as well as the availability of land. The vaccinations are done as follows 0-5 day – RDF Vaccine 10- 14 days – IBD Vaccine 20 days- 25 days – RD Lasota Vaccine Feed, feeders waterers, vaccines etc are provided by the integrators. B- Complex vitamins are administered on daily basis. There are regular visits by veterinary supervisors and veterinarians visit on request to ensure the health of the birds. Medicines and disinfectants are also provided by the integrators. The farmer has to provide the shed, put in the labour and do the management. The birds are reared to a period varying from 35 to 50 days and they may weigh from 1.60 kg to 3 kg. The farmers get a remuneration varying from Rs.2 to 3.60 per kg depending upon the prevailing market rates. Five to six batches
  • 66. 66 of birds are reared in a year with a down time of 10-15 days in between. 5.2.3 Discussion of the findings The data obtained revealed that majority of the poultry owners (46.67%) belonged to the middle age group, The fact that backyard poultry farmers are mostly not from the old age group is conducive, since they will be more malleable to change. It is obvious that in today's world of modernization, the younger generation will obviously have more scientific orientation and consequently, adopt more number of technologies. Education is one of the important factors which promote the development of any enterprise. Education results in changes in overall behaviour. Majority of the respondents were well educated and all of them could read as suggested by the high literacy rates in Kerala. About 10 per cent were graduates indicating that, educated people are also taking up poultry rearing as a means of livelihood. A majority of the respondents (50%) belonged to the schedule caste. About 56% of the respondents had a medium family size. A vast majority (83.33%) of the respondents lived as joint families. About 60% of the respondents had agriculture and animal husbandry as their major occupation. The role of the poultry owners in a family largely depends on the type and size of the family. The time available with the members of the household largely depends on the number of members as well as the type of family. It is
  • 67. 67 clear that most of the respondents had a family size above four and belonged to joint families, and as the number of individuals involved in the business are more, birds get better care throughout the day. Fifty–three per cent of the respondents were marginal farmers, 33% small farmers and the rest were large scale farmers. There was equal participation from all castes, but usually poultry are kept only in the rural villages. There is the need to propagate poultry rearing in the suburbs through the popularization of homestead cages. Poultry rearing is accepted as a subsidiary occupation by majority of the rural households. As pointed out by Dr. M S Swaminathan, India now needs to have a campaign for achieving nutritional security and if the rural population sticks to the old tradition of caste related occupation; this would most definitely hamper the progress. The findings of the study further shows that backyard poultry farming was found to be a subsidiary occupation for all the respondents. The findings are in consonance with the findings Panda and Nanda (2000) and Saha (2003). Thus, this enterprise could prove to be an excellent source of income to support their livelihood. It could provide gainful employment to the family members and utilize the land available with the farmers. In most of the cases in the present study, the families had more than one occupation
  • 68. 68 for their source of income. The earnings from all sources of income were, however, pooled in the family. Many farmers had batches with more than 2000 birds, this indicates the high level of business these farmers are involved in. The study shows that all the respondents kept poultry of medium size units. Since, diversification is the need of the hour, thus, given the present scenario, rural poultry can offer an excellent avenue of employment. The most important problem faced by the broiler farmers is that of waste disposal. Due to the lack of space many farmers cannot get rid of the wastes hygienically. There is the need to probe into measures for proper waste disposal and propagate the same among these entrepreneurs. It is a known fact that many a good farms were closed down in Kerala due to the hazardous waste coming from them creating problems in the neighbourhood. They if not treated properly are liable to contaminate the waterways and the surroundings leading to a serious health problem. Value added tax imposed by the government of Kerala is yet another major problem faced by the farmers. A good portion of the profit will have to be remitted as tax. This can lead to all the farmers trying to reduce their profits to evade tax to the extend possible. This in turn will lead to all farmers restricting the number of batches or the total number of birds reared. So, due to under utilizing of space, optimum
  • 69. 69 production will not happen and thus the cost of production can go up. Incidence of diseases continue to be a big problem and there is the need to educate them more on the hygienic precautions and bio-security measures to be adopted in farms. This point has a greater significance in the dawn of Avian Influenza threat in all parts of the world. The study by Mandal (2006) revealed that mortality rate in desi birds due to Ranikhet disease was highest, followed by Fowl pox, Coccidiosis, respiratory problems and other miscellaneous diseases, which corresponds with the findings of Saha (2003). The study also shows that, the death rate was high in chicks followed by growers and adult birds and diseases contributed markedly to high flock mortalities recorded during rainy season (Mandal2006). High disease levels were probably due to exposure of chickens to the natural environment, interaction of different entities, within and among flock contacts during scavenging, uncontrolled introduction of new stocks, contacts through exchange or sale of live chickens or movement between households and villages(Mapiye and Sibanda 2005) Lack of space leads to smaller stocks and this will increase the cost of production, and lesser profits. The commodity prices would go up leading to fewer purchases.
