Poultry waste management practices under small scale intensive urban poultry production in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Poultry waste management practices under small scale intensive urban poultry production in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia"

Hilda Jenkins
6 years ago
Views:

1 Academia Journal of Agricultural Research 4(4): , April 2016 DOI: /ajar ISSN: Academia Publishing Research Paper Poultry waste management practices under small scale intensive urban poultry production in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Accepted 21 st March, 2016 ABSTRACT Nebiyu Yemane 1*, Berhan Tamir 2 and Ashenafi Mengistu 2 1 College of Agriculture, Arba Minch University, Arba Minch Ethiopia. 2 College of Veterinary Medicine and Agriculture, Addis Ababa University, Debrezeit, Ethiopia. *Corresponding author nebiyuyem2000@gmail.com. The study was conducted with the objective of assessing the poultry waste management practices under small scale intensive system of poultry production in Addis Ababa. A two-stage sampling technique was used to select Sub-cities and poultry farmers. A total of 156 poultry farmers were included in the study. Manure (50.6%) was the major waste in their farm followed by litter and manure mix (35.9%) and dead birds (13.5%). Among the family members 37.7% of the wives, 23.2% of daughters, 20.2% of household servants, 18.6% of sons and 0.3 % of husbands were involved in the cleaning and removal of the poultry farm wastes. Teff straw (70.1%) and wood shavings (29.9%) were the main litter material used in small scale intensive poultry farming. Manual scrapping with shovel was the main method of waste collection in particular in the floor housing system. In cage housing system, poultry farmers mainly put a plastic sheet under each tier for collection of droppings and removing it using water flushing. Most (94.3%) of the poultry farmers used plastic polythene and hessian sacks to transport the wastes to the dump site, whereas 5.7% of them used wheel barrow. In cage system, the manure is removed daily (66.1%) and those using the modified cage system which has a litter under each tier removed the manure every month (11.9%) and every 3 months (22%), whereas in the floor system it is once per year. Disposing of wastes in the dump site around residence (64.7%), marketing for use as a fertilizer (21.8%), given freely to neighborhood farmers for land application (10.9%) and used as a fertilizer in the garden farm (2.6%) are various means through which manure/litter in the study area were disposed. Dead birds disposed by being thrown away to the dump site (83.3%), burning (13.5%) and burial (3.2%). The major constraints of waste disposal encountered were (1) nuisance odour; (2) lack of convenient dump site; (3) lack of market for selling the manure/litter; (4) lack of transportation facilities and lastly, shortage of labor. Key words: Litter, manure, poultry, small scale intensive, waste management. INTRODUCTION The poultry industry produces large amounts of waste that include solid waste and waste water. The solid waste consists of bedding materials, excreta (manure), feed, feathers, hatchery waste (empty shells, infertile eggs, dead embryos and late hatchlings), shells, sludge, abattoir waste (offals, blood, feathers and condemned carcasses) and mortality. Poultry waste is usually a combination of poultry bird faeces, urine, saw dust and remnants of animal feeds, drugs and pesticides (Adedayo, 2012). Poultry manure contains high phosphorus which has positive effect on the growth and productivity of crops. It is also effective when combined with mineral phosphorus fertilizer for farm use (Mokwunye, 2000). Dead birds and hatchery waste are

2 Academia Journal of Agricultural Research; Yemane et al. 213 high in protein and contain substantial amounts of calcium and phosphorus due to high levels of mineral supplements in the diet. The approximated percentages of nutrient intake excreted by poultry are: nitrogen (65.5%), phosphorus (68.5%) and potassium (83.5%), elements for soil fertility and increased crop production (Olumayowa and Abiodun, 2011). There are several ways of disposing of poultry waste including burial, rendering, incineration, compositing, feed for livestock, fertilizer or source of energy. Other waste disposal methods include conversion of poultry waste to energy and use of poultry waste for treatment of heavy metal contaminated water (Moreki and Chiripasi, 2011). Poultry production systems in Ethiopia show a clear distinction between traditional, low input systems and modern production systems using relatively advanced technology (Alemu, 1995). There is also a third upcoming "small scale" intensive system with a small number of birds (from 50 to 500) as an urban and peri-urban household income source using exotic birds and relatively improved feeding, housing and health care (Alemu and Tadelle, 1997). Despite the increase in number of small scale intensive system of urban poultry farming in the study area, there is lack of information on the poultry waste management practices. Therefore, it is necessary to undertake a study on the poultry waste management practices under small scale intensive poultry farming. Having this in mind, the objective of this study was to assess the waste management practices and identify the constraints of waste disposal under small scale intensive system of urban poultry farming in the study area. MATERIALS AND METHODS Study area The study was conducted in Addis Ababa, the capital city of the government of Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Addis Ababa is situated at a latitude of 90 3 North and East and an altitude of 2408 m above sea level. The average minimum and maximum annual temperature are 9.4 and 23.2 o C, respectively and the mean annual rainfall is 1201 mm. The total area of the city is about 527 km 2 and the total human population was estimated to be 2,917,295 (CSA, 2010). Sampling procedure and sample size Sub-cities and small scale intensive urban poultry farmers were selected using a two-stage sampling technique. The first stage involves purposive selection of five sub-city out of the ten sub-cities where small scale intensive urban poultry farming is highly practiced and taken into consideration the availability of small scale intensive poultry farms in those areas. Thus, Gullele, Bole, Nifasilklafto, Akaki-kality and Yeka sub-cities were selected for the study. In the second stage, small scale intensive urban poultry farmers were selected randomly from the registered list of urban poultry farmers from each selected sub-city. Thus, 33, 27, 34, 37 and 25 registered small scale intensive urban poultry farmers were selected randomly from Gullele, Bole, Nifasilk-lafto, Akaki-kality and Yeka sub-cities, respectively. The sample size for each sub-city was based on the proportional sampling method. Therefore, a sample size of 156 small scale intensive urban poultry farmers was used for the survey study. The sample size (N) was determined using the formula recommended by Arsham (2007). Data collection and analysis Primary data were collected using a structured questionnaire. The data were mainly focused on the waste management practices and constraints of waste disposal. All the collected data were coded and entered into a data base using statistical package for social sciences (SPSS). Descriptive statistics such as mean, percentiles and frequencies were used to analyze the data using the SPSS statistical software (SPSS for windows, release 20, 2011). Indices were calculated to provide ranking of the constraints of waste disposal in small scale intensive urban poultry faming according to the formula: Index = Sum (n number of HHs ranked first) + (n-1) x number of HHs ranked second + (n-2) number of HHs ranked third x number of HHs ranked last) for one factor divided by the sum of (n number of HHs ranked first+ (n-1) number of HHs ranked second+. +1 number of HHs ranked last) for all factors, and where n= number of factors under consideration. The variable with the highest index value is the highest economically important (Kosgey, 2004). RESULTS Common wastes in small scale intensive urban poultry farming According to the poultry farmers, manure (50.6%) was the major waste in their farm followed by litter/manure mix (35.9%) and dead birds (13.5%) depending on the type of housing system (Figure 1). Household labor allocation in removing poultry waste Among the family members 37.7% of the wives, 23.2% of daughters, 20.2% of household servants, 18.6% of sons and 0.3% of husbands were involved in cleaning and removal of the poultry farm wastes such as manure and/or

Academia Journal of Agricultural Research; Yemane et al. 214 Figure 1. Common wastes in urban small scale intensive poultry farming. Table 1. Household labor allocation for poultry waste removal.

