Review of Rural Poultry Projects in two Panchayaths of Thrissur in Kerala

1. 1
THE RELEVANCE OF BACKYARD AND SMALL
SCALE POULTRY PROJECTS TO SUSTAINABLE
LIVELIHOOD IN TWO PANCHAYATHS IN
THRISSUR DISTRICT
Deepa G Menon
THESIS
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirement for the course
APPRECIATION PROGRAMME
ON
SUSTAINABILITY SCIENCE
(Programme Code: APSS)
AN IGNOU INITIATIVE FOR OUR SUSTAINABLE FUTURE
IN COLLABORATION WITH
M S SWAMINATHAN RESEARCH FOUNDATION, CHENNAI
2009

2. 2
Indira Gandhi national Open University, Maidan Garhi, NewDelhi

3. 3
The relevance of backyard and small scale
poultry projects to sustainable livelihood
in two Panchayaths in Thrissur District

4. 4
CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY
This is to certify that the project report entitled “The relevance of backyard and small scale
poultry projects to sustainable livelihood in two Panchayaths in Thrissur District” submitted
to the Indira Gandhi National Open University, Maidan Garhi, New Delhi – 110068 in partial
fulfilment of the requirement for the programme is an original work carried out by Deepa G
Menon with enrolment no 093569130 under the guidance of Dr P Anitha.
The matter embodied in this project is genuine work done by the student and has not been
submitted either to this University or to any other University / Institute for the fulfilment of
the requirement of any course of study.
Date:25/05/09
Name Address &
Designation of the student
Name and Address of the Guide
Deepa G Menon Dr P Anitha
Assistant Professor, Associate Professor,
Department of Poultry Science, Centre for Advanced Studies in
Kerala Agricultural University, Poultry Science,
Mannuthy, Thrissur, Kerala Kerala Agricultural University,
Mannuthy, Thrissur, Kerala

5. 5
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my deep and sincere gratitude to my
supervisor, Dr. P Anitha Associate Professor Department of
Poultry Science, College of Veterinary & Animal Sciences,
Mannuthy. Her understanding, encouraging and personal
guidance have provided a good basis for the present thesis.
I wish to express my warm and sincere thanks to Professor E
Nanu, Dean, College of Veterinary & Animal Sciences,
Mannuthy for permitting me to join this course.
I am deeply grateful to my Professors Dr. A Jalaludeen and Dr. P
A. Peethambaran, Centre for Advanced Studies in Poultry
Science for their detailed, constructive comments and important
support throughout this work.
I owe my most sincere gratitude to Dr U S. Ramachandran,
whose ideals and concepts have had a remarkable influence on
my entire career.
I am thankful to Dr P D Suresh, Dr Baburaj,Dr Joy George, who
gave me untiring help during my work. I warmly thank my
colleagues Dr. Anish D, Dr Geetha R, and Dr. Radhika for their
valuable advice and friendly help. The extensive discussions
around my work and interesting explorations in operations have
been very helpful for this study.
My warm thanks are due to Ambili, a good friend and colleague
who was kind enough to help and support me.

6. 6
My sincere thanks are due to the official referees for their
detailed review, constructive criticism and excellent advice during
the preparation of this thesis.
I also wish to thank Dr. Baburaj, Dr Sethumadhavan, Dr Joy
George, for their continued support and guidance has been of
great value in this study.
During this work I have collaborated with many colleagues for
whom I have great regard, and I wish to extend my warmest
thanks to all those who have helped me with my work.
I owe my thanks to my family members, my sons Roshan and
Aaryan. Without their encouragement and understanding it
would have been impossible for me to finish this work. My
special gratitude is due to Mr. Musa Isaacs and Mr. Farook
Qureshi for their constant encouragement and affection.

7. 7
Sl No Table of contents
Page
1. INTRODUCTION
11
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
19
3. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY
29
4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
31
5. RESULTS & DISCUSSION
36
6. RECOMMENDATIONS
75
7. CONCLUSION
79
8. SUMMARY
81
9. REFERENCES
84
10. APPENDIX
86

8. 8
LIST OF TABLES
Table no Title Page
1 Year-wise Estimate of Egg production 13
2 Profile of Thrissur District 17
3 Observed frequencies and percentages 36
of Variables studied among farmers
4 Production performance of standard 48
birds
5 Observed frequencies and percentages 51
of variables among integrators
6 Details of poultry projects in 58
Panchayath-I
7 Details of poultry projects in 61
Panchayath-II
8 Economics of backyard poultry units 67
9 Economics of broiler production 69
10 Ratings of constraints faced by poultry 70

9. 9
farmers
11 Constraints felt by broiler farmers 71

10. 10
LIST OF FIGURES
Table no Title Page
1 Family size of the respondents 37
2 Experience of the respondents in 38
poultry rearing
3 Details of pullets distributed in the last 58
five years
4 Details of pullets distributed in the last 62
five years in Panchayath-II
5 Split up of cost of production in 68
backyard units
6 Ratings of constraints faced by poultry 70
farmers
7 Ratings of Constraints felt by broiler 71
farmers

11. 11
Preface
This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the course Appreciation Programme on
Sustainability Science submitted to Indira Gandhi National
Open University. The matter embodied in this project is
genuine work done by me and has not been submitted to this
University or to any other University / Institute for the
fulfilment of the requirement of any course of study.
This thesis is the final work of my study of done in
collaboration with the Department of Animal Husbandry,
Local self governments, Government of Kerala. It serves as
documentation of my project work, which has been made from
my detailed discussions with veterinarians, poultry farmers,
kudumbasree members, trainees, entrepreneurs, and subject
matter specialists. The study has been a part of my job as a
scientist at the Centre for Advanced Studies in Poultry
Science, Mannuthy.
The thesis consists of ten chapters which cover various aspects
of rural poultry production scenario in some Panchayaths of
Thrissur district. My supervisor on the project has been Dr P
Anitha of the Centre for Advanced Studies in Poultry Science,
Faculty of Veterinary & Animal Sciences of Kerala
Agricultural University. The thesis has been made solely by
me and there has been an attempt to provide in this work,
references to similar studies done elsewhere.

12. 12
INTRODUCTION

13. 13
1. INTRODUCTION
Poultry provides employment to about 1.5 million
people and contributes about Rs. 350 Billion to
the National GDP. Though poultry development in
the country has taken a quantum leap in the last
three decades, the growth has been mainly
restricted to commercial poultry. Rural backyard
poultry, contributing nearly 30% to the national
egg production, is the most neglected one. This
is in spite of the fact that their poultry eggs
and meat fetch a much higher price than that from
commercial poultry. For the poorest of the poor
and the landless, the major issues are food
security and risk spreading through subsidiary
income. Backyard poultry requiring hardly any
infrastructure set-up is a potent tool for
upliftment of the poorest of the poor. Besides
income generation, rural backyard poultry can
improve food self-sufficiency. Small-
scale poultry production has the potential to
stimulate economic growth of resource poor
households. Poultry rearing can enhance household
food security and contribute to poverty reduction
through provision of supplementary food, income
and employment.
Poultry production in Kerala remains largely as a
backyard venture with virtually no modern units.
These backyard birds have low to medium
productivity. There is, however, a market demand
of 5063 million eggs in the State against the
availability of a meager 1197 million eggs. The
State food security project aims to enhance Egg

14. 14
production in the State from the base level of
1196 (Million Nos.) to 2395 (Million Nos.). Its
implementation requires coordination and
integration of government departments, local
governments, and several other institutions.
Increasing the productivity of small-scale
farmers will improve the availability and
nutritional content of food, and enhance food
security generally among the poor. There are a
number of community groups and individuals
engaged poultry production projects. This
research will focus on finding out how the
projects are functioning, their socio economic
status, profitability, constraints and strategies
that can be employed to improve their success.
The per capita availability of egg in Kerala is
very low at 72 eggs/ year and that of poultry
meat is at 0.9 kg/year against the world average
of 147 eggs and 11 kg poultry meat /year, which
is the level recommended by the National
Institute of Nutrition. The Census figures
indicate that the chicken and duck population in
Kerala reduced to half over a period from 1996 to
2003. However, there has been a significant
improvement in the population of other species of
poultry especially quail and turkeys. An overall
47% reduction in the poultry population was
observed during the period.
One of the biggest problems is the non-
availability of land. Kerala is already placed in
India among the most thickly populated States.
The agricultural land is also on the decline,
which translates to a higher cost of feed

