Practices , Housing and Diseases Within Indigenous Poultry Production in Eastern Cape , South Africa

In an effort to improve the livelihood of indigenous farmers in South Africa, little input has been accorded to documentation and validation of some practices of poultry production farmers in Eastern Cape Province, South Africa which is the objective of this study. One hundred and Sixty (160) structured questionnaires were administered in six villages from two district municipalities using non-probabilistic (snowball) sampling method from July 2017 to June 2018. Results reveal that 73.1% of indigenous farmers are female, 24.38% reared mostly for household consumption, 48.1% flock ranges from 10-50. In addition, about 46.2% of farmers practiced semi-intensive rearing systems. Diseases (63.52%) and Theft (51.94%) are major challenges affecting most chickens. Most farmers used both ethno veterinary (Aloe ferox 32.5%) and medicinal drugs (Terramycin 42.5%) for treatment of diseases respectively. Correlation between diseases and housing was insignificant across different villages. The cleaning system, place of purchase and stage of purchase are highly significant across different villages. Most farming practices are positively correlated across different villages. There is need to assess farming practices adopted, this will help in proper planning and in maximizing profit across indigenous poultry production.


Introduction
Indigenous poultry production assumes an integral agricultural role in meeting animal protein and income need of rural areas (McAinsh et al., 2004;Njenga, 2005;Olwande et al., 2010).In previous studies, indigenous poultry production has been grouped into four different rearing systems based on resources available, number of flock size, housing structure, vaccination plan and feeding system (Conan et al., 2012;Thieme et al., 2014).The groupings are small extensive scavengers (1-5 matured hen), unimproved scavengers (5-50 hens), semi intensive (50-200 chicken), and small scale intensive production (> 200 matured hen or > 100 layers) (Conan et al., 2012;Thieme et al., 2014).Poultry production grouping reveal its total dependency on the personal preference or what best describe the farmers' intention.Furthermore, farmer's groupings can be maintained with low land area, minimal labour and little capital inputs.Such features make it acceptable by even the least privileged social strata of the rural population (Gueye, 1998;Anjum et al., 2012).
Poultry acceptability depends on its availability and affordability and this has sporadically increased its consumption.Regardless of the importance explained earlier, the consumption of poultry products is also known to take a prime role in erratic infections when contaminated (Mayers et al., 2017).Temperature changeability, stress, environmental harshness, stocking densities, housing structure has been stated as factors exposing poultry animals to infections (Mayers et al., 2017).Also, high mortality rate, host species low resistance, adulterated immune and health status, strain of diseases (bacterial, viral), environmental factors, housing, feeding, information and marketing are some of challenges faced by farmers (Gueye, 2004;Miller et al., 2015).And in most cases, such challenges are encouraged by lack of epidemiology records leading to reoccurring of diseases with no proper treatment and good managerial facilities to curb such infection (Sahin et al., 2015).Despite these challenges, indigenous poultry is greatly utilized in day to day protein consumption (Sahin et al., 2015).
Although, such utilization depends on family occupation, of which most farmers are fully involved in poultry production which make poultry products locally accessible for consumption (FAO, 2010;Thieme et al., 2014).
In South Africa, disease causes great harm to communities from processed poultry products to live chickens ranging from 1.3-8.3%loss of live poultry (Malatji et al., 2016).Nevertheless, there are no documentation and validation for practices embraced in indigenous poultry production.Although, some findings have been done on swine, veal calf and dairy farms in comparison to poultry related disease (Monecke et al., 2013).Disease prevalence with inability to trace them to their source and how to manage them has been a great challenge to indigenous poultry production in Eastern Cape Province.This study aims at revealing different housing structure, cleaning systems adopted, flock size and age groups and prevailing diseases coupled with control measures adopted by indigenous poultry farmers in Eastern Cape Province.This study was conducted based on the need for documentation and validation of indigenous poultry production practices for proper farming structure in area of study.

