L.Y. Mopate, G. Balndoh, V. Zeuh and G.P. Gongnet

The survey was carried out on 100 duck farms with 902 birds. These farms were distributed over 3 administrative districts consisting of 6 sub-districts and 20 blocks in N'Djaména city. It was found out that duck houses are mainly made of threshed mud. Feed is principally composed of cereal brans and of small-scale brewery by-products. A few breeding birds are selected according to their origin (males descended from prolific mothers), conformation, weight and plumage colour. Mean age at culling of males is 2.6±1.2 years. Average clutch per year is 2.6±1.2, with a mean egg number of 33±12 and a mean clutch size of 14 or 15 eggs.

Hatchability varies from 80 to 85 percent during the rainy season (between June and November) and from 59 to 78 percent during the dry season (between December and May). Mean brooding period is 63±28 days, and survival rate at 2 months ranges from 67 to 71 percent during the dry season and from 71 to 85 percent during the rainy season. Out of the 1,068 ducks kept by farmers, 54 percent were consumed and 46 percent were sold. Diseases, thieves, accidents and the raving constitute the major constraints. An adequate technical assistance for better management and appropriate feeding strategies could improve performances of ducks.

Key words: Chad, family poultry, Muscovy duck, socio-economics, urban area.

Back

N'Djaména, the capital-city of Chad, had in 1993 a population of 531,000 inhabitants, representing about 9 percent of the total population and a demographic growth rate amounting to 7 percent per annum (Anonymous, 1995). In addition, according to estimates of the Direction de l'Elevage et des Ressources Animales', the national poultry flock amounted to 24 million birds in 1997. Chickens, ducks and guinea fowls, in that order, constitute the most important species. The sale of poultry enables poultry keepers to acquire usual consumer goods. Products (meat and eggs) represent sources of cheap animal protein of high quality and are available to urban and rural households (Mopate et al., 1997).

The successive droughts occurring since 1973 have led to a change and a disorganization of the human population structure. Migratory phenomena and the diversification of production activities accelerate. The insecurity resulting from the civil wars and the devaluation of the CFA franc are the main causes of the important movement of rural population towards the capital. This situation has contributed to a rapid expansion of the rearing of short-cycle animals, in particular the Muscovy ducks.

To our knowledge, no work has been done to investigate the rearing and the productivity of Muscovy ducks in Chad. Yet, some poultry keepers claim that they prefer rearing Muscovy ducks than chickens because of the rusticity of ducks and their resistance to avian diseases.

The present survey on Muscovy duck rearing in N'Djaména, based on interviews, was carried out in order to characterize keepers, husbandry practices, performances, the exploitation (socio-economics), and to identify the constraints.

Back

The retrospective transversal investigation was conducted during the rainy season (August) 1998 in three districts of the city (first, second and fifth), divided into wards and squares. The selection criterion of these districts is the existence of a significant number of Muscovy duck keepers. Districts involved were Melezi, Madjorio and Farcha for the first district, Sabangali and Kabalaye for the second and Chagoua for the fifth. District, ward and square are administrative entities on which is exerted the communal authority.

During the pre-investigation period, information related to these entities, the number of duck keepers, the husbandry practices and the bibliographical data were collected. This information made it possible to prepare a questionnaire, to test it and to define sampling procedure. Thus, from the 50 randomly selected squares in 6 districts, 20 squares were randomly chosen. Out of these 20 squares to be surveyed, seven are located in the first district, five in the second and eight in the fifth. On the basis of information collected during the pre-investigation phase, a rate of survey of 20 percent was used for squares consisting of 10 duck keepers and more, and the totality for squares of less than 10 duck keepers. On the whole, 100 duck keepers were interviewed (i.e. 50 in the first district, 12 in the second and 38 in the fifth).