15. 15
ingredients. There are no feed companies in
Kerala which make specific poultry feeds.
Therefore, many a times, feed has to be procured
from other States. The availability of quality
chicks is another problem in Kerala. Moreover,
the cost of labour compared to neighbouring
States is another constraint. For poultry
farmers, loan/credit facilities are far from
satisfactory. Furthermore, small poultry units
lack insurance coverage. Over and above,
Government has imposed a 12.5% Value Added Tax.
Low production potential in the stocks maintained
by the backyard farmers and small holders is yet
another problem. However, the up gradation has to
be gradual as the birds need to retain their
hardiness, required for their scavenging nature
and survivability in harsh rural conditions.
Proper feeding and other managemental aspects
will also help improve the productivity of the
birds.
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
The Department being the nodal agency for poultry
activity provides a nucleus for the
implementation of schemes like SGSY (Ministry of
Rural Development) as per their requirement. This
Department has taken up in association with
Indian Council of Agricultural Research a
targeted program for up-gradation of low-input
technology birds Poultry Development activities
in the State aim at increasing the production of
egg, production and distribution of chicks and
good quality poultry meat, impart training on
Scientific Poultry Rearing and Management,

16. 16
encouraging unemployed youth and members of
weaker sections of society to take up poultry
rearing and gain self employment, assisting women
to start backyard poultry units etc. To carry out
the development activities there are nine poultry
farms, one Broiler Farm, One Duck Farm, One
Central Hatchery and two Intensive Poultry
Development Blocks under the Department.
Table 1 Year-wise Estimate of Egg production
Sl. No. Year India % change over Kerala %
contribution
previous year
of Kerala
1 2001-02 38729 5.72 2002 5.2
2 2002-03 39823 2.82 1347 3.4
3 2003-04 40403 1.46 1277 3.2
4 2004-05 45201 1.87 1197 2.9
5 2005-06 46166 2.13 1196 2.6
6 2006-07 50663 9.74 1199 2.4
Source: Economic Survey and Department of Animal Husbandry
In a country like India where the average
level of nutrition is very low, chicken and eggs,
which are not expensive, can contribute
considerably towards improving diet as a source
of animal protein. As per estimates available,
the per capita availability of egg is very low at
41 eggs /year and poultry meat is 0.9 kg/year
against the world average of 147 eggs and 11 kg
poultry meat /year. Government of India has set a
target for achieving production of over 52
billion eggs by 2011-12, at a growth rate of 4.3
per cent.

17. 17
Poultry farming for egg production relaying
on purchased feed are uneconomic in Kerala.
Poultry rearing on commercial lines is therefore
largely confined to broiler production. The egg
production which reached 2054 million in
1999-2000 is continuously showing declining trend
and in 2005-06 it reached a lower level of 1196
million recording a drastic fall of 41.75per
cent. During 2006-07 the situation is changing
and a 0.25% increase over the previous year is
recorded and egg production increased to 1199
million Nos. The per capita availability of egg
based on production during 2003-04 is only 39/
year and from 2004--05 to 2006-07, it further
declined to 36/year. The per capita consumption
of egg during 2006-07 is 66/year. The gap is
filled by importing eggs from neighbouring State.
An alarming factor to be noted in this regard is
that over the last three years the domestic
production of egg is declining to a lower level
than that of 1984 - 85. The decline in poultry
population and hike in cost of feed were the
major reason for the decline in production.
During 2006-07, 1021 million numbers of eggs is
imported to the State. The export during the year
is 4.3 million numbers
Backyard poultry system has good potential in the
state. Around 8-10 lakh chicks are being
introduced every year in the state. Apart from
Animal Husbandry department and Kerala
Agricultural University, KSPDC, a few NGOs and
private farms are also involved. But the system
is yet to develop to the required extent. The

18. 18
functioning of the department farms is to be
strengthened to foster the backyard poultry
system. On the contrary, in India as a whole it
was transferred into a vibrant scientifically
organised industry.
BROILER PRODUCTION
Poultry production has undergone rapid changes
during the past decades due to the introduction
of modern intensive production methods, new
breeds and improved preventive disease control
and bio-security measures. Nearly 10-15 Private
hatcheries, working as satellite hatcheries
contribute to the local production of chicks and
chicken meat. Approximately 40000-50000 direct
employment is generated through broiler
production. Apart from this, around 30000-40000
MT of chicken meat, which includes broilers,
layer chicks, broiler and layer parent, culls
etc. is being imported from neighbouring states.
PEOPLES PLAN CAMPAIGN
The State of Kerala flagged off the people’s plan
campaign in 1997. Poultry projects are being
implements right from the start of the campaign.
The greatest challenge to any Government is
alleviation of poverty in the rural areas of the
State. Kerala State Planning Board, initiated a
'Peoples' Campaign' in order to improve the
Panchayaths and municipal bodies to draw up the
Plan Schemes within their respective areas of
responsibility. Following are the objectives of
the campaign

19. 19
• To evolve economic planning with peoples'
participation and mobilization of local
resources in the development process by
involving stake holders.
• To effect substantial relaxation of
beauracratic control and thus the empowerment
of people. One of the important features of
people's planning is that the major thrust of
the Panchayaths has been focused on
productive sectors mainly agriculture and
other activities followed by social sectors
and infrastructures.
THRISSUR DISTRICT PROFILE
Thrissur is the cultural capital of Kerala State.
Profile of the District is depicted in Table 2
below. The district lies between 100 101 X 100 461
latitude and 760 541 longitude in the central part
of Kerala and is surrounded by (a) Arabian Sea on
the West (b) Coimbatore District of Tamil Nadu
and Palakkad district of Kerala in the east (c)
Malappuram and Palakkad district in the north and
(d) Ernakulam and Idukki district in the South.
It has an area of 3032 Sq km. The land holding
is predominantly marginal.
The district has moderate infrastructural
facilities. It has a busy railway station and is
well connected to other districts and states.
Two national high ways NH 47 and NH 17 passes
through the district. The economic development
of the district in the recent past has been more
conspicuous in the tertiary sector. The flooding
NRI remittance has helped development of new town

20. 20
ships and growth centres at different parts of
the district.
The district has a well-developed bank
network Canara Bank, the lead bank of the
district has been doing exceedingly well as the
leader. Among the public sector banks SBT, SBI
and Canara bank have a major presence. Thrissur
is an industrially and commercially developed
district. The district has basic infrastructure
facilities and as per the latest census the
district has a population of 29.74 lakhs of
which, 71.8 percent live in rural areas, the
district has 92.56% literacy rate and a high
percentage of skilled persons.
Table 2 Thrissur Districts’ Profile

21. 21
Table -2
District Came Into Existence
1 st JULY 1949
District Head Quarters
Thrissur
Geographical Area
3032 Sq.km
Parliamentary Constituencies
3
Assembly Constituencies
14
Taluks
5
Villages
254
Corporation
1
Municipalities
6
District Panchayath
1
Block Panchayath
17
Grama Panchayaths
92

