Dr. Asifo O. Ajuyah
find it quite interesting that the production constraints in the sub-Saharan continent of Africa is similar to that in the South Pacific Island countries. However apart from low productivity, poor housing and under nutrition one of our major problem is losses from predators such as dogs, cats and mortality from motor vehicles. On the average a village hen will incubate between 10 to 14 eggs, hatch 8 to 10 chicks, wean 6 to 7 chicks and only 2 to 4 birds are most likely to survive to be used as replacement, food or income for the family.

With the necessary funding our next research focus will be to compare three groups of village chickens as per the format below:
a. total confinement of hen and chicks until re-breeding stage.
b. partial confinement of hen and chicks until weaning stage.
c. zero confinement.

The following parameters will be of major interest:
- survivability.
- growth rate.
- income.
- resource utilization and management (RUM).

In the South Pacific Island countries the backyard or village chicken may represent between 60% (e.g. in Fiji) and 95% (e.g. in Samoa) of total poultry population. As a result of which it could serve as a major source of nutrition and income for rural families.

From the lead paper 1 I want to know the following:
- a. average # of birds per household.
- b. relationship between your disease control strategies and poor nutrition. I presume under-nutrition will negate the efforts of your village para-vet.

Back

Dr. Adama Traore
I fully agree with the comment 1 on the lead paper 1 by Dr. Asifo O. Ajuyah regarding the levels and the causes of losses in rural family chickens, especially in growing birds.

Dr. Ajuyah´s findings are consistent with values observed in most countries in sub-Saharan Africa: from 10 newly hatched chicks, only 2-3 birds probably survive up to 6-8 months. Various predators (i.e. snakes, rats, dogs, cats, etc.) and vehicles are also major causes of losses.

With regard to the average flock size, it is difficult to give an accurate and reliable figure for the sub-region. However, in Mali, the obtained data show a considerable variation, with values ranging from 1 to 50 birds per household. Number of birds per household largely depends on the production system(s) adopted and the season in which surveys were carried out. The average flock size observed in countries like Mali, Burkina and Togo is about 15-20 birds per household.

The interaction between poor nutrition and health is important. Therefore, the PNPE-project in Togo disseminates also valuable information in order to improve the nutritional status of family poultry. For example, smallholder poultry farmers were advised to use alternative feed resources such as termites and others insects as protein sources and some grains and by-products. The feeding problem is less acute in adult birds, as they usually scavenge in/and around the compounds of households, feeding on the locally available feed resources e.g. household refuse, residues from the harvest and food processing, earthworms, insects, vegetables, grits, etc.

Back

Prof. A. J. Akakpo
I wish to compliment Dr. A. Traor¬ for his excellent paper (see Lead paper 1) which provides thoughts pertinent to the development requirements for family poultry. However, I would like to make some comments:

1. In the control of major poultry diseases, the author mentions only Newcastle disease. I think problems related to other diseases such as fowl pox and parasitism (i.e. coccidiosis, spirochetosis, etc.) also need to be addressed, if this is not done.

2. The access to services and technical support is crucial for the success of the deployed interventions. However, that is a problem if trained farmers perform prophylactic cares themselves. The understanding of the term "auxiliaries" is not the same for everyone, especially if their tasks can be multiform. Moreover, the author underlines that "the auxiliary may be paired with a private veterinarian". The global context of the privatization of the profession means, above all, an improvement in the quality of health cares and technical support for the farmers. Under these circumstances, it is not advisable to allow competition between two professions that do not have the same level of education. In my opinion, the "auxiliary", whether (s)he is a technician or livestock engineer or vaccinator or "village auxiliary", should always work under the supervision of a veterinarian. This may help to avoid possible misuse, unfair competition (as the farmer will always choose the lowest-cost service) and misuse of products that could be harmful to the consumer.

3. Launching farmers organization is an excellent initiative which needs to be encouraged and promoted.

4. The training of poultry keeping farmers should not allow them to perform technical gestures reserved to veterinarians. Although the number of veterinarians in our countries is low, the fact that they are assisted by "auxiliaries" may allow to satisfy the farmers' demand for health care. We should not move backwards until transforming farmers into syringe manipulators!

Back

Stephen E. J. Swan
"Poutry para-vets, animal health auxiliaries, poultry workers"

This is a comment on Prof. A. J. Akakapo's observations (see Comment 3 on the Lead Paper 1).
The issue of non-qualified (but trained in the basic concepts and procedures) persons using syringes for vaccination of poultry is sensitive. In rural areas where there are no human doctors, such persons can come under quite desperate pressure to treat seriously ill humans. In my experience this has had serious consequences.

The use of the eye-drop inoculation pathway by the heat tolerant V4 /I2 vaccine is a good solution in this situation. Other advantages are it's heat tolerance and simple low-tech batch production systems (Spradbrow, 1994).

In Bangladesh the Department of Livestock Services has recognised its limited resources to reach rural family poultry units with their veterinarians, and accepted that they have a role in training village-based Poultry Workers (mainly women) associated with the Smallholder Poultry Semi-scavenger (partly food supplemented) Model which the Department has developed since 1983 with assistance from several donors (FAO/UNDP, Danida, IFAD, World Bank and AsDB). The Poultry Worker uses a syringe, and is often supplied with locally produced vaccine through the Department's rural offices at sub-district (thana) level. Imports of NDV are also permitted. The Poultry Model is implemented through NGOs working in close cooperation with the Department (Alam, 1997), and micro-credit loans (about US$40 per household) have popularised the model which now reaches 1.3 million rural poor households and is planned to reach 2 million households over the next 5 years.

References:
Spradbrow, P.B. (1994): Newcastle disease in Village Chickens. Poultry Science Rev. 5 (1993/4). pp 57-96.
Alam, J. (1997): Impact of Smallholder Livestock Development Project in some selected areas of rural Bangladesh. LRRD 9 (3) 13pp available on
http://www.hcm.fpt.vn/inet/lrrd/LRRD9/3/CONT93.HTM

Back

Dr. Adama Traore
I totally agree with Prof. Akakpo's observations (see Comment 3 on the Lead Paper 1) which state that it is necessary to take into account pathologies other than the Newcastle disease (ND), although ND presently remains the first priority. It is essential to take into account the importance of health aspects in a given area and under the poultry husbandry systems practised. As I underlined in my recommendations for further Research and Development activities, ectoparasites such as Argas sp. constitute in some areas a major constraint and must be controlled. Fowl fox is also a significant pathological constraint in some areas. Besides, the effectiveness of the coccidiosis control, especially in chicks, will largely depend on the importance of other environmental factors, i.e. season, hygiene in the habitat, etc.

Regarding the problem related to the intervention of the auxiliaries, I am delighted with Prof. Akakpo's contribution which, hopefully, will activate again the unavoidable debate around this very complex question. It is important to find out how far it is possible to go in giving the traditional poultry keepers responsibility for the health of their birds.

First of all, the question to be answered is: Can vaccination on a large-scale basis be ensured by the existing (public or private) veterinary personnel, and at which cost?

Like Prof. Akakpo, I believe that the best approach would be that some auxiliaries intervene in support and under the technical supervision of a (public or private) veterinarian. The veterinarian will also have to provide farmers with technical support in the domains of production and health. This is the approach adopted by the PNPE (i.e. National Small Animal Development Programme) in Togo. The Veterinarian of the zone participated in the training of the auxiliary and in its supply with veterinary products. The restrictive element of such an approach resides in the weakness of veterinary manpower, in general, and private veterinarians, in particular.

Back