Farmers were asked to report on the adaptive and mitigation measures that were put in place to deal with ND. An interesting fact emerged revealing that 99 percent
of the farmers were aware of the signs of ND which included, coughing and sneezing, nasal discharge, watery yellow diarrhoea, twisted wings and paralysis of wings and legs. Only 1 percent of the farmers did not know the signs ND.
Findings revealed that farmers used various methods to control ND summarised in Table 4.32.
Table 4.32: Farmers responses on methods of disease control Methods of disease
control Frequency Percent
Traditional herbs 28 14.0 Selling 18 9.0 Eating 8 4.0 Burying 2 1.0 Vaccination 18 9.0 Traditional herbs and Selling 14 7.0
Sell, eat and
bury 30 15.0
All 82 41.0
Total 200 100.0
The findings revealed that 15 percent sold, ate the sick chicken and buried the ones that had died; 14 percent used traditional herbs such grounded garlic mixed with water, grounded aloe mixed with water and fresh milk; 9 percent used vaccines; 9 percent sold their chicken once an outbreak occurred; 7 percent used both
traditional herbs and also sold some; 4 percent ate the sick birds; 1 percent buried the ones that had died and 41 percent of the poultry farmers used all the above method. This agreed with Dontwi et al. (2011) who found that farmers used traditional herbs to control diseases and Byrarugaba et al. (2012) who found that farmers sell their birds during outbreaks which maintain the disease within the flock.
Farmers used traditional herbs especially aloe, because it is locally available and was believed to be effective against a wide range of diseases and ailments. The leaves were harvested, cleaned with water and crushed before they were mixed with drinking water for chickens. The „medicated‟ water was offered to all birds until they showed signs of good health. However, not all the chickens could be cured. Farmers also used fresh milk as they believed that it cleansed the swap from the throat of the sick chicken. It was noted that the use of traditional herbs was of great importance in the smallholder farmers in Suneka Division at the expense of conventional drugs as they were readily accessible and inexpensive.
Farmers used vaccines such as ND vaccine and infectious bronchitis (IB) vaccine to control the disease. However a few farmers were aware of this vaccine. This was done by veterinary officers who formed an integral part in disease control. Findings revealed that about 9 percent of the farmers were not aware of the veterinary services in the area, while 91 percent of the of the chicken farmers were aware of the veterinary services, however they visited it occasionally as it had
monetary attachment to get the services. Further the veterinary offices were distant from the farmers‟ residential areas and this hindered the frequent use of the services (Table 4.33).
Table 4.33: Proximity of veterinary offices to the poultry farmers
Distance Frequency Percent
1 km 23 11.5 2 km 28 14.0 3 km 49 24.5 4 km 34 17.0 5 km 34 17.0 6 and above 32 16.0 Total 200 100.0
It also emerged that there were only four veterinary officers in the district and was deemed inadequate given the size of the population of farmers in the area. This made control of the disease difficult as they could not reach every farmer on time.
Further, when farmers were asked how frequent they visited the veterinary offices, 80.5 percent reported that they used the veterinary offices when need arose, 7.5 percent, weekly, 1 percent, monthly and 11 percent have never made use of the veterinary services (Table 4.34).
Table 4.34: Responses on the frequency of using the veterinary services
Visits Frequency Percent
Weekly 15 7.5
Monthly 2 1.0
When need arises 161 80.5
Never 22 11.0
The implication is that the veterinary services that offer vital services to farmers are not being utilized adequately. Hence farmers are missing out the necessary services of disease control.
Sensitization was another method that was employed by veterinary officers to control the disease. Sensitization involved teaching the farmers on methods of disease control, methods of increasing productivity, modern methods of poultry farming and services they offered. This was done through workshops, seminars, field demonstrations and barazas as reported by the veterinary officers.
When farmers were asked on how often they attended workshops and seminars, only 31 percent had attended, while 69 percent had never attended. This was attributed to lack of proper dissemination of information to farmers and lack of proper cooperation between administration especially chiefs and veterinary officers as reported by one of the veterinary officers. The implication is that not all farmers got the necessary information on disease control hence disease control becomes difficult.
Farmers also reported that they used other disease control methods such as observing hygiene and controlling internal and external parasites. Fourth one percent observed hygiene and control of parasites, 36.5 percent observed hygiene while 22.5 percent controlled parasites (Table 4.35).
Table 4.35: Other disease control methods used by farmers
Control measures Frequency Percent
Control of parasites 45 22.5
Observing hygiene 73 36.5
Both 82 41.0
Total 200 100
Farmers cleaned the poultry houses on daily basis, disinfected them with disinfectants, and observed personal hygiene when handling chickens such as washing hands when handling chickens and their products and wearing protective clothing when handling chicken.
Internal parasites were controlled using traditional drugs such as crushed garlic mixed with water. Farmers believed that garlic was sour and therefore could destroy internal parasites such as ringworms. External parasites were controlled by pouring hot water in poultry houses and spraying powdered drugs such as “Sevin” or “Dudu dust”. The control of these parasites formed an essential part of controlling diseases, as they weaken the immunity of the chickens if not controlled. This was in agreement with Moreki (2006) who found out that control of internal and external parasites helped in controlling the outbreaks and spread of diseases.
Further the study found out that government support also formed an integral part of disease control and improving productivity. When respondents were asked if the government gave any support to the poultry farmers, 79 percent reported that the government does not give any support while 21 percent agreed that the government supported the sector (Table 4.36).
Table 4.36: Reponses of poultry farmers on the government support to the poultry sector
Responses Frequency Percent
No 158 79.0
Yes 42 21.0
Total 200 100.0
Even though there were a greater percentage of farmers who were not aware of the government support, a report from veterinary officer revealed that there was. This was through the Ministry of Livestock Development which had employed extension and veterinary officers. The extension officers were responsible for educating poultry farmers on methods of improving productivity and giving general advice as far as poultry is concerned. On the other hand veterinary officers vaccinated poultry and taught farmers different poultry diseases, signs and symptoms and methods of disease control. The veterinary officers also procured drugs on behalf of the government to vaccinate the chickens. Further, the government had started a project of small scale indigenous poultry improvement project through the Ministry of Livestock Development. Currently there 16 groups
which have benefited from this project. These groups include women groups, youth group and self help groups comprising of between 14-48 people and are registered with the Ministry of Social Services. The government has built poultry houses, purchased improved indigenous chicken from Naivasha, gave them to the groups and also provided feeds until they started laying eggs. From there, the groups took full management of the chickens.
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS