IMPACT OF CONSTRAINTS MINIMIZATION ON PRODUCTIVITY AND POPULARITY OF TRADITIONAL BACKYARD POULTRY PRODUCTION D.P.Singh, T.S.Johri, U.B.

Singh, Raj Narayan, D. Singh and S. Saran Central Avian Research Institute, Izatnagar, India dpscari@rediffmail.com Abstract Lack of technical know how and suitable germplasm, decrease in availability of natural resources of feed and inadequate veterinary support are the alarming constraints of the traditional backyard poultry production system. National Agricultural Technology Project titled Small farm rural poultry production was started to minimize the constraints with integrated approach. 21 villages each with 15-20 beneficiaries were adopted. The participants were not promised any subsidy / reward except the benefits of free disease control and technical know how. Awareness and vaccination camps were organized in each village to educate the farmers (preferably women and children) and to immunize the existing birds respectively. High yielding CARI Nirbheek, CARI Shyama, Hitcari and Upcari birds developed utilizing Aseel, Kadakanath, Naked neck and Frizzle breeds/ecotypes of Indian native fowl respectively, were used as replacement of nondescript birds used by farmers. Day old chicks were reared by institute or trained chick rearer under intensive system and six to eight weeks old birds vaccinated for prevailing diseases were supplied on payment along with packets of balanced feed for supplementary feeding. Health care was provided as and when required in addition to the routine vaccination and deworming. Training, vaccination camp and regular medication generated faith in the farmers to rear the scavenging chicken in profitable way. Farmers accepted all four types of improved germplasm having 2 to 3 times improved productivity with appreciable adaptability in comparison to their own birds. Use of locally available feed ingredients in formulation of feed and supplementary feeding of nearly 35 g / bird / day enhanced the productivity. The women at interview stated emphatically that they are the care takers and make decisions for consumption and marketing. As nutritional benefits family members consumed 9.45 eggs per week while priority was given to children followed by husband and finally the wife. The over all benefit cost ratio observed was 3.01: 1. Economic returns ranged from Rs.100 to 360 per month and distribution of economic benefits generally followed the priority of the children for school needs followed by health care and daily needs of the family. The approach was found to be very effective and successful which initiated many SAUs, NGOs and KVKs to follow similar procedure. Key Words : Backyard, constraints, productivity, economic, benefits. Introduction Importance of backyard poultry production has been globally recognized to overcome the worsening problems of poverty, hunger and malnutrition in developing countries. Traditional backyard poultry production in India is practiced since time immemorial which was the primary source of animal protein and supplementary income for the down trodden rural poor and only source of poultry egg and meat for city dwellers before poultry industrialization. No doubt, poultry industrialization in the country in recent two decades has assured the availability of eggs and meat in the urban areas but the first problem observed from the change in the poultry production system was neglect of the traditional poultry husbandry in villages, which was the primary source of animal protein and supplementary income for more than 50% of the population of this country. The villagers supplied the city dwellers with eggs and poultry for centuries but this direction was reversed within a period of less than two decades. More than 75% of eggs and almost 100% of the broilers produced in the organized farms around the urban areas are consumed in cities and towns leaving the vast demand in rural areas to be met by the decreasing number of desi fowls. When a fraction of this production reaches the villages, it costs the rural consumer at least 50% more than what it costs the urban consumer. One must remember that the cheapest egg is the backyard egg, which is produced by a foraging hen, scavenging in the backyard and feeding on nothing specific. In this system few hens (5-20) are kept in each family which is mostly reared by women along with other household chores. Birds receive housing only in the form of night shelter and are fed minimally by kitchen waste as and when available and are left to subsist and scavenge by themselves in gardens, village alleys and surroundings farms feeding on crop residues, insects, worms and green forage. The night shelter is either on a tree or roof of the house or any raised platform inside the house or a bamboo basket in the corner of room. But productivity of the desi birds under this system is very low. Dr. Branckaert (1995), Animal Production Officer, FAO reported that an indigenous hen produces an average of 40 eggs of 45 to 50 g in two cycles a year. From the 20 eggs produced per cycle, only a small quantity (4 to 5) can be consumed or sent to market. The reminder will be hatched with a success rate of 60 percent that is 9 chickens. Out of these, a maximum of four will survive the others

