DISEASE PREVALENCE AND HEALTH MANAGEMENT PRACTICES OF
INDIGENOUS CHICKENS (Gallus domesticus) IN MALINDZA (LUBOMBO)
MAVIMBELA MTHOKOZISI Q.
A Research Project Report submitted to the Department of Animal Science Faculty of
Agriculture of the University of Eswatini in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Bachelor of Science in Animal Science.
Luyengo Campus, Eswatini
June, 2019
APPROVAL
DISEASE PREVALENCE AND HEALTH MANAGEMENT PRACTICES OF
INDIGENOUS CHICKENS (Gallus domesticus) IN MALINDZA (LUBOMBO)
Author: Mthokozisi Q. Mavimbela……………………………………………………………….
Supervisor: Dr. B. N. Dlamini…………………………………………………………….
Date approved:…………………………………………………………………………….
Approved for inclusion in the library of the University of Eswatini
…………………………………………..
Dr. R. L. Vilakati-Kiondo
Head of Department
Date:……………………………………
i
COPYRIGHT
Permission has been granted to the library of the University of Eswatini to lend copies of this
Research Project Report.
The author reserves other publication rights and neither the Research Project Report nor
extensive extracts from it may be printed or produced without the author’s written permission.
Copyright © Mthokozisi Mavimbela 2019
ii
DECLARATION
I confirm that this is my work and the use of all material from other sources has been properly
and fully acknowledged.
Signed:……………………………………….. Date:…………………………………
iii
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this research work to my late father, my mother for her endless prayers,
my brother for having faith in me and believing in me since the beginning and my sisters
undying support. I also thank God Almighty for guidance and protection throughout the research.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my greatest appreciation to my supervisor Dr. B.N. Dlamini who took his
time and energy in helping and guiding me throughout the research project. His comments and
advice opened up my mind towards completing the project. I’m also greatful for the constructive
comments from the Department of Animal Science during presentations and consultations.
I also like to thank the Ministry of Agriculture under the Veterinary & Livestock Production
Services Department, Poultry Division in Siteki for giving me their records and positive attitude.
My forever interested, encouraging and always enthusiastic brother Thokozane Mavimbela. He
was always keen to know what I was doing and how I was proceeding. I am grateful to my
siblings and friends, who have provided me through moral and emotional support in my life.
v
ABSTRACT
There is a growing number of consumers that demand organic food and indigenous chickens are
in high demand. Backyard chicken production is important for many rural households although it
is a small and sometimes unorganized sector but it is steadily growing in the country. A study
was conducted on 42 indigenous chicken producers in Malindza sub-region of Lubombo region
of Eswatini, focusing mainly on smallholder farmers to evaluate the prevalence of infectious
diseases, the health management practices and preventative measures. Questionnaires were used
to collect the data and purposive sampling was used for selecting the respondents. The objectives
of the study were to identify the demographic statistic of farmer, identify prevalent infectious
diseases which affect indigenous chicken production, determine the impact of management
practices on the health of indigenous chickens and determine control measures of the prevailing
infectious diseases. The study revealed that 47.1% of indigenous chicken farmers experienced
Fowl pox problems in their locality and Newcastle disease was the second common and
economically important disease. A majority of the respondents (42.9%) suggested that farmers
vaccinate the chickens against prevalent diseases. Some others (14.4%) pointed out that access to
affordable vaccine would also be important. Therefore, the study recommended that, the success
of indigenous chickens depends entirely on the good health management practices such as
vaccination and government intervening by assisting farmers with extension services and
provision of affordable vaccines.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL ................................................................................................................................... i
COPYRIGHT ................................................................................................................................ ii
DEDICATION.............................................................................................................................. iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... v
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... x
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS ........................................................................................................ xi
LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................................................ xii
ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................................... xiii
1.0
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 1
1.1.0 Background information .................................................................................................... 1
1.2.0 Problem statement .............................................................................................................. 2
1.3.0 Justification of the study .................................................................................................... 3
1.4.0 Objectives of the study....................................................................................................... 3
1.4.1 General objective ........................................................................................................... 3
1.4.2 Specific objectives ......................................................................................................... 3
1.5.0 Hypothesis of the study...................................................................................................... 4
1.6.0 Limitations of the study ..................................................................................................... 4
1.7.0 Definition of terms ............................................................................................................. 4
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................... 5
2.1.0 Overview of indigenous chicken production in Eswatini .................................................. 6
2.2.0 Breeds of Indigenous Chicken ........................................................................................... 6
2.3.0 Housing and feeding management ..................................................................................... 7
2.4.0 Indigenous Chicken diseases ............................................................................................. 7
2.5.0 Disease prevention and control methods ........................................................................... 9
2.0
MATERIALS AND METHODS .................................................................................... 10
3.1.0 Study area......................................................................................................................... 10
3.2.0 Research design and procedure ........................................................................................ 10
3.3.0 Validity and reliability ..................................................................................................... 11
3.4.0 Subject selection .............................................................................................................. 11
vii
3.5.0 Sampling procedure ......................................................................................................... 11
3.6.0 Data analysis .................................................................................................................... 12
4.0 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 13
4.1.0 Characteristics of the farmers .......................................................................................... 13
4.2.0 The farmer’s experience in indigenous chicken production ............................................ 14
4.3.0 Farmer’s indigenous chicken breeds, production systems and ownership of flock ......... 14
4.4.0 Infectious disease prevalence ........................................................................................... 18
4.5.0 Indigenous chicken mortality........................................................................................... 19
4.6.0 Disease management practices and preventative measures ............................................. 21
4.7.0 Suggested control of the prevalent diseases..................................................................... 24
5.0 DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................ 26
5.1.0 Characteristics of farmers ................................................................................................ 26
5.2.0 The farmer’s experience in indigenous chicken production ............................................ 27
5.3.0 Farmer’s indigenous chicken breeds, production systems and ownership of flock ......... 27
5.4.0 Infectious disease prevalence ........................................................................................... 28
5.5.0 Indigenous chicken mortality........................................................................................... 29
5.6.0 Disease management practices and preventative measures ............................................. 29
5.7.0 Suggested control of the prevalent diseases..................................................................... 31
6.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 32
7.0.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 34
APPPENDICES........................................................................................................................... 40
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1. Distribution of respondents according to the demographic characteristics
