The significance of predation as a constraint in scavenging poultry systems: some findings from India

C Conroy, N Sparks^*, D Chandrasekaran^**, A Sharma^***, D Shindey^***, L R Singh^***, A Natarajan^** and K Anitha^**

Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich,
Central Avenue, Chatham Maritime, Kent ME4 4TB
m.a.conroy@gre.ac.uk
^*Avian Science Research Centre, Animal Health Group, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG
^**Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal 637 001, Tamil Nadu, India
^***c/o BAIF Development Research Foundation, Dr. Manibhai Desai Nagar, N.H. 4, Warje, Pune 411 029, India

Abstract

 

A research project has been investigating the production problems facing backyard poultry-keepers in two locations in rural India, Udaipur district in Rajasthan and Trichy District in Tamil Nadu. Backyard poultry-keeping is a significant livelihood activity for many poor rural families in India, and for women in particular. A baseline survey of 90 backyard poultry-keepers provided a general overview of socio-economic factors, practices and constraints.

 

When asked about their main constraints, poultry-keepers ranked predation as being as important as, or more important than, disease. The baseline survey collected some quantitative data that showed high mortality rates in chickens in both locations, primarily due to predation. The findings of the baseline survey regarding the relative importance of predation were subsequently confirmed by a one-year monitoring programme. Other papers on constraints to scavenging poultry in India mention predation, but do not identify it as the principal constraint: possible reasons for this are discussed.

Keywords: Chickens, constraints, India, predation, scavenging poultry

 

Introduction

 

There has been relatively little research in India on village chickens, regarding both constraints and technological improvements that could be affordable to the resource-poor. Instead, research (much funded by commercial producers) has focused on intensive production systems. What limited research there has been on scavenging poultry has focused primarily on 'improved' breeds, as was reflected in several papers presented at a national seminar in December 2002 (Devegowda et al 2002).

 

A research project managed by the Scottish Agricultural College, and with socio-economic inputs from the Natural Resources Institute, has been making a modest contribution to filling the research gap by looking at other aspects of improving scavenging systems. The project, which began in late 2000, is funded by DFID's Livestock Production Programme. The locations, both semi-arid, are Udaipur district in Rajasthan and Trichy District in Tamil Nadu; and BAIF Development Research Foundation and Tamil Nadu University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences (TANUVAS) are the collaborators in the respective districts.

 

The two project locations are quite different as far as poultry-keeping is concerned. In the Udaipur project villages the local people are primarily poor tribals, and there is no organised market for chickens. By contrast, in Trichy the poultry-keepers belong to a range of castes and wealth categories. Chickens from this area are highly prized for their superior taste. There is a well-developed commercial market, with traders visiting some of the villages and local markets to purchase birds for sale in urban centres 30-150 kms away.

 

 

Project Methodology

 

During the first 18 months the project focused its efforts on gaining a thorough understanding of the scavenging poultry systems in the project locations, including the constraints affecting them. To do this it used a combination of methods.

 

Selection of villages and respondents

 

Trichy District, Tamil Nadu

 

The general project area was chosen partly on the basis that the state veterinary services were working closely with poultry-keepers here, and were interested in cooperating with the project team in the research; and partly because it was reasonably accessible from Namakkal, where the TANUVAS researchers are based. The TANUVAS team itself did not have a previous record of working on an ongoing basis in villages in Trichy, so the cooperation of the veterinary services was seen to be important in helping the team to establish a good rapport with the villagers.

 

Three categories of backyard poultry-keepers were identified in this district by the team in the early stages of the project. It was decided to work in two villages in which all three categories were present. This would enable us to be relatively confident that any differences found between the three groups could be attributed to the nature of their poultry-keeping systems, rather than other extraneous factors (e.g. distance from poultry market). Two villages were selected that satisfied this criterion, Peruganur and Ayyanar Kovil Salaikadu (AKS). The former is well connected to a small town and various services, whereas the latter is less well-connected.

 

The three categories of poultry-keepers identified were:

• Category 1 = small and marginal farmers whose home and poultry are adjacent to their agricultural land

• Category 2 = small and marginal farmers whose home and poultry are separate from their agricultural land, i.e. in a nucleated settlement

• Category 3 = landless people who live in a colony (hamlet), with poultry kept in and around the house.

Udaipur District, Rajasthan

 

The project team decided to work in three villages of Baghpura area in Jhadol block, since BAIF has a strong operational presence in this area, where it has been implementing a European Union-funded rural development project. The people living here are predominantly tribal, mainly belonging to the Bhil tribe. The project has been working through women's self-help groups (SHGs) in this project area.

 

Baseline survey

 

The project undertook a structured baseline survey of 60 poultry-keepers in Trichy district and 30 poultry-keepers in Udaipur district to obtain a general overview of practices and constraints (Conroy et al 2003). In Udaipur, 10 poultry-keepers were selected in each of the three project villages; while in Trichy 10 poultry-keepers from each of the three categories in each village were interviewed (except that in AKS only nine C3 poultry-keepers were interviewed as there were no more in this category). Most of the respondents were women, since they are usually responsible for all aspects of poultry-keeping.

 

The principal survey method was an interview schedule, which included a question about constraints and their relative importance. The enumerators were given the following instructions: and format for recording answers (Figure 1).

 

The enumerators were given the following instructions: Ask about poultry-keeping problems – do NOT read out the list below. First record answers with a tick. Then show interviewee cards symbolizing the problems they have mentioned, and ask them to rank the problems. The format used for recording answers is shown in Figure 1.

