Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Deepa G Menon
THESIS
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirement for the course
APPRECIATION PROGRAMME
ON
SUSTAINABILITY SCIENCE
(Programme Code: APSS)
IN COLLABORATION WITH
2009
CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY
This is to certify that the project report entitled “The relevance of backyard and small scale
poultry projects to sustainable livelihood in two Panchayaths in Thrissur District” submitted
to the Indira Gandhi National Open University, Maidan Garhi, New Delhi – 110068 in partial
fulfilment of the requirement for the programme is an original work carried out by Deepa G
Menon with enrolment no 093569130 under the guidance of Dr P Anitha.
The matter embodied in this project is genuine work done by the student and has not been
submitted either to this University or to any other University / Institute for the fulfilment of
the requirement of any course of study.
Date:25/05/09
Name Address &
Designation of the student
Name and Address of the Guide
Deepa G Menon Dr P Anitha
Assistant Professor, Associate Professor,
Department of Poultry Science, Centre for Advanced Studies in
Kerala Agricultural University, Poultry Science,
Mannuthy, Thrissur, Kerala Kerala Agricultural University,
Mannuthy, Thrissur, Kerala
4
Acknowledgements
Sl No Table of contents
Page
1. INTRODUCTION
11
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
19
3. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY
29
4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
31
5. RESULTS & DISCUSSION
36
6. RECOMMENDATIONS
75
7. CONCLUSION
79
8. SUMMARY
81
9. REFERENCES
84
10. APPENDIX
86
8
LIST OF TABLES
Table no Title Page
1 Year-wise Estimate of Egg production 13
2 Profile of Thrissur District 17
3 Observed frequencies and percentages 36
of Variables studied among farmers
4 Production performance of standard 48
birds
5 Observed frequencies and percentages 51
of variables among integrators
6 Details of poultry projects in 58
Panchayath-I
7 Details of poultry projects in 61
Panchayath-II
8 Economics of backyard poultry units 67
9 Economics of broiler production 69
10 Ratings of constraints faced by poultry 70
9
farmers
11 Constraints felt by broiler farmers 71
10
LIST OF FIGURES
Table no Title Page
1 Family size of the respondents 37
2 Experience of the respondents in 38
poultry rearing
3 Details of pullets distributed in the last 58
five years
4 Details of pullets distributed in the last 62
five years in Panchayath-II
5 Split up of cost of production in 68
backyard units
6 Ratings of constraints faced by poultry 70
farmers
7 Ratings of Constraints felt by broiler 71
farmers
11
Preface
INTRODUCTION
13
1. INTRODUCTION
BROILER PRODUCTION
Table -2
21
REVIEW OF
LITERATURE
22
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
RATIONALE OF THE
STUDY
34
RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
38
4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
years.
projects.
poultry farmers.
of poultry projects.
METHODOLOGY
39
each constraint.
poultry farmers
(a)Gender
(b)Family size
(c) Occupation
(d)Experience
(e)Flock Size
(f)Management Practices
(g)Feeding system
(h)Flock Health
(i)Diseases
(j)Production particulars
(k) Preferences of beneficiaries
(l)Self help groups
(m)Cost of production
would include
• Cost of production
• Problems faced
• Profitability
evaluated.
• Increase in income
• Trainings received
41
• Job satisfaction
households
42
RESULTS &
DISCUSSION
43
5.1.2.a Gender
It could be seen that a good majority of the
respondents (63.33%) were females where as only
36.67% were males. The person in charge of the
poultry unit in these houses was identified as
the respondent in all of the cases.
50 46.67
40 36.67
30
Series1
%
20 16.67
10
0
<4 5-7 >7
Number of individuals
5.1.2.c Occupation
A vast majority (96.67 %)of the respondents
considered poultry rearing as a subsidiary
occupation. Though most of the respondents
belonged to the farming community, with
45
5.1.2. d Experience
The study revealed that 10.00 % of the
respondents were having less than 1 year
experience in poultry farming. A 36.67 % of the
respondents had 2-5 years experience, whereas a
majority (53.33%) had more than 5 years
experience.
10.00
53.33
<1 2-5 >5
36.67
5.1.2.h.1 Diseases
5. 1.2.h.2 Vaccinations.
job.
table 5 below.
