THE EFFECT OF FREE-RANGE SYSTEM OF POULTRY KEEPING ON CHICKEN PRODUCTION IN ANGWETANGWET PARISH, ADEKOKWOK SUBCOUNTY

IN LIRA DISTRICT

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the study

Animal welfare is increasingly viewed as a factor affecting the quality of animal products while being an important tool of marketing strategy. The management system used in highly productive farms is often subjected to harsh criticism, one of the reasons being its failure to provide adequate welfare. In many countries, this attitude has led to the development of poultry meat production under less intensive rearing conditions. Currently, there is rapidly growing interest in the potential of specific foods to influence various aspects of the psychological state and well-being. A survey of American consumers showed that they purchase organic foods because of the production method (Onyango et al. 2006). Furthermore, consumers believe that the meat of free-range chickens is healthier than that of birds kept in a poultry house only (Fanatico et al. 2006). It is also believed that “natural”, less intensive management systems provide chickens with higher welfare levels, resulting in much better product quality (Pavlovski et al. 2009). However, the evaluation of overall welfare is very difficult.

Livestock production constitutes an important sub-sector of Uganda’s agriculture, contributing about 9% of Gross Domestic Product and 17% of Agricultural Gross Domestic Product. It is an integral part of the agricultural system in many parts of the country. Livestock contribute significantly to the welfare of the population at both household and national levels by: being the source of food such as meat, milk and eggs, which are sources of essential nutrients; providing income to farmers through sale of animals and their products; serving as mobile banks from which the funds can be liquidated for other uses; using the dung as fertilizer for sustainable agriculture; providing draught power for ploughing and transport and; contributing to socio-cultural values of society in the form of dowry, gifts and pride.

In Uganda, local poultry is an important animal resource in most rural areas. They are easy to acquire and, under improved management, their reproduction and production is high enough to realize faster income generation due to the minimal initial investment. In rural communities, free range chickens contribute significantly to the livelihoods of farmers (Kirunda et al., 2003). However, rural poultry does not rate highly in the mainstream national economies because of the lack of measurable indicators of its contribution to macroeconomic indices as Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Economic evaluation of livestock at household and national levels is complicated by the multiple functions of livestock in the economy. Moreover, estimating the value of rural poultry is even more difficult than for other livestock because of the lack of reliable data (Kitalyi, 1998). Indeed, Ssewanyana et al., (2003b) remarked that scientific reports or investigations on local poultry in Uganda are scarce. The high illiteracy rate among local poultry keepers complicates record keeping that would have served to evaluate the sector.

This is the main management system for the majority of local poultry in Uganda (Byarugaba, 2002; Ssewanyana et al., 2003c; Kyarisiima 2004). The free-range chicken production system is an integrated part of the farming system with low input-output. Local poultry rearing serves as a means to convert low-quality feed (household waste) into high protein. The birds range freely during the day and are usually gathered at night into a basic shelter for protection against predators. Local poultry houses meet some of the basic requirements like protection against inclement weather but rarely provide adequate space and ventilation. The hygiene and provision of a clean environment in the house is also inadequate. Studies done reveal that housing of local chicken is not a priority for farmers. For example, Ssewanyana et al. (2003c) observed that in Lira, only 37% of the farmers housed the chicken at night. The scavenger (extensive) system has little management interventions from the owner, and there is no national data on the number of households that keep and own local poultry.

The free-range poultry production may sometimes include mixed type of species, especially chickens and turkeys. But this is not widespread and it is mostly in the eastern parts of the country. All species and ages run together and interaction with wild birds is common. In this system rearing losses are very severe due to disease, poor nutrition and predators. Kirunda et al. (2003) estimated that mortality of indigenous poultry under scavenging conditions is 70% and above in chicks up to 8 weeks of age, which greatly inhibit increase in the number of local poultry populations. Presence of predators exacerbates the losses but local poultry keepers have improvised by applying dye on chicks. This may help to increase the flock sizes albeit on a small scale.

Local poultry usually scavenge for most of their feed requirements and the feed resource in this system is limited to the available nutrients in the area that include insects, seeds, discarded grain and kitchen wastes. There is no provision of water by the farmer allowing flocks to get water from any available source. Most times such water is found in mud water pools.