  • 70. 70 Evaluation of poultry projects implemented in the two Panchayaths during the past 5 years. 5.3.1 Pullet Distribution schemes Poultry projects have been regularly implemented in the Panchayaths of Kerala through the Animal Husbandry Department, Local self governments, Kerala State Poultry Development Corporation and some private players. In Panchayath – I, poultry projects are being implemented for the past five consecutive years. The details of beneficiaries, type of project are given below in Table 6. The findings indicate that there is a good proportion of beneficiaries from the under privileged sector of the society. There has been considerable increase in the number of birds distributed in the Panchayath during the last year owing to the implementation of Pullet Distribution schemes (SEP) under the tsunami rehabilitation programme of the government. In the first three years, all the poultry distribution was done without any Plan Fund. There has been considerable improvement in the poultry population in the Panchayath as evidenced
  • 71. 71 by the latest census reports. As the farmers are not with the habit of keeping records of production only estimates of production could be obtained. In this Panchayath more poultry projects have been envisaged and implemented owing to the increased demand from the society. Two egger nurseries have been started by the middle of the last financial year taking into consideration the increase demand for chicks in the Panchayath. st Panchayath I IInd IIIrd IVth Vth I year year year year year Plan Fund - - - 1,65,000 1,45,000 Beneficiary 55000 124000 60000 78000 25000 contribution Beneficiaries 110 96 163 115 222 SC/ST 24 28 34 55 beneficiaries Types of Pullet Pullet Pullet School Egger projects distrib- distrib- distrib- poultrynurseries- ution ution ution club 2 nos Pullet Pullet distribut distributi ion on No of birds 550 980 815 575 1100 distributed Table 6 Details of poultry projects in Panchayath-I
  • 72. 72 1200 1100 1000 980 No of birds distributed 815 800 600 550 575 400 200 0 I II III IV V Fig 3 Details of pullets distributed in the last five years 5.3.2 Performance of the Egger Nurseries in the Panchayath The higher demand for pullets has led to an egger nursery project being envisaged in the Panchayath. At present two beneficiaries have been selected and trained or the same by the Animal Husbandry Department. It is expected that units of 1000 bird capacity will help to address the problem of non-availability of quality chicks in the Panchayath. Chicks are purchased from the Kerala Agricultural University. On the day of purchase they are given B-complex vitamins and glucose in the drinking water. This practice has helped the farmers to reduce the chick mortality to bare minimum (1%).
  • 73. 73 These chicks are brooded for a period of 15 days and then are reared for a period of at least 40 days of age. Vaccinations are carried out as per the stipulations of the Centre for Advanced Studies in Poultry Science. The birds are dewormed, vaccinated against Ranikhet Disease and distributed to beneficiaries who had booked for the same with the local veterinary surgeon. All the pullets are sold before 45 days of age. The farmers are obtaining on an average a profit of Rs. 6000/- per batch. The birds which are supplemented with compounded feed were found to start laying at 160 days of age on an average. The egg production was again found to vary from nil to 160 eggs per annum. The average egg weight was found to be around 50g.Though there are no egg cooperatives in the Panchayath, there has been an attempt to collect eggs from the households. Each egg fetches a minimum of Rs 2.50/-. This egg is being utilized in the mid day meal programme for school going children in the Panchayath. At present there are two schools implementing this project. This has been a stimulus for the farmers to produce table eggs, as there is good and regular demand for the same in the Panchayath.
  • 74. 74 5.3.3 School Poultry Club Project During the last financial year, this project with an outlay of around Rs 1 lakh has been implemented in the Panchayath. Each selected student is given 5 birds free of cost (1 male: 4 females). Some quantity of compounded feed was also given to the beneficiaries. This project is implemented among students from the Below Poverty Line Category with the objective that it would help to improve the nutritional status of these children. It is expected that the eggs produced will be available for consumption for their households and thus the children will have an access to an additional protein source in their diet. Vaccination and deworming programmes have been implemented to augment production and thus ensure better productivity. Training programmes were conducted for the student prior to the distribution of birds. Enclosures for these birds were constructed at the houses under the supervision of the project supervisor. Steps were taken to ensure that there will be monthly meeting of the club members and regular evaluation of the progress of the programme.