The main points of the questionnaire turned on

- duck keeper (age, ethnic group, social status, professional activity, duration and reasons for presence in the city, possession of a house and number of years of experience in duck rearing);

- duck rearing (numbers, structure and origin of birds, types of duck housings for breeding and laying, healthiness of the housings, feeding, criteria for selection and culling of breeding drakes, performances of ducks and socio-economics of the production). Based on information gathered in pre-investigation as well as from the literature (Anonymous, 1976; Mourthe, 1989; Romboli, 1990), following age groups were considered: ducklings (0-2 months), growing drakes (3-6 months), growing ducks (3-5 months), adult drakes (7 months and more) and adult ducks (6 months and more). The exploitation of birds occurs only after two months of age.

- production constraints (causes and importance of losses, predators and obstacles to development), principal symptoms of diseases responsible for mortality and the attitude of duck keepers towards sick birds.

The survey was carried out during the rainy season, but reproductive performances of the ducks were also asked about over the other seasons. This poses a problem of reliability (memory and experience of duck keepers) with regard to the information collected. The names of the seasons were given in the local Arabic language, the majority of urban dwellers usually speaking it fluently. The cold season (Shitet') goes from December to February, the dry and hot season (Seif') from March to May, the first rains (Rouchach') in June, the rainy season (Kharif') from July to October and the post-rainy season (Darat') from October to November.

Information relating to number of eggs laid, number of ducklings hatched and those still alive at 2 months of age was also collected. Similarly, some weighings were performed on young birds (males or females) and adults (males and females) in order to estimate the average live weight at sale within the age group. The survey was conducted within the homesteads, in presence of duck flocks in order to better fix the attention of duck keepers and to precise flock sizes and duck categories.

Data registration as well as calculation of frequencies and average mean values were carried out using the Epi-info' software (Dean et al., 1990).

Back

Characteristics of duck keepers and other types of livestock:
Duck keepers were men (53 percent), women (39 percent) and children (8 percent) with an average age of 42±12 years. All stated to be owners and responsible for the rearing of their flock. The majority (92 percent) was married with on average 1.17±0.5 women, and there were 7±4 persons per household. The average number of persons per household was higher than the value (5.3) reported by Anonymous (1998). Nevertheless, this reference indicates that, in households whose heads are about forty years old, values range from 6 to 9 persons.

What is in conformity with our findings. Duck keepers had on average 7±6 years of experience in the venture and live, for the majority (93 percent), in their own house. They belonged to the following ethnic groups: the Kabalaye (28 percent), originated from the prefecture of Tangilē; the Sara (37 percent), native of the prefectures of the Western Logone, Eastern Logone and the Mid-Chari; the Banana and Massa (34 percent), from the Mayo-Kebbi region and the Hadjarai (1 percent) from Guēra. They have lived in N'Djaména for 24±12 years. This is to be related to the turbid periods of the country. The reasons for the presence of duck keepers in N'Djaména city and their activities are presented in Table 1.

Back

Table 1: Reasons for presence of duck keepers in N'Djaména and their activities

Agricultural activities consisted of food crops, truck farming and the maintenance of orchards. With regard to pastoral activities, besides ducks, rearing of small ruminants and other monogastric animals is practised. Average flock sizes in the surveyed family farms were: sheep (2±1, n=10 households); goats (6±5, n=33); pigs (13±5, n=6); rabbits (3±1, n=4); chickens (7±6, n=41); guinea fowls (5±3, n=7); pigeons (9±7, n=8) and geese (2±0.7, n=5).

These multi-species farming systems were observed in 56 percent of surveyed farmers and the exclusive rearing of ducks in 44 percent of them. Farms, which in addition to ducks, had one or more other poultry species (chickens, guinea fowls, geese, pigeons) represented 15 percent, and 4 percent of homesteads associated ducks with other monogastric animals (pigs, rabbits, chickens). Slight differences noted between the results of our study and those reported by other authors (Centrœs, 1996; Thiombiano and Mattoni, 1995; Missohou et al., 1995) are explained by the fact that we targeted only areas where duck rearing does exist. For example, the north-eastern part of the city where the rearing of chickens and small ruminants is important was not considered during the present survey, because of the absence of duck rearing.