1.2 Problem statement

In Uganda, local poultry is an important animal resource in most rural areas. They are easy to acquire and, under improved management, their reproduction and production is high enough to realize faster income generation due to the minimal initial investment. In rural communities, free range chickens contribute significantly to the livelihoods of farmers (Kirunda et al., 2003). However, rural poultry does not rate highly in the mainstream national economies because of the lack of measurable indicators of its contribution to macroeconomic indices as Gross Domestic Product (GDP). It is also envisaged that Local poultry production significantly contributes to the overall poultry production in the country with numerous benefits to the farmers and yet this looks insignificant to the farmers of Angwetangwet parish in Adekokwok Sub County in lira district. It is for this reason that this research is undertaking

1.3 General objective

The effect of free range system of poultry keeping on chicken production in Angwetangwet parish, Adekokwok Sub County in lira district

1.4 Specific objectives

1. To find out the relationship between poultry keeping methods and poultry production
2. To find out the relationship between poultry keeping and farmers’ incomes

1.5 Research hypotheses

There is a relationship between poultry keeping methods and poultry production

There is a relationship between poultry keeping and farmers’ incomes

1.6 Scope of the study

1.6.1 Time scope

The study covered the effect of free range system of poultry keeping on chicken production in Angwetangwet parish, Adekokwok Sub County in lira district for 5 years ranging from 2009 to 2013. This period is preferred by the researcher because it is the period which is relevant to make inference when drawing up conclusions and recommendations basing on the urgency of the study matter. The study will be carried out between February and May 2015.

1.6.2 Area scope

The study was carried out amongst the poultry farmers of Angwetangwet parish, Adekokwok Sub County in lira district

1.6.3 Population scope

The study population included mainly poultry farmers of different categories in Angwetangwet parish.  The researcher selected 60 respondents who are the indigenous residents of the area

1.7 Significance of the study

The research will benefit other researchers, as it would provide information about poultry keeping and production.

This research will help farmers realize the best methods of poultry keeping since it will provide a detailed assessment of various methods

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter entails literature related to the two objectives of the study that include but not limited the relationship between poultry keeping methods and production and the relationship between poultry keeping and farmers’ incomes so that the information gathered is relevant to the study and to create consistency and uniformity hence giving readers a clear picture of what is being researched on. The chapter includes empirical or past studies revealing the gaps that were left in the given studies. The section also explains opinions of past researchers that are appropriate in understanding the problem.

2.2 The relationship between poultry keeping methods and poultry production

As is generally known, poultry meat quality is a complex issue that can be viewed in different aspects. Bird rearing system is one of many non-genetic factors that can considerably affect meat quality (Bogosavljević-Bosković et al. 2006b) hence the poultry production is also affected as well. Large discrepancies found in the literature concerning evaluation of the effect of alternative production systems on poultry meat quality probably result from different age and genetic origin of the birds studied.

According to Castellini et al. (2002b) and Jahan et al. (2004) more natural rearing conditions and increased activity of the birds contribute to the lower lipid content in broiler meat, and pasture intake generates their meat with a greater degree of consumer acceptability (Ponte et al. 2008). It is known that fast-growing broiler chickens are not adapted to extensive management systems, but they are commonly used under extensive conditions for economic reasons (Castellini et al. 2006).

Burgos et al. (2003) studied and classified poultry farming in Thailand into three systems. The first system was the traditional production system. The second system was the semi-industrial one. This type of system was quite large and connected with the commercial production system. The third system was the industrial system. Aengwanich et al. (2007) defined domestic poultry production clusters  (PPCs) as “areas of concentrated poultry production in rural areas usually separated from residential  areas—where farms practice certain economies of scale and use comparative advantages of localities,  resulting in improvements to and increased intensification of poultry production. The farms in the cluster apply standard biological safety and environmentally friendly practices and install related facilities. Major drives for the formation of PPCs and changes to PPCs include government programs for enhanced bio-security at both national and local levels, extended families, cooperatives and improved links to contracting companies that supply inputs and purchase outputs and outbreaks of diseases affects chicken production.

2.3 The relationship between poultry keeping and farmers’ incomes

The turnover of poultry breeders is high, due to price fluctuations (concurrence of imports, overproduction periods) but also the technical and economical fragility of farms in a rather speculative activity. Therefore the knowledge of many breeders is very low, especially in terms of health management. Bad practices associated with some unsuited buildings and equipment or technical management favor the emergence of sanitary problems.

