This document summarizes a study on the use of livestock protective fences (LPFs) to control flies and improve dairy production in Kenya. The key findings were: 1) LPFs reduced fly populations by over 50%, mastitis infections by 46-88%, and malaria cases in humans by 36-61%. 2) Milk production increased by 27-45% with LPFs, resulting in $233-480 more income annually per household. 3) Treatment costs for mastitis and disease fell by $78-114 per household over 2 years with LPFs. 4) Farmers were willing to pay $0.9-2.35 annually for LPFs and wanted

1. Animal Health Packages
Livestock Protective Fence (LPF) for enhanced milk
production and mastitis control in intensive zero-grazing
dairy farms in Kenya
International Fund for Agricultural Development
Food and Agricultural Organization of UN
R.K. Saini, B. Bauer, M. Mattoni, R.C. Mattoli and P. Muasa

2. Zero-grazing Units and flies
Productivity of smallholder dairy cows is constrained
by multiple of animal diseases e.g. mastitis,
helminthosis, tick borne diseases and in some
cases tsetse transmitted trypanosomiasis
• Cows in zero grazing units attract flies
which bite the animals and cause agitation,
spread diseases and contribute to
unsanitary conditions.
• Flies reduce productivity of dairy cows and
cause weight loss
• Wounds from stable and biting flies may
become infected
• In some areas even tsetse flies are
attracted to zero-grazing units

3. Waste pits and flies
• Waste pits are breeding grounds of
biting (including mosquitoes)
and non-biting flies
• Waste management is also a problem

4. Biting flies in Zero Grazing Units
Stomoxys on a cow A Cow responding to biting
flies while feeding
Stable and other biting flies mechanically transfer disease agents
to the animal hosts causing, eye infections and mastitis

5. Development of site specific Animal Health Packages
As part of development of site specific animal
health packages, a Rapid Rural Appraisal of
zero-grazing units in Kenya was undertaken
to:
• Determine the diseases affecting their
cattle and control practices being adopted
• Assess the status of the zero grazing
units
• Identify appropriate project sites for
interventions
• Activities within the Smallholder Dairy
Commercialization Programme (SDCP) which
covers 9 districts (GoK project funded by IFAD)
ICIPE team setting a NGU trap
CDC trap

6. Baseline data collection
Entomological
Fly catches in Kisii

7. Baseline data collection
Entomological
Fly catches in Bungoma

8. Baseline parasitological data collection
Animal diseases identified in Kisii prior to intervention

9. Baseline data collection
Parasitological
Animal diseases identified in Bungoma

10. LPFs as part of Animal Health Package
• In Kisii, 105 zero- grazing units and waste pits
were protected with LPF as part of
development of site specific animal health
packages
• In Bungoma – 30 semi-zero grazing units were
protected
Bungoma
Kisii

11. HOW LPF WORKS
Flies are attracted to
odours of animals in
pens
LPF (Insecticide treated
screen) is attached to
pen perimeter
Flies don’t see open
mash; land on it and are
killed by insecticide in
fibers of the screen
Flies travel at low levels (<1.5m) and will land on the LPF, pick up the
insecticide (deltamethrin) and die within 24 hours (10-20 sec exposure is
enough)
LPF supplied by Vestergaard Frandsen

12. Milk off-take Kisii
Increase wrt
Control
Netting: 45%
Waste: 27%

13. Milk off-take Kisii

14. Milk off-take Bungoma
Increase wrt control 40%

15. Milk Off take in Kisii
Before LPFs
Mosocho produced the least milk
while Keumbu produced the most
amongst the Dairy Commercialization
Areas (DCAs) under SDCP in Kisii
After introduction of LPFs
milk production in Mosocho has
surpassed all the DCAs where LPFs
were not introduced

16. Mastitis Kisii

17. Mastitis Kisii
Reduction wrt Control
Netting: 63%
Waste: 46%

18. Mastitis Kisii

19. Mastitis Bungoma

20. Mastitis Bungoma
Mastitis prevalence
reduced by 46% wrt
control

21. Stomoxys (FTD) in Kisii

22. Stomoxys (FTD) in Kisii

23. Stomoxys (FTD) Bungoma
% reduction wrt control 52%

24. Mosquitoes (FTD) in Kisii

25. Impact on malaria morbidity Kisii
Households falling sick of malaria

26. Impact on malaria morbidity Kisii

27. Impact on malaria morbidity Kisii

28. Impact on malaria morbidity - Bungoma
% reduction wrt control 36%

29. Social and Economic Impacts of Livestock Protective
Fence (LPF) Technology for Protecting Dairy Cows in
Zero-grazing Enterprises in Kenya

30. LPNF mastitis incidence in Kisii & Bungoma
Dairy cows of 76% respondents
had previous mastitis infections
No. of biting flies positively
correlated with mastitis
infections (r=0.406 at 0.01
significance level)
Mean mastitis
infections per
cow before LPNF
use
Mean mastitis
infections per
cow after LPNF
use
% change
Kisii
Zero grazing LPNF 3.94 0.47 88.07%
Waste Pit LPNF 3.71 1.81 51.21%
Control (No LPNF) 3.5 3.5 -
Bungoma 2.67 0.25 9 1 %
Mean number of mastitis incidence in Kisii and Bungoma before and after LPNF
use

31. Constraint of flies to animal production
• 80 % farmers cite biting flies as a serious
constraint causing animal irritability,
agitation (97%); interference with stall
feeding, wastage of feeds (scattering and
trampling of feed – 100%)
• Common method of controlling flies –
swatting
• Use of human capital - during milking 2
persons deployed – one for swatting and
one for milking
• farmers estimate a loss of 1.5 liters per
milking event before LPFs – loss of 27%
milk in Kisii and 33% in Bungoma