Sampling Site
This study was carried out in six villages in Eastern Cape Province.The villages were Ciko, Gosani, Dokodela and Dokodweni, Nqabarha and Ludondolo respectively.It is located amidst the coastal region of Eastern Cape Province with an area of 3,303 km², characterized by average annual rainfall of 580-800 mm per annum with most occurring rainfall experienced in spring and summer months (ECDC, 2007;Nyoni & Masika, 2012).

Sampling Procedure
The study was conducted from July 2017 to June 2018 in six villages present in two district municipalities of the Eastern Cape Province in South Africa (i.e.Mbhashe and Nyandeni).Non-probabilistic (snowball) sampling techniques were adopted by recognizing farmers that meet the criteria for study inclusion (Khapayi & Celliers, 2016).Information was gathered after pre-visit test with deputy head of department of agrarian.

Sample Size, Power and Precision
Six villages were sampled with over 160 structured questionnaires.But 160 questionnaires were duly filled and thus analyzed for this study.These were administered through personal interviews with different households which practice poultry production irrespective of the sample size.Criteria for selection were basically farmers who reared indigenous breeds alone.

Measures and Covariates
Five trained enumerators coupled with an extension officer helped the investigator to conduct the research.Only those households who owned chickens and willing to participate in the research were considered.Information on village chicken production were gathered under the following categories: husbandry practiced, rearing system practices, health management and common challenges faced by smallholder farmers, vaccination method practiced, household demography, livestock inventory, roles of village chickens, housing and health management and agricultural extension services.Farmers' perceptions of village chicken production constraints were also gathered.Ethical clearance was duly applied for and granted (Ethical Reference Number: MPA031SIDO01) before the commencement of the study, thus, the safety of the participant and animals were greatly considered.

Research Design
Collected data was analyzed using Statistical Analysis System (SAS, 2003).Frequency procedure was used for descriptive statistics.Cross tabulations was used to reveal the relationships between flock size and age groups.Means procedures were computed to analyze age range of poultry farmers, rearing system adopted, household demography, housing structure and poultry related diseases by indigenous poultry farmers.Correlation analysis was done to show association between disease and housing methods.Tukey's test was used for multiple comparisons of means between cleaning system, stage of purchase, place of purchase and rearing system adopted.