Strohm and Hoeffler (2006) argue that contract farming has been gaining popularity in developing countries. Some of the enterprises where contract farming is widely used are French beans and other horticultural crops (Kenya and Ethiopia), fruits such as pineapples mangoes and passion fruits (Ghana), cotton (Zimbambwe) and poultry (Kenya). Indeed, much of the success in the 20 horticulture industry in Kenya, Zambia and Ethiopia has for instance been attributed to contract 21 farming with producer organization (Narrod et al, 2009; Okello and Swinton, 2007)

Large–scale farmers/commercial farmers involved in poultry production are often highly dependent on this income and have few other income opportunities. A high 60 – 100 percent of their income is derived from poultry production. In addition, they invest most of their capital in this (Dolberg et al., 2005).

Poultry production in these systems is generally not the main household income generation activity. Otte et al, (2008) argue that in developing countries, which have such systems; poultry is an important supply of protein and have a social value. The cash input costs are limited and products are used for subsistence. However, poultry can be converted into cash in case of emergency needs such as food, fuel, healthcare, medicine, funerals, education, clothing, pocket money, festivities. Thus, it has several functions as ‘insurance’ or ‘savings account” for household (Otte et al., 2008).

Poultry products as a source of food are very important. They contribute to a well-balanced diet for people, and they are especially important for children, the elderly and pregnant women. As poultry products contribute vitamin A, Iron, Zinc and vitamin B12, they are very significant for growth and development of humans (Iannotti, 2009). Iannotti, (2009) suggests that HPAI can have the negative impact on human heath due to its influence on nutrition.

CHAPTER THREE

METHODLOGY

3.0 Introduction

This chapter will dwell on the methodology to be used in the study. It will include; research sampling design, research area sample, research sampling techniques, instrument of data collection, procedure and data analysis.

3.1 Research Design.

The researcher used survey research design because it helped him to get information from different people (farmers).

3.2 Research Area.

This study was conducted in three selected villages in Angwetangwet, Adekokwok Sub County, and Lira District.

3.3 Sample.

The sample of this study included men and women who are farmers. Men were chosen because they are the head of families. This makes them to be in a better position to provide information about free system of poultry keeping for chicken production.

Women were chosen because they take long hours at home with chicken and can give information on the production of chicken under free system.

3.4 Sample Technique.

The following samples were used.

The farmers were purposely selected, for instance, 20 farmers from each three villages and therefore making a total of 60 farmers.

Farmers were randomly selected form the three villages.

Table 1

Source: primary data

3.5 Instruments

The following instruments were used to collect data.

Questionnaire.

The researcher gave farmers questionnaires because they know how to read and write.

Interview guide:

This guided the farmers to get information from .the field

The researcher picked 20 farmers, gathered them and asked them some questions within the area of study because some farmers were illiterate and could not read and write.

3.6 Procedure of data collection.

The researcher gave introductory letter to chairmen of Angwetangwet parish who held discussion with the researcher to allow him carry out research in Angwetangwet parish.

The researcher presented an introductory letter and questionnaire, the chairmen of Angwetangwet parish to direct the researcher to the chosen villages for his research

The researcher was directed in the chosen villages by the chairman of each village where the researcher carried his research by choosing 20 farmers from each village. This was done by randomly selecting farmers who are both men and women.

After choosing the farmers, the researcher gave the farmers questionnaire to fill. The questionnaires were given to farmers who cannot read and write and those who cannot read and write are given guided questions by the researcher.

3.7 Data analysis.

Descriptive techniques. The data from different instruments were summarized in the table with their frequencies and percentages.

CHAPTER FOUR

ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter gives the description of the background variables, data analysis, presentation and interpretation of the findings from the study about the effect of free range system of poultry keeping on chicken production in Angwetangwet parish, Adekokwok Sub County in lira district

Table 4.1 Gender of the respondent

Source: primary data

The table above illustrates that majority (60%) of the respondents were males while 40% were females. This shows that the views of the male respondents dominated those of the female counterparts concerning issues of the free range system in other words males are more involved in this type of farming than the females.