Primary 4 13.33
Pre-degree 14 46.67
Muslim 2 6.67
Others 0 0.00
Christian 12 40.00
Joint 25 83.33
Service 2 6.67
Business 3 10.00
Labour 7 23.33
Marginal 16 53.34
( 10 cents)
Small 10 33.33
(25 cents)
Large 4 13.33
8 years 10 33.33
High 9 30.00
Taxation 19 63.33
63
Fund.
the Panchayath.
st
Panchayath I IInd IIIrd IVth Vth
Panchayath-I
70
1200
1100
1000 980
No of birds distributed
815
800
400
200
0
I II III IV V
the Panchayath
diet.
Items
Plan Fund 1,02,000 60,000 - 125000
Beneficiaries 97 53 25 106 300
SC/ST 3 25 50
beneficiaries
Type of Backyard Backyard Backyard Backyard
project
poultry poultry poultry poultry
Panchayath-II
5.3.4 Panchayath-II
74
year.
2500 2500
2000
1500
1000
number
of birds 500 488 539
372
0 0
I V
II III IV
Years
Panchayath-II
by the farmers.
the state.
combinations of these.
• Increase in income
households
• Trainings received
• Job satisfaction
Biosecurity measures.
amount of protein.
sell birds.
78
Projects
below.
4 Miscellaneous 10 5 50
6 Income
Cost of pullets
Cost of egg production in Backyard
FeedCost
Shelter/
Miscellaneous
50 (2%)
750(37% )
1000(50% )
225(11% )
units
projects
farmers
Sl Item Amount
no (Rs)
1 Average Cost of production of 1 kg meat 42.00
Value
Problems added tax
Problems Non- Non- Threat Threat Problems of Sales & imposed by Complaints
Availability Availability from from Lack of of Waste Marketin the from
of Feed of Birds predators Diseases space Disposal g government neighbours
Mean
Scores 3.47 3.73 5.03 5.63 4.67 3.00 2.47 2.89 4.18
Rank
6 5 2 1 3 7 9 8 4
Table 10 Ratings of constraints faced by poultry
farmers
Threat from diseases continue to be the
greatest problem followed by threat from
predators, lack of space, complaints from
neighbourhood, non availability of quality chicks
as per the need and at the proper time. This
finding points out the fact that there is the
need to strengthen the disease control measures
like vaccination and other hygienic precautions
like disposal of wastes and dead birds.
Ratings
6.00 5.63 Ratings
5.03
5.00 4.67
4.18
4.00 3.73
3.47
3.00 2.89
3.00 2.47
2.00
1.00
0.00
Feed B irds Predators Diseases Space Disposal Sales V AT C omplaints
&M ktg
Constraints
84
11, Fig 6.
70 65.35
Percentage of farmers
60.08
60 54.74
50.1 49.35
50
40
32.26 30.65
28.76 27
30 25.6
20
10
0
Constraints
Diseases chicks Tax Subsidy feed
Other State Neighbour Space Waste Marketing
RECOMMENDATIONS
88
farming.
venture.
Poverty Line.
CONCLUSION
93
CONCLUSION
Backyard Poultry Farming plays a significant role
in rural people's life. These birds in addition
to cash income have nutritional, cultural and
social functions. The rural poultry owners had
poor knowledge about feeding, breeding and
management practice, which led to poor
performance of the birds. Increasing the
awareness on new technologies as well as the
recommended practices can help to maximize the
productivity and consequently the income of
poultry farmers. On-farm training of rural
poultry owners is also necessary so as to bring
about changes in their practices.
SUMMARY
95
SUMMARY
REFERENCES
99
REFERENCES
Books
Journal Article
Conference proceedings
Book Chapter
Internet Resource
APPENDICES
105
APPENDIX-I
POULTRY POPULATION IN KERALA AS PER 2003 CENSUS
ANNEXURE-II
106
ORGANIZATION OF SOCIETIES
A KEPCO Club will be organized for every 20
beneficiaries and a Marketing Outlet is
organized comprising 20 KEPCO Clubs and one
Society in each Block. The Societies are formed
as per Charitable Societies Act, 1955 and
Organizing Body. All beneficiaries will be the
members of the Society formed. Each Society will
have 7 Governing Body Members including one
President, Secretary and Treasurer. The
organization of various activities will be
managed by the Societies. The societies will
also be responsible for the inspection of
equipments, various assets provided to the
beneficiaries, distribution of feed, birds, etc
and co-ordination of all the Sales Outlet Units
of the respective Block.
108