Results and Discussion
Poultry farming is majorly practiced and best maximized by women in South Africa (73.1%).It is assumed that poultry management is female occupation because they are known to be at home to take care of the family and to manage poultry production.The same observation was recorded in Cameroon, Gambia, Senegal and Morocco (Agbede et al., 1995;Andrews, 1999;Missohou et al., 2002;Issa et al., 2013).However, contrary result was observed in Niger.More men are into poultry production than women; this could be as result of quick response of men to survey than women (Amadou et al., 2010).
Females of age group (31-50years) who are married with only primary level of education are predominantly involved in poultry farming (Table 1).This is believed to be a form of assistance to financial need of the each household.The same age group was reported by Nyoni and Masika (2012).This study also reveals that men own cattle, goats and sheep, these are generally relatively low in numbers in comparison to chickens.Hence, the latter were regarded as very important by most farmers (Hossen, 2010).Most young ones are sent to school and are not involve in poultry production this development may improve indigenous poultry production as new techniques could be applied by learned upcoming farmers.Indigenous poultry are predominantly kept for consumption purposes (24.38%) and egg production (23.13%) respectively (Table 2).This can be attributed to the availability of chicken meat and eggs as a rich source of protein and the fact that they are perceived to be more nutritious.This finding is in agreement to report of (Nyoni and Masika, 2012;Issa et al., 2013).Farmers reported selling poultry birds for the purpose of generating income to meet unplanned needs, food security and to assist fellow farmers in need.All the reasons for keeping chicken were also reported by Mwale and Masika (2009), Olwande et al. (2010), and Mtileni et al. (2012) respectively.In addition, slaughtering easiness and ability to consume within a short time, without stress about storage facilities are responsible for high consumption rate.This was also stated by Nyoni and Masika (2012).The result of this study also found that chickens are used as a gift, kept for hatching or breeding purposes and for religious purposes (Table 2).According to Olwande et al. (2010) both live and slaughtered chicken are used as gifts amidst farmers.However, the report of this study stated that chickens are used for traditional and/or religious purposes.This finding negates report of Nyoni and Masika (2012) who reported that chicken are not used for traditional or religious purposes.Note.The superscript was used to explain reasons for keeping chicken by poultry farmers based on order of percentage.
Average range of flock size per household in the current study is 10-50 (Table 3).This is in accordance with Hossen (2010) Rearing system adopted by indigenous poultry farmers are semi-intensive system (46.2%),cage confinement (28.1%), unimproved scavengers (16.2%) and free range or extensive system (9.4%).This finding is in contrast to Herve-Claude (2010) who reported that 83% of farmers use free ranging system.Most farmers prefer to allow their chickens to graze around during the day and kept in poultry houses at night (Table 4).This is believed to reduce cost of production but invariably also affect profit turnover of poultry production.This finding is in agreement to Issa et al. (2013).In addition, different breeds of chicken are raised within area of study: Ovambo breeds (38%), Venda (21%), Potchefstroom Kooekok (23%), and naked neck (19%).These breeds were also reported by Mtileni et al. (2012) in similar study.Note.The superscript was used to explain rearing systems adopted by poultry farmers based on order of percentage.
Table 5 reveals the relationship between housing methods adopted by indigenous poultry farmers.Housing methods adopted are positively insignificant in relation to disease prevalence at p ≤ 0.005 this shows that housing method adopted is not affected by disease in poultry production.It can be deduced from this study that housing methods adopted has no direct impact on disease prevalence.Wilson (2010) reported that there may be other farming practices which results in disease prevalence.Note.p ≤ 0.005 at 2 tailed level of significance.NS means not significant.
Table 6 shows poultry housing structure embraced by indigenous poultry farmers.This study observed use of half block and half zinc, half zinc and half wire, inside the house, no definite housing, half zinc and half wood.This finding negates study by Aganga et al. (2000) who reported that poultry farmers resorted to cheap and locally available materials such as mud, wooden poles, and corrugated sheets only.The observed improvement could be as a result of farmers experience and improvement of indigenous farmers by intervention of extension agents, exposure to trainings and need to reduce disease occurence.Indigenous poultry farmers attach more importance to poultry housing than in previous years by providing more comfortable housing for chicken.Nevertheless, nest and feeders for brooding activities are not yet available in most poultry farm.Predation such as cat, dog, and snake do affect survivability in the area of study.This has lead to great loss by posing lots of threats to success of indigenous poultry production.

Figure
Figure 7. Clean

Table 1 .
Demographic representation of indigenous poultry in Eastern Cape Province

Table 2 .
Reasons for keeping chickens by poultry farmers (N = 160) in Eastern Cape

Table 3 .
Hossen (2010)(2007)013)who reported 16.3 and 16.8 flock size respectively.Based on our findings, the small flock size is related to low feed conversion rate of indigenous chicken, disease occurrence from feeding of diseased ants or insects and lack of capital to practice large scale farming.This was also stated byPhiri et al. (2007)in similar study.Flock size was defined byHossen (2010)as heterogeneous state of flock composition which shows different age group.It is a great factor that reveals dynamism across poultry production.In area of study farming experience, breeding goal and available resources are factors determining flock size of indigenous poultry farmers (Table3).Distribution of poultry farms maintained by indigenous poultry farmers in Eastern Cape Province in relation to flock size and age (N = 160) Note.Figures in parentheses arepercentages.Mean values with different superscripts differ significantly (p < 0.05).MA = multi-age.NB: each number represent farming households not chickens.

Table 4 .
Rearing system practiced by farmers in Eastern Cape Province

Table 5 .
Effect of housing on disease prevalence in indigenous poultry production

Table 6 .
Distribution of level of education with housing structure

Table 7
weeks' old (21.25%) and day old chicks (11.25%) in that order.Most farmers prefer to buy matured hen due to unavailability of hatching centre, no knowledge about brooding activities and most farmers do not sell day old chicks.Coefficient of correlation was done across some farming practices.Cleaning system structure adopted was negatively insignificant to place of purchase and stage of purchase which means cleaning strategy has no relationship to where chicken was purchased.But rearing system adopted has a huge impact on how farmers