Table 4.2: Marital status of respondents

Source: primary data

The findings in table above illustrates that 48.3% of the respondents interviewed were married; another 21.7% of them were single while only13.3% were widowed. Those who were divorced had 16.7% of the responses implying that married people have enough time to carry out free range system because they are always at home women are good mangers at home when it comes to farming activities.

Table 4.3: Age bracket of respondents

Source: primary data

From the table above, the majority (46.6%) of the respondents were in the age group of 40-50 years followed by those in the age group of 20-30 years with 21.7%. Those in the age group of 30-40 years were 16.7% and 15% were 50 years and above. This indicates that most of the respondents were mature enough to give reliable information about the study problem.

Table 4.4 Education level

Source: primary data

The table above shows that majority 43.3% of the respondents had attained secondary education, followed by those who had attained tertiary level with26.7%. Eighteen point three (18.3%) percent had reached primary level of education while 11.7% had informal education. This implies that majority of the respondents were knowledgeable enough to provide relevant and accurate information given their experience in free range system of farming.

Table 4.5: Occupational status of respondents

Source: primary data

According to the findings from the table above, forty five percent of the respondents were farmers followed by 26.7% of them who were business people while those who were civil servants were represented by 21.6% of the responses. The smallest proportions of 6.7% of the respondents were still students respectively. This means that most of the respondents who were farmers and have taken free range system seriously in their homes and have embraced this system compared to other systems like zero grazing.

Table 4.6: The period of using free range system

Source: primary data

Results above exemplifies that most of the respondents have used free range system as suggested by 41.7% of the respondents followed by thirty five percent of the respondents suggested that have used the system for 6-10 years and those who have used the system between 1-5 years were represented by 15% of the respondents. The smallest proportions of 8.3% of the respondents suggested 16 years and above. This means that most of the respondents have embraced free range system and are comfortable with it given enough space they have.

Table 4.7 Cause(s) of the loss of birds

Source: primary data

The results in table above illustrates that the majority (45%) of the respondents suggested that the cause of birds loss is predators, 21.7% of the respondents suggested new castle diseases while 20% of the respondents stated theft of the birds and other 13.3% of the respondents suggested harsh weather. The findings revealed that the birds are exposed to predators like eagles, snakes in Adekokwok Sub County in lira district

Table 4.8 Risks are closely associated with rearing chicken using the free range system

Source: primary data

The results in the table indicate risks associated with free range system as suggested by majority (45%) of the respondents. This was followed by 30% of the respondents who suggested that they faced a risk of loss of eggs and birds. Some other respondents revealed that birds are also exposed to diseases with 16.7% and 8.3% suggested disunity respectively. This means that birds do not have enough protection and this reduces on the egg production an expansion of the farm and a lot need to be done if better yields are to be realized.

Table 4.9 whether farmers give supplementary feeds

Source: primary data

Respondents revealed that they do not provide supplementary feeds to the birds as suggested by the majority73.3% of the respondents while 26.7% of them were opposed to the statement and said for them they try to when they have access to these feeds. This shows that many farmers consider free range system as the easiest way of farming because it is not expensive as the birds move and feed on different feeds like grass, thrown foods, grass hoppers among others.

Table 4.10 Return on investment to a poultry farmer

Source: primary data

According to the findings, majority (31%) of the respondents suggested that poultry farming has  value because it is source of proteins to most of them. This was followed by 50% of the respondents who suggested source of income as stated by respondents. The findings further portray manure as fertilizer to their farms with 13.3% of the responses. The smallest percentage of 5% of the respondents suggested that it upholds the cultural values because it is of value for every household to have chicken in their homes in other words it is prestige.

Table 4.11 How risks can be better managed

Source: primary data

From the table above, 45% of the respondents suggested vaccination of birds as away of managing risks followed by twenty five percent of the respondents who suggested provision of supplementary feeds. It was also found that providing security or looking after the birds with 13.3 % of the responses while 16.7% of the respondents stated fencing the compound. This therefore can help to reduce on the risks that the birds are exposed to.

Table 4.12 whether someone really go commercial in chicken production under the free range system

Source: primary data

According to the findings presented in the table above, most respondents 76.7% suggested that it is good for people to go commercial in chicken production under the free range system

While the minority represented by (23.3%) of the respondents did not agree to the statement. The findings therefore imply that majority of the respondents were doing well with commercial production emphasized most people to join as the only way they can improve on the welfare and they will not regret this kind of system

Table 4.13 reasons why someone should go commercial in chicken production under the free range system

Source: primary data

The results in the above table demonstrate the importance of doing commercial production as compared to subsistence in chicken production because it increases on the household income as suggested by 51.7% of the respondents followed by improves in the health of farmers especially proteins twenty three point three percent of the responses. The findings also exemplify that 15% of the respondents revealed that it increases on the agricultural production because of diversification as a result of expansion. A few of the respondents further suggested that creation of employment opportunities in bigger farms (10%). Therefore, commercial chicken production is the way to go.

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS, SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE STUDY

5.1 Introduction

This chapter presents discussion of the findings, summary, conclusion and recommendations to the study meant to examine the effect of free range system of poultry keeping on chicken production in Angwet Angwet parish in Lira district.

5.2 Discussion of findings

5.2.1 The relationship between poultry keeping methods and poultry production

According to the results in the study the cause of birds loss are predators, this findings is also in line with Castellini et al. (2002b) and Jahan et al. (2004) more natural rearing conditions and increased activity of the birds contribute to their loss, some of the respondents also further stressed that new castle diseases also has a great influence on the loss of the birds, this view is also shared by (Bogosavljević-Bosković et al. 2006b), who states that it is generally known, poultry meat quality is a complex issue that can be viewed in different aspects. Bird rearing system is one of many non-genetic factors that can considerably affect meat quality hence the poultry production is also affected as well, he further stresses that poultry diseases like diseases like new castle disease greatly affects the quality of poultry.

5.2.2 The relationship between poultry keeping and farmers’ incomes

According to the findings in the study most of the respondents were farmers this shows that most of the poultry keepers are people of low social class, only few of the respondents were civil servants, Otte et al, (2008), who states that Poultry production in these systems is generally not the main household income generation activity, in developing countries, which have such systems; poultry is an important supply of protein and have a social value. The cash input costs are limited and products are used for subsistence. However, poultry can be converted into cash in case of emergency needs such as food, fuel, healthcare, medicine, funerals, education, clothing, pocket money, festivities.

According to the findings the respondents suggested that poultry farming has value because it is source of proteins to most of them this results indicates that most of the farmers who keep poultry gain from it and are able to ensure that they get maximum profitability, this is also in line with Iannotti, (2009), who states that Poultry products as a source of food are very important. They contribute to a well-balanced diet for people, and they are especially important for children, the elderly and pregnant women. As poultry products contribute vitamin A, Iron, Zinc and vitamin B12, they are very significant for growth and development of humans, suggests that HPAI can have the negative impact on human heath due to its influence on nutrition.

5.2 Summary of the Results

The findings revealed that majority (60%) of the respondents were males while 40% were females. The majority (46.6%) of the respondents were in the age group of 40-50 years followed by those in the age group of 20-30 years with 21.7%. Those in the age group of 30-40 years were 16.7% and 15% were 50years and above. According to the findings, forty five percent of the respondents were farmers followed by 26.7% of them who were business persons while civil servants were represented by 21.6% of the responses. The smallest proportions of 6.7 of the respondents were still students respectively.

According to the findings, majority (45%) of the respondents suggested that birds are highly exposed to predators like eagles and snakes. This was followed by 21.7% of the respondents who suggested new castle diseases as stated by respondents. The findings further portray that theft of the birds by neighbors who don’t wish others well with 20% of the responses. The smallest percentage of 13.3% of the respondents suggested harsh weather affecting the life of birds especially young birds.

The results demonstrate that Risks are closely associated with rearing chicken using the free range system which includes destruction of crops as suggested by 45% of the respondents followed by loss of eggs and birds with thirty percent of the responses. The findings also exemplify that 16.7% of the respondents revealed that birds have risks of diseases under free range system and also high crime causes disunity with 8.3% of the responses. However the above risks can be managed by provision of vaccination of the birds as suggested by the majority 45% of the respondents, followed by 25% of the respondents who suggested provision of supplementary feeds and also providing security as suggested by 13.3% of the respondents. A few of 16.7% suggested fencing of the compound.

Results illustrate that 51.7% of the respondents suggested relevance of commercial chicken production as being; improves household income followed by 23.3% of the respondents who suggested improvement on the health of farmers through proteins. It was also found that commercial chicken production improves on agricultural production through diversification with 15% of the responses while 10% of the respondents stated employment opportunity creation among the farmers and those in business.

