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:
Reply To:
Date:
Wed, 20 Jun 2012 13:39:06 +0200
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 kB) , text/html (53 kB)
Dear All,

As I have told several times for the last 10 years in different forum and conferences, the first sustainable experience well documented about ND vaccination in rural family poultry dates 1978 in Burkina Faso.
Today, my information is that there are around 30 millions rural chicken vaccinated per year on that way mostly in West Africa and also in the rest of the world.
Since 35 years, many other vaccination programs have been implemented with the same vaccination strategy.

- Type of vaccine: inactivated injectable vaccines (brand names such as Itanew, Newcavac, Immopest,...). Many companies produce this type of vaccine. Better to check quality (international standards) and relevant strain (even if many cross immunity are possible). ALL INACTIVATED vaccines ARE THERMOSTABLE BY EXPERIENCE...although it cannot be written and partern as such. The advice is keep them in the fridge at veterinarian level, then the farmer can use it in the village during several weeks (usually we say 2 weeks in a fresh place (water pot)). Experience shows that thermostability is very good anyway. I proposed several times to make scientific experiences, but there were never financed...

- injectable, is the easiest way. Everybody can make an injection in poultry brest muscle. No risk of missing the dosis or point.

- easiest dosis to inject is 0,5 ml because most seringes have this type of graduation (better than 0,3 ml which need an insuline type syringe)

- a single shot, without any booster, is enough to protect the flock or population. It is done idealy 2-3 months before the epizootic season (usually windy or cold season). All poultry more than 1-2 months old are vaccinated. The immunity last at least 6-8 months. It is quite enough to protect a population and dicrease drastically the death toll.
Then after years, some people may like to do 2 injections per year for reproductive flocks.

The strategy of implementation which is successfull and sustainable is when the veterinarians buy and sell the vaccines to farmers which have been sensitised and trained to do vaccination on their poutlry and those of their neighbours/village/community.
The only public cost is massive advertising and communication.
Usual cost is for the farmer around 0,1 USD/poultry. It is very profitable as poultry are usually sold 6 months later at around 3 USD.
The only added information that could reduce again mortality is "protection of chicks" against predation.

All this is well documented in a CD ROm called "health and protection of village poultry" published by African Union International Bureau of Animal Resources and French Cooperation.
If you want this CD ROM, I can try to upload and send it. Hope this could help.

Sincerely

ERIC FERMET-QUINET








> Message du 20/06/12 09:05
> De : "Mamta Dhawan"
> A : [log in to unmask]
> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: PoultryDevelopment-L: approval required (AC67DF1E)
>
> Dear All,
 
I have been following this  interesting and informative discussion and would like to share my views especially on the ND control in Backyard poultry through vaccinations.
 
Since ND causes huge losses to small poultry farmers, mostly women, its control in South Asia through vaccination is paramount. There are three issues here-
•           Appropriate vaccine ie thermo-stable, small pack size
•           Awareness amongst farmers to vaccinate their flocks
•           Delivery mechanisms in place
 
Despite I2 and V4 vaccines available and used in BY poultry both in Africa and a few South East Asian countries, it is not allowed in India due to regulations that do not permit a foreign strain to enter the country. Hence GALVmed is currently supporting research on D58 thermo-stable vaccine suitable for Backyard poultry in Indian Subcontinent. Indigenous ND strain- D58 was developed in TANUVAS, Chennai in India and field trials of pellet vaccine produced here has so far given promising results as it is found suitable for Indian rural conditions. Detailed report would be published shortly and vaccine production moved to a commercial partner.
 
In order to create a model that ensures ND vaccination in BY poultry that is sustainable, supply line has to be viable and each stake holder should make a decent profit to remain in the system.   Animal Husbandry department has constraints of resources and manpower to reach small poultry farmers spread wide topographically, and this gap can be bridged by trained community animal health workers. Since ND is endemic in the region, vaccinations need to be carried out regularly, every three months for  Lasota  and every 6 months for R2B. Ongoing GALVmed ND Pilot projects in Orissa and Nepal have shown that once farmers see value in vaccinating birds against ND, they are ready to pay both for services and vaccine that would ensure a small income for the community animal health worker and vaccine retailer for the system to sustain!
 