22. 22

23. 23
REVIEW OF
LITERATURE

24. 24
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Studies in Bangladesh by Rahman and Hossain,
(1995) showed that an intervention with poultry
production created a relatively small decline in
the overall poverty with the proportion of
extreme poor declining from 31 to 23% and the
moderate poor stagnating around 29%.
`Todd, (1999) and Dolberg, (2001) opined
that poultry activity is to be considered as a
learning process for the beneficiaries, but it
has to be realised that one activity alone is not
sufficient to lift a family out of poverty. The
opportunities called as the enabling environment
must be available for the beneficiaries to
establish a small poultry enterprise, to minimize
the risks and to take up other income generating
activities.
Jensen (2000) observed that about 70 % of
the rural landless women are directly or
indirectly involved in poultry rearing
activities. He found that homestead poultry
rearing is economically viable. The poultry
sector could be one of the most productive
sectors if these women are properly trained,
supported with credit and other necessary inputs
and made to operate under supervision of
extension workers. Poultry rearing is suitable
for widespread implementation as it is of low
cost, required little skills, is highly
productive and can be incorporated into the

25. 25
households work. Poultry is the only activity in
which a large number of landless women can
participate. In the small-scale poultry units,
which support the landless, production per bird
may be low, but distribution of benefits will be
more equal and have great human development
impact. Poultry rearing is a culturally
acceptable, technically and economically viable.
Moreover, the ownership of poultry is entirely in
the hands of women.
Mack et al (2000) opined that in order to
increase egg and poultry meat production there is
a need for increased investment guided by
policies and institutions that promote equitable,
sustainable, and environmentally friendly long-
term outcomes. As Backyard poultry make an
important contribution to poverty mitigation, it
should be considered as any strategy to improve
rural livelihoods. Right policies and investment,
well designed and participative development
programmes can overcome the constraints faced by
the smallholder poultry producers. These
intensive production methods place high demands
on proper health, hygiene and management and
require only a small, but very skilled labour
force. This type of production has also been
adopted in developing countries but the scope of
adoption has been limited due to the high inputs
and skills required. The progress in industrial
poultry production methods has however had little
effect on subsistence poultry production methods
in rural and peri-urban areas, where inputs into
disease control remain minimal. Although this is

26. 26
true in general, there are some geographical hot
spots where industrial poultry production and
small holder village poultry systems have both
massively grown in close geographical proximity,
notably in Thailand, Indonesia, and China.
Del Ninno et al., (2001) described in their
paper that rural poultry production will not
protect poor people in Bangladesh against the
natural disasters that hit the country from time
to time, but it can help them build up their
asset base.
Jensen and Dolberg (2002)advocated for using
poultry as a tool in poverty alleviation. An
enabling environment must be established by
providing access to feed, vaccine, vaccinations
services, micro-finance, marketing and other
inputs and services. A village group, composed of
members of socially equal status, is an excellent
entity to disseminate improved technology, a
cost-effective entity to disseminate extension
messages, and a secure entity for disbursement of
loans.
Karlan, (2002) opined that an enabling
environment would give all the villagers access
to poultry farm input supplies and services; pave
the way for disbursement of micro-credits in a
cost-effective way; facilitate easier formation
of associations through formalised village
livestock groups; help people acquire the skills
that are required for a business set-up ., form

27. 27
the basis for a marketing organization for farm
products and can be used by other NGOs, having
the same target groups, to implement other
development activities.
Dolberg (2003) reviewed poultry as a tool in
poverty alleviation focusing on experiences from
Bangladesh but survey and project work that has
been undertaken in India. Animal husbandry and
agricultural departments’ extension programmes
are hardly known or used by most poor people for
whom the poultry work is relevant. The work in
Bangladesh is closely linked to the presence of
NGOs and their capacity to reach out to poor
people. Micro-credit has been an important
component in the interventions that the NGOs
undertake and it is difficult to distinguish
between the benefits from micro-credit and the
benefits from poultry production in Bangladesh.
In India, there are many NGOs that are much
closer to people than the government extension
services, but few of them have any poultry
expertise. in some States, the commercial sector
has a strong presence. He stresses that project
‘models’ need to be adapted to the conditions
prevailing in different countries.
Gondwe et al (2003) found that rural poultry
is raised and utilized by about 80 percent of the
human population, primarily situated in rural
areas and occupied by subsistence agriculture.
Different poultry species are raised, mostly

28. 28
indigenous to the area, except chickens, where
traces of Black Australorp breed can be
identified The paper describes a community-based
project that aims to contribute to food self-
sufficiency among smallholder farmers through
promotion and improvement of poultry species in
an integrated system without changing the
cultural and farming system Distribution of
flocks by age groups was in favour of old birds
(over 52 weeks) in chickens and ducks and growers
(20-30 weeks) in pigeons. This showed that
farmers keep their birds for a long time. The
proportion of chicks and ducklings less than ten
weeks old was small. This suggests high mortality
rates caused by diseases and predators. This age
group is vulnerable and needs care. In pigeons
the number of squabs is low since this is the
group that is mostly consumed. Growers, mature
and old pigeons are used for breeding. Inbreeding
within flocks is probably occurring because of
the lack of a cockerel-exchange system and
record-keeping. The major constraints to poultry
production were outbreaks of Newcastle disease
among chickens in the months of September to
December every year; predators that fed on
pigeons, chickens and ducks; and poor housing and
prolonged weaning periods for chickens and ducks.
There is also haphazard sharing of breed stock
among relatives, friends and others, within the
village rather than between villages. Poultry in
rural areas could play a role to contribute to
the nutritional status of the people in these
areas.

29. 29
Bujarbaruah and Gupta (2005) reported that a
flock size ranging from 25-250 birds are reared
across the country under the village poultry
system. They have low production potential with
only 40-80 eggs per year but are less susceptible
to most of the common diseases requiring less
veterinary care. In order to meet the deficiency
gap in poultry meat and egg sectors, adequate and
sustained efforts will have to be made to improve
the production efficiency of the rural poultry
which has been responsible to produce 40% of meat
and 44% of egg requirement in the country.
Average productivity from around 75% of the
indigenous poultry population is 60-70 eggs per
year per bird. The distribution of desi birds per
square km is 71 with an average holding of 2.59
indigenous birds per family i.e. a production of
2.59 X 65 eggs = 168 per family per year. With an
average family size of 5.5 in the region and
projected requirement of 90 eggs per person per
annum (50% of WHO recommendation), the
requirement per family is 5.5 x 90= 495 i.e. a
deficiency of 327 eggs per family. For the
development of the region through family poultry,
the need therefore is to increase the production
potential of the indigenous birds through
improvement measures like Sound and systematic
breeding programs with improved breeds developed
for backyard purpose. Slow but steady replacement
of the existing indigenous birds with lower
production potential with improved breeds like
Vanaraja / Giriraja was recommended.

30. 30
Mapiye and Sibanda (2005), in a study
carried out in Zimbabwe revealed that on an
average, each household had a flock size of 30 ±
6 chickens. Chickens that received full feed
supplementation had highest flock sizes, hen and
chick numbers. About 40.5 % of deaths recorded
were due to predation, 30.2% due to disease, 8.8%
due to accidents, 8.6% due to parasites and 12.9%
due to unknown causes. Although 88% of the
households were male-headed, women owned 95% of
the chickens. Female-headed households had higher
chicken flock sizes and lower mortalities than
male-headed households. Women dominated in
feeding (43.5% of the households), watering
(51.2%) and cleaning (37.2%). Men mainly
dominated in shelter construction (60%). Housing,
feeding and health systems were identified as
opportunities, and predation, diseases and chick
mortality as constraints to the expansion of
village chicken production. Adequate disease
control, reduction of chick losses, improvement
of husbandry practices and implementation of
gender sensitive projects were recommended.
Rai et al (2005) studied the poultry
production in Andaman and Nicobar Islands and
found that majority of eggs in the market come
from hens kept in semi-intensive or backyard
systems in rural areas. Poultry keeping has a
pivotal role in the economy of rural farmers. Of
late there has been an increasing awareness among
the farmers to adopt diversified agriculture,
including livestock and poultry. Poultry flock
size in the villages varies from 10-50. Women,