3 Academia Journal of Agricultural Research; Yemane et al. 214 Figure 1. Common wastes in urban small scale intensive poultry farming. Table 1. Household labor allocation for poultry waste removal. Variable Frequency Percentage (%) Husband Wife Daughters Sons HH servants Table 2. Type of floor and litter materials used in small scale intensive poultry housing. Variable Frequency Percentage (%) Floor type - - Non-cemented Cemented Litter material Teff (Eragrostis) straw Wood shavings litter, dead birds and other poultry farm wastes. According to the present result, the involvement of husbands in cleaning and removing of the wastes is relatively very less compared with the other family members (Table 1). Floor type and Litter materials Most (84.4%) of the poultry houses had a non-cemented floor covered with bedding materials and 15.6% had cemented floors. About 62.2% of the poultry farmers that had floor housing used litter material like Teff (Eragrostis) straw (70.1%) and wood shavings (29.9%). Out of the 37.8% of poultry farmers that had cage housing, 12.4% of them used the modified cage housing technology which enables them to use litter material; under each tier of the cage also provide litter material like Teff straw and wood shavings (Table 2). Method of waste collection and transportation Manual scrapping with shovel was the main method of waste collection in small scale intensive system of poultry

4 Academia Journal of Agricultural Research; Yemane et al. 215 Table 3. Frequency of waste removal in cage and floor housing system. Variable Frequency Percentage (%) Cage - - Every day Every month Every 3 months Floor Once every year Table 4. Disposal methods of manure/litter and dead birds in small scale intensive system. Disposal methods Frequency Percentage (%) Manure/litter disposal - - Disposed in dump site Marketing as a fertilizer Given freely to neighborhood farmers for land application Fertilizing their garden farm Dead birds disposal Throw away it to dump site Burning Burial Table 5. Major constraints of waste disposal in small scale intensive poultry farming. Constraints 1 st 2 nd 3 rd 4 th 5 th Index Rank Nuisance odour Lack of convenient dump site Lack of market for selling manure Lack of transportation Shortage of labour farming in the study area in particular, in the floor housing system. In the case of cage housing system, poultry farmers mainly put a plastic sheet under each tier of the cage for collection of droppings and remove it daily from the plastic sheet using water flushing. Most (94.3%) of the poultry farmers used polythene and hessian sack to transport the waste to the dumping site on foot, whereas 5.7% of them used wheel barrow. Frequency of waste removal in cage and floor housing system The present study revealed that poultry farmers that used the cage system removed the manure every day (66.1%) and those using the modified cage system which has a litter under each tier removed the manure every month (11.9%) and every 3 months (22%). On the other hand, poultry famers that used the floor system removed manure/litter once a year and manipulate the litter every 3 and 6 months depending on its condition (Table 3). Disposal methods of manure/litter and dead birds The study revealed that the main methods of disposal of manure/litter in the study area were disposed of in the dump site around their residence (64.7%), marketing for use as a fertilizer (21.8%) for urban vegetable and flower seedling farmers, given freely to neighborhood farmers for land application (10.9%) and used as a fertilizer in their own garden farm (2.6%). The main methods of dead birds disposal in small scale intensive system of poultry farming in the study area is by throwing it away to the dump site (83.3%), burning (13.5%) and burial (3.2%) (Table 4). Constraints of waste disposal The major constraints of waste disposal encountered by the small scale intensive system of poultry farmers were (1) nuisance odour; (2) lack of convenient dump site; (3) lack of market for selling the litter/manure; (4) lack of transportation facilities; (5) shortage of labor (Table 5).