Best regards
Mamta
 
Dr. Mamta Dhawan
Programme Manager, South Asia
GALVmed
(Global Alliance for Livestock Veterinary Medicines)
 
 201, Regus Level 2, Elegance Towers, 
Mathura Road, Jasola N.Delhi 110025
Ph +91 1140601170
Mob 9818866447
Web: www.galvmed.org
'Protecting livestock, saving human life'
 
 

> From: efq 
> Date: 14 June 2012 16:24
> Subject: Re: PoultryDevelopment-L: approval required (AC67DF1E)
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> 
To moderator of FAO Family Poultry Forum
 
I would be pleased if you could confirm that the lack of information is not on my side.
I'm sorry to repeat that all inactivated vaccines produced by reputable international pharmaceutical companies are quite enough thermostable and have been used successfully without any problem by rural family poultry owners where they have been adequately distributed by relevant professional networks even in the poorest and remotest African countries.
It is hard to believe that 35 years of experience and hundred of millions vaccinated rural poultry from millions of rural farmers should still continue to be ignored.
Many articles and conferences have been made on the successful and very cost beneficial usage of commercial inactivated vaccines in rural poultry (without possibility to maintain a cold chain).
We could provide data and documents if needed. I'll transfer this answer to relevant resources persons for their information.
 
Sincerely
 
ERIC FQ
 
 
 
 
De : Dibungi Luseba 
> Répondre à : Forum on family poultry production in developing countries 

> Date : Thu, 14 Jun 2012 13:13:00 +0000
> À : 

> Objet : Re: PoultryDevelopment-L: approval required (AC67DF1E)
 
Dear all,
 
The message below refers. It has a strong element of lack of information from the sender. A thermostable vaccine is almost a must for the African FP. I have been personally commissioned to conduct a market studies on the thermostable vaccine by Global Alliance for Livestock Veterinary Medicines (GALVMED) last year in the SADC region. Besides South Africa and Zimbabwe where the cold chain can be maintained, this is just not possible for the rest of the region. The veterinary service is lacking and ill-equipped. Where the system has been partially privatised, the vaccinators  charge up to the equivalent of one dollar to cover for the wasted vaccine. Remember these vaccines are sold in 100 to 1000 doses, meaning that at any given time, the vaccinator will never get the adequate number to vaccinate. 
 
There is a need for an holistic approach to health issues of the FP. The Mozambican experience is a success story I have seen.
 
Just my prompt response
 
Regards,
Dibungi
 
 
Dr Dibungi Luseba 
DrMedVet (L'SHI), MSc (Agric), PhD (Pret.)
Dept Animal Sciences, Faculty of Science
Tshwane University of Technology
P.Bag X680
Pretoria 0001
South Africa
Visit us at: www.tut.ac.za 
 
 
 
From: Forum on family poultry production in developing countries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of efq
> Sent: 14 June 2012 01:46 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: PoultryDevelopment-L: approval required (AC67DF1E)
 
Dear All,
 
Sorry for my very low level of participation in the forum but I'm almost always in mission and out of connection.
 
There is one single point that I would like to make clear about family poultry vaccination against Newcastle disease (subject mentioned in the email below):
Thermostable vaccines adapted to family poultry are available from many brand names of very well known veterinary pharmaceutical companies.
These vaccines are inactivated and one shot of vaccine is globally enough for the production cycle of family poultry population.
This is know at least since 1978. 
Hundred of millions of family poultry have been vaccinated successfully by farmers themselves and with full cost recovery of the vaccines sold by veterinarians.
There is a clear reason for that: everybody is ready to spend 0,1 USD/dose=poultry because 6-8 months later this poultry will be sold 2-3 USD.
 
The fact that, still, many scientists and development agencies, continue to claim for "thermostable vaccine" is just a pity and a proof of lack of communication.
 
I'm ready to send again, if necessary the CD Rom that has been made about this matter.
 
Sincerely
 
ERIC FERMET-QUINET
 
 
 
De :Funso Sonaiya 
> Répondre à : Funso Sonaiya 
> Date : Fri, 1 Jun 2012 23:49:12 -0700
> À : 

> Objet : Fw: PoultryDevelopment-L: approval required (AC67DF1E)
 
 
Prof. E. B. Sonaiya
> Dept. of Animal Science,
> Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife 220005, NIGERIA.
> [log in to unmask], +234 803 719 7378
> Co-ordinator,
> International Network for Family Poultry Development.
> 
----- Forwarded Message -----
> From: LISTSERV.FAO.ORG LISTSERV Server (16.0) 

> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Friday, June 1, 2012 3:57 PM
> Subject: PoultryDevelopment-L: approval required (AC67DF1E)