5.3 Conclusion

In conclusion, the return on investment to poultry farmers includes; protein, increases income source, manure and upholding cultural values. The risks associated with rearing chicken using the free range system as suggested by respondents are; predators, new castle diseases, , harsh weather conditions and theft. However these risks can be managed by provision of supplementary feeds, vaccinations of the birds and fencing the compound. Finally commercial chicken production is the way to go for farmers as it improves on their household income, increase in agricultural production, health and creation of employment opportunities.

5.4 Recommendation to the study

• Famers should carry on routine inspection and to thoroughly check the birds for signs of ill health, injury or disease. This can be best done in the morning, and also afternoon/evening prior to lights out. It is important that the whole of the flock is walked, and that no birds are missed. It is also important that the lighting sufficiently bright that all the birds can be clearly seen. This can be achieved by turning the house lights up, or alternatively, by using an additional row of inspection lights, or by hand-held torch.
• There should be careful disposal of dead birds to reduce the risk of disease spread back to the flock and other species, reduces the likelihood of car cases being removed by scavengers, which can transmit disease, reduces the risk of blow flies (Caliphora sp.), which can also transmit disease. The most effective and reliable way of disposing of dead birds is by burning in a properly constructed incinerator fuelled by gas or oil and incorporating an after-burner.
• Improve on Nutrition of the birds by providing supplementary feeds. Diet can exert a profound influence on bird welfare and performance, so it is essential that the quality and quantity of the rations are adequate. Feeding birds in alternative systems is generally regarded as more difficult than feeding birds in cage systems, because of the additional competition between birds for feeder space, and because of greater fluctuations in house temperature.
• There should be Record keeping by farmers doing livestock production. It is particularly important in the case of free range as it aids early detection of potential problems. As minimum records should be kept of mortality and culls, egg numbers, average egg weight (weekly), feed consumption, water usage and house temperature. This is particularly useful where more than one person may be responsible for looking after the birds.
• Good pasture management is essential in free range laying systems, if the ground is to remain in good condition and the problems of poaching and the build-up of parasitic intestinal worms are to be avoided. Worm infestation and cocodiosis can seriously compromise bird health and welfare. The signs of a worm infestation include a general loss of condition, diarrhea, loss of egg size and numbers.

REFERENCES

Byarugaba, D. 2007. The Structure and Importance ot the Commercial ana village Dasea Poultry Systems in Uganda. FAO – Consultancy Report.

Kajura, C. & Bwali, S. 2006. Hoima District NAADS Annual Progress Reports, July-June 2005/2006

Kajura, C. & Bwali, S. 2007. Hoima District NAADS Annual Progress Report, July 2006 – June 2007

katule, A.M. 1998. Study on the Productivity of Indigenous chickens under village management  conditions. In proceedings of the 25th Scientific Conference AICC – Arusha, August 5-7 pp48-54.

Kiddu-Makubuya, A. 1998. Ecto-parasitism in free-range chickens in Kawempe Division Kampala. BVM Project R eport, Makerere University.

Kirunda Halid & Mukiibi-Muka, G. 2003. Causes of Chick Mortality in Free range poultry in Busede sub-county, Jinja district. Proceedings of the Livestock Research Programme (LSRP) Annual Scientific Workshop, in collaboration with DANIDA are Agricultural Sector Research Programme (ASPS) and the National Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO).

kitalyi, A.J. 1997. Village chicken production systems in developing countries: What does the future hold? World Animal Review, 2: 48 – 53.

Kitalyi, A.J. 1998. Village chicken production systems in rural Africa: Household food security and gender issues. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper 142.

Kwapil, S., Mangeni, I. M.W. & Mukiibi-Muka, G. 1992. Baseline Survey on husbandry, socio-economic role of New Castle Disease of village poultry in Iganga district, Uganda. Proceedings 29th Seminar for Tropical Veterinary Medicine (Free University of Berlin).

Mukiibi-Muka, G., Nahamya, F. & Kasadha, T. 2003. Proceedings of the Livestock Research Programme (LSRP) Annual Scientific Workshop, in collaboration with DANIDA’s Agricultural Sector Research Programme (ASPS) and the National Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO).