12
2. Experience in Indigenous Chicken production
13
3. Farmer’s indigenous chicken breeds, production systems and ownership of flock.
14
4. Mortality caused by diseases over the past 3 years
18
5. Disease management practices and preventative measures
21
6. Suggested control of prevalent diseases
23
7. Level of agreement on the disease control measures
24
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Infectious disease prevalence
17
Figure 2. Common clinical signs of illness observed in sick indigenous chickens
19
x
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Page
Photograph 1. Semi intensive production system
15
Photograph 2. An Extensive (Free-range) production system
16
Photograph 3. Dirty and undisinfected feeders and waterers
22
xi
LIST OF APPENDICES
Page
1. Questionnaire
39
2. Letter of request to beef cattle farmers for participation during the study
42
xii
ABBREVIATIONS
ND
Newcastle Disease
IB
Infectious Bronchitis
xiii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1.0 Background information
The most common type of poultry kept in Eswatini rural households is chicken (Gallus
domesticus) species (Siyaya, 2013). Indigenous chicken farming has been described variously as
backyard poultry rearing, rural poultry production or scavenging (Ondwasy et al., 2006). Masuku
et al., (2013) also noted that surveys indicated that 91% of families in rural areas of Eswatini
raise chickens. Village poultry production is significant in all developing countries as it plays a
critical role in livelihood strategies of rural households. (Alders et al., 2005; Alders 2004;
Dolberg 2003). The Ministry Of Agriculture (2012) reported that indigenous chicken production
is a fast growing poultry production industry in Eswatini, mainly in the rural areas of the SNL
(Swazi Nation Land). The production is mainly for both eggs and meat for home consumption
and, to some extent as a cash income for families. Indigenous chickens are usually reared in the
traditional way, which is based on scavenging (Food Agriculture Organisation, 2009).
There is a growing number of consumers that demand organic food and village chickens
produced organically are in high demand. Due to the limited supply of village chickens in the
market today, the consumer is willing to pay a premium price for them (Shongwe, 2009). The
commercialization of indigenous poultry production might delay in terms of meeting the needs
of the increasing population and disease prevalence (Ondwasy et al., 2006). According to Siyaya
(2013) most of the indigenous chicken production in Eswatini rural areas is done mostly by
women. These indigenous chicken are frequently owned and managed by women and children,
1
and are especially common in female-headed households (Guèye, 2000). Therefore, the majority
of indigenous chicken farmers are mostly women.
According to Kitalyi (1998) the performance of chickens under rural conditions remains
generally poor as evidenced by highly pronounced broodiness, high mortality rates, slow growth
rates, small body size and low production of meat and eggs. Therefore it is also essential to
identify the parasites commonly occurring in backyard or free-range poultry in rural areas in
order to plan strategies for improved production (Mukaratirwa and Hove, 2009). Despite being
disregarded through limited provision of shelter, feeds, limited protection against predators and
above all against infectious and parasitic diseases which cause high mortalities, indigenous
chickens have invaluable characteristics that are not found in the exotic strains (Kyarisiima et al.,
2004).
1.2.0 Problem statement
Most indigenous chickens die due to diseases, predators and weather averaged at 28 chickens per
farmer per year (Siyaya, 2013). Infectious diseases are the main causes of the low production of
indigenous chicken breed due to high mortality rates mainly in rural areas of Eswatini
(Lubombo). Alders and Harrison (2009) stated that mortality is the highest in chicks (85.6%) due
to Newcastle disease. Newcastle, Avian Influenza, coccidiosis, round worms, tape worms,
Salmonellosis and infectious coryza are some of the examples of infectious diseases that severely
affect the viability of indigenous chicken industry (Ondwasy et al., 2006). There is little or not
enough documented knowledge on the management of indigenous chicken disease prevalence
2
and health management practices in Eswatini. Health management practices will determine the
success of the growing indigenous chicken industry.
1.3.0 Justification of the study
The study aims to provide information that will help small-scale indigenous chicken farmers to
manage the occurrence of the most common and dangerous infectious diseases especially around
Malindza sub region of Lubombo region. It is also going to help determine the most prevalent
infectious diseases affecting indigenous chickens. Thus enabling farmers to take preventative
measures and necessary actions to control these diseases before resulting to high mortality rates
and low productivity of indigenous chickens. The study is also aiming to assist the Government
Agricultural Livestock Extension personnel to educate indigenous chicken producers. Results
from this study will identify the most common diseases affecting indigenous chickens in
Malindza. Furthermore, the problem faced by Swazi small-scale farmers these days is that, no
previous research has been carried out on infectious diseases affecting indigenous chickens as
this a newly growing industry.
1.4.0 Objectives of the study
1.4.1 General objective
To investigate the occurrence of infectious diseases and management practices which affect the
growing indigenous chicken production in Malindza.
1.4.2 Specific objectives
1. To identify the demographic statistic of the indigenous chicken producers.
3
2. To identify the most common infectious diseases which affect indigenous chicken production
in Malindza.
3. To determine the management practices impact on the health of indigenous chicken.
4. To determine ways of controlling the most extensive indigenous chicken infectious diseases.
1.5.0 Hypothesis of the study
H0: Infectious diseases and management practices have no significant impact on indigenous
chicken health and production.
Ha: Infectious diseases and management practices have a significant impact on indigenous
chicken health and production.
1.6.0 Limitations of the study
The study was limited to Malindza sub region of the Lubombo region of Eswatini due to time
and financial constraints. This study relied much on records such as vaccination and mortality
rates records of which most small holder farmers do not keep. Data collection without the
records was a challenge in that manner regardless of the questionnaires and interviews.
Inaccuracy of responses from the interviews and questionnaires from the indigenous chicken
farmers hindered data collection results. Transport availability and flexibility was another
limitation to reach the locations to collect the data.
1.7.0 Definition of terms
Mortality – The number of deaths in a given population in a period of time.
4
Disease extensiveness – It is the occurrence of an infectious disease within a population.
Demographic – Data relating to the population and different groups within it.
Symptomatology - The set of symptoms characteristics of a disease observed in a species.
5
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.0 Overview of indigenous chicken production in Eswatini
In Eswatini, indigenous chickens are kept through subsistence farming practices by almost all the
households, with a minimum of at least five birds per family (Thwala, 2012). The most common
type of poultry kept in rural households is chicken (Gallus domesticus) species (Masuku, 2011).
Masimula (2004) noted that surveys indicated that 91% of families in rural areas of Eswatini
raise chickens. With that being said, many restaurants and food outlets now serve indigenous
chicken meat though, only in limited amounts (MOA, 2012). A study in Eswatini, Bongani and
Masuku (2013) found that, farmers were constrained by lack of fencing material, lack of chicken
housing and equipment and high disease incidences, lack of organized market, predators, low
productivity of the chickens, lack of vaccinations to control diseases, slow growth and maturity
of indigenous chickens, lack of credit to buy capital equipment, chicken theft, low market prices
and high mortality rates of stock.
2.2.0 Breeds of Indigenous Chicken
The number of chickens in the country can be reasonably estimated at 1.8 million (MOA, 2017).
The most common type of poultry kept in Eswatini rural households is chicken (Gallus
domesticus) species (Siyaya, 2013). Some of the common indigenous chickens that are kept by
Swazi famers and in family backyards include the Necked-neck (Kelukelwane), Frizzle
(Imfukwane), Dwarf (Mapipiligwane), Malay chicken (ligema), Tailless (ingcunu) (Vilakati-K,
2017). These chickens have a variety of colour patterns and are well adapted to diverse
temperatures and to scavenging for food (Fourie and Grobbelaar, 2003).
6
In India some of the important breeds/varieties which have been documented are Aseel,
Ankaleshwar, Busra Chitagong, Daothigir, Denki, Ghagus, Haringhatta black, Kadaknath,
Kalasthi,Kashmir Faverolla,Miri, Punjab Brown, Tellichery, Titri, Teni, Nicobari, Necked-neck,
and frizzle fowl (Mohapatra and Panda, 1981).
2.3.0 Housing and feeding management
There are three production systems that are used in poultry production namely, intensive, semiintensive and extensive (Vilakati-K, 2017). Scavenging system is the most common in Eswatini
whereby a small flock of native birds are allowed to fully scavenge without feed supplementation
(Rahman, 2012). According to Thwala (2012) forty-six percent of farmers let their birds stay in
trees and 11 percent of farmers provide housing and protection for chicks under one month of
age.
Even though scavenging was the main feed resource of rural poultry, most farmers simply pour
feed on the ground (Tadesse, 2015). According to FAO (2009) indigenous chickens receive few
inputs such as feed supplementation and health care for their survival and productivity. Shongwe
(2009) adds on that farmers throw chicken feed on the ground when feeding them which is very
unhealthy and exposes the chicken to parasite infestation.
2.4.0 Indigenous Chicken diseases
The significance of a disease depends on the rate of infection or infestation and the number of
birds that die and the death rates depend on age and nutritional status (Ondwasy 2006).
Natukunda et al., (2011) stated that 98% of indigenous chicken owners experienced chicken
diseases in Uganda with Newcastle disease being the most common and economically important
disease. Furthermore, a study by Mutua (2011) in Kenya revealed that chick mortality still
7
remains as high as 80–90% within the first six weeks after hatching, due to diseases, parasites,
lack of feed, poor housing, insufficient water supply and predation.
Findings by Yitbarek, et al., (2013) most of the indigenous chicken flocks are affected by disease
outbreak which may lead to loss of flocks. Moreover, Newcastle disease is one of the most
significant diseases of poultry worldwide and a major constraint to village poultry production
(Alders 2004; Bagnol 2001; Alexander et al., 2004). It also the most economically important and
the only notifiable disease in chickens (Ondwasy 2006). Ambali et al (2007) reported that the
major cause of death for indigenous chicken in North-West Amhara in Ethiopia was seasonal
outbreaks of chicken diseases, specifically Newcastle disease. Yongolo (1996) and Spradbraw
(1993) also supported the argument that Newcatle disease was the major constraint to the
development of both indigenous and exotic chicken industries in Africa.
According to Dutta et al., (2013) chickens died of various diseases, the mortality rate was highest
due to fowl cholera, Newcastle disease, bacillary white diarrhea (BWD), gumboro, coccidiosis,
salmonellosis, fowl pox and eimeriasis which were also the main diseases prevailing in
Bangladesh. Newcastle disease can have up to 100% mortality (Yousuf 2005). However, it was
clear that mortality was the highest in chicks (Harrison and Alders, 2010).
In another instance, FAO (1994) states that Infections Bronchitis is a highly contagious viral
disease. A study by Shane (2005) states that, Infectious bronchitis occurs worldwide and is
responsible for decreased production of chickens commercially and breeder flocks. It causes a
mild respiratory complications affecting the liveliness and growth if it becomes worse by adverse
management.
8
It was also found that Fowl pox virus which occurs in most countries with warm and humid
climates affects poultry by spreading slowly and decreasing their appetite due to difficulty in
eating and breathing (Davis, 2012). This is associated with lesions around the eyes and mouth
which can be seen. Pink focal lesions occur on the comb and wattles and non-feathered portions
of the body (Shane, 2005).
FAO (1994) states that coccidiosis is another major disease problem which affects the intestinal
tract of chickens on which the birds bleed to death. Coccidiosis is generally acute in onset and is
characterized by depression, ruffled plumage, and diarrhea and birds infected with E. tenella
show pallor of the comb and wattles and blood-stained cecal droppings Shane (2005).
2.5.0 Disease prevention and control methods
The development of poultry health programs requires reliable information on the epidemiology
of diseases, which is lacking in indigenous chicken production systems (Pandey et al., 1992).
Natukunda et al.,(2011) states that indigenous chicken farmers had years of experience in
indigenous chicken rearing, which is enough time for them to be able to adapt better chicken
management systems.
Most rural famers treat their indigenous chickens at home using traditional remedies and fewer
use conventional medicine or visit the veterinary clinic for treatment (Tadesse 2015).
9
3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1.0 Study area
The study was conducted in Malindza sub-region of Lubombo region of Eswatini, focusing
mainly on smallholder farmers as this is still a growing industry in rural areas. It is located in the
east of the country. It has an area of 5,849.11 km² and a population of 207,731 (2007). Its
administrative center is Siteki. It borders all three other regions: Hhohho to the north, Manzini to
the west, and Shiselweni to the south. With latitude -26,40404408 and longitude 31,7711685,
Lubombo has a high number of smallholder indigenous chicken producers (MOA, 2017). There
are 207 927 indigenous chickens in the Lubombo as a whole, with Malindza having the most, 37
804 apart from the other seven sub-regions (MOA, 2017).
3.2.0 Research design and procedure
This was a survey type of research. Questionnaires were used to gather needed information and
practices by indigenous chicken producers on the subject (topic) needed in this research. The
questionnaires were designed to get household information, information on management
practices, health and ways of controlling the most occurring infectious diseases. Questionnaires
were hand delivered to the respondents in their homesteads and business areas.
10
3.3.0 Validity and reliability
A pilot survey was conducted at Mafutseni, Lubombo region. A sample of 10 questionnaires
were used for the pilot survey. Reliability of the questionnaire was checked by expects in the
Department of Education.
3.4.0 Subject selection
The Lubombo region was selected for this study because most of the indigenous chickens are
produced by Lubombo farmers (207 927) and evidently, there are most roadside sales of these
breeds in that region of Eswatini. Most of the Lubombo population reside on rural areas of the
Swazi Nation Land which have engaged in keeping indigenous chickens for meat, eggs and to
the extent as a cash income for families.
3.5.0 Sampling procedure
Purposive sampling was used when selecting the indigenous chicken producers. Famers were
selected according to the production systems used to raise the chicken. In this case, famers using
the semi-intensive and extensive system (scavenging) qualified to participate in the study. The
homesteads were selected with the help of the local extension officer (Madibhane) under the
Malindza sub-region in Lubombo region. The respondents selected were 42 in all.
11
3.6.0 Data analysis
A software called Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows version 20
(2011) was used for analysing the data. Descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages) were
used to analyse the data obtained from the questionnaires.
12
4.0 RESULTS
4.1.0 Characteristics of the farmers
In the study, 59.5% of the respondents were females and the rest were males. The majority
(26.2%) of the respondents were >60 years, while the rest were distributed in different age
categories. Over half 59.5% of the respondents are not heads of the household being mentioned,
40.5% are unemployed (Table 1).
Table 1. Distribution of respondents according to the demographic characteristics.
Variable
Category
Frequency of farmers
% of farmers
Status of respondent Head of household
17
40.5
Not head of household
25
59.5
Sex
Male
Female
17
25
40.5
59.5
Age
<20 years
21-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
>60
1
4
9
7
10
11
2.4
9.5
12.4
16.7
23.8
26.2
Occupation
Employed
Private sector
Civil servant
Self-employed
Unemployed
Retired
7
2
6
4
17
6
16.7
4.8
14.3
9.5
40.5
14.3
Education level
Not been to school
Sebenta/Adult literacy
Primary school
Secondary school
High school
Tertiary
3
2
6
7
16
8
7.1
4.8
14.3
16.7
38.1
19.0
13
4.2.0 The farmer’s experience in indigenous chicken production
The results presented on Table 2 shows the experience of the producers regarding indigenous
chicken production. About 31% of the respondents had little experience in the rearing of
indigenous chickens. Many of the respondent had more experience in indigenous chicken’s
production in which 33.3% of the sampled respondents have been raising indigenous chickens
for over 10 years.
Table 2. Experience in Indigenous Chicken production
Category
Frequency of farmers
% of farmers
Up to 3 years
13
31.0
4-6
11
26.2
7-10
4
9.5
Over 10 years
14
33.3
4.3.0 Farmer’s indigenous chicken breeds, production systems and ownership of flock
A large percentage of farmers (81%) raise the mixture of all the breeds together without focusing
on only one breed. The respondents mostly used extensive system (57.1%) of production than
semi-intensive (42.9%) whereby chickens roam around freely and there is partial housing
respectively (Table 3). Almost every flock owner cash purchased (81%) their first chickens.
14
Table 3. Farmer’s indigenous chicken breeds, production systems and ownership of flock
Variable
Category
Frequency of farmers % of farmers
Type of breed
Necked-neck (Kelukelwane)
1
2.4
Frizzle (Imfukwane)
1
2.4
Dwarf (Mapipiligwane)
2
4.8
Malay (Ligema)
4
9.5
Tailless (Ingcunu)
0
0
Mixture of all breeds
43
81.0
Production system
Semi intensive
Extensive (Free range)
18
24
42.9
57.1
Ownership of flock
Inheritance
Cash purchase
Gift
1
34
7
2.4
81.0
16.7
Photograph 1 shows a semi intensive production system where the chickens are partially housed
but also roam around the yard outskirts scavenging for food. This type of system is used by some
farmers in the selected area of study.
15
.
Photograph 1. Semi intensive production system.
16
Photograph 2 shows an extensive production system where the chickens roam around and sleep
on trees without any housing but scavenging for food.
Photograph 2. An Extensive (Free-range) production system.
.
17
4.4.0 Infectious disease prevalence
The diseases which attacked indigenous chickens are presented in Figure 1. The respondents
only mentioned signs noticed on the chickens and the researcher was able to deduce the disease
based on the stated symptoms on which coccidiosis being the least disease mentioned (2.9%).
The results of the study indicate that 47.1% of indigenous chicken farmers experienced Fowl pox
problems in their locality and Newcastle disease (ND) was the second common and
economically important disease (32.4%) in the study area.
coccidiosis
Figure 1. Common causes of mortality of indigenous chickens.
18
4.5.0 Indigenous chicken mortality
Table 4 shows the number of lost chickens due to some of the recorded prevalent indigenous
chicken diseases. Fowl pox had about 288 deaths which was the highest then followed by ND
with 176. Infectious Bronchitis had 42 death and coccidiosis with 39 deaths. The diarrhoea being
the least with 29 deaths.
Table 4. Mortality caused by diseases over the past 3 years
Category
Fowl pox
Newcastle disease (ND)
Infectious Bronchitis (IB)
Diarrhoea
Coccidiosis
Mortality
288
176
42
29
39
The common clinical signs of illness observed in sick indigenous chickens mentioned by
respondents are presented on Figure 2. The symptoms of lesions around the eyes and paralysis
being the frequent occurring in the chickens. Secondly was the paralysis, a twisted neck
accompanied by wheezing. The symptoms of coughing and diarrhoea occurred almost equally
amoung the farmer’s flocks.
19
Clinical signs of prevailing
infectious diseases observed
by farmers
Figure 2. Common clinical signs of illness observed in sick indigenous chickens.
20
4.6.0 Disease management practices and preventative measures
Even though semi-intensive was the minor production system practiced in Malindza area, 59.5%
of the respondents did not clean and disinfect the place where they house their chickens. Only
28.6% of them use jeyes fluid than other disinfectants. About 19% of the sampled population
clean and disinfect waterers and feeders, the majority (81%) and those who did used soap (50%).