> ----- Forwarded Message -----
>
> This  message  was originally  submitted  by  [log in to unmask] to  the
> PoultryDevelopment-L list  at LISTSERV.FAO.ORG. You  can approve it  using the
> "OK" mechanism (click on the link below), ignore it, or repost an edited copy.
> The message will expire  automatically. You do not need to  do anything if you
> just  want  to  discard  it.  Please  refer to  the  List  Owner's  Manual  at
> http://www.lsoft.com/resources/manuals.asp if  you are  not familiar  with the
> "OK" mechanism. These instructions are  being kept purposefully short for your
> convenience in processing large numbers of messages.
>
> To APPROVE the message:
> https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?OK=AC67DF1E&L=POULTRYDEVELOPMENT-L
>
> Dear colleagues this is Datta Rangnrkar from India again mailing views and
> comments on topics 1 and 3.
>
> *2. The contribution of research to the development of family poultry
> production systems.*
>
>
>
> ·        There is very little research, in India, on family poultry
> production systems, economics and such related aspects and if there is some
> the results are not easily available (not well publicized)*.* Having said
> that I must also mention that the major contribution of research has been
> to develop ‘low input varieties of birds (synthetics/hybrids)’ that looks
> like indigenous bird and needs low inputs.* *These varieties are developed
> by breeding farms / research institutes/centers of the Indian Council of
> Agri. Research (ICAR) as well as private hatcheries and recommended for
> distribution under Government schemes for development of family poultry.
> While there are claims that these new birds the real picture will emerge
> after the Govt. grants and subsidies are withdrawn.
>
> ·        Studies on role of family poultry from the perspective of
> livelihood systems perspective are lacking. With due apologies let me state
> that the ‘usual reductionist approach adopted in research’ does not suit
> studies on family poultry and there is need for paradigm change and
> adoption of ‘systems and participatory approach’. Results of studies with
> such an approach would help in making development of family poultry more
> effective.
>
> ·        While genetic characterization of indigenous fowl is lacking
> there is need to take up research related to health aspects on priority.
>
> ·        As always, the families living in relatively better developed
> areas get benefits of research.
>
> ·          There is need for shift from the conventional ‘Transfer of
> Technology’ approach and attempts should be made to assess and prioritize
> needs of family poultry and select appropriate technologies. However, the
> fact remains that family poultry does not attract much attention (for
> funding) in view of low commercial value. A good example is
> non-availability of ‘heat resistant or tolerant vaccine’ in India although
> in many parts of the country maintaining cold chain is not possible and
> hence poor coverage through vaccination of birds maintained by families in
> interior rural areas resulting in heavy losses.
>
> ·        The expertise developed in commercial poultry industry is not
> much use for family poultry. However, commercial hatcheries have made good
> contribution by developing a dual type/low input bird.
>
> ·        Any product of research (recommendations or technology) which is
> not only technically sound, economically beneficial but also socially
> adoptable and not risky would be welcome by family poultry producers. Help
> in developing low cost housing based on local material was most welcome by
> family producers.
>
> 3. *Competing or complementing commercial poultry production systems?*
>
> ·          Household consumption vs. commercialization of family poultry -
> which is best? There is basic flaw in this concept since family poultry has
> multiple functions e.g. contribution to family income, nutrition and risk
> coverage (an addition is empowerment of women since it is usually managed
> by women).
>
> ·          Family poultry contributes substantially towards protein needs
> and in some states of India as much as 50% of poultry production is from
> family poultry. However, much of the contribution as protein source is
> hidden and not accounted for through conventional surveys carried out since
> the families do not keep records of home consumption or for social events.
>
> ·          As mentioned earlier family poultry does not have problem of
> selling the produce – consumers and retailers come to them in most cases.
> Families keeping small number of birds – indigenous fowl – under
> free-ranging low external input system have a niche market and get higher
> price for their produce. In general the family units are most likely to be
> competitive in view of low establishment cost and overheads.
>
> ·          Traditional family poultry units do not compete for food/feed
> and are likely to meet food safety and even welfare standards as compared
> to commercial intensive system based farms (do not use growth promoters).
>
> ·          Rising per-capita income is increasing demand for products from
> traditional family poultry since people from peri-urban and urban areas are
> willing to pay higher price for products having more appealing taste and
> flavor.
>
> ·          It is not proper to compare low external input family poultry
> and high external input commercial farms in an ad-hoc manner since each has
> place and situations in different regions of a developing country differ.
> For example in India there are several pockets where establishing large
> commercial farms is not feasible due to some constraints and family poultry
> can make substantial contribution to poultry products.
>
> Best wishes.
>
>
> Datta
>
> ########################################################################
>
> To unsubscribe from the PoultryDevelopment-L list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.fao.org/scripts/wa-fao.exe?SUBED1=POULTRYDEVELOPMENT-L
 
Dear colleagues this is Datta Rangnrkar from India again mailing views and comments on topics 1 and 3.
 