National Animal Genetic Resources Centre and Data Bank, MAAIF, July 2002: A Fact Sheet on the Animal Genetic Resources of Uganda, July 2002, pp57-71.

Ojok, L. 1993. Disease as important factor affecting increased poultry production in Uganda, Trop. Landwirk. 1993; 94: 7-44.

Otim, M. O., Bisgaard, M., Christensen, H., Jorgensen, P. & Handberg, K. 2003. Molecular Characterization and Phylogenetic study of NDV Isolate from recent Outbreaks in Eastern Uganda – 2003: Proceedings of the Livestock Systems Research Programme (LSRP) Annual Scientific Workshop, 2003.

Roberts, J.A. 1992. The Scavenging Feed Resource Base in Assessments of the Productivity of Scavenging Village Chickens.

Ssebina, B.S. 1996. Commercial Chicken Production Manual for Uganda, 1996.

Ssebina, B.S. 2003. Integrated Programmed Hatching of Day Old Chicks on One

Particular Day per week (A basis for improving the social economic status of rural communities.)

Ssewanyana, E., Oluka, J., & Masaba, J. 2003a. Performance Evaluation of Crossbred Chickens at Serere. Uganda Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2003: 151-158 ISSN 1026-0919. National Agricultural Research Organisation.

Ssewanyana, E., Ssali, A., Kasadha, T., Dhikusooka, M., Kasoma, P., Kalema, J., ^^^pKwatotyo, B.A. & Aziku, L. 2003b. Characterisation of Indigenous Chickens in Uganda. ^ sji* Proceedings of the Livestock Research Programme (LSRP) Annual Scientific Workshop, in

collaboration with DANIDA’s Agricultural Sector Research Programme (ASPS) and the NationalAgricultural Research Organisation. (NARO).

Ssewanyana, E., Onyait, A.O., Ogwal, J., Mukasa, B., Nsamba, P. & Masaba, J. 2003c. Characteristics of Rural Chicken in Apac and Kumi districts of Uganda. Uganda Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2003, 8: 159-164, ISSN 1026-0919 National Agricultural Research Organisation.

Ssewanyana, E. & Rees, D. 2004. Developing a methodology for sustainable production of improved animal breeds. Serere Agricultural and Animal Production Research Institute (SAARI), Uganda Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 9:271-273 ISSN 1026-0919. National Agricultural

Salimata, P. 2007. Supplementation Strategies for Semi-Scavenging Chickens in Burkina Faso. Evaluation of some Local Feed Resources, PhD Thesis. Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Uppsala. Ssentumbwe, J. 2006. Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries: Review of the Poultry Sector in Uganda.

Kyarisiima C, Kugonza D R and Twesigye C K 2004 The potential role of Ugandan indigenous chicken in poverty alleviation. ^ The Uganda Journal 50: 85-90

MAAIF (Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries) 1998 A Publication on the Plan for Modernisation of Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries, Entebbe

Mopate L Y and Lony M 1999 Survey on family chicken farms in the rural area of N’Djam’ena, Chad. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 11, Article # 2. Retrieved from www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrdl 1/2/chadl 12.htm

Muchadeyi F C, Sibanda, S, Kusina N T, Kusina J F and Makuza S M 2004 The village chicken production system in Rushinga District of Zimbabwe. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 16, Article # 6. Retrieved December 5, – –   2007, from http://www.cipav.ora.co/lrrd/lrrdl 6/6/much 16040.htm

Mukiibi-Muka G 1992 Epidemiology of Newcastle disease and the need to vaccinate local chickens in Uganda. In: Newcastle disease in village chickens (Spradbro P B, Editor), ACIAR Proceedings No. 39, Canberra, Australia, pp. 155-158

Mwalusanya N A, Katule A M, Mutayoba S K, Mtambo M M A, Olsen J E and Minga U M 2001 Productivity of local chickens under village management conditions. Tropical Animal Health and Production 4: 405-41

Nsubuga H S K 1985 Poultry and Rabbit Farming in Uganda, Unpublished manuscript, Makerere University, Kampala

Soba P 2000 An assessment of the factors influencing the productivity of indigenous chickens in Ngora sub-county, Kumi district. S    A special research project report, Makerere University. 40 pp

Okot M W 1990 A co-operative Approach to smallholder Rural Poultry Production in Uganda. In: Smallholder Rural Poultry ^Production. Proceedings of a CTA Seminar, Thessalonica, Greece, October, 9-13, pp. 249-253

OIaboro G 1990 Smallholder Rural Poultry Production in Uganda. Country Report. 35 pp.