Over half of the respondent (69.1%) never carryout vaccination of the chickens against
Newcastle disease and Fowl pox and the minority who did, they administered the vaccine once a
year (11.9%). Most of the respondents (81%), never carry out post mortem inspection on the
dead chickens at all. Those who did practice vaccination, most of the used Lasota (16.7%) and
Aloe vera leaves (7.1%). A majority of the respondent (81%) do not get any help from poultry
extension officers (Table 5)
21
Table 5. Disease management practices and preventative measures
Variable
Category
Cleaning and disinfecting house
Yes
No
Disinfectant
Frequency of farmers
17
25
% of farmers
40.5
59.5
Jeyes fluid
Viruguard
Pharmguard
Other
Never disinfect
12
3
0
2
25
28.6
7.1
0
4.8
59.5
Yes
No
8
34
19.0
81.0
Jeyes fluid
Viruguard
Pharmguard
Other
Never disinfect
13
0
0
21
8
31.0
0
0
50.0
19.0
Yes
No
13
29
30.9
69.1
Type of medication used
Lasota
Clone30
Aloe vera leaves
Cayenne pepper
None
7
2
3
1
29
16.7
4.8
7.1
2.4
69.0
Frequency of application
Every month
Once a year
Twice a year
Never
4
5
4
29
9.5
11.9
9.5
69.1
Post mortem inspection
Yes
No
8
34
19.0
81.0
Help from poultry extension officers Yes
No
8
34
19.0
81.0
Cleaning and disinfecting waterers
and feeders
Disinfectant
Vaccination against Newcastle
and Fowl pox
22
Photograph 3 shows waters and drinkers that are dirty with some soil residues. This indicates that
they are rarely washed and disinfected.
Photograph 3. Dirty and undisinfected feeders and waterers.
23
4.7.0 Suggested control of the prevalent diseases
Table 6 below shows some of the views and ideas the Malindza chicken farmers had regarding a
successful disease free flock of indigenous chickens. A majority of the respondents (42.9%)
suggested that farmers vaccinate the chickens against prevalent disease. Some others (14.4%)
point it out that access to affordable vaccine would also positively contribute to successful
indigenous chicken rearing.
Table 6. Suggested control of prevalent diseases.
Variable
Frequency of farmers
Vaccination and treatment
2
Vaccination
18
Close monitor
4
Access to affordable vaccine
6
Extension education on diseases
4
Free vaccine
3
Use of ethnoveterinary medicine
4
Increase extension services in rural areas
1
% of farmers
4.8
42.9
9.5
14.3
9.5
7.1
9.5
2.4
A majority of the farmers (57%) strongly agree on educating farmers on diseases affecting
indigenous chickens and how the management goes about and also monitoring the chickens
closely (59.5%). Some of the farmers agreed on government increasing poultry extension
officers (2.4%). However, 14.3% of the farmers slightly disagree on government initiating free
testing of disease in the local veterinary facilities because it would be expensive for government
(Table 7).
24
Table 7. Level of agreement on the disease control measures.
Control measure
SD% D% SLD% SLA% A%
SA%
Government should increase poultry
extension officers
7.1
0
4.8
16.7
52.4 19
Government should open local market
for vaccines
2.4
4.8
7.1
38.1
26.2 21.4
Government should initiate free testing
of diseases
0
9.5
14.3
26.2
38.1 11.9
Education of farmers on diseases and
management
0
2.4
0
2.4
38.1 57.1
Farmers should monitor chickens closely
4.8
0
0
4.8
31.0 59.5
Key: SD% = Strongly Disagree, D%= Disagree, SLD% = Slightly Disagree,
SLA% = Slightly Agree, A% = Agree, SA% = Strongly Agree
25
5.0 DISCUSSION
5.1.0 Characteristics of farmers
The results show that, out of the 42 sampled farmers from Malindza, 59.5% of the respondents
were females and 40.5% were males, this points to the fact that most of the indigenous chickens
are kept by females. A study carried out in Bokaa a village in Botswana also indicated a gender
bias, in that all backyard chickens were reared by women (Binta et al., 2006). The results are in
agreement with the observation that females spend most of their time at home with no formal
employment. As housekeepers, they have sufficient time to look after the chickens while the
males are at work to provide for the family (Siyaya, 2013).
A majority of the respondents were over the age of 60 years (26.2%), only 23.8% were in the age
group 51-60 years. This is because the industry is dominated by adults who are unemployed or
retired (Siyaya, 2013). The youngest farmer was 14 years old and the oldest was 71 years old
amongst the respondents. Furthermore, unemployed respondents were 40.5% and the retired
were 14.3% which exceeds 50% of non-working class compared to the other working classes
[Employed (16.7%), Civil servants (14.3%), Private sector (4.8%)] or self-employed (9.5%)
combined.
Only 7.1% of the respondents did not have formal education and 4.8% had adult literacy, while
14.3% of them attended up to primary level of formal education and 16.7% reached secondary
level. About 38.1% of the respondents completed high school and 19% had tertiary education.
Over half of the respondents had access to formal education or had no education at all which
agrees to a study by Bebe et al., (2013). In addition, the level of education acquired by the farmer
26
may determine the successful adoption of innovative ideas that will have a positive impact on the
growing indigenous chicken production.
5.2.0 The farmer’s experience in indigenous chicken production
A majority of the respondents have been rearing indigenous chickens for their whole life since
each and every homestead owned a flock. About 33% of the respondents have had over 10 years
of experience raising indigenous chickens, these findings agree with Siyaya, (2013) that farmer’s
experience averaged around ≥12 years. Moreover, the experience determines the success of the
indigenous chicken production.
5.3.0 Farmer’s indigenous chicken breeds, production systems and ownership of flock
In general, the study identified that a greater majority of farmers (81%) raise the mixture of all
the chicken breeds together without focusing on only one breed. This means that there is no
specialization on the type of indigenous chicken breed. The results are in agreement with theses
of Kingori et al (2010) and Haddad et al (2013). The authors reported that in most developing
countries mixed indigenous chicken populations are the result of uncontrolled cross breeding
programs between various lines of local and exotic breeds, which explains why most of the
farmers choose to rear mixed breeds.
27
The production systems considered for this study include: extensive system and semi-intensive
system which show that a majority of the households (57.1%) used the extensive system (freerange) (Photograph 2) in managing their indigenous chickens which agrees with the study by
Haddad et al., (2013). In addition, a research by Ahmed et al (2018) also states that almost all the
poultry raisers reared their poultry through free-range scavenging system. The remaining
respondents (42.9%) used a semi-intensive system, which was less preferably used by
respondents. With the extensive system, there is no way of isolating sick chicken during disease
outbreak.
The study also revealed that 81.0% of the farmers acquired their flock through cash purchase and
only 16.7% received their stock as a gift from friends and relatives. These results approve what
was found by Bebe et al., (2013) that rural folks owned chickens through purchases and form of
gifts by relatives and the community. In this case, indigenous chickens stock is started as
purchases and gifts.