  • 75. 75 This scheme has been implemented only in the last financial year and hence the critical evaluation of the same can be done only ion a later stage. It could be seen that there is a belief among farmers that brown shelled eggs are better for health than white shelled ones. Farmers preferred coloured birds to white feathered birds in their backyard. Highest livability was seen in the case of Gramapriya followed by Gramasree. In Panchayath – II, poultry projects are being implemented for the past five consecutive years. The details of beneficiaries, type of project are all given below in table 7. Years => I II III IV V Items Plan Fund 1,02,000 60,000 - 125000 Beneficiaries 97 53 25 106 300 SC/ST 3 25 50 beneficiaries Type of Backyard Backyard Backyard Backyard project poultry poultry poultry poultry No of birds 488 372 125 539 2500 distributed Table 7 Details of poultry projects in Panchayath-II 5.3.4 Panchayath-II
  • 76. 76 The evaluation of the projects implemented in Panchayath –II indicated that during the last year, more than 2500 birds have been distributed to the beneficiaries. There are no broiler units in the Panchayath. The trend is that there is an increase in the demand for chicks from year to year. Birds distributed in the last 5 years 3000 2500 2500 2000 1500 1000 number of birds 500 488 539 372 0 0 I II III IV V Years Fig 4 Details of pullets distributed in the last five years in Panchayath-II The local veterinary surgeon had devised the project in such a way that some quantity of compounded feed is also supplied to the beneficiaries at the time of distribution of pullets to the farmers. So also they will be provided with B-complex vitamins and glucose on that day. The Panchayath had distributed
  • 77. 77 Gramapriya and Gramalakshmi with good acceptance by the farmers. 5.3.5 Financial Matters The cost of a pullet from 45 to 60 days age varies from Rs. 50 to 75. A farmer rearing 1000 pullet for egg purpose under moderate conditions gets a gross profit of around Rs 6000 to 10000. This indicates that more ,egger nursery projects may be envisaged and implemented in the Panchayath to create job opportunity and income for the local farmers, cater to the needs of the farmers through supply of chicks and thus increase the poultry wealth and egg production in the state. The Veterinarians of both Panchayaths opined that there is the need to ensure year round supply of quality chicks to the farmers. It is necessary that these chick nurseries get ample number of day old chicks from the government farms and approved agencies for the perpetuation of the project in the years to come.
  • 78. 78 5.4 Socio-economic development (SED) registered if any consequent to these projects. The principal measures of SED are education, nutritional standards, occupation, and income or combinations of these. • Improvement in knowledge level/ skills • Increase in income • Improvement in the nutritional status of the households • Trainings received • Job satisfaction 5.4.a Knowledge level Knowledge level is an important measure because it does not usually change (as occupation or income might) after young adulthood and information about education can be obtained easily. There information gathered from the broiler farmers indicated that they were well aware about the management of birds, diseases and Biosecurity measures. 5.4. b. Nutritional Aspects It could be noted that the eggs produced in the house holds are consumed by the family members
  • 79. 79 themselves (75%) and the rest is being utilized for local sales. Though the income generated through the sales of these eggs is not too significant, the improvement in the nutritional status of the households need to be considered. A family with 5 hens on an average with 150 eggs each would produce 750 eggs in the production cycle. If 10 per cent of all these eggs are lost, from among the remaining 675, 25% is locally sold. These 169 eggs sold @ Rs 2.50 each would generate an income of Rs 422/- per family. The rest, i.e. 506 eggs are consumed in the household. The cost of this would come to Rs 1266/-. This in other words on an average would come up to 25 kgs of eggs and proportionate amount of protein. The findings of this study is in agreement with the findings of Mandal(2006), who reveals that majority of the poultry owners(85%) did not sell the eggs and used them for domestic consumption, whereas, only 15 per cent respondents sold the surplus eggs. However, with regard to selling of birds' majority of the poultry owners (90%) sold birds and only 10 per cent respondents did not sell birds.