will perish through predators or disease. Thus a local hen, bred traditionally can produce 8 chickens annually and 8 to 10 eggs for consumption or marketing. In spite of virtually no production of eggs and meat the scavenging poultry production system with merger productivity has been proved to be uneconomical. It is essential to evaluate and understand the local production system, their limitation and opportunity, the circumstances under which such traditional system came to existence and how they can be gradually improved. Low producing birds, high mortality, inadequate balanced feed supplementation and lack of technical know how were adjudged to be the main constraints by various workers (Reddy and Qudratullah, 1996; Sonaiya, 1996; Spradbrow, 1995; Singh 2003a). Attempts have been made to study the effects of constraints minimization on productivity and popularity of traditional backyard poultry production Material and methods Critical evaluation of the constraints, limitations and opportunities of this production system revealed urgent need of reorientation under the aegis of organizational support. A simple working model (Fig. 1) comprising Research Institution, State Agricultural Universities, State Governments KVKs, NGOs and villagers with different responsibilities was envisaged and tested (Singh et. al. 2003) under the National Agricultural Technology Project on Small farm rural poultry production. It was aimed to improve the existing husbandry practices of scavenging chicken by reducing the constraints through application of scientific approach. The project was started with the intensive survey for selection of villages to be adopted under the project on the basis of secondary information contained in the statistical bulletins of respective districts and the primary information gathered from physical survey of the block and villages. 21 villages having the existing scavenging chicken or with previous experience of rearing village chicken were preferred in the list of adopted villages. Bulletins/leaflets containing the application of scientific knowledge in backyard poultry production were prepared in simple local languages for different states and distributed among the villagers. Awareness camps were arranged in the adopted villages to provide the technical know how to maximize the production from village scavenging chicken and vaccination camps were arranged to immunize the birds of the whole village before the introduction of new improved germplasm in the village. It was emphasized that only those farmers having the scavenging space around the house or having the house on the periphery of the village should keep the backyard poultry. Local feed ingredients were collected and analyzed for their chemical composition. Various combinations of balanced ration utilizing local ingredients were compounded for supplementary feeding of the birds. Routine medication and vaccination of the birds reared in different villages were undertaken for disease monitoring and surveillance of disease status. Farmers were discouraged to hatch out their own chicks for replacement due to the reasons that it induces the broodiness habit in pullets which has been globally recognized as cause of lower productivity, fertility, hatchability and increase in mortality of rural poultry. The participants were not promised any subsidy / reward except the benefits of free disease control and technical know how. During second phase, some resourceful and educated farmers were trained as chick rearer by arranging short term training course at the institute for the rearing of small flock of day old chicks under intensive system, feed formulation with locally available ingredients, vaccination and medication. Day old chicks were supplied to the chick rearer and all the helps were provided during rearing of two lots of rearing of chicks. After rearing the chicks for 6-8 weeks it is sold to key rearer. Key rearers were provided health care by the Government/ NGOs. In addition some youth were initiated for marketing of eggs and live birds as intermediaries or the farmers directly marketed it. Scientific package of practice: Improved native breeds or a cross of native breed with exotic would be a good proposition to replace the existing low producing scavenging local stocks. Either of the four types of improved germplasm viz. CARI Nirbheek, CARI Shyama, Hitcari and Upcari (Fig. 2) developed with four Indian native breeds Aseel, Kadakanath, Naked neck and Frizzle respectively, having the look of respective breeds and potential to produce 160-210 eggs and to attain 1700-2000 g body weight at 20 weeks of age, developed at Central Avian Research Institute, Izatnagar may be used successfully. The chicks need brooding and rearing under intensive system for 6-8 weeks of age in-group by the chick rearer/Government organization/NGOs. During this period birds are fed (ad-lib) the balanced chick feed and are vaccinated against the Mareks, Ranikhet, IBD and Fowl Pox diseases at appropriate ages. After 6-8 weeks chicks are sold to key rearers (farmers) in limited number of 5 to 25 birds depending on the open yard available in the vicinity for scavenging of the birds. Birds are let free for scavenging in the backyard/open field surrounding of the house whole day. During initial acclimatization, care needs to be taken to make them used to reaching the nest in the evening for night shelter. Night shelter should provide good ventilation and protection from the predators, which can be prepared from the low cost locally available materials. First two-three days birds should be provided sufficient feed (mixture of grains) and there after it should be gradually reduced to 35-40 g/bird/day. But the quantity may be increased or decreased depending on the availability of natural feed resources, which depends on season of the year and the prevailing rainfall. Larger numbers of birds more than 25 may not be much advantageous, as it will require more amount of feed to be supplemented as the availability of natural resources remain limited and