5.4.0 Infectious disease prevalence
There are a few a numbers of poultry diseases in backyard poultry. But some of the infectious
diseases cause tremendous mortality of the birds in the rural areas. Among those diseases, Fowl
pox disease is found as the major cause of death of the chickens (47.1%) in Malindza followed
by Newcastle disease (ND) with 32.4%. However, a report by Ahmed et al (2013) disagrees with
the results whereby ND was found to be a major infectious disease that reduces the number and
productivity of traditionally managed chickens in Bagdad. A study by Dutta et al (2013) also
disagrees with the results of the study of Fowl pox is a major cause of backyard poultry but ND.
28
Other diseases of chicken included Infectious Bronchitis (IB), diarrhoea and coccidiosis which
caused great economic loss to the rural poultry farmers.
In this study, most households described a disease with clinical signs of lesions around the eyes
and paralysis being the frequent occurring in the chickens. Secondly, it was the symptoms of
paralysis, a twisted neck accompanied by wheezing. Evidently diarrhoea, dyspnea and nervous
signs were other common symptoms that caused mortality among chickens as it was also
discovered by Binta et al, (2006). Then it was speculated by the researcher that mortality was
caused by Fowl pox, ND, IB, diarrhoea and coccidiosis based on clinical symptomatology stated
by the respondents.
5.5.0 Indigenous chicken mortality
Most of the respondents do not keep track of the numbers of mortality but instead give a close
approximation of the chickens lost through some of the prevalent disease. About 288 chickens
were killed by Fowl pox disease followed by ND with 176 deaths. This opposes a study done by
Natukunda (2011) which documented ND being the most prevalent disease in indigenous
poultry.
5.6.0 Disease management practices and preventative measures
The results of the study showed that a few of the farmers in the study area provide some sort of
housing for their flock in the form of semi-intensive production system. Consequently, this kind
29
of production system is the one that determines the health status of the chickens because most
microorganisms easily establish themselves and spread in their housing through equipment
(Awan et al., 1994). However, about 59.5% of the respondents do not clean and disinfect the
housing facility which might be the reason of the high prevalence of Fowl pox and ND in
Malindza which is supported by a study by Tadesse (2015). In addition to that, where they
housed their chickens 28.6% of them used jeyes fluid as a disinfectant and quite a few used other
disinfectants mostly soap (4.8%) and viruguard (7.1%). About 81% also did not clean and
disinfect the waterers and feeders used by chickens (Photograph 3).
A minority of farmers (30.9%) managed chicken diseases through treatments using vaccination
(25.5%) and ethno-veterinary medicine (9.5%) to try and evade prevalent disease outbreaks
(Ondwasy, 2007). Some of the herbs used to treat chicken diseases were Aloe vera and cayenne
pepper and the vaccines were mostly Lasota (16.7%) and Clone 30 (4.8%) which indicated a
quiet a low use of conversional medicine. However, a majority of respondents do not practice
ND and Fowl pox control (69.1%) which supports a study by Binta et al, (2006).
Some respondents did not carry out post mortem inspection if one of their chickens died (81%)
which in the case explains the again the 81% of those who did not get assistance from veterinary
personnel. These results agree with the study by Magothe et al., (2012), that extension services
do not actually reach everyone in the rural areas.
30
5.7.0 Suggested control of the prevalent diseases
The respondents in the study reported a number of approaches to manage diseases in their
indigenous chicken flocks and at large. Regular vaccination (42.9%) and access to affordable
vaccine (14.3%) were the two main disease prevention strategies mostly suggested by
respondents followed by the use of ethnoveterinary medicine (9.5%) which agrees with a
research by Tadesse (2015). Other respondents also pointed out that extension education on
diseases affecting indigenous chickens was also important in improving production. Getting free
vaccine from government was also touched by some respondents that it would be of beneficiary.
About 9.5% suggested that the farmers must have close monitoring of the chickens in order to
tackle any developing symptoms at an early stage and apply proper preventative measures. In
addition, some respondents insisted on the increased extension services in rural areas.
A majority of the farmers (57%) strongly agree on educating farmers on diseases affecting
indigenous chickens which agrees with the study by Natukunda (2011). Close attention to the
flock was also strongly emphasized by 59.5% of the selected respondents. About half of the
farmers agreed on government increasing poultry extension officers (52.4%) to reach out to
farmers in the rural areas .
Moreover, the study has highlighted the need for intervention by government to help farmers
control infectious diseases by providing intense extension education and increasing the number
of available extension officers in the country under poultry. Most farmers stated that it is better
to tackle a problem while still afar.
31
6.0 CONCLUSION
This study concludes that challenges faced in indigenous chicken production in Malindza were
prevalent diseases, health management practices, little access on the conversional medicine and
extension education. In addition, fowl pox and Newcastle disease were a great menace in the
area. These diseases were mostly responsible for the high mortality of indigenous chickens.
32
7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Rural farmers should therefor pay close attention to their flock in order to tackle occurrence of a
disease at an early stage. The farmers were of the opinion that government could greatly
contribute towards the development of the said indigenous chicken industry by provision of
subsidized chicken vaccines.
33
8.0 LITERATURE CITED
Ahmed J., Alam S., Chowdhury K., Dipta P.M., Monzur Q.M., Popy F.Y., and Sawrab R.
(2018). Backyard Poultry Management and Production System at Barlekha Upazila,
Moulvibazar, Bangladesh. International Journal of Science and Business. 2 (2): 90-100
Alders, R.G. (2004). Poultry for profit and pleasure. (Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations, Rome).
Alders R.G. and Harrison, J.L. (2009). An assessment of chicken husbandry including Newcastle
disease control in rural areas of Chibuto, Mozambique. Tropical Animal Health Production 42:
729–736.
Alders, R.G., Bagnol, B., Harun, M. and Young, M.P. (2005). Village poultry, food security and
HIV/AIDS mitigation. (Unpublished, Paper presented at the FAO meeting on HIV/AIDS and
livestock in Africa, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 8-10 March), p. 21.
Alexander, D.J., Bell, J.G. and Alders, R.G. (2004). Technology Review: Newcastle Disease
with special emphasis on its effect on village chickens. (FAO Animal Production and Health
Paper No. 161. FAO, Rome).
Ambali, A.G., Abubakar, M.B. and Tamjdo, T. (2007). Rural Chicken Production: Effects of
gender on ownership and management responsibilities in some parts of Nigeria and Cameroon.