  • 80. 80 Mandal (2006) reported an average selling price of Rs.2.75 for desi, whereas, in case of birds the average selling price was Rs.120 when it attained a body weight of about (1.5-2)kg. 5.4.c . Financial Aspects It is clear that as a consequence of the project there will be considerable improvement in the nutritional status of these families as well as provides an additional income when their salvage value is realized at the end of production. In the case of males, higher are the returns as birds sold during the festivals and for religious purpose fetch around Rs 250/- each. The few eggs which are kept aside for hatching are utilized to either propagate the flock or for local sales. 5.4.d. Trainings received All the farmers had received training in poultry rearing from the integrator. Local poultry farmers regularly received the training from Animal Husbandry Department. Their awareness about diseases, their control, vaccination techniques were all very high. 5.4.e Job satisfaction
  • 81. 81 The findings on the table in page 37 indicated that 73.37 % of the respondents had moderate to high level of satisfaction with their job. The low satisfaction was on account of the objections raised by the neighbours like foul smell and absence of a provision for proper waste disposal.
  • 82. 82 5.5. To investigate the profitability of backyard and small scale poultry projects. 5.5.a Profitability of Backyard poultry Projects Items of production ie the expenses, income, profit, cost of production etc in backyard poultry production is given in the Table 8 given below. Table 8 Economics of backyard poultry units No Item Nos Unit cost Total Cost in Rs in Rs Expenses 1 Cost of a pullet (60 10 75 750 days old ) 2 Feed Requirement @ 15 kg/ 15 225 bird 3 Shelter/ 1 1000 1000 4 Miscellaneous 10 5 50 5 TOTAL Expenses 2025 6 Income Egg Production 135 x 9 2.5 3038 7 8 Salvage value females 9 50 450 9 Male 1 112 112 10 TOTAL Income 3600 11 Profit per unit 1575 12 Profit per bird 157.5 13 Cost of production of Rs 1.67 one egg
  • 83. 83 Cost of pullets Cost of egg production in Backyard FeedCost Shelter/ Miscellaneous 50 (2%) 750(37% ) 1000(50% ) 225(11% ) Fig 5 Split up of cost of production in backyard units The data shown above points out that when the mortality rate is nil, a unit of 10 birds reared by the farmer is capable of producing an income upto Rs 3600/-. In that case the profitability per bird would be as high as Rs 157.50/-This seems to be a nominal income and hence may be suggested as a means to improve the income of the rural poor. 5.5.b Profitability of Broiler integration projects There is seasonal variation in the cost of broiler meat. All the fluctuations in cost levels in the neighbouring state like TamilNadu affect the price of chicken in the District. Usually
  • 84. 84 integrators get a profit varying from Rs.2 to 3.60 per kg depending upon the prevailing market rates. So a farmer with 1000 birds in a batch and 6 such batches per year on an average makes a profit of 30000 annually. 5.5.c Profitability of small scale broiler farmers The estimates of expenditure and income with respect to broiler units of size 1000 and 6 batches per year, undertaken entirely by the farmer and birds sold locally for meat indicated the following. The economics of production are depicted in Table 9 below. Sl Item Amount no (Rs) 1 Average Cost of production of 1 kg meat 42.00 2 Average weight of a broiler bird 1.9 kg 3 Average Cost of production of a broiler bird 79.80 4 Average selling price of 1 kg of broiler 50.00 5 Average profit per bird 8.00 6 Average profit for 1000 birds reared 8000.00 7 Profit per year 48000.00 Table 9 Economics of broiler production
  • 85. 85 5.6 The constraints faced by poultry farmers. Problems faced by the farmers with egger nurseries were as follows ( table 10),(fig 6). Value added tax Problems Non- Non- Threat Threat Problems Problems imposed by Complaints Availability Availability from from Lack of of Waste of Sales & the from of Feed of Birds predators Diseases space Disposal Marketing government neighbours Mean Scores 3.47 3.73 5.03 5.63 4.67 3.00 2.47 2.89 4.18 Rank 6 5 2 1 3 7 9 8 4 Table 10 Ratings of constraints faced by poultry farmers Threat from diseases continue to be the greatest problem followed by threat from predators, lack of space, complaints from neighbourhood, non availability of quality chicks as per the need and at the proper time. This finding points out the fact that there is the need to strengthen the disease control measures like vaccination and other hygienic precautions like disposal of wastes and dead birds. Ratings 6.00 5.63 Ratings 5.03 5.00 4.67 4.18 4.00 3.73 3.47 3.00 2.89 3.00 2.47 2.00 1.00 0.00 Fe ed B i rd s P re d a t o rs D is e a s e s S p ac e D is p o s a l S ale s VAT C o mp l a i nt s &M kt g Constraints
  • 86. 86 The major constraints felt by broiler farmers as expressed in percentage is given below in Table 11, Fig 6.