Owoyesigire B B 2002 The role, potential and constraints to women in livestock production in the Teso farming system. B.Sc. Special project dissertation, Makerere University

SAS 2001 SAS/STAT User’s Guide: 8.2 edition, Statistical Analysis System Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA.

Sonaiya E B 1990 Poultry husbandry in small rural farms. Entwicklung, Landlicher Raum, 4: 3-6

Sonaiya E B 1999 International network for family poultry development: Origins, activities, objectives and visions. In Proc. Workshop on Poultry as a Tool in Poverty Eradication and Promotion of Gender Equality, 22-26 March. Tune Landboskole, Denmark (also available at www.husdyr.kvl.dk/htm/php/tune99/4-Sonaiya.htm)

Swatson H K, Nsahlai IV and Bycbwa B 2001 The Status of smallholder poultry production in the Alfred district of Kwa Zulu-Natal, South Africa: Priorities for intervention. Department of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Natal, Pietermarizburg, South Africa

QUESTIONNAIRE (FOR POULTRY FARMERS)

INTRODUCTION

This questionnaire is for collecting information on the effects of free range system of poultry keeping on chicken production in Angwetangwet parish, Adekokwok County, lira district. Please, note that this is not a test and there are no wrong answers, and so no marks are given.

You are only required to give your option to the best of your knowledge. Confidentiality of the information you shall give is duly guaranteed.

Note further that the information you shall give will be used strictly for the academic purposes as stipulated by Kyambogo University. Your co-operation in this regard will therefore be crucial to the success of the study and will be appreciated highly.

Procedure:

Please, answer the questions that follow by filling in the spaces provided and ticking in the boxes.

1. Personal information:

• Sex: Male              ,             Female
• Marital status

Single

Married

Widowed

Divorced

• Age: …………………………………………….
• Occupation ………………………………………
• Level of education:

Informal

Primary

Secondary

Tertiary

2. How well are you doing in rearing chickens using the free range system of poultry keeping?

• Very well
• Fairly well
• Well
• Not very well

3. For how long already have you been rearing chickens using the free range systems?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

4. How many chickens did you start with?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5. How many chickens do you have now?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

6. (i). How many birds did you lose?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

(ii). What was the cause(s) of the loss?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

7. What specific risks are closely associated with rearing chicken using the free range system?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

8. How many eggs on average do the hens lay each period before they begin sitting on them.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

9. Out of the average number of eggs per hen how many actually hatch into chicken?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

10. How many of the chicken reach maturity?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

11. Do the chicken really have enough to eat under the free range system?

Yes                                 No

12. (i). Do you give supplementary feeds?

Yes                           No

(ii). If yes, what do you give the birds?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

13. What level of protection do the chickens under free range system actually enjoy?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

End of questionnaire.

Thank you very much for your patience and co-operation.

INTERVIEW GUIDE:

(For poultry farmers).

This interview is about the effects of free range system of poultry keeping on chicken production in AngwetAngwet parish, Adekokwok, sub- County, Lira district. You may have noticed that the free range system of poultry keeping is the traditional and dominant system of chicken breeding in the parish. In spite of this, no comprehensive study has been undertaken to understand its effect on chicken production in the parish. This interview is therefore an attempt to bridge that research gap. Please feel free to participate in the study. The confidentiality of the information you shall give is dully guaranteed and shall be used strictly for academic purposes as stipulated by Kyambogo University. Your co-operation in this regard will therefore be crucial to the success of the study and will be highly appreciated.

The guiding questions:

1. How good is the free range system of poultry keeping in rearing chicken here in Angwet Angwet parish?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

2. How much return on investment does the system really bring to a poultry farmer in the Parish?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

3. How much investment does one have to make to rear chicken under this system?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4. What are the risks involved?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5. How can this risk be better managed?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

6. Is the free range system of poultry keeping not really very wasteful?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

7. Can someone really go commercial in chicken production under the free range system of poultry keeping?

Yes                                         No

If yes give reasons

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

End of interview Thank you very much for your patience and co-operation.