31. 31
assisted in some cases by children, play key role
in this sector, and they are main owners and
managers of family poultry production. The birds
are reared either under free-range system or
backyard or semi intensive system. The owner
sometimes provides supplemental feed like rice,
wheat and paddy. The amount of food provided to
the birds depends on the financial status of the
farmers and egg laying capacity of the birds.
Constraints analysis of backyard poultry in
Erode, a district of TamilNadu done by Baskaran
et al(2005), it was observed that the farmers
predominantly had medium level (31-38) of
constraints, while inferior number of respondents
had low (< 30) and high (> 39) level. The results
of correlation analysis revealed that out of 11
socio-economic characteristics, education,
experience in backyard poultry farming,
possession of backyard poultry birds and contact
with extension agency had significant negative
relationship with the constraints faced by
backyard poultry farmers. Further, the regression
analysis revealed that all the 11 socio-economic
characteristics put together contributed to the
extent of 81.20 per cent towards constraints
level which was found to be highly significant (P
< 0.01) and the characteristics namely,
occupation, experience in backyard poultry
farming, possession of backyard poultry birds and
contact with extension agency had significant
negative influence on constraints level among the
respondents

32. 32
Krishna Rao (2005) recorded that poultry are
inseparable from mankind and in the rural
scenario they do not need any land, are easy to
manage, regularly lay eggs, disease resistant and
well adapted to the harsh environment. With
better nutrition, their egg production can be
stepped up substantially. Only a good Night
Shelter need to be provided to them. With all
these attributes poultry farming in the rural
environment can be a powerful tool for poverty
alleviation and social justice. To the rural poor
this can be Rainless Harvest with egg production
and stock multiplication proceeding unhampered
irrespective of rain or drought. It is women that
are largely involved in poultry farming. In every
village market and fairs poultry and eggs are
major commodities.
Huq and Mallik (1998) found that rural women
in Bangladesh use poultry as a tool in poverty
alleviation and concluded that poultry
development has potential for capturing the
inequitable distribution of income and employment
in rural areas. Women could operate and manage
broiler, layer and duck farms efficiently with a
high return on the investment. Poultry production
on a smaller scale like in the are useful to
improve the native backyard poultry under
scavenging and semi-intensive systems, where
women traditionally play the most important role.
Lack of quality feed supply, Lack of vaccines
especially RD, Infectious Bursal Disease (IBD)
and Marek’s disease, Low price of dressed

33. 33
broilers and eggs were pointed out as the
constraints faced by them.
Singh and Jilani (2006) conducted a study in
Garhwal, Himalayas with sample size of 100
backyard poultry farmers and found that most
farmers belonged to old age category, having
medium family size, low annual income and high
social participation. Among the constraints
perceived non- availability of day old
chicks/lack of suitable germplasm, Infrastructure
facility, high price rate of day old chick, lack
of technical know-how, non-availability of
vaccine and medicines, Government policy and
credit facility of farmers were ranked as most
important. The total improvement of this sector
needs proper planning, creation of adequate
infrastructure and monetary support. To make
backyard poultry rearing a profitable venture the
farmers should be adequately trained in
scientific poultry rearing.
Mandal et al (2006) studied the Backyard
poultry farming in Bareilly district of Uttar
Pradesh, India and found that the respondents
were predominantly young, had low level of
education, belonged to Muslim religion and were
from the medium sized nuclear family.
Agricultural labour was the major occupation;
they had marginal land and medium livestock
holding with more than 6 years of poultry farming
experience. The average flock size was 5 birds
and they reared birds in free-range/backyard
system with little supplementary feeding. The
production level was very low. Natural hatching

34. 34
was the main source of chicks. No systematic care
was taken with regard to the diseases and
vaccination of the birds was also not carried out
in any of the villages surveyed. Direct marketing
was prevalent in the area although middlemen
existed. The major constraints identified were
high incidence of poultry diseases, lack of
suitable germ-plasm and attack by predators.
Choprakarn and Wongpichet(2007) reviewed the
information on indigenous chickens in Thailand,
describing the production systems, management,
conservation and utilization. Their production
systems have been sustainable and about 6 million
households, or 50 percent of Thais, keep poultry
at home. Each family produces 30–50 birds of
marketable size annually, which represents 100–
120 million birds for the country as a whole.
These chickens kept as one cockerel and three to
five hens per household. Flock size varies
through the year, as it depends on the hatching
rate, the availability of natural feed, the
effects of endemic diseases, and the amount of
time that the farmers have available to take care
of their birds. Periods of seasonal change are
critical times of high mortality; about 30–70% of
birds in a flock die annually. About 50–70 % are
raised for home consumption; the rest are for
sale to provide cash income. Few are used for
cultural and religious activities.

35. 35
RATIONALE OF THE
STUDY

36. 36
3. RATIONALE OF THE STUDY
In spite of the progress in agriculture,
India still faces a big challenge in job creation
and maintenance of food security and women’s role
in farming is still inadequately acknowledged.
With increasing urbanisation and sky-rocketing of
land prices everywhere due to population
explosion and allied factors back-yard poultry
units have vanished to a great extent from the
middle-class and lower middle-class and lower
middle-class people leaving poultry largely in
the hands of rural poor in single digit numbers
only who can only maintain these birds through a
system of foraging and scavenging. To these
deprived sections of our society Poultry
constitute instruments of social justice and
measures for poverty alleviation.
It is estimated that 78% of India’s
economically active women are involved in
agriculture. Across the poor farming communities,
care of animals is the women’s domain, but not in
the rich families. Rural poultry sector
contributes nearly 30% of the national egg
production in India and is the most neglected
one. The rural households normally maintain the
desi birds under scavenging or semi-scavenging
conditions. During the past three decades, the
popularity of scavenging chicken has reduced
drastically due to low production of the native
chicken used in this system.

37. 37
Against this background of poultry ownership
there are only two major groups of Poultry
keepers, the economically advanced commercial
farmers and the economically poor rural farmers,
labourers etc., who supplement their meager
income by raising a few desi chickens. It may
therefore be appropriate to term the poultry
raised by the urban elite as Urban Poultry and
the poultry raised by the rural poor the bulk of
which belong to the desi group as Rural Poultry.
Government of Kerala has implemented several
poultry projects in the past and especially after
the advent of the peoples plan campaign. It is
expected that such projects will continue to be
implemented in the future. There is the need to
evaluate the success of these projects and to
suggest measures to improve them. In this context
a study has been undertaken to critically examine
the after effects of poultry distribution
projects in two important Panchayaths in Thrissur
District.
Along with this, an evaluation of integrated
poultry units (broilers) prevalent in many parts
of Thrissur will also be done to get an idea
about their performance and feasibility. This
study will provide information on the
profitability of these projects will act as a
stimulus to attract more entrepreneurs to this
field.
Opinion of experts in this field will be
collected to enlist the main problems faced by

38. 38
poultry farmers and also the pitfalls in the
programmes taken up previously.
The findings of the study will help the
local level planners to critically evaluate the
projects implemented in past and restructure the
future poultry projects as needed. This will
result in better profitability and streamlining
of poultry production in the District. The
outcome of the study will be improved food
security, more sustainable use of natural
resources and increased income for the rural
poor.

39. 39
RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY

40. 40
4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Keeping in mind the limitations of the various
ongoing schemes and taking into account the need
to have a deeper insight into the requirements of
the rural poultry sector with focus aimed at the
poorest of the poor the study was completed in
two important Panchayaths of Thrissur District.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1. To analyse the situation of poultry rearing in
the two Panchayaths
2. To evaluate the poultry projects implemented
in the two Panchayaths during the past 5
years.
3. To determine the socio-economic development
registered if any consequent to these
projects.
4. To investigate the profitability of backyard
and small scale poultry projects.
5. To determine the constraints faced by the
poultry farmers.
6. To develop strategies to improve the success
of poultry projects.
METHODOLOGY

41. 41
Structured interview schedule was used to conduct
the situational analysis of the two Panchayaths.
Thirty households in the two Panchayaths were
covered under the study. The households were
selected at random. The variables as perceived by
the rural poultry owners were recorded in the
schedule prepared for the purpose of the study.
The rank position of the constraints was decided
on the basis of frequency distribution against
each constraint.
Data available with the Veterinary, Local self
governments and Rural Development Departments
were collected and evaluated. Ten experts in the
field and ten small scale poultry production unit
owners were identified and information was
gathered from them. A total of 30 respondents
were selected from the two Panchayaths by
purposive sampling technique. Data collected
through personal interview was categorized and
tabulated. The data was then subjected to
standard statistical analysis by finding the
mean. Correlation and multiple-linear regression
analysis by taking the total constraints score as
the dependant variable and the chosen socio-
economic characteristics of backyard poultry
farmers as independent variable.