  • 87. 87 Table 11 Constraints felt by broiler farmers Constraints faced by broiler farmers 70 65.35 Percentage of farmers 60.08 60 54.74 50.1 49.35 50 40 32.26 30.65 28.76 27 30 25.6 20 10 0 Constraints Diseases chicks Tax Subsidy feed Other State Neighbour Space Waste Marketing Fig 7 Constraints felt by broiler farmers Threat from predators have been highlighted as a bigger problem because of the so called unidentified animal attacks in the coastal Panchayaths during last year. This was later on identified as packs of street dogs and necessary steps were taken to control this menace. Lack of space is the major constraint faced by any livestock / poultry farmer or entrepreneur in Kerala. Complaints from the neighbourhood are mostly on account of improper disposal of wastes and dead birds. Lack of space might have led to this problem. Non availability of quality chicks can be solved only by steeping up the production
  • 88. 88 of birds through satellite farms and hatching them through hatcheries at the Panchayath level. It is understandable that Government an quasi government institutions in this arena are not in a position to completely satisfy the demand.
  • 89. 89 RECOMMENDATION S
  • 90. 90 6. To develop strategies to improve the success of poultry projects. - Recommendations • Poultry Farmers Service Centres may be established on Regional basis to provide need based service to farmers be it Quality chicks, Feed, Biologicals, and Medicines on subsidised rates and Technical Advice. • Health coverage to the birds in the rural areas needs to be strengthened. Timely vaccinations and medication, coupled with strict bio-security measures are needed. Availability of vaccines and drugs, as also their safety in terms of acceptable levels in end products for human consumption are other issues needed to be tackled. • Special emphasis is needed for creating a marketing network of rural poultry produce. There is a need to improve processing, preservation and marketing of eggs and poultry products. It needs to be supported by providing infrastructure for meat processing, packaging, preservation and marketing with value addition of products and maintaining a cold chain till the product reaches the consumer.
  • 91. 91 • With intensive production, environmental pollution abatement and bio-waste management strategies have to be worked out. Exemption of VAT (value added tax) on poultry and better insurance coverage to poultry units to mitigate natural disasters and disease incidences will help to promote poultry farming. • Duck production is a feasible choice for ensuring the food security of the rural poor. This improves the nutritive status via egg and meat and improves economic activity by giving supplementary income. • Strengthening of other species like quail and turkey for eggs and meat will enable us to ensure food security. • Farm fresh egg and meat production is another option to maximize the returns to farmers in poultry sector. • Organic egg and meat production will add to the returns of the farmers and also ensure the health of the members of the society. Kerala has tremendous potential in organic poultry because of the existence of traditional backyard system. Thus with the
  • 92. 92 help of appropriate approach and technology, the backyard system of poultry rearing can be transformed into a successful organic venture. • Considering the impact of the rural poultry on poverty alleviation it is essential for Government to launch comprehensive programmes of development of the Desi chicken on a long-term basis. Given the initial all-round support such dynamic programmes can gain momentum and can move on their own steam. If these programmes are started, within one decade the country can make a Rural Poultry Revolution pushing a large percentage of the poor above the Poverty Line. • Methods for proper disposal of poultry waste and dead birds are to be devised and propagated among the farmers. • There is the need to ensure strict bio- security measures in all the small and even backyard units as a precautionary measure against Avian Influenza threat. • There is the need for a detailed evaluation of the poultry projects implemented in all
  • 93. 93 the Panchayaths. Social and performance is to be undertaken on a regular basis. Impact assessment should be in a uniform manner so that the performance of different Panchayaths can be directly compared. • There is the need to keep record of the production performance of the hens in the backyard system so as to get the exact cost of production and profitability details. • Need based projects have to be devised and implemented in the Panchayaths. Resource mapping may be done to utilize the locally available feedstuff in the formulation of concentrate feed to the birds. • Measures for value addition may be instilled in the minds of the farmers to make poultry farming more profitable.
  • 94. 94 CONCLUSION
  • 95. 95 CONCLUSION Backyard Poultry Farming plays a significant role in rural people's life. These birds in addition to cash income have nutritional, cultural and social functions. The rural poultry owners had poor knowledge about feeding, breeding and management practice, which led to poor performance of the birds. Increasing the awareness on new technologies as well as the recommended practices can help to maximize the productivity and consequently the income of poultry farmers. On-farm training of rural poultry owners is also necessary so as to bring about changes in their practices. The middleman needs to be trained and included in the extension programme for backyard poultry farming. Farmers need training to be able to control disease, improve management and increase size of flock. Most of the farmers were reluctant to rear large flocks as they lacked skills and capital. Inputs like feed, training on processing, support for marketing are to be provided to sustain the farmers in this field. Backyard poultry farming utilizing the varieties and cross breds developed for this purpose can help to improve the nutritional and economic status of the rural poor, women and unemployed youth.
  • 96. 96 SUMMARY
  • 97. 97 SUMMARY Poultry production in Kerala remains largely as a backyard venture with virtually no modern units. These backyard birds have low to medium productivity. Poultry production has undergone rapid changes during the past decades due to the introduction of modern intensive production methods, new breeds and improved preventive disease control and bio-security measures. This study was conducted to evaluate the projects implemented in past and restructure the future poultry projects as needed. This will result in better profitability and streamlining of poultry production in the District. A vast majority (96.67 %) of the respondents considered poultry rearing as a subsidiary occupation. Seventy-three percent of the farmers give supplementary feed to chicken. There is no regular time for feeding of poultry as well as there is no proper idea about the nutritional requirements of poultry. Cross bred hens start laying from 160 to 175 days. Households consume about 75 % of the eggs laid. Selling of eggs is not common. Price of eggs and birds varied according to season and religious festivals. Farmers had no proper idea about the nutritional requirements of poultry, proper disposal of wastes as well as dead birds. Regular supply of Ranikhet disease and Fowl Pox vaccines is to be ensured.
  • 98. 98 The average price obtained for each egg being Rs.3 to 4. Broiler integration farmers and their situation were studied in detail. As the farmers are not with the habit of keeping records of production only estimates of production could be obtained. Today, more poultry projects have been envisaged and implemented owing to the increased demand from the society. Vaccinations are carried out as per the stipulations of the Centre for Advanced Studies in Poultry Science. Each egg fetched a minimum of Rs 2.50/.Farmers preferred coloured birds to white feathered birds in their backyard. More, egger nursery projects may be envisaged. Local poultry farmers regularly received the training from Animal Husbandry Department. Poultry Farmers Service Centres may be established on Regional basis to provide need based service to farmers be it Quality chicks, Feed, Biologicals, and Medicines on subsidised rates and Technical Advice. Special emphasis is needed for creating a marketing network of rural poultry produce. There is a need to improve processing, preservation and marketing of eggs and poultry products. Exemption of VAT on poultry and better insurance coverage to poultry units to mitigate natural disasters and disease incidences will help to promote poultry farming. Duck production is a feasible choice for ensuring the food security of the rural poor. This improves the nutritive status via egg and meat and improves economic activity by giving supplementary income. Farm fresh egg and meat
  • 99. 99 production, Organic egg production are other viable options. Farmers need training to be able to control disease, improve management and increase size of flock.
  • 100. 100 REFERENCES
  • 101. 101 REFERENCES Books Rahman, H. Z and Hossain. M (1995) (eds) (1999). Rethinking Rural Poverty:Bangladesh as a case study. UPL, Dhaka. Sage publications New Delhi. Journal Article Gondwe, T.N.P., Ambali, A.J.D., Chilera, F.C., Lwesya, H. & Wollny, C.B.A. (1999). Rural poultry biodiversity in Lilongwe and Mzuzu. Agricultural Development Divisions (ADD), Malawi. Malawi J. Science and Technol., 5: 17-25. Conference proceedings Todd, H. (1999). Women Climbing out of Poverty through Credit; or what do Cows have to do with it? In: F. Dolberg and P. H. Petersen (eds.) Women in Agriculture and Modern Communication Technology. Proceedings of a workshop, March 30-April 3, 1998, Tune Landboskole, Denmark. www.husdyr.kvl.dk/htm/php/tune98/2-HelenTodd.htm. (Also published in Livestock Research for Rural Development http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd10/3/todd103.htm Jensen, H. Askov (2000). Paradigm and Visions: Network for Poultry Production in Developing Countries. In: F. Dolberg and P. H.