Back

Production characteristics: The structure of the surveyed household ducks is presented in Table 2. A low number of growing birds (excluding the not-exploited ducklings) was noted. This indicates that a significant number of growing birds is removed from the flocks. Theft, predation, mortality, consumption and sale are the principal causes of this.

Table 2: Structure of surveyed duck population in the N'Djaména city

The average flock size was 9±6 birds. This result is close to that reported by Kuit et al. (1985) in rural areas of Central Mali. On the other hand, it is lower than those observed by Ajala et al. (1998) in rural Nigeria and by Kuit et al. (1985) in urban areas. In surveyed households, a ration of about one duck per person was observed.

With 665 duck keepers counted during the pre-investigation phase in the 6 districts, duck number was estimated at approximately 6,000. By adding to it those of the four other wards of the city (Ardepdjoumal, Moursal, Dembē and Amtougoui) where the rearing of Muscovy duck is significant, an estimate of 9,000 to 10,000 ducks for N'Djaména is plausible. The duck to drake ratio was 3.4. These stocks were founded at the origin by purchase (74 percent), gift (23 percent) and inheritance (3 percent). The socio-economic importance of poultry in the sphere of human relationships would explain differences observed between our results and those reported by other authors (Hassan and Aliyu, 1996; Ajala et al., 1998).

The sex ratio is lower than standards recommended by Anonymous (1976), Romboli (1990) and Anonymous (1991a). This low ratio is explained by the need for hard cash that obliges peasants to preferentially sell breeding stocks (often large-sized birds) whose commercial values are high. For duck keepers, this is not prejudicial because they can always count on breeding drakes from the neighbourhood to ensure mating of their ducks while they scavenge together. Moreover, duck farmers do prefer to keep just one breeding drake per flock to avoid brawls between males. This sex ratio would ensure a good fertility of eggs through a better care of the females.

Back

Duck housings and their maintenance:
Duck houses made of threshed mud were largely used (93 percent), and other possibilities were: no housings (3 percent), houses made of clay with straw roof (2 percent) and straw houses (2 percent). These small-sized duck houses are hastily built in a corner of the homestead. All categories of ducks shelter there all the year round. Laying nests were located, in majority (81 percent), in duck houses, but also in humans' dwelling houses (14 percent) and kitchens (5 percent). The number of poultry placed is in conformity with that reported by Kuit et al. (1985) in Central Mali.

Cleanings were ensured irregularly:
at least once per day (14 percent), at least once per week (69 percent), once per month (7 percent) and once per year (10 percent). It is in these housings or their small yard that feeds and drinking water for ducks were supplied in various utensils.

Feeding:
Cereals brans (sorghum, maize, rice, etc.), local brewer's grains (sorghum and rice) and residues from the preparation of indigenous alcohol were the principal feed resources (Table 3). They were distributed to ducks by 97 percent of farmers, at least once a day and without any distinction of age. The remaining percentage of farmers (3 percent) supplement ducks at least once a week. Feeds were bought (72 percent), produced (25 percent) or received at no cost (3 percent) by farmers. Our results are higher than those reported by Kuit et al. (1985) in Central Mali. Moreover, despite supplementary feeds, the scavenging system of rearing remains dominating.

Table 3: Types of feeds supplied, feeders and drinkers used for Muscovy ducks in N'Djaména.

Back

Feeders and drinkers were used for all age groups. Springs for the watering of ducks were traditional wells (76 percent) and drinking water drillings or taps (24 percent).

Management of the reproduction and performances of ducks: More than half of poultry farmers (57 percent) had a breeding drake. The remaining percentage counted on breeding drakes of the neighbourhood to ensure mating of their ducks. These breeding drakes were chosen mainly within farmers' duck flocks (56 percent), from the neighbourhood (22 percent), at the market or from another district (22 percent). This demonstrates a certain confidence that duck farmers place on they genetic stocks, as they know their origin. However, the risk is that this practice could, in the long run, pose problems of consanguinity in their flocks.