32. LPNFs and Milk Production
Mean milk yields (litres/cow/day) in Kisii and Bungoma
Mean milk yield (litres/cow/day) in two years
Before LPNF After LPNF Percentage
LPNFs positively influence milk off-take by:
• reducing the number of biting and non-biting flies
• reducing disease morbidity
• improving dairy animal feeding behavior
• improving milking experience both for the animal and the farmer.
change
Kisii Zero grazing LPNF 5.99 8.18 37%
Kisii Waste Pit LPNF 5.25 6.98 33%
Overall Kisii LPNF 5.62 7.58 35%
Kisii No LPNF (Control) 5.17 5.17
Bungoma zero grazing
LPNF
4.50 7.65 70%
Bungoma No LPNF
(Control)
4.69 4.69

33. Impact on LPNFs on human diseases
Mean malaria infections per household per year
Mean malaria infections per household per year
Before LPNF After LPNF Percentage
change
Kisii Zero grazing LPNF 4.44 1.76 60%
Kisii Waste Pit LPNF 5.08 2.40 53%
Kisii No LPNF (Control) 4.70 -
Bungoma zero grazing LPNF 4.92 1.92 61%
Bungoma No LPNF (Control
5.14 -
group)
• LPNFs have positive effect on human health.
• LPNFs around zero grazing units were more
effective in controlling malaria-causing mosquitoes
than nets around waste pits
• This could be attributed to attraction of mosquitoes
to humans and cattle which are in closer proximity
of dwelling units next to zero grazing units than
waste pits.

34. Gender and development impacts of LPNFs
LPNFs and gross economic benefits from milk sales
Table 7: Gender disaggregated milk yields and gross economic
benefits
County LPNF
Household
type
Mean milk
production
before
LNPF
(Litres/Day)
Mean milk
production
after LNPF
(Litres/Day)
Yield
gain
(Litres
/day)
*Average
additional
economic
gain/HH/day
(Ksh)
Gross
annual
benefit/
Hh/Year
(Ksh.)
Gross
annual
benefit/
Hh/Year
(US$)
Kisii Male 6.63 9.22 2.59 129.63 27,222 324.07
Female 4.61 6.48 1.87 93.48 19,630 233.70
Bungoma Male 4.4 7.5 3.1 186.00 39,060 465.00
Female 4.6 7.8 3.2 192.00 40,320 480.00
Market price for milk in Kisii Ksh.50/litre and Bungoma Ksh.60/litre

35. LPNF and cost savings in the reduction of mastitis infections
Table 10: Gender disaggregated savings from reduced mastitis infections
per household over a 2 year period
County LPNF
Household
type
Mean
mastitis
infections
per Hh 2
years
before
LNPF
Mean
mastitis
infections
per Hh 2
years after
LNPF
Variance *Average
cost saving
per Hh
(Ksh)
Average cost
saving per Hh
(US $)
Kisii Male 3.85 0.65 3.19 9,577 114
Female 3.81 1.63 2.19 6,563 78
Bungoma Male 2.63 0.25 2.38 7,125 85
Female 2.72 0.25 2.47 7,395 88
* Average cost of treating uncomplicated mastitis is Ksh. 3000 (US$35.71)/animal for a single incident
Picture by M. Mattoni

36. Combined economic benefits two years after LPNFs
Table 13: Combined economic benefits realised in two years after LPNF
Benefit Average cost
savings per Hh
after LPNF (US $)
Additional average
gross income per
Hh after LPNF
(US $)
Kisii Bungoma Kisii Bungoma
Additional milk sales after LPNF 556 944
Cost savings in treatment of complicated malaria per
1187.5 1031.74
household
Cost savings in treatment of mastitis infections 96.07 86.43
Cost savings in treatment of helminthosis infections 28.19 39.3
Cost savings in reduced livestock mortality 670 611
Average combined cost savings per household 1,981.76 1,768.47
Average direct earnings per household 556 944
Total average benefit per household (cost savings +
2537.76 2712.47
direct earnings)

37. Farmers perceptions of the LPF technology
• 100% of farmers in Bungoma and Kisii rate LPF to be very effective against
controlling biting and non biting flies.
• All farmers want to continue using the LPF technology.
• All control group farmers are willing to adopt the technology
• No major negative effects were reported except for skin irritation upon contact
with LPNF (20% of farmers in Kisii)
How much are farmers ready to pay for LPNFs?
• Bungoma: Ksh. up to 200 (US$2.35) /m/yr (average Ksh.120/ m/yr -US$1.41)
• Kisii: Ksh. up to 100 (US$1.8)/m/yr (average Ksh. 75/m/yr -US$ 0.9)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eD6Ve_SjW08 on FAO website

38. Netting in a Dairy Farm in Nebraska, USA
Introduced by
USDA in
June 2013

39. International Fund for Agricultural Development
Acknowledgements
Centre International de Recherche-
Developpement Sur l'Elevage en Zone
Subhumide
Technical Staff:
John Andoke
Peter Muasa
David Mbuvi
Tiberius Marete
John Ngiela
Philip L. Kolei Caroline
Muya
Private Sector- LPF supplied by Vestergaard Frandsen
Consultants:
B. Bauer - Free University of Berlin, Institute for Parasitology and Tropical Veterinary
Medicine, Berlin, Germany
M. Mattoni - Università degli Studi di Torino Facoltà di Medicina Veterinaria Dipartimento
di Produzioni Animali, Epidemiologia ed Ecologia Via Leonardo Da Vinci,
Italy