42. 42
Variables studied with respect to rural
poultry farmers
(a)Gender
(b)Family size
(c) Occupation
(d)Experience
(e)Flock Size
(f)Management Practices
(g)Feeding system
(h)Flock Health
(i)Diseases
(j)Production particulars
(k) Preferences of beneficiaries
(l)Self help groups
(m)Cost of production
Descriptive research was used in the study of
integrated poultry units so as to obtain a
complete and accurate description of the schemes
and the problems there in. Items of observation
would include
• Description of the project
• Cost of production
• Problems faced
• Profitability
Socio economic development in terms of
improvement in the following variables was also
evaluated.
• Increase in income
• Improvement in the skills
• Trainings received

43. 43
• Job satisfaction
• Improvement in the nutritional status of the
households

44. 44
RESULTS &
DISCUSSION

45. 45
RESULTS & DISCUSSION
The results are expressed as answers to six major
objectives and depicted below followed by a brief
discussion of the same.
5.1. Situation of poultry rearing in the two
Panchayaths
5.1.1 General overview
Most of the households rear village chickens
under scavenging system mainly as a source of
income (39%) and food (36%). It could be seen
that women own and mange most of the flocks
(54%). But chicken meat is only consumed when
important guests visit the family. Most farmers
(59.5%) prefer chicken with brown plumage color
mainly because it sells faster at the market.
5.1. 2 Variables observed are depicted in the
Table 3 below
Variables Category No. of Percentage
respondents
Gender Male 11 36.67
Female 19 63.33
Family size <4 14 46.66
5-7 11 36.67
>7 5 16.67
Major Others 29 96.67
Poultry Rearing 1 3.33
Occupation
Experience in <1 3 1.00
years
2-5 11 36.67
>5 16 53.33
Flock Size <5 5 16.67
6-10 15 50.00
>10 10 33.33
Table. 3 Observed frequencies and percentages of
variables

46. 46
5.1.2.a Gender
It could be seen that a good majority of the
respondents (63.33%) were females where as only
36.67% were males. The person in charge of the
poultry unit in these houses was identified as
the respondent in all of the cases.
5.1.2.b Family size
The data revealed that 46.67% of the respondents
had a nuclear family with a family size less than
four, whereas 36.67 % had a family size between
five and seven. A 16.67 % lived as a joint family
with family size above 7. The graph representing
family size of the respondents is given as Fig
1 .
Family size of the respondents
50 46.67
40 36.67
30
Series1
%
20 16.67
10
0
<4 5-7 >7
Number of individuals
Fig 1 Family size of the respondents
5.1.2.c Occupation
A vast majority (96.67 %)of the respondents
considered poultry rearing as a subsidiary
occupation. Though most of the respondents
belonged to the farming community, with

47. 47
agriculture as their major means of livelihood,
only one farmer did not have any other means of
livelihood.
5.1.2. d Experience
The study revealed that 10.00 % of the
respondents were having less than 1 year
experience in poultry farming. A 36.67 % of the
respondents had 2-5 years experience, whereas a
majority (53.33%) had more than 5 years
experience.
Years of Experience in Poultry Farming
10.00
53.33
<1 2-5 >5
36.67
Fig 2 Experience of the respondents in poultry
rearing
5.1.2. e Flock Size
Average flock per household was eight birds with
a sex ratio of four hens for one cock in around
60% of the households evaluated. Scavenging space
is the criteria behind the decision of flock
size. About 16.67 % of the households reared less
than 5 birds, 50.00 % reared less than 10 birds
and 33.33% reared more than 10 birds. Most of

48. 48
the families (63.33 %) did not hatch eggs using a
broody hen. Chicks were brought at day old stage
and above in 36.67% of the households. Pullets
and male birds were also purchased as growers
below 2 months of age. At least one broody hen
was always kept to maintain the flock. Rarely did
they hatch eggs regularly. Some (19 %) households
did not have a cock. About 65% of the families
opined that they purchased chicks only from
reliable sources or through the local veterinary
hospital/ dispensaries.
5.1.2. f Management Practices
Most of the farmers housed the birds in their
backyard. A temporary shelter was constructed in
all the households to provide shelter to the
birds. Around 70 % of the households made
shelters with wooden planks. None of the
households were following intensive system of
management. All the respondents were using semi-
intensive system of housing. Around 42% of the
respondents were aware of homestead cages. No
bedding material is provided in the poultry
houses. Some have the habit of using cane baskets
to protect and cover the birds. Few farmers have
built pakka poultry houses but are mostly with
inadequate spacing. Chicks when hatched were not
given any artificial warmth. They are left with
the mother hen under a bamboo basket at night.
Most of the farmers let out chicks only after at
least 10 days of age. In most of the houses there
were not more than two broody hens. The birds are
let out from as early as 7 am in the morning, and
they are permitted to roam around till 6 pm

49. 49
generally. Owners were not aware of the floor
space requirements.
5.1.2. g Feeding Practices
Seventy-three percent of the farmers give
supplementary feed to chicken. There is no
regular time for feeding of poultry though they
are fed daily in most of the households. There is
no proper idea about the nutritional requirements
of poultry. When 63% opined that birds should be
fed less than 25 g of feed every day, 30% opined
that it should be between 25 and 50 g. About 7 %
were of the view that this should be around 100g.
Few farmers (23.33 %) give shell grit to improve
the shell quality of eggs produced. The birds in
backyard survive well on kitchen waste, coconut
grating, insects, pests, wild seeds, grains,
grasses and other vegetations. The supplemented
feed consist of cooked rice, kitchen wastes,
vegetables, rice bran, dried fish, commercial
feeds, flour and milling wastes lacking in
vitamins and proteins. More than 75% of the
farmers were supplementing carbohydrates alone.
There is no regular provision of protein sources
to these chickens.
The total quantitative supplementation varies
from 2.00 to 3.30 kg per week given mainly during
harvest time. On an average this expenditure
comes to 20 to 33 rupees per week. Chickens are
given water in all the households mainly by
women. Water is also provided in basins inside
the poultry shelters. These containers are seldom
removed for cleaning and sanitation. Water is
simply refilled when the level goes down. Few

50. 50
household (13.33%) had the practice of giving
feed supplements (mineral mixtures, B-complex
vitamins etc). No regular deworming was in
practice and usually the medicines were got from
the local veterinary dispensary. Farmers also had
the habit of purchasing medicines from the local
medical shop without prescriptions.
5.1.2. h Flock Health
The mortality rate is often more than 50% rising
to 100% in most of the households. Around 72% of
the house hold reported disease incidences and
mortality rates. Thirty percent of the farmers
had noted a mortality of 100% over the past five
years. Ninety-eight percent of the farmers treat
sick chicken with diverse types of drugs
including traditional medications. About 12.7 %
were reported to use traditional methods, 66.9%
used modern drugs including anti-biotics, and
68.9% vaccinated chicks while 14.5% used
pesticides to control external parasites.
5.1.2.h.1 Diseases
The most worrying disease symptoms are
respiratory distress, white, greenish diarrhea,
blood in droppings, closed eyelids, mucus
exudates from the nostrils and mouth and gaping.
Pox is a common incidence in almost all of the
households. Few farmers reported that the cross
bred birds distributed had poor immunity and
seldom lived beyond 2 years. Some farmers also
reported that some poultry developed dermatitis

51. 51
problems and bumble foot, which were difficult to
be cured. Farmers of the opinion that coloured
birds have better livability. The death rates
were found to be higher among chicks immediately
after purchase, followed by birds above two years
of age. The causes of mortality in chicks were
predators (42.6 %), disease (31.3%), and
accidents (26.1%).
From the symptoms described by farmers, it is
probable that Newcastle disease (ND), Infectious
Bronchitis (IB), Fowl Pox, Chronic Respiratory
distress, Coccidiosis, Fowl Typhoid and Pullorum
Disease may be prevalent in the backyard poultry.
Most (93.33%) of the households bury dead birds
while the rest throw dead birds into pits, which
are eventually picked up by scavengers.
5. 1.2.h.2 Vaccinations.
All of the households had vaccinated their birds
during the - RD vaccination programme under
Assistance to States for Control of Animal
Diseases of the Panchayath. Some farmers utilized
the vaccines supplied by the Veterinary
dispensaries during the rest of the periods.
There is no practice of any vaccination other
than against Ranikhet Disease.