Farmers chose breeding drakes either before 7 months of age (12 percent) or after (46 percent). The others (42 percent) were ignorant of the exact age of choice or did not take it into account. No exchange of breeding drakes between farmers from different wards of the city was reported. The majority of duck farmers (60 percent) did not privilege any criterion for the choice of future breeding drake.

On the other hand, 40 percent adopted the following criteria: the colour of plumage (white or grey-white) 16 percent, the origin for males descending from prolific ducks 23 percent, the weight and the format 48 percent, and finally, the colour of plumage, the weight and the format together 13 percent. Improvement of the farming system and seeking for aesthetics (colour of plumage) were the mentioned purposes. Average age for culling breeding drakes was 2.6±1.2 years, this value being close to that reported in Anonymous (1976). Old age of birds and financial needs were the dominant reasons (64 percent). Sale was the mode of culling for the majority of duck farmers.

Back

Duck lays on average 2.2±0.7 times per year, with an average clutch size of 14 or 15 eggs and an average number of eggs of 33±12 per year. The average number of clutches per year as well as the number of eggs per laying are consistent with values reported by Mourthe (1989). On the other hand, the number of eggs per year observed during our investigation is lower than the production level reported in Anonymous (1991b). The differences between these results might be explained by fluctuating feeding during the year. Feed intakes while scavenging during the day does not make it possible for ducks to balance their daily rations.

The distribution of duck performances according to seasons highlights average parameters given in Table 4. In the wet season (from June to November), ducks showed better reproductive performances. The decrease in temperature during this season and the existence of many temporary ponds in certain wards of the city would, thus, create favourable conditions for the reproduction of ducks. During this period, greenery also appears in the surroundings of these ponds.

Table 4: Average reproductive performance parameters of local ducks according to seasons in N'Djaména

Hatching rates ranged from 80 to 85 percent during the rainy season (between June and November) versus 59 to 78 percent during the dry season (from December to May). Low performances were recorded during the warm period (Seif') where average temperatures in the shade oscillate between 30 and 45•C. The low hatching rate is explained, then, by the rotting of eggs during this period. The differences noted between the seasons were, however, not significant. On the whole of the year, the hatchability is close to those reported by other authors (Romboli, 1990; Guœye, 1999), but lower than that reported by Hassan and Aliyu (1996).

Average age at weaning of ducklings was 63±28 days. However, 56 percent of duck farmers mentioned it to be between 45 and 60 days. This result is consistent with that reported by Hassan and Aliyu (1996).

Socio-economics of the production: The production efficiency rate was approximately 120 percent, which appears low. Purposes for keeping ducks were: sale and home consumption at the same time (53 percent), home consumption only (39 percent), sale of ducks only (5 percent) and sale of duck eggs only (3 percent). Consumption of duck meat occurred usually within the homestead (61 percent), during feasts (25 percent) and as special banquets for family guests (14 percent).

For 90 percent of duck farmers having consumed 579 ducks and 52 percent having sold 487 birds in a year, average numbers were 6 and 9 birds, respectively. Sales took place mostly on farms. Indeed, the price differences being insignificant between wards of the city, which are the production areas, and the various markets of N'Djaména, duck keepers do find it profitable to sell ducks on farms or to neighbours. Centrœs (1996) made the same observations on the production of urban farmers in Bamako, Mali. Out of 1,068 studied ducks, 54 percent were consumed and 46 percent were sold in a year (Table 5).

Back

Table 5: Numbers consumed and sold in a year, average prices per unit, average liveweights per duck category and receipts from sales in the studied sample.

Home consumption, which is more important than sales, contributes thus to the improvement of the protein supply to town dwellers. It also enables duck keepers (salaried or not) to save money in the household budgets devoted to food expenses. Food expenses amount to 41 percent of the budget of salaried persons and to 60 percent of that of non-salaried persons (Anonymous, 1998).