Figure - 1. Working model of backyard poultry production

Research Institution (National/State Level)

Development of backyard germplasm

Feed compounding formulae with local ingredients

Development of suitable vaccine

State Government/NGOs/KVKs (District Level)

Health care

Training

Improved chick supply

Poultry health worker

Key rearer

6-8 week old chicks

Chick rearer

thus will reduce the profitability. Availability of plenty of clean water around the clock is essential. Since the birds scavenge in the free range, there is a possibility of parasitic infestation. Therefore, periodical deworming at 2-3 months interval is required. It is also recommended that males should be sold or used for domestic purposes at the age of 15-20 weeks and new lot should be added in the flock. Figure - 2. Pair of different genotypes used under scavenging chicken production

CARI NIRBHEEK

HITCARI

Results and discussions CARI SHYAMA

UPCARI

Productivity and growth rate of nondescript native scavenging fowls are very low but they are good forgers, efficient mothers, require less special care to grow and thus have characteristics essential for raising poultry under village conditions. Substitution of these chickens with coloured high yielding birds have been proved unsuccessful as conditions of villages are antagonistic to the successful raising of heavy weight or high producing birds. In addition to high productivity scavenging chicken should be capable of self defense for which light weight, coloured plumage, longer shanks and aggressive temperament are essential requirements. The additional requirements are adaptability to local environment, considerable resistance to tropical diseases, self propagating ability for replacement and look of native birds for acceptability. Improved native breeds or a cross of native breed with exotic would be a good proposition. High yielding CARI Nirbheek, CARI Shyama, Hitcari and Upcari birds developed utilizing Aseel, Kadakanath, Naked neck and Frizzle breeds/ecotypes of Indian native fowl respectively (Singh, 2003b), were used as replacement stock of nondescript poor birds used by farmers. The growth and production performance of various genotypes under scavenging system have been presented in Table 1. It was evident that the average 20 week body weight of Hitcari birds were highest and it was lowest in CARI Shyama. However, CARI Nirbheek occupied the second place followed by Upcari. Body weights of all genotypes were nearly to the body weights reported by Singh (1997) for these genotypes under intensive system indicating the suitability of these genotypes for village conditions and sufficient natural feed resources were available under scavenging system. The earliest age at sexual maturity of 162 days was recorded for Upcari and produced highest number of 172 eggs among all genetic groups. The highest egg production was expected in this genetic group due to negative correlation between age at sexual maturity and annual egg production. The highest egg weight of 59 g at 40 weeks of age was also observed in this genotype which is not as per expectation due to negative correlation between egg number and egg weight but it might be due to the frizzle plumage of this genotype for which higher egg weight has been reported in literature under tropical environment. Hitcari which possess the naked neck gene ranked second in productivity and egg weight and toped the list for body weight at all the ages. The heavier body weight of naked neck birds in comparison to its normal counterpart on same plane of nutrition (protein %) with increased egg production and higher egg weight under tropical environment (above 30 0C) has been reported by Merat (1986). Annual egg production of all the genotypes was significantly lower than the production reported by Singh (1997) of these genotypes under intensive system of rearing. All the growth and production parameters were associated with big standard errors which was expected as the availability of natural feed resources depend very much on both the season of the year and the prevailing rainfall (Tegene, 1992; Tadelle and Ogle, 1996). Those portions supplied as grain and those that come from the environment vary with the activity involved in the village life such as land preparation, sowing, harvesting and availability of grain within the household. The life cycles of insects and other invertebrates also influence the food resource base. Annual egg production performance which ranged from 158 to 172 eggs for different genotypes were found to be significantly higher than the 114 and 129 eggs of native and crosses of native with exotic birds respectively (Tadelle et al., 2000) under scavenging system and nearly four times higher than the annual egg production of 40 eggs from non descript desi fowl (Branckaert, 1995). The mortality among these genotypes was below 10% at farmers door from 9 to 72 weeks of age including the accidental mortality of predations. Upcari birds ranked first followed by Hitcari, CARI Shyama and CARI Nirbheek on the basis of the production performance but the ranking of Upcari and CARI Nirbheek were just reversed on the basis of the liking of the farmers where as Hitcari and CARI Shyama occupied the second and third position respectively as earlier observed on the basis of performance. If both the rankings are considered together Hitcari might be adjudged to be the best genotype followed by CARI Shyama, Upcari and CARI Nirbheek. But in practice CARI Nirbheek was liked most in spite of its lowest productivity due to its phenotypic resemblance and characteristics of pure Aseel birds which helps in adaptability in rural environment due to its longer shank length, very active and aggressive temperament which protect these birds from predators like stray cats and dogs and hence the name CARI Nirbheek has been assigned to this genotype. The least mortality percentage was observed in this genotype in addition to its highest market price due to its special native fowl look and martial gait. Upcari and Hitcari birds having frizzling and naked neck plumage respectively were less preferred by the farmers due to its unfamiliar look. The non acceptance of these two genotypes was very acute during the first year of introduction of these birds in the villages but demand is increasing year to year after realizing the advantage of these genotypes in tropical adoptability and productivity. The results of the analyzed data obtained from the interview of the beneficiaries of the project have been presented in Table 2. The average numbers of birds purchased by each family were 12.83 while 5.84 birds were sold up to 40 weeks of age it was clearly evident that nearly half of these have been sold which indicated that the beneficiaries had followed the instruction of selling or other utilization of most of the males between 18 to 20 weeks of age as rearing of males after this age was not economical. Since straight run chicks were supplied, 50 % of males were expected in the flock which was to be removed. The purchased average number of birds in the present study by each family was 12.83 and the number of adult females were 3.29 which is in close agreement with the finding of the