52. 52
5.1.2.h.3 Avian Influenza awareness
Farmers are aware of the zoonotics importance of
the disease and are concerned about the control
measures. None of the households were found to
adopt any of the bio-security measures.
5.1.2.h.4 Constraints to managing chicks
Main constraints to chicks in the backyard were
found to be the lack of feed, disease outbreaks,
predators and poor management in this order of
importance.
5.1.2.i Flock Production Characteristics
Farmers opined that cross bred hens start laying
at an age varying from 160 to 175 days. In some
cases the egg production was nil. Hens lay an
average of 15 eggs per clutch with an annual
production varying from less than 100 to 140 per
year. It could be noted that the birds are seldom
kept for production beyond a period of two years.
Households consume about 75 % of the eggs laid.
Selling of eggs is not common among the
households, though they sell eggs in the
neighbourhood.
Usually, the birds after laying, stay in and
around the house of the owner in search of feed
and come back at dusk or by the call of the
owner.
5.1.2. j Preferences of beneficiaries
There is a better preference for brown shelled
eggs. The average price obtained for each egg

53. 53
during local sales varies from 3 to 4 rupees.
Farmers are of the opinion that coloured birds
fetch better price when sold. The price may vary
from Rs 120 to 150 per kg live weight. Some
birds did not produce any eggs and were sold for
meat at around 8 months of age when they attain
around 2 kg body weight. All the poultry owners
reported that, the price of eggs and birds varied
according to season and religious festivals
5.1.2. k Self help groups
Among the respondents, 70% were members of
kudumbasree. Farmers believe that membership in
Kudumbasree has helped them to be selected as
beneficiaries of various plan schemes, increase
their awareness about the plan, participate in
various training programmes etc.
5.1.2.l Cost of production
The farmers kept no records of the expenditure
incurred in the rearing of backyard flock. So the
calculation of cost of production could not be
done accurately.
5.1.3 Discussion of the findings
The findings reveal that poultry is kept as
a means of income and food by majority of the
households. This is in agreement with the
findings of Gondwe et al (2003). The results of
the present study indicated that a majority of
the respondents were females. This is an asset

54. 54
over which the poor women actually have control.
This activity can therefore play an important
role in poverty alleviation and also s may
contribute to an improvement in the income of the
household. Jensen (2000) also reported similar
findings.
The fact that poultry meat is consumed only
during special occasions indicated that their
standards of living are not especially good. A
good majority of the households did not have a
big family and this is again in support of the
general trend in Kerala. Respondents considered
poultry as only a subsidiary income source. The
fact that a vast majority of the farmers had more
than 5 years experience in poultry rearing
indicates that this system is prevalent in Kerala
for many years and is generally accepted as a
viable one. The proportion of new households is a
positive sign as this indicates many new families
coming into this sector in the recent days.
The average flock size of 8 and a male
female ratio of 1:4 were reported. This is in
tune with the ratio recommended by the Kerala
Agricultural University for Backyard rearing.
Scavenging space is the criteria behind the
decision of flock size. It is a known fact that
the non-availability of land is a major
constraint to commercial poultry production in
Kerala. The same is again a restricting factor in
rural poultry rearing indicating the need for
innovative techniques of poultry rearing which
also takes into consideration the scarcity of
land. The fewer number of families holding a

55. 55
broody hen is indicative of the increasing
popularity of artificial incubation and the
realization of production losses owing to
broodiness.
Majority of the households raised cocks and
this indicated that cocks are of demand among the
farmers. These cocks are used for religious
purposes and sold at a comparatively higher price
than that of hens. There is also another positive
finding that majority of the farmers did not buy
chicks from unknown / road side vendors. It
indicates the increase in awareness about the
quality and acceptance of the chicks supplied
through government agencies among the farmers.
This may be due to the fact that deaths reported
within a period of one month among chicks
distributed through the Panchayath veterinary
dispensaries / hospitals are replaced.
Most of the families (63.33 %) did not hatch
eggs using a broody hen and this indicates the
need for hatcheries at the District level to
hatch chicks as per the need of common farmers.
Chicks were brought at day old stage and above in
36.67% of the households. Pullets and male birds
were also purchased as growers below 2 months of
age this indicates that there is scope for chick
hatcheries and egger nurseries in the district.
Around 70 % of the households made shelters
with wooden planks which is the most economical
system of housing possible in our conditions. All
the respondents were using semi-intensive system
of housing. Higher level of awareness about

56. 56
homestead cages indicated that they can be
propagated among the needy farmers. The fact that
the farmers were not aware of the floor space
requirements has led to inadequate space being
provided. Thus it is indicated that this problem
need to be focused in future. There is the need
to make farmers aware of the drawback of
inadequate space in poultry houses. The facts
that Chicks were hatched without any artificial
warmth and that they are let out from 10 days of
age is owing to the higher atmospheric
temperature in Kerala. The birds are let out from
as early as 7 am in the morning, and they are
permitted to roam around till 6 pm generally. So
on an average a bird gets 8- 13 hours for
scavenging.
The fact that 73% of the farmers give
supplementary feed indicated the high level of
awareness on the importance of concentrate
feeding for better productive performance in
rural poultry. There is no proper idea about the
nutritional requirements of poultry. This is
evident from the fact that farmers give a
quantity of feed which may be less than 25 g per
every day or as high as 100g. Few farmers (23.33
%) give shell grit and this is essential to
improve shell quality. Majority of the feed fed
being carbohydrates and household wastes, lacking
in vitamins and proteins, this alone is
insufficient for the bird to perform to its full
potential. The total quantitative supplementation
varies from 2.00 to 3.30 kg per week given mainly
during harvest time.

57. 57
Chickens are given water inside the poultry
shelters, but these containers are seldom removed
for cleaning and sanitation. This practice is to
be instilled in their minds as contaminated water
will be a good source for spread of diseases. Few
household (13.33%) had the practice of giving
feed supplements, which though would increase the
cost of production, are certainly found to be
beneficial to the health of the birds. There is
the need to stipulate regular deworming
programmes through the local veterinary
dispensaries. They should be instructed to use
broad spectrum dewormers in the correct dosage.
Farmers’ habit of purchasing medicines from the
local medical shop without prescriptions needs to
be curtailed as indiscriminate use of drugs would
lead to the development of resistance.
The mortality rate is often more than 50%
after supply probably due to the stress of
transportation and heat. Thirty per cent of the
farmers had noted a mortality of 100% over the
past five years with some outbreaks. So the
disease diagnosis and surveillance system has to
be fortified further to reduce economic losses to
farmers. These results are similar to those
reported by Gondwe et al (2003), Mapiye and
Sibanda (2005).
The disease symptoms reported are suggestive
of chronic respiratory distress, Fowl Pox,
Ranikhet disease, Coccidiosis, syngamosis, ecto-
parasitism, dermatitis problems and bumble foot.