The 579 ducks consumed by the surveyed farmers were equivalent to savings of FCFA 1,097,100 for the households. Assuming an average price of FCFA 2,000 per unit, for all duck categories, the average value of annual production (average values of sales and consumption) per household is estimated at FCFA 30,000, the average income per inhabitant amounting to about FCFA 98,000. For the whole city, the global turnover of this production might be of the order of 18 to 20 million FCFA.

The average annual receipts earned by duck keepers from sales were about FCFA 17,000, i.e. FCFA 879,700 (total receipt from sales) divided by 52 (number of duck keepers having actually sold ducks). The generated money was used to purchase cereals (36.5 percent), clothes (25.0 percent), school fees and health care (30.8 percent) and payment of the civic tax (7.7 percent).

Back

Finally, it should be pointed out that, by comparison with prices of local chickens raised traditionally, ducks are cheaper. In N'Djaména, a 2-kg-chicken costs less than FCFA 2,500 whereas this price allows to acquire a duck weighing more than 3 kg. Moreover, the supply of ducks to markets is not regular all the year.

Production constraints: Diseases, thefts, accidents and predation constitute major concerns for duck farmers. Out of 996 losses (all age groups) recorded in a year, diseases were responsible for 57 percent of cases, thefts for 19 percent, accidents for 14 percent and predation for 10 percent. Children and road traffic were the major causes of accidents. Pigs and dogs were the most reported predators. Besides these constraints, duck keepers identified the absence of technical assistance (42 percent), the lack of means (35 percent), the problem of space in terms of availability or absence of fence (15 percent) and the quality of feeds (8 percent) as major obstacles to the expansion of their farm.

Nervous symptoms, especially the paralysis of growing ducks of less than 5 months (58 percent), the inflammation of the pigial gland (36 percent), digestive symptoms of which the white, yellow or green diarrhoea (3 percent) and respiratory symptoms (3 percent) were responsible for the mortality of ducks. The attitude of farmers towards sick ducks was varied: 39 percent were undecided, 29 percent practised modern health care using anti-parasitic and anti-infectious drugs from the commerce, 26 percent relied on traditional remedies using plant barks, roots, fruits and leaves, 4 percent isolated birds and 2 percent systematically slaughtered them.

Health problems relating to digestive disorders reported by farmers were probably linked to parasites. A coproscopic study (Ngolao, 1998) carried out on 115 ducks from these farms revealed a parasitic prevalence of 53 percent, main parasites being Eimeria spp., Ascaridia galli, Trichomonas spp. and Hymenolepis spp. This situation is attributable to the defective hygiene (feeding, housing) and to the predominance of the scavenging husbandry system. Cases of paralysis, inflammations of the pigial gland and stiff neck were also reported.

Back

The study shows that the rearing of ducks is practised by all family members (men, women and children) in N'Djaména, Chad. Different socioprofessional groups are devoted to this activity and consider it as a secondary occupation. Most farmers raise ducks along with other animal species. Housing and feeding practices are still, in most cases, rudimentary. Even if they are rounded up in a house during the night, ducks scavenge in the daytime. Besides these practices, diseases, thefts, accidents and lack of technical assistance constitute major constraints.

Socio-economic elements demonstrated genuine advantages of this venture. It plays a significant role in the supply of animal produce to the town. The selling of the production does not pose a problem. Reproductive performances are however low. They can be improved through a balanced feeding which should be distributed in adequate hygienic conditions. Similarly, a better care of ducklings during the first weeks after hatching as well as good housing conditions would give positive results. Furthermore, health-related problems and production parameters deserve a thorough investigation. They could be resolved through interventions in the domains of technical assistance and advice to duck farmers. A development programme would be highly appreciated by duck keepers.

Acknowledgements: We would like to express our gratitude to Mr. Denis Bastianelli of the CIRAD-EMVT for his pertinent observations.

Back

Ajala, M.K., Nwagu, B.I. & Otchere, E.O., (1998): Socio-economics of free-range poultry production among agropastoral Fulani women in Kaduna State, Nigeria. In: Proceeding of the Silver Anniversary Conference of the NSAP and the Inaugural Conference of the WASAP, 21-26 March 1998, Abeokuta, Nigeria, pp. 264-265

Anonymous (1976): La basse-cour en zone tropicale. Collection Les Classiques Africaines, Issy-les-Moulineaux, France

Anonymous (1991a): L’ēlevage des canards. Tome 1. Collection Apprentissage Agricole, FAO, Rome, Italie

Anonymous (1991b): Manuel d’aviculture en zone tropicale. Collection manuel et prēcis d’ēlevage, 2^œ ēdition, IEMVT - Ministœre de la Coopēration, France.

Anonymous (1995): Recensement Gēnēral de la Population et de l’Habitat 1993. Volume 3, Tome 2, Ministœre de l’Intērieur et de la Sēcuritē, N’Djamēna, Tchad

Anonymous (1998): EnquŌte sur la Consommation et le Secteur Informel au Tchad 1995-1996. Rapport final, Ministœre du Plan et de l’Amēnagement du Territoire, N’Djamēna, Tchad

Centrœs, J.M. (1996): L’ēlevage et l’agriculture en zones urbaines et pēriurbaines dans deux villes sahēliennes: Bamako et Bobo-Dioulasso. Cahiers d’Agriculture 5: 373-381

Dean, A.G., Dean, J.A., Burton, A.H. & Dicker, R.C. (1990): Epi-info version 5.1 word processing, database and statistics system for epidemiology on microcomputers. USA, Incorporated, Stone Mountain, Georgia, USA.

Guœye, E.F. (1999): Hatchability in African villages. International Hatchery Practice 13 (5): 19-23

Hassan, W.A. and Aliyu, A.T. (1996): Reproductive performance of ducks in semi-arid Northern Nigeria. ANRPD Newsletter 6 (1): 4-5

Kuit, H.G., Traorē, A. & Wilson, R.T. (1985): A profil of small-holder poultry production in Central Mali. In: Proceedings of 2nd International DLG-Symposium, Poultry Production in Hot Climates of the Middle East and Far East, 16-19 June 1985, Sporthel "Harzstern", Goslar-Hahnenklee, Germany, pp. 199-219

Mopate, L.Y., Hendrikx, P., Imadine, M. & Idriss, A. (1997): Exploitation des poulets dans la rēgion du Centre-Est du Tchad. Communication prēsentēe ł l’Atelier du RIDAF, 9-13 dēcembre 1997, M’Bour, Sēnēgal

Missohou, A., Ly, C., Diēdhiou, M., Tillard, E. & Diouf, S. (1995): Elevage citadin de mouton ł Dakar: Structure et productivitē. Proceeding of 8th International Conference of Institutes of Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Berlin, Germany, pp. 208-212

Mourthe, M. (1989): Les oies et canards. Collection la vie en vert, Dargaud ēditeur, 8^œ ēdition

Ngolao N. (1998): Elevage et pathologies des canards dans N’Djamēna et ses banlieues. Rapport de fin de stage, Laboratoire de Farcha, N’Djamēna, Tchad

Romboli, I. (1990): Quelques donnēes sur l’ēlevage extensif du canard de Barbarie. In: Actes du Colloque de Belgrade du 5 au 7 novembre 1897 (Editeur scientifique: B. Sauveur), Options Mēditerranēennes, Sērie A / n•7, 1990, pp. 127-137

Thiombiano, D. & Mattoni, M. (1995): Caractēristiques de l’ēlevage des petits ruminants dans la ville de Bobo-Dioulasso et sa pēriphērie (Sud-Ouest du Burkina Faso). Proceeding of 8th International Conference of Institutes of Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Berlin, Germany, pp. 213-218

Back