  • 102. 102 Petersen (eds.) Poultry as a Tool in Poverty Eradication and Promotion of Gender Equality Proceedings of a workshop, March 22-26, 1999, Tune Landboskole, Denmark. http://www.husdyr.kvl.dk/htm/php/tune99/3- AJensen.htm K.M.Bujarbaruah and J.J.Gupta (2005) Family poultry for the development of NEH region ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region,Umiam, Barapani, Meghalaya IPSACON-2005 Email: kmbujarbaruah@123india.com C. Krishna Rao (2005) A rural poultry revolution for poverty alleviation in rural India Former Animal Husbandry Commissioner, Govt. of India, H.No. 110, Jaya Nagar , New Bowenpally, Secunderabad – 500 011 IPSACON-2005 Book Chapter C Mapiye and S Sibanda Livestock Research for Rural Development 17 (10) (2005) Constraints and opportunities of village chicken production systems in the smallholder sector of Rushinga district of Zimbabwe , Department of Agriculture, Bindura University of Science Education. P. Bag 1020, Bindura, Zimbabwe cmapiye@yahoo.co.uk*Department of Animal Science, University of Zimbabwe, P.O Box MP 167, Mt Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe. Fao publication
  • 103. 103 M K Mandal, N Khandekar and P Khandekar (2006) Livestock Research for Rural Development 18 (7) 2006 Backyard poultry farming in Bareilly district of Uttar Pradesh, India: an analysis malayjammu@yahoo.com Singh C.B. and Jilani M.H.(2005) Animal Science Section, GBPUA&T, Hill Campus, Ranichauri, Tehri Garhwal- 249 199 (UA) Backyard poultry farming in Garhwal Himalayas Animal Science Section. Internet Resource Md Fazlul Huq and. Kabir Mallik (1998) The Role of Women in Poultry Development: Proshika Experiences, Proshika, Dhaka, Bangladesh , E- mail: proshika@bdonline.com , http://www.fao.org/ DOCREP/004/AC154E/AC154E04.htm S. Mack, D. Hoffmann and J. Otte (2000) Animal Production and Health Division, Food and Agriculture, The contribution of poultry to rural development Organization of the United Nations, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome,Italy *Corresponding author: Simon.Mack@fao.org del Ninno, C., Dorosh, P. A., Smith, L.C. and Roy, D.K (2001). The 1998 Floods in Bangladesh. Disaster Impacts, Household Coping Strategies, and Response. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington. http://www.ifpri.cgiar.org/ pubs/abstract/abstr122.htm
  • 104. 104 Dolberg, F. (2001). A livestock development approach that contributes to poverty alleviation and widespread improvement of nutrition among the poor. Livestock Research for Rural Development: http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd13/5/dolb135.htm Karlan, D. S. (2002). Social Capital and Group Banking. Downloaded from http://web.mit.edu/spencer/www/soccappaper.pdf Frands Dolberg(2003) The Review of Household Poultry Production as a Tool in Poverty Reduction with Focus on Bangladesh and India Pro- Poor Livestock Policy Initiative (PPLPI)Website: http://www.fao.org/ag/pplpi.html Working Paper pdf(English): http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/projects/en/pplpi / docarc /wp6.pdf 2 , http:// www.poultrysolutions.com/ pserv/DetailedNews? news_id=508 (September 8, 2003). Timothy N.P. Gondwe, Clemens B.A. Wollny, A.C.L. Safalaoh, F.C. Chilera and Mizeck G.G. Chagunda (2003) Community-Based Promotion of Rural Poultry Diversity, Management, Utilization and Research in Malawi. Department of Animal Science, Bunda College of Agriculture, University of Malawi, PO Box 219, Lilongwe, Malawi. (E-mail: tgondwe@chirunga.sdnp.org.mw) Choprakarn and Kitti Wongpichet (2007) Faculty of Agriculture, Ubon Ratchathani University, Thailand, Kreingkrai. Village chicken production systems in Thailand. E-mail address of corresponding author: kreingkraicho@yahoo.com
  • 105. 105
  • 106. 106 APPENDICES
  • 107. 107 APPENDIX-I POULTRY POPULATION IN KERALA AS PER 2003 CENSUS Sl No Districts Total Ducks Total Fowls 1 Thiruvananthapuram 14,459 1,027,219 2 Kollam 72,135 690,352 3 Pathanamthitta 30,763 615,825 4 Alappuzha 251,132 594,197 5 Kottayam 70,338 926,868 6 Idukki 11,114 413,099 7 Ernakulam 63,365 991,734 8 Thrissur 49,214 1,192,016 9 Palakkad 33,120 1,132,467 10 Malappuram 39,367 1,444,351 11 Kozhikode 12,057 754,803 12 Kannur 4,040 449,951 13 Wayanad 7,828 320,870 14 Kasargod 1,677 438,080 TOTAL 660,609 10,991,832 ANNUAL POULTRY PRODUCTION 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 Egg (in lakh no.s) Fowls 12475.45 11704.57 10948.63 10922.083 Ducks 993.43 1063.57 1025.54 1033.855 Total eggs 13468.88 12768.14 11974.17 11955.938 Total Animal Meat in the 42804 47663 54189 55921 organised sector Total poultry meat 52611 39327 32704 27609 Total meat production 181023 182316 195271 195372 (including unorganised Sector) ANNEXURE-II