 2. The contribution of research to the development of family poultry production systems.
 
·        There is very little research, in India, on family poultry production systems, economics and such related aspects and if there is some the results are not easily available (not well publicized). Having said that I must also mention that the major contribution of research has been to develop ‘low input varieties of birds (synthetics/hybrids)’ that looks like indigenous bird and needs low inputs.These varieties are developed by breeding farms / research institutes/centers of the Indian Council of Agri. Research (ICAR) as well as private hatcheries and recommended for distribution under Government schemes for development of family poultry. While there are claims that these new birds the real picture will emerge after the Govt. grants and subsidies are withdrawn. 
·         Studies on role of family poultry from the perspective of livelihood systems perspective are lacking. With due apologies let me state that the ‘usual reductionist approach adopted in research’ does not suit studies on family poultry and there is need for paradigm change and adoption of ‘systems and participatory approach’. Results of studies with such an approach would help in making development of family poultry more effective.
·         While genetic characterization of indigenous fowl is lacking there is need to take up research related to health aspects on priority. 
·         As always, the families living in relatively better developed areas get benefits of research.
·          There is need for shift from the conventional ‘Transfer of Technology’ approach and attempts should be made to assess and prioritize needs of family poultry and select appropriate technologies. However, the fact remains that family poultry does not attract much attention (for funding) in view of low commercial value. Agood example is non-availability of ‘heat resistant or tolerant vaccine’ in India although in many parts of the country maintaining cold chain is not possible and hence poor coverage through vaccination of birds maintained byfamilies in interior rural areas resulting in heavy losses.
·         The expertise developed in commercial poultry industry is not much use for family poultry. However, commercial hatcherieshave made good contribution by developing a dual type/low input bird.
·         Any product of research (recommendations or technology) which is not only technically sound, economically beneficial but also socially adoptable and not risky would be welcome by family poultry producers. Help in developing low cost housing based on local material was most welcome by family producers.
 3. Competing or complementing commercial poultry production systems?
·          Household consumption vs. commercialization of family poultry - which is best? There is basic flaw in this concept since family poultry has multiple functions e.g.contribution to family income, nutrition and risk coverage (an addition is empowerment of women since it is usually managed by women).
·          Family poultry contributes substantially towards protein needs and in some states of India as much as 50% of poultry production is from family poultry. However,much of the contribution as protein source is hidden and not accounted for through conventional surveys carried out since the families do not keep records of home consumption or for social events.
·          As mentioned earlier family poultry does not have problem of selling the produce – consumers and retailers come to them in most cases. Families keeping small number of birds – indigenous fowl – under free-ranging low external input system have a niche market and get higher price for their produce. In general the family units are most likely to be competitive in view of low establishment cost and overheads.   
·          Traditional family poultry units do not compete for food/feed and are likely to meet food safety and even welfare standards as compared to commercial intensive system based farms (do not use growth promoters).
·          Rising per-capita income is increasing demand for products from traditional familypoultry since people from peri-urban and urban areas are willing to pay higher price for products having more appealing taste and flavor.  
·          It is not proper to compare low external input family poultry and high external input commercial farms in an ad-hoc manner since each has place and situations in different regions of a developing country differ. For example in India there are several pockets where establishing large commercial farms is not feasible due to some constraints and family poultry can make substantial contribution to poultry products.  
Best wishes.
 
Datta 
 
 
To unsubscribe from the PoultryDevelopment-L list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.fao.org/scripts/wa-fao.exe?SUBED1=POULTRYDEVELOPMENT-L
 
 
To unsubscribe from the PoultryDevelopment-L list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?TICKET=NzM0Njg4IGVmcUBMQVBPU1RFLk5FVCBQT1VMVFJZREVWRUxPUE1FTlQtTN3n8TUf3BB7&c=SIGNOFF
 
To unsubscribe from the PoultryDevelopment-L list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?TICKET=NzM0Njk4IEx1c2ViYURAVFVULkFDLlpBIFBPVUxUUllERVZFTE9QTUVOVC1MIE%2BZuBsPbqx6&c=SIGNOFF
 

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tshwane University of Technology
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This email is sent and received in terms of the Electronic
> Communications Policy of Tshwane University of Technology.
> In line with this policy, this email is private, privileged and
> confidential. The full text of the Electronic Mail Disclaimer
> can be seen on the TUT web site at
> http://www.tut.ac.za/Other/disclaimer/Pages/default.aspx
> or obtained by phoning (012) 382-5911
 
To unsubscribe from the PoultryDevelopment-L list, click the following link:
https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?TICKET=NzM0Njk4IGVmcUBMQVBPU1RFLk5FVCBQT1VMVFJZREVWRUxPUE1FTlQtTFNIcrKMRbEn&c=SIGNOFF
 
To unsubscribe from the PoultryDevelopment-L list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?TICKET=NzM0Njk4IGx1Y3kubWFhcnNlQEdNQUlMLkNPTSBQT1VMVFJZREVWRUxPUE1FTlQtTDRo7YphRNms&c=SIGNOFF 
 

> To unsubscribe from the PoultryDevelopment-L list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?TICKET=NzM0NzA0IGVmcUBMQVBPU1RFLk5FVCBQT1VMVFJZREVWRUxPUE1FTlQtTP0oqK3JBCf1&c=SIGNOFF 


Une messagerie gratuite, garantie à vie et des services en plus, ça vous tente ?
Je crée ma boîte mail www.laposte.net

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

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