International Journal of Poultry Science 6: 413–416.
Awan, M.A., Otte, M.J. and James, A. D. (1994). The epidemiology of Newcastle disease in
rural poultry: A review. Avian Pathology, 23:3, 405-423.
Bagnol, B. (2001). The Social Impact of Newcastle Disease Control. In: R.G. Alders and P.B.
Spradbrow (eds) SADC Planning Workshop on Newcastle Disease Control in Village Chickens.
Proceedings of an International Workshop, 2000, (Maputo, Mozambique, ACIAR Proceedings
No 103), 69-75.
34
Bebe, B.O., George, O. G., Justus, O., (2013). Management practices and challenges in
smallholder indigenous chicken production in Western Kenya. Journal of Agriculture and Rural
Development in the Tropics and Subtropics. 114 (1): 51–58
Binta, M.G., Chabo R.G., Itebeng, K., Mushi, E.Z. (2006). Diseases of indigenous chickens in
Bokaa village, Kgatleng district, Botswana. Journal of the South African Veterinary Association
77(3): 131–133.
Davis, A.D., (2012). Poultry disease manual. The Texas A and M University. Dallas, Texas.
Dolberg, F. (2003). Review of household poultry production as a tool in poverty reduction with
focus on Bangladesh and India. (Pro-Poor Livestock Policy Initiative of the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Working Paper No. 6. Rome, Italy, p. 2.
Dutta, R.K., Islam, M.S. and Kabir, M.A. (2013). Production Performance of Indigenous
Chicken (Gallus domesticus L.) in some selected areas of Rajshahi, Bangladesh. American
Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 3(2): 308-323.
Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). (2009). Characterization of indigenous chicken
production systems in Cambodia. Prepared by M.T. Dinesh, E. Geerlings, J. Sölkner, S. Thea, O.
Thieme and M. Wurzinger. AHBL – Promoting strategies for prevention and control of HPAI.
Rome, Italy.
Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). (1994). Meat inspection for developing countries.
Fourie, C. and Grobbelaar, J.A.N. (2003). Indigenous poultry breeds. Wing Nut Publications. .
Krugersdorp, Germany. p. 20–21.
Guèye, E.F. (2000). The role of family poultry in poverty alleviation, food security and the
promotion of gender equality in rural Africa. Outlook on Agriculture 29: 129- 136.
35
Haddad, B., Larbi, M.B., and M’hamdi, N. (2013). Indigenous chicken production systems in
villages in the south of Tunisia. Laboratoire des ressources animales et alimentaires, Institut
National Agronomique de Tunisie, 43 Avenue Charles Nicole, 1082 Tunis, Tunisia.
Harrison, J.L. and Alders, R.G. (2010). An assessment of chicken husbandry including
Newcastle disease control in rural areas of Chibuto, Mozambique. Tropical Animal Health
Production 42: 729–736.
Kingori, A.M., Wachira, A.M. and Tuitoek, J.K. (2010). Indigenous Chicken Production in
Kenya: A Review. International Journal of Poultry Science 9 (4): 309-316, p 309-316.
Kitalyi, A.J. (1998). Village chicken production systems in rural Africa household food security
and gender issues: FAO, Rome. 142:
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/003/W8989E/W8989E00.htm. 27/09/2018.
Kyarisiima, C.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.
Masimula, J.M. (2004). Poultry Enterprise Budget and Farmers Perceptions towards the National
Agricultural Marketing Board (NAMBOARD). Unpublished Research Project, University of
Eswatini. Eswatini.
Masuku, M.B. (2011). An Analysis of the Broiler Supply Chain in Eswatini: A Case Study of the
Manzini Region. Asian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 3(6): 492-499.
Mbabane, Eswatini.
Masuku, M.B. and Siyaya, B.J. (2013). Factors Affecting Commercialisation of Indigenous
Chickens in Eswatini. Department of Agricultural Economics and Management, University of
Eswatini, Manzini, M200, Eswatini .Journal of Agricultural Studies Vol. 1, No. 2, 45-46.
36
Ministry Of Agriculture (MOA) (2012). Ministry of Agriculture Annual Report. Introduction to
Indigenous Poultry Keeping – The Case of the Swazi Chicken. Mbabane, Eswatini.
Ministry Of Agriculture (MOA) (2017). Ministry of Agriculture Annual Report. Livestock
Census. Siteki, Eswatini.
Mohapatra, S.C. and Panda, B. (1981). Poultry genetic resources in India. Indian Poultry
Industry Year Book. pp. 50–58.
Mukaratirwa, S. and Hove, T. (2009). A survey of ectoparasites, cestodes and management of
free-range indigenous chickens in rural Zimbabwe. Journal of the South African Veterinary
Association 80(3): 188–191.
Mutua, B.M. (2011). Challenges facing indigenous chicken production and adoption levels of
biosecurity measures in selected areas of Makueni County, Kenya. Master’s Thesis. South
Eastern Kenya University, Kenya.
Natukunda K., Kugonza D.R. and Kyarisiima C.C. (2011). Indigenous chickens of the Kamuli
Plains
in
Uganda:
I.
Production
system
and
flock
dynamics.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233059017. 27/09/2018.
Ondwasy, H.O., Okitoi, L.O., Siamba, D.N. and Nkurumah, D. (2007). Traditional herbal
preparations for indigenous poultry health management in Western Kenya. Livestock Research
for Rural Development 19 (5).
Ondwasy H., Wesong H., Okitoi L.O. (2006). Indigenous chicken production manual. Technical
note series no. 18, Kenya Agricultural Research Institute. Kenya.
Pandey, V.S., Demey, F., Verhulst, A. (1992). Parasitic diseases: a neglected problem in village
poultry in sub-Saharan Africa. In Pandey V.S., Demey F. (eds) Village poultry production in
Africa. Rabat, Morocco: p. 136–141.
37
Rahman, S.M.R. (2012). Documentation of good practices (GP) for family poultry development
in Eswatini. Report prepared for the IFAD funded FAO project “Smallholder Poultry
Development”. Mbabane, Eswatini.
Shane, S.M., (2005), Hand book on poultry diseases. American soybean association. Liat towers,
Singapore. p. 86-135
Shongwe, S. (2009). High Demand for Village Chicken. Times of Eswatini. June 24, 2009.
Mbabane, Eswatini. p. 13.
Siyaya, B. J. (2013). Determinants of Profitability of Indigenous Chickens in Eswatini. Masters
Thesis. University of Eswatini, Luyengo, Eswatini.
Tadesse, A. (2015). Household poultry production and health management practices in two agroecological zones of central Tigray, Ethiopia. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare
5(13): 86-99.
Thwala, M. (2012). Analysing the value chain of the Family Poultry Subsector in the Lower
Usuthu Project Area in Eswatini. SWADE. Siphofaneni, Eswatini.
Vilakati-Kiondo, R. L. (2017). Poultry Production Manual. Indigenous Chickens of Eswatini.
University of Eswatini. Luyengo, Eswatini. p.12.
Yitbarek, M.B. and Andargie, Z. (2013). Performance Evaluation of Local Chicken at Enebsie,
Sar Middir, Eastern Gojjam, Ethiopia. World Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences &
Technology 1(1): 1-6.
Yongolo, M.G.S. (1996). Epidemiology of Newcastle disease in indigenous chickens in
Tanzania. Ph.D Thesis. Tanzania.
38
Yousuf, D. (2005). Control of Newcastle Disease in Village Chickens as a process. In: M.F.
Wellington, (ed) Rural Poultry e-Newsletter 6th edition, (International Rural Poultry Centre,
KYEEMA Foundation). p. 9-11.
39
APPPENDICES
Appendix 1: Questionnaire
SECTION A: FARMER
Instruction: Please tick, circle or fill in the blank space where required.
Demographic characteristics
1. Status of respondent
1) Head of household
2) Not head of household
2. Sex
1) Male
2) Female
3. Age ………………..
4. Occupation
1) Employed
2) Private sector
3)
Civil
4) Self-employed
5) Unemployed
6) Retired
servant
5. Education level respondent
1) Not been to school
2) Sebenta/adult literacy
3) Primary school
4) Secondary school
5) High school
6) Tertiaty
6. Experience in indigenous chicken production
………………………………………….
SECTION B: INDIGENOUS CHICKENS
7. Total number of indigenous chicken population........................................................
8. What are the type of breeds you keep?
1) Necked-neck (Kelukelwane) 2) Frizzle (Imfukwane)
3)
4) Malay chicken (ligema)
6) Mixture of all breeds
5) Tailless (ingcunu)
Dwarf
(Mapipiligwane)
7) Other (specify)………………………………………………………………………….
9. Which poultry production system do you use?
1) Intensive
2) Semi intensive
3) Extensive (Free range)
10. How did you own your flock?
1) Inheritance
2) Cash purchase
3) Gift
4) Other (specify)..........................................
40
11. Origin of flock
1) Manzini
2) Hhohho
3) Shiselweni
4) Lubombo
5) Other (specify)..........................................
SECTION C: DISEASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
12. Do you clean and disinfect the chicken housing facility? Yes ( ) No ( )
13. What do you use for disinfecting chicken housing?
1) Jeyes fluid
2) Viruguard
3) Pharmguard
4) Other (specify).............................................
14. How often do you disinfect the chicken house?
…………………………………………………………………………………………........
15. Do you clean and disinfect waterers and feeders? No ( ) Yes ( )
16. What do you use for disinfecting the waterers and feeders?
1) Bleach
2) Jeyes fluid
3) Pharmguard
4) Other (specify)...........................................
17. How often do you disinfect the waterers and feeders?
………………………………………………………………………………………………
18. Do you practice Newcastle control? No ( ) Yes ( )
19. Which type of vaccine is used? ....................................................................................
20. Who applies the vaccine?
1. Owner ( )
2. Non owner ( )
21. Which method of application do you use?
1) Injection
3) Water administration
3. In feed
4) Other (specify).........................................
22. What is the frequency of application? ........................................................................
23. What is the dosage rate used?
1) Correct strength
2) Under strength
3) Over strength
24. Is there any help for sick birds from the veterinarian? No ( ) Yes ( )
25. Is there mortality experienced for the past 3 years? No ( ) Yes ( )
26. If so, how many birds died? .........................................................................................
27. Cause of death (disease common name) …………………………………….………
41
28. Do you do a post mortem inspection to find the cause of death? Yes ( ) No ( )
29. Was there any sick bird in your flock? Yes ( ) No ( )
30. If so, what was it treated with? …………………………………………...….……...
31. If animals fall sick, what are the clinical symptoms or signs of illness? …….……
…………………………………………………………………………………………...…
32. Do you vaccinate your chickens against Newcastle and Fowl pox diseases? Yes ( ) No ( )
33. Any way you suggest will help in controlling the most prevalent diseases?
…………………………………………………………………………………………..…
SECTION D: WAYS OF CONTROLLING THE MOST PREVALENT DISEASES
Indicate by circling in the number that reflects your perceived level of agreement on the
Following statements.
The rating scale:
Strongly disagree = SD
Disagree= D
Slightly disagree=SLD
Slightly agree=SLA
Agree= A
Strongly Agree=SA
PARAMETERS
SD D SLD SLA A SA
34. Government should increase poultry extension officers
1
2
3
4
5
6
35. Government should open local Market for vaccines
1
2
3
4
5
6
36. Government should initiate free testing of diseases
1
2
3
4
5
6
37. Education of farmers on diseases and management
1
2
3
4
5
6
38. Farmers should monitor animals closely
1
2
3
4
5
6
42
Appendix 2: Request for participation of indigenous chicken farmers
University of Eswatini
Faculty of Agriculture
Department of Animal Science
Tel: 25274021/2/3
Luyengo Campus
Fax: 25274021
P.O. Box
Telegram UNEWSA
Eswatini
Luyengo
Dear sir/madam
RE: REQUEST FOR PARTICIPATION IN DATA COLLECTION IN THIS STUDY
Kindly find hereto request for your participation in a survey on “Disease prevalence and health
management practices of indigenous chickens (Gallus domesticus) in Malindza (Lubombo)”.
This study is in partial fulfillment for the requirement of a Bachelor of Science degree in Animal
Science. You are kindly requested to assist in this research work by responding to the questions I
have posed on disease prevalence and health management practices of indigenous chickens.
The objectives of the study are:
1. To identify the demographic statistic of the indigenous chicken producers.
2. To identify the most common infectious diseases which affect indigenous chicken production
in Malindza.
3. To determine the management practices impact on the health of indigenous chickens.
43
4. To determine ways of controlling the most prevalent indigenous chicken infectious diseases.
The research is strictly an academic exercise. I therefore assure you most faithfully that my
information in this exercise is provided with confidence.
Please note: There are no right or wrong answers.
Yours sincerely
………...............................
…………………….................
Mthokozisi Mavimbela (Researcher)
Dr. B.N. Dlamini (Supervisor)
44