FAO assisted TCP/RAF/2376 project in Ethiopia and Gambia in which the initial average number of purchased birds per family were 10 and 12 respectively and this number reduced to 3.49 and 2.22 for adult females (Rushton, 1996). These results indicated the similarity of the backyard poultry production among developing countries. The benefit cost ratio of 3.01:1 was observed in this study which was based on only 20 week egg production. The additional later part egg production will further increase this ratio. Sayeed (1996) and Paul et al. (2000) have reported the benefit cost ratio of 3:1 for scavenging chicken production. The benefit cost ratio indicated that scavenging chicken production might play vital role to cater the day to day family need and thus helpful in poverty alleviation. The use of 9.45 eggs/week/family might be sufficient for protein security. In addition to the above findings the following impacts of the project were observed: Training camps in the villages improved the technical know how of the poultry farmers (especially the women) and improved husbandry practices resulted in improvement in the productivity and economic efficiency of the birds. Traditional birds have been replaced by the improved ones and hatching of chicks of their own has almost been stopped as the farmers are now well aware of the improved productivity and adaptability of genotypes supplied to them in comparison to their own birds with low productivity. Vaccination camp and regular medication have generated faith in the farmers to rear the backyard poultry in better and profitable way without the fear of outbreak havoc of poultry diseases. Use of locally available ingredients in supplementary feeding has enhanced the profitability. The women at interview stated emphatically that they are the care takers and make decisions for consumption and marketing which showed the women empowerment. As nutritional security family members consumed 9.45 eggs per week while priority was given to children followed by husband and finally the wife. Economic returns ranged from Rs.100 to 360 per month and distribution of economic benefits generally followed the priority of the children for school needs followed by health care and daily needs of the family and thus are playing important role in poverty alleviation. The approach was found to be very effective in maximizing the productivity with application of improved husbandry practice, use of suitable germplasm, disease control and feed supplementation. The success initiated many SAUs, NGOs and KVKs to follow similar procedure for reviving the popularity of traditional backyard poultry production. Table - 1. Growth and production performance of various genotypes under scavenging system TRAITS Body weight at 4th weeks of age (g) Body weight at 8th weeks of age (g) Body weight of cockerels at 20th weeks of age (g) Body weight of pullets at 20th weeks of age (g) Age at first egg (days) Egg weight (g) Annual egg production (No.) Ranking (based on performance) Ranking (based on liking) B:C Ratio CARI NIRBHEEK 225 422 1885 1382 173 56 158 4th 1st CARI SHYAMA 207 390 1645 1205 165 54 165 3rd 3rd 3.01:1 HITCAR I 230 443 2050 1450 167 58 168 2nd 2nd UPCARI 210 403 1735 1250 162 59 172 1st 4th