5 Academia Journal of Agricultural Research; Yemane et al. 216 DISCUSSION The study revealed that manure is the major waste in small scale intensive poultry farms followed by litter/manure and dead birds depending on the poultry housing system used. Household wives, daughters and servants accounted for the largest share in cleaning and removal of poultry farm wastes in small scale intensive farms in the study area. The roles of husbands in cleaning and removing farm wastes were relatively low as compared with the other family members. The less involvement of husbands in cleaning and waste removal might be due to the cultural believes that considers cleaning activities as female jobs in the study area. Most (84.4%) of the small scale intensive poultry houses of the study area had non-cemented floor covered with bedding materials like Teff straw and wood shavings. In contrast to this, Kalu (2015) reported that majority (96.6%) of the poultry houses had concrete floors in Port Harcourt. The reason for the less use of concrete floor in the study area might be due to the fact that it needs high cost to make a concrete floor. Most (70.1%) of the small scale intensive poultry farmers used Teff (Eragrostis) straw as the main litter material followed by wood shavings in the study area. In contrast to this, Adeyemi and Malomo (2014) reported that wood shaving is the most popularly used litter material followed by sawdust, crushed corn cobs and grasses in Abeokuta and Ogun State, Nigeria. The reason for the use of Teff (Eragrostis) straw as the main litter material in the study area is due to its availability and the main crops cultivated by most of the farmers in the surrounding areas of the study area. All of the poultry farmers that used the modified cage housing technology which enables the use of litter material under each tier of the cage also provide litter material such as Teff (Eragrostis) straw and wood shavings like that of floor system housing. According to the poultry farmers the nuisance odour from poultry droppings are now being minimized due to the use of the new modified poultry cage housing technology that enables the use litter materials. Manual scrapping with shovel was the main method of waste collection in small scale intensive system of poultry farms in particular for the floor housing system in the study area. Similarly, Adeyemi and Malomo (2014) reported that in floor/deep litter houses, scraping with shovel was the most common method of waste collection in Nigeria. In the case of cage system, poultry farmers mainly put a plastic sheet under each tier for collection of droppings and remove it daily from the plastic sheet by flushing with water. Most (94%) of the small scale intensive poultry farmers in the study area used polythene and hessian sack for carrying the wastes to the dump site. In contrast to this, Adeyemi and Malomo (2014) reported that the common methods of waste transportation were the use of wheel barrow, tractor trailer and head pan. The difference in the use of transportation means for poultry waste disposal might be due to the scale of operation and the amount of waste generated. Mijinyawa and Dlamini (2007) stated that effective movement from the point of collection to either a temporary storage or point of final use is a crucial factor in waste management. According to the present finding manure is removed every day from the cage system, whereas in the modified cage housing that use litter under each tier removal of waste is once per month and every three months. On the other hand, in the floor system manure/litter is removed once per year after depopulation of the spent layers and before the arrival of a new batch of pullets since they are using an all-in all-out system of poultry rearing. According to the present study, majority of the small scale intensive poultry farmers removed the manure/litter by disposing it in the dump site around their residence (64.7%). In contrast to this, Moreki and Keaikitse (2013) reported that most (80%) of the poultry farmers in Botswana disposed of manure/litter by giving it away to other farmers to use in their arable fields. Mijinyawa and Dlamini (2007) also reported that the primary utilization of all forms of livestock and poultry wastes in Swaziland is fertilizer in their own farms. However, there are very few urban farmers in the study area that can use the manure/litter as a fertilizer in their garden or cultivated marginal lands along the river side. Moreover, most of them are less aware of the use of poultry waste as a fertilizer in their garden farm. This might be due to the nuisance odour of poultry waste for use as a fertilizer in their garden without any treatment. Moreki and Keaikitse (2013) stated that using manure to fertilize the soil is a good way to dispose of litter or manure because manure and/or litter can add the nutrients that are lacking in the soil. In the present study, 21.8% of the small scale intensive urban poultry farmers sold the manure/litter as a fertilizer to the vegetable and flower seedling farmers of the study area. In contrast to this, Paraso et al. (2010) reported that the sale of chicken manure in small-scale enterprises is almost impossible due to the fewer number of birds, whereas most commercial chicken farms put value to manure by selling them as fertilizer for plantation and field crops, or as livestock feed since properly processed poultry litters are acceptable feed ingredients for cattle. According to Moreki and Chiripasi (2011), application of manure or litter appears to be an ideal method of disposal for soils poor in phosphorus. Poultry manure contains all the essential plant nutrients including nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium, calcium, magnesium, sulphur, manganese, copper, zinc, chlorine, boron, iron and molybdenum (Amanullah et al., 2010). The main disposal methods of dead birds in small scale intensive system of poultry farming in the study area is by throwing it away to the dump site ( 83.3%), burning (13.5% ) and burial (3.2%). A different result was reported by Moreki and Keaikitse (2013); they stated that the common methods of mortality disposal were through

6 Academia Journal of Agricultural Research; Yemane et al. 217 landfills. According to Sainsbury (1992) sanitary landfill disposal is convenient but may experience a lot of growth and requires manpower to maintain. On the