POULTRYDEVELOPMENT-L Archives

Forum on family poultry production in developing countries

PoultryDevelopment-L@LISTSERV.FAO.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Sujit Nayak <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Forum on family poultry production in developing countries <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 5 Jun 2012 09:40:01 +0530
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (7 kB) , text/html (27 kB)
 Dear Coordinators and friends,
 
 
I am Sujit Nayak, a veterinarian with veterinary immunology as my specialization (P.G.) working in the Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries, Government of India as Assistant Commissioner. I am associated with the national Rural / family poultry development program implemented by the Central Government across the country for BPL (below Poverty Line) beneficiaries. Government of India (GoI), at the apex level, is mainly concerned with policy, planning and program formulation/ implementation. However, this is family poultry development program is among the few directly beneficiary-oriented programs being implemented by GoI. This scheme component aims at supporting BPL beneficiary families with tapering assistance, wherein 4-week old chicks, suitable for rearing in the backyard, reared at the ‘mother units’ are further distributed to them in three batches of 20, 15 and 10 birds. Further, to raise the birds in a bio-secure manner, a provision of Rs. 750/- per beneficiary for night-shelter etc. is made in the scheme.  
 
 
 
I would like to share some of my experiences and opinions (the views are exclusively mine). I would also like to agree with Dr. Datta Rangnekar regarding the lack of field level impacts/ participatory research in the country.
 
 
 
1.         The contribution of research to the development of family poultry production systems. 
 
 
 
I believe, research is sin qua none for the development of family poultry production systems. It may have started initially with the careful study of the environment and requirement of birds under harsh village conditions, their ability to protect themselves from predators, little or no input requirement, and the social aspect of poultry keeping and how it was traded or consumed for benefit (all these have been covered mostly during previous e-conferences).
 
 
 
Therefore the research aspects have not only been confined to development of the suitable bird but their nutrition, participatory research in human-poultry keeping interactions, their methods of disposal (self-consumption, bartering, trading etc.). Though very difficult to quantify and reduction into measurable parameters, scientists across the world have actually found ingenious ways to measure benefits which include buying of better amenities due to supplementary income, growth of children in the house keeping poultry/ piggery (as they presumably received more nutrition etc).
 
            
 
Government of India (GoI) accordingly tied up with the Indian Council of Agricultural Research-ICAR (which is the nodal Research agency) and has, over the years developed and promoted low-input technology birds suitable for survival at farmers’ doorstep e.g. CARI (Central Avian Research Institute under ICAR) – Nirbheek  (Asil x Naked neck), Shyama, Debendra, UPCARI, HITCARI ( Aseel x CARI Red); Project Directorate on Poultry also under ICAR  -Vanaraja, Gramapriya  etc. Central Poultry Development Organizations under GoI have also developed Kalinga brown, Chhabro, Colored crosses (Kaveri) etc. Besides many veterinary universities have also developed these birds as follows:
 
a)    Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University, Rajendranegar, Hyderabad (Tirupati)  which has developed Rajasri
 
b)    Karnataka Veterinary, Animal & Fisheries Sciences  University, (KVAFSU) which has developed Swarnadhara, Raja- II, Giriraja, Girirani c)    Kerala Agricultural University, Mannuthy which has developed Gramslakhmi, Gramrshree, Krishipriya 
 
d)    Tamil Nadu University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences (TANUVAS) which has developed Nandanam 99 
 
 
 
Some private organizations have also seen the business opportunity in this area and have developed and marketed such birds like M/s Kegg farms, New Delhi: Kuroiler ; Dr. Yashwant Agritech Pvt. Ltd.; Jalgaon, Maharashtra: Satpuda Desi and M/s Indbro Research and Breeding Farm Ltd., Hyderabad: Rainbow Rooster
 
                                                   
 
A lot of research and studies have also been made in studying the economics / benefits as stated earlier and the model of night shelter etc. 
 
However, I would like to learn if there are any epidemiological models and simple formats designed for  monitoring at a macro level to assess the IMPACT in measurable terms of such programs specially in case of a nation-wide program.
 
 
 
2.         The development for livelihoods through family poultry - cost and opportunities. 
 
 
 
Again, drawing from the national program, I would like to share that so far in 3 years more than Rs. 67 crore has been released in 21 States covering over 3 lakh BPL families. 
 
 
 
Considering At this stage considering even one fourth (25%) success rate or say, successful implementation as envisaged – around 75,000 families have benefitted. This comes to the following: 
 
§   If Rs. 6000 annual benefit/ beneficiary is considered already Rs. 45 crore / year accrued 
 
§   Invaluable protein/ nutrition to family
 
§   Subsistence – relief from extreme poverty
 
 
 
However alongwith the opportunities, comes the threats such as biosecurity risks (the implementing States/ agencies are asked to implement the same away from intensive poultry production areas, night shelter is provided for biosecurity to some extent) and diseases. As the commercial/ industrial sector is also very much developed, the risks for incidences of diseases in the backyard jeopardizing the exports is always looming large. Compartmentalization top some extent is attempted in the commercial sector to sort out the trade implications.
 
 
 
3.         Competing or complementing commercial poultry production systems?
 
Whereas it is evident that family poultry system so far is meant for subsistence and no surplus production requiring organized marketing is envisaged, there is no question of competition. Slowly however, private industry is evincing interest in this sector and it may not be long before this unorganized sector will also come under the ambit of semi-commercialized system.
 
             
 
As far as complementing is concerned, initially private sector was least interested as there was little commercial interest in remote areas. Therefore, commercial industry had no issues as far as their paths did not cross. Private commercial industry does not atleast criticize the Government program on family poultry, but with the food safety concerns, quality assurance norms, stringent export requirements etc., it is imperative that a more ingenious approach to either keep these two subsectors segregated or any other measures to enable them to co-exist has to be thought of.
 
 
 
Regards,
 
 
 
Sujit Nayak

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the PoultryDevelopment-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.fao.org/scripts/wa-fao.exe?SUBED1=POULTRYDEVELOPMENT-L


ATOM RSS1 RSS2