Table - 2. Salient observations related to traditional poultry production Average number of chicks purchased by farmers Average cost of feed Average number of birds sold up to 40 weeks of age Average cost of medication/vaccination Number of eggs produced Value of eggs produced Egg consumed per family Average mortality Average annual rearing cost (hen housed basis) Average annual return (hen housed and combined sex basis) Benefit : Cost (B:C Ratio) References Branckaert, R. (1995) FAO and rural poultry development. Proceedings of an international workshop, 13-16 June, Addis, Ababa, Ethiopia, pp. 24-29 Merat, P. (1986) Potential usefulness of the Na (naked neck) gene in poultry production. Worlds PoultryScience Journal 42: 124-142 Paul, D.C., Beg. M.A.H., Salah Uddin. M., Podder, C.K. and Aktaruzzaman, (M.2000) Sustainability of commercial layer farming in a sub-urban area of Bangladesh. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 1 ( 2 ) : 141-144. Reddy, C.V. and Qudratullah, S. (1996) Strategic feeding supplementation through locally available resources. Proceedings of XX Worlds Poultry Congress, New Delhi, India. 1:3-16 Rushton, J. (1996) Emergency assistance to Newcastle disese control in Zimbabwe. Consultants report, project TCP/ZIM/4553. Rome, FAO. Sayeed , M.A. (1996) Economics of poultry farm in Bangladesh. Socio-Economic Research Division, BLRI, Savar, Dhaka 1341, Bangladesh. Singh, D.P. (1997) Evaluation of local poultry resources for creating genetic stock with improved adaptability, productivity and disease resistance in tropical environments. Final Scientific Report EEC Project No TS3*CT92-0091 Singh, D.P. (2003). Problems and prospects of traditional backyard poultry production. Proceedings Winter Institute on Modern techniques and practices in poultry production and breeding. GAU Anand, India. Singh, D.P. (2003b) Breeding strategies for scavenging chicken. Proceedings of XXII IPSACON-2003, 27-28 March, CARI, Izatnagar, Bareilly, India, pp.40 41 Singh , D.P. ; Johri, T.S.; Singh, U.B.; Singh. D. and Raj Narayan. (2003) Tested model for sustainable organic chicken production. Proceedings of International seminar on Downsizing technology for rural development, Regional Research Laboratory, Bhubneshwar, India. II:665-671. Sonaiya, E.B. (1996) Employment income generation and skill development through rural poultry development. Proceedings of XX Worlds Poultry Congress, New Delhi, India. 1:17-22. Spradbrow, P.B. 1995. Policy framework for smallholder rural poultry development. Proceedings of an international workshop, ILRI, Addis, Ababa, Ethiopia. pp 30-39. Tadelle, D. and Ogle, B. (1996) Studies on scavenging poultry production system in Central Highlands of Ethiopia. Swedish University of Agric. & Sciences, M.Sc. Thesis. Tadelle,D. Alemu, Y. and Peters, K.J. (2000) Indigenous chickens in Ethopia:genetic potential and attempts at improvement. World Poultry Science Journal 56: 45-54. Tegene, N. (1992) Dietary status of small holder local chicken in Leku, Southern Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Science 15: 58-67. 12.83 chicks/family Rs.0.23/bird/day 5.84 Rs.3.00/bird 13 eggs/week/family Rs.32.46/week/ family 9.45 eggs/week 9.7% Rs.92.81/bird Rs.279.35/bird 3.01:1