58. 58
This is in agreement with the findings of Huq and
Mallik (1998), who found that lack of quality
feed supply, vaccines especially RD, Infectious
Bursal Disease (IBD) and Marek’s disease, low
price of dressed broilers and eggs were the
constraints faced by farmers. There is the need
to educate the farmers on the proper disposal of
wastes as well as dead birds. All of the
households had vaccinated their birds during the
RD vaccination programme under Assistance to
States for Control of Animal Diseases (ASCAD) of
the Panchayath indicates the success of this
Central Government programme, conducted in
collaboration with the Animal Husbandry
Department.
The study also shows that, the death rate
was high in chicks followed by growers and adult
birds and diseases contributed markedly to high
flock mortalities recorded during rainy season.
These results are in agreement with reports from
other developing countries( Kitalyi 1998, Minga
et al 1989). Dessie and Ogle (1996) recommended
that diseases spread faster in large flocks
compared to smaller flocks. High disease levels
were probably due to exposure of chickens to the
natural environment, interaction of different
entities, within and among flock contacts during
scavenging, uncontrolled introduction of new
stocks, contacts through exchange or sale of live
chickens or movement between households and
villages (Mapiye and Sibanda 2005)
There is the need to ensure regular supply
of Ranikhet disease and Fowl Pox vaccines to the

59. 59
farmers as these two diseases create havoc in the
rural poultry production systems. Though the
farmers were aware of contagious and zoonotics
diseases, the fact that none of the households
adopt bio-security measures, are a matter of
serious concern.
Main constraints to rearing chicks being the
lack of feed, disease outbreaks, predators and
poor management, if proper attention is directed
towards these, their mortality rates can be
brought down considerably. Chick mortality could
be controlled in one of the Panchayaths by
adopting the administration of anti- stress
medications and glucose to them immediately after
reaching the farmers premises.
Cross bred hens start laying at an age
varying from 160 to 175 days, which is much
better than the desi hens. In some cases, the egg
production was nil. This might be due to the poor
nutritional status of the birds prior to the
start of lay. The analysis of feeding practices
indicated that in most of the households no
protein source is fed to the birds. Mostly birds
in lay alone have access to ample quantities of
feed. Hens lay an average of 15 eggs per clutch
with an annual production varying from less than
100 to 140 per year. The expected production of
various crosses distributed in the District from
Kerala Agricultural University is as given below
in Table 4. A comparison indicated that most of
the birds were performing far below the
benchmarks.

60. 60
Characteristics Gramalakshmi Gramasree Gramapriya
Age at sexual maturity in days 160 152 150
Age at 50% egg production 180 175 180
Annual egg production (upto 72 180-200 190-200 200-225
weeks of age) in numbers
Body weight at 72 weeks in kg 1.8 2 1.8
Egg weight in g 50 52-55 55
Egg Colour Light Brown Brown tinted
Livability in % 95 95 95
Purpose Backyard Backyard Backyard
Feeding Scavenging + 25-30 Scavenging + Scavenging +
g balanced layer 25-30 g 25-30 g balanced
ration balanced layer layer ration
ration
Table 4 Production performance of standard
birds
Households consume about 75 % of the eggs
laid and this definitely improves the plane of
nutrition at the household level.
There is a better preference for brown
shelled eggs owing to the age old misconcept
that, they are better in the nutritional and
medicinal value. The average price obtained for
each egg being Rs.3 to 4 is comparatively higher
indicating that there is the preference for farm
fresh eggs in the District. Value addition may be
resorted to at various levels to improve the
returns to farmer. Those birds which did not
produce any eggs were sold for meat at around 8
months of age when they attained around 2 kg body
weight. All the poultry owners reported that, the
price of eggs and birds varied according to

61. 61
season and religious festivals like Easter, Eid
etc.
A good majority of the respondents were
kudumbasree members and they were provided with
training in poultry rearing and financial support
from banks to start poultry enterprises.
As the farmers kept no records of the expenditure
incurred only approximates of the cost of
production could be calculated. Under the
prevailing conditions in Kerala, backyard system
of rearing seems to be the ideal solution to
improve egg and meat production and thus ensure
food security.
5.2 Evaluation of Broiler Integrators in the
Panchayath
5.2. 1. Socio-economic Profile of
Respondents
The broiler unit owners according to their age
were categorized into three groups, i.e., young,
middle and old. The data presented in Table below
reveals that majority of the poultry owners
(46.67%) belonged to the middle age group, while
30 per cent poultry owners were from older age

62. 62
group and 23.33 per cent hailed from the young
age group.
Majority of the respondents were well educated
and all of them could read and write. A majority
of the respondents (50%) belonged to the schedule
caste. About 56% of the respondents had a medium
family size. A vast majority (83.33%) of the
respondents lived as joint families. About 60% of
the respondents had agriculture and animal
husbandry as their major occupation.
Fifty–three per cent of the respondents were
marginal farmers, 33% small farmers and the rest
were large scale farmers. About 43.44% of the
respondents had more than 3 years experience and
33.33% had more than 8 years experience in this
field. Seventy three per cent of the farmers had
moderate to high level of satisfaction in their
job.
These farmers reared flocks of a size ranging
from 1000 to 10000. Birds are housed in units of
size 900 to 1200 per shed. Most of the farmers
owned multiple sheds. The observations made with
respect to the variables studies is given in the
table 5 below.
Variables Category No. of Percentage
respondents

63. 63
Young (less than 7 23.33
32 yrs)
Age Middle 14 46.67
(32-47yrs)
Older (more than 9 30.00
47 yrs)
Primary 4 13.33
Education High school 9 30.00
Pre-degree 14 46.67
Graduate and 3 10.00
above
Religion Hindu 16 53.33
Muslim 2 6.67
Others 0 0.00
Christian 12 40.00
Caste General 12 40.00
Schedule caste 15 50.00
Schedule tribe 0 0.00
Other backward 3 10.00
caste
Family type Nuclear 5 16.67
Joint 25 83.33
Family size Small (less than 10 33.33
4 members)
Medium (5-7 17 56.67
members)
Large (more than 3 10.00
8 members)

64. 64
Major Agriculture 10 33.33
Occupation
Animal Husbandry 8 26.67
Service 2 6.67
Business 3 10.00
Labour 7 23.33
Land holding Landless 0 0.00
Marginal 16 53.34
( 10 cents)
Small 10 33.33
(25 cents)
Large 4 13.33
Flock size Small <2000 6 20.00
Medium 2001- 20 66.67
5000
Large >5001 4 13.33
Experience < 3 year 7 23.33
4-8 years 13 43.34
8 years 10 33.33
Level of Low 8 26.66
satisfaction
Moderate 13 43.34
High 9 30.00
Constraints Diseases 15 50.00
Waste Disposal 23 76.67
Lack of space 12 40.00
Taxation 19 63.33

65. 65
Table 5 Observed frequencies and percentages of
variables
5.2. 2 General rearing practices
5.2.2.1 Type of farm unit- Integration
There are more than 50 farmers in the
Panchayath who are involved in this type of
projects. The major integrator is Thompson group.
Day old chicks are supplied to trained farmers
according to their potential to rear birds as
well as the availability of land.
The vaccinations are done as follows
0-5 day – RDF Vaccine
10- 14 days – IBD Vaccine
20 days- 25 days – RD Lasota Vaccine
Feed, feeders waterers, vaccines etc are
provided by the integrators. B- Complex vitamins
are administered on daily basis. There are
regular visits by veterinary supervisors and
veterinarians visit on request to ensure the
health of the birds. Medicines and disinfectants
are also provided by the integrators. The farmer
has to provide the shed, put in the labour and do
the management.
The birds are reared to a period varying
from 35 to 50 days and they may weigh from 1.60
kg to 3 kg. The farmers get a remuneration
varying from Rs.2 to 3.60 per kg depending upon
the prevailing market rates. Five to six batches