 

In addition, to collect information about hatchability and mortality the survey used a new technique, which we have called the participatory clutch history method (Conroy 2005). This information was obtained by getting the owner to recall what had happened to one or more specific clutches in her/his flock during the previous 6-9 months, and to record this information on a chart placed on the ground. Since many poultry-keepers are illiterate, the chart was based on symbols (e.g. use of stones to indicate numbers), rather than words and numerals. They would start (see Figure 2) by showing the number of eggs laid, then the numbers of eggs or birds at various subsequent stages, and ultimately the number reaching marketable age and retained in the flock. The 17 subsequent rows indicated possible explanations for removal from the flock, both deliberate (e.g. consumption, sale) and accidental (mortality due to disease, particular types of predator, etc.); and any removals were recorded in the appropriate row and column.
 

 

In each Udaipur village, a total of 15 clutch histories was taken from 10 respondents. In Trichy, 36 clutch histories were recorded in AKS and 42 in Peruganur.

 

Monitoring programme

 

After the baseline survey a one-year monitoring programme (from July 2001 to June 2002) was established in villages in the two locations to collect further information about poultry production and productivity. The programme, which covered 2056 birds in Udaipur and 1445 birds in Trichy, monitored weight gain and mortality and its causes. In addition, dead birds were examined for the presence of internal parasites: 94 birds were examined in slaughterhouses in Tamil Nadu, and 40 birds were sacrificed and examined in Udaipur at the state government's Regional Disease Diagnostic Centre.

 

Results

 

Baseline survey rankings

 

Trichy villages

 

Overall, predators and disease were perceived as being of roughly equal importance in Peruganur, as can be seen from Table 1. Predators were seen as the main problem by 12 poultry-keepers, and the second most important by nine; while disease is seen as most important by 11 and second most important by 10. Among category 1 and 2 poultry-keepers the two problems account for the vast majority of the top three rankings - 18 of the 20 top rankings and 16 of the 20 second rankings, respectively.

 

Among category 3 poultry-keepers feed-related problems acquire greater importance. This may be explained by the fact that C3 poultry-keepers are landless, and therefore they have to purchase grains; whereas C1 and C2 villagers have farms, and probably produce the majority of the grains given to their poultry.

 

In AKS, 28 of the 29 people interviewed ranked predators as the main constraint, while only one gave disease this ranking. Fifteen of them ranked disease as the second most important constraint, but 7 of the 9 C3 (landless) poultry-keepers ranked feed availability as the second most important.

 

Udaipur villages

 

In the Udaipur villages, as in Peruganur, predation and disease were perceived as being the most important problems. Roughly equal numbers of poultry-keepers rank them as the first and second most important problems: no other problems are ranked as first or second most important. Health service availability was ranked the third most important problem by 17 respondents, and feed availability by seven of them.

 

Baseline survey clutch history findings - overall mortality rates

The baseline survey's clutch history data (Conroy et al 2003) identified serious constraints on productivity in both locations. Respondents were generally aware of the causes of mortality. In the case of predation-induced mortality, they even knew the types of predators in most cases; although in a few cases they said they did not know, and in some cases they may have been guessing. Landless labourers may sometimes have not known whether a bird had been lost to a predator or had been stolen, given that they are away from their village during the day. Although reliability can be an issue when using recall methods (like the clutch history), the monitoring programme, in which causes of losses were recorded every two weeks, produced similar results. This suggests that recall reliability was not a problem.

Trichy villages

The baseline survey (Conroy et al 2003) identified serious constraints on productivity in both locations. In Trichy, losses were greater in the remoter village, AKS, where the overall mortality rate was more similar to that of the Udaipur villages than that of the second Trichy village, Peruganur (see Table 3). In both locations the survey data showed that predation was a more important cause of mortality than disease. The vast majority (95%) of predation deaths occurred during the first 8 weeks after hatching.

Udaipur Villages

The results are summarised in Table 4. The mean number of deaths per clutch was highest in Jagannathpura. Almost 42% of the birds that hatched died before reaching market age.

Mortality rates are similar in the three villages, but Richawar's is slightly higher than the other two. Overall, predation (21.9%) is a more important cause of mortality than disease (16.6%), and the predation rates in the three villages are quite similar.

 

Differences in Mortality Rates between Groups in the Trichy Villages

 

In Peruganur, disease is highest in category one birds and lowest in category 3, whereas predation mortality is similar (11 or 12%) for category 1 and 2 poultry-keepers, and highest (21.4%) for category 3 (see Table 5). In AKS, however, predation mortality rates are very similar for all three categories. The reasons for these differences are not readily apparent.

Baseline survey clutch history findings - types of predators

 

In Peruganur, all predation mortality was attributed to wild birds (see Table 6). The main type of predator for all three categories was large birds of prey (LBoP). while the second was small birds of prey (SBoP). Crows (Corvus spp.) were the third type of predator, but were involved much less frequently. There are two widespread crow species in India that are found near human habitation, namely the House crow (Corvus splendens) and the Large-billed crow (Corvus macrorhynchos).  In AKS, wild birds also caused more mortality than other types of predator, and again Large Birds of Prey is the main type.  However, in AKS crows are more important than Small Birds of Prey, whereas the opposite is the case in Peruganur. The principal mammalian predator is the wild cat, which is thought to be the Jungle Cat (Felis chaus). This has been described as "the common wild cat of India", and has been noted as preying on poultry (Prater 1980).