  • 108. 108 GENERAL STRATEGY FOR BACKYARD POULTRY UNIT SCHEMES of KERALA STATE POULTRY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION • The egg production is planned through backyard rearing system. • The hatching eggs of the parent stock maintained at the farms will be used for producing day old chicks. • The Day old Chicks will be reared in egger nurseries of the Self Help Groups or farmer or private individuals, which are acting as a satellite farm. • The birds when they attain 45-60 days will be procured from the above farm and supplied to beneficiaries . • In case of shortage of birds, birds will be procured from reputed firms outside the state. • The eggs thus produced and procured will be marketed through the societies formed for the specific purpose at remunerative price to the producer. • The feed produced by Kerala State Poultry Development Corporation will be supplied for the scheme (the installed capacity for feed production is 16 Mt per shift). The feed ingredients will be purchased on annual rate contract for all the facilities. • Beneficiaries will be selected by the Panchayaths • The Panchayaths and local bodies will be directed to distribute pullets to the women beneficiaries. Project activity (Monitoring & Coordination) This project activity will be entirely handled by the Corporation for proper and effective implementation. Required personnel will be provided on contract basis to Co-ordinate and
  • 109. 109 Supervise the Programme during its implementation stage for its effectiveness in implementation within the time scheduled. The project will have a Programme Coordinator and supported by programme Supervisors for properly maintaining the accounts and other details. The Programme Supervisors will be responsible for organizing the SHG’s and to guide in all areas. They will be supported by Voluntary Extension Workers at the grass root level selected from among the KEPCO Club Members for linking the beneficiaries with Supervisors / Coordinators. The Programme Supervisors will have good liaison with local Veterinary Surgeons for providing timely health cover and other technical guidance. ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETIES A KEPCO Club will be organized for every 20 beneficiaries and a Marketing Outlet is organized comprising 20 KEPCO Clubs and one Society in each Block. The Societies are formed as per Charitable Societies Act, 1955 and Organizing Body. All beneficiaries will be the members of the Society formed. Each Society will have 7 Governing Body Members including one President, Secretary and Treasurer. The organization of various activities will be managed by the Societies. The societies will also be responsible for the inspection of equipments, various assets provided to the beneficiaries, distribution of feed, birds, etc and co-ordination of all the Sales Outlet Units of the respective Block.
  • 110. 110 The activities of the Societies will be as below: • To guide and supervise the primary level societies. • The primary societies will have sub centers in the Panchayat for the purpose of egg collection, distribution of other inputs. • The eggs collected can be hatched using the proposed mini hatchery in the societies. • The chicks will be sold to the beneficiaries on cost from the second year onwards as replacement stock. • The egger nurseries or integration farms under KSPDC shall rear the chicks. • The egg marketing will be done by the society at block level. • Each member has to contribute Rs.10/- towards the membership fee. The cost of eggs sold by the beneficiary can be deposited in the society, which can be utilized as thrift loan to needy members. The amount can be utilized by KEPCO Clubs to take up other income generating activities. Since no subsidy is provided during 2nd year, the Society should remit the full cost of birds collected from beneficiaries to KSPDC.
  • 111. 111 • Once the market and remunerative price is assured to the producers the growth of the segment can be assured, as the growth is market pulled. • The birds required to be distributed for the backyard poultry scheme is to be reared in 45 nurseries involving the SHGs and private entrepreneurs. The SHGs and individuals having shed to rear the birds will be supplied chicks and feed and will rear the birds under strict protocol of vaccination and health care and the birds will be procured and issued to the selected beneficiaries of the local body through the Veterinary institutions of the Panchayat.