66. 66
of birds are reared in a year with a down time of
10-15 days in between.
5.2.3 Discussion of the findings
The data obtained revealed that majority of
the poultry owners (46.67%) belonged to the
middle age group, The fact that backyard poultry
farmers are mostly not from the old age group is
conducive, since they will be more malleable to
change. It is obvious that in today's world of
modernization, the younger generation will
obviously have more scientific orientation and
consequently, adopt more number of technologies.
Education is one of the important factors
which promote the development of any enterprise.
Education results in changes in overall
behaviour. Majority of the respondents were well
educated and all of them could read as suggested
by the high literacy rates in Kerala. About 10
per cent were graduates indicating that, educated
people are also taking up poultry rearing as a
means of livelihood.
A majority of the respondents (50%)
belonged to the schedule caste. About 56% of the
respondents had a medium family size. A vast
majority (83.33%) of the respondents lived as
joint families. About 60% of the respondents had
agriculture and animal husbandry as their major
occupation. The role of the poultry owners in a
family largely depends on the type and size of
the family. The time available with the members
of the household largely depends on the number of
members as well as the type of family. It is

67. 67
clear that most of the respondents had a family
size above four and belonged to joint families,
and as the number of individuals involved in the
business are more, birds get better care
throughout the day.
Fifty–three per cent of the respondents
were marginal farmers, 33% small farmers and the
rest were large scale farmers. There was equal
participation from all castes, but usually
poultry are kept only in the rural villages.
There is the need to propagate poultry rearing in
the suburbs through the popularization of
homestead cages.
Poultry rearing is accepted as a subsidiary
occupation by majority of the rural households.
As pointed out by Dr. M S Swaminathan, India now
needs to have a campaign for achieving
nutritional security and if the rural population
sticks to the old tradition of caste related
occupation; this would most definitely hamper the
progress.
The findings of the study further shows that
backyard poultry farming was found to be a
subsidiary occupation for all the respondents.
The findings are in consonance with the findings
Panda and Nanda (2000) and Saha (2003). Thus,
this enterprise could prove to be an excellent
source of income to support their livelihood. It
could provide gainful employment to the family
members and utilize the land available with the
farmers. In most of the cases in the present
study, the families had more than one occupation

68. 68
for their source of income. The earnings from all
sources of income were, however, pooled in the
family.
Many farmers had batches with more than 2000
birds, this indicates the high level of business
these farmers are involved in. The study shows
that all the respondents kept poultry of medium
size units. Since, diversification is the need of
the hour, thus, given the present scenario, rural
poultry can offer an excellent avenue of
employment.
The most important problem faced by the
broiler farmers is that of waste disposal. Due to
the lack of space many farmers cannot get rid of
the wastes hygienically. There is the need to
probe into measures for proper waste disposal and
propagate the same among these entrepreneurs. It
is a known fact that many a good farms were
closed down in Kerala due to the hazardous waste
coming from them creating problems in the
neighbourhood. They if not treated properly are
liable to contaminate the waterways and the
surroundings leading to a serious health problem.
Value added tax imposed by the government of
Kerala is yet another major problem faced by the
farmers. A good portion of the profit will have
to be remitted as tax. This can lead to all the
farmers trying to reduce their profits to evade
tax to the extend possible. This in turn will
lead to all farmers restricting the number of
batches or the total number of birds reared. So,
due to under utilizing of space, optimum

69. 69
production will not happen and thus the cost of
production can go up.
Incidence of diseases continue to be a big
problem and there is the need to educate them
more on the hygienic precautions and bio-security
measures to be adopted in farms. This point has a
greater significance in the dawn of Avian
Influenza threat in all parts of the world. The
study by Mandal (2006) revealed that mortality
rate in desi birds due to Ranikhet disease was
highest, followed by Fowl pox, Coccidiosis,
respiratory problems and other miscellaneous
diseases, which corresponds with the findings of
Saha (2003). The study also shows that, the death
rate was high in chicks followed by growers and
adult birds and diseases contributed markedly to
high flock mortalities recorded during rainy
season (Mandal2006).
High disease levels were probably due to
exposure of chickens to the natural environment,
interaction of different entities, within and
among flock contacts during scavenging,
uncontrolled introduction of new stocks, contacts
through exchange or sale of live chickens or
movement between households and villages(Mapiye
and Sibanda 2005)
Lack of space leads to smaller stocks and
this will increase the cost of production, and
lesser profits. The commodity prices would go up
leading to fewer purchases.

70. 70
Evaluation of poultry projects implemented in the two
Panchayaths during the past 5 years.
5.3.1 Pullet Distribution schemes
Poultry projects have been regularly
implemented in the Panchayaths of Kerala through
the Animal Husbandry Department, Local self
governments, Kerala State Poultry Development
Corporation and some private players.
In Panchayath – I, poultry projects are being
implemented for the past five consecutive years.
The details of beneficiaries, type of project are
given below in Table 6. The findings indicate
that there is a good proportion of beneficiaries
from the under privileged sector of the society.
There has been considerable increase in the
number of birds distributed in the Panchayath
during the last year owing to the implementation
of Pullet Distribution schemes (SEP) under the
tsunami rehabilitation programme of the
government. In the first three years, all the
poultry distribution was done without any Plan
Fund.
There has been considerable improvement in the
poultry population in the Panchayath as evidenced

71. 71
by the latest census reports. As the farmers are
not with the habit of keeping records of
production only estimates of production could be
obtained. In this Panchayath more poultry
projects have been envisaged and implemented
owing to the increased demand from the society.
Two egger nurseries have been started by the
middle of the last financial year taking into
consideration the increase demand for chicks in
the Panchayath.
st
Panchayath I IInd IIIrd IVth Vth
I year year year year year
Plan Fund - - - 1,65,000 1,45,000
Beneficiary 55000 124000 60000 78000 25000
contribution
Beneficiaries 110 96 163 115 222
SC/ST 24 28 34 55
beneficiaries
Types of Pullet Pullet Pullet School Egger
projects distrib- distrib- distrib- poultrynurseries-
ution ution ution club 2 nos
Pullet Pullet
distribut distributi
ion on
No of birds 550 980 815 575 1100
distributed
Table 6 Details of poultry projects in
Panchayath-I

72. 72
1200
1100
1000 980
No of birds distributed
815
800
600 550 575
400
200
0
I II III IV V
Fig 3 Details of pullets distributed in the last five years
5.3.2 Performance of the Egger Nurseries in
the Panchayath
The higher demand for pullets has led to an
egger nursery project being envisaged in the
Panchayath. At present two beneficiaries have
been selected and trained or the same by the
Animal Husbandry Department. It is expected that
units of 1000 bird capacity will help to address
the problem of non-availability of quality chicks
in the Panchayath. Chicks are purchased from the
Kerala Agricultural University. On the day of
purchase they are given B-complex vitamins and
glucose in the drinking water. This practice has
helped the farmers to reduce the chick mortality
to bare minimum (1%).

73. 73
These chicks are brooded for a period of 15 days
and then are reared for a period of at least 40
days of age. Vaccinations are carried out as per
the stipulations of the Centre for Advanced
Studies in Poultry Science. The birds are
dewormed, vaccinated against Ranikhet Disease and
distributed to beneficiaries who had booked for
the same with the local veterinary surgeon. All
the pullets are sold before 45 days of age. The
farmers are obtaining on an average a profit of
Rs. 6000/- per batch.
The birds which are supplemented with
compounded feed were found to start laying at 160
days of age on an average. The egg production was
again found to vary from nil to 160 eggs per
annum. The average egg weight was found to be
around 50g.Though there are no egg cooperatives
in the Panchayath, there has been an attempt to
collect eggs from the households. Each egg
fetches a minimum of Rs 2.50/-. This egg is being
utilized in the mid day meal programme for school
going children in the Panchayath. At present
there are two schools implementing this project.
This has been a stimulus for the farmers to
produce table eggs, as there is good and regular
demand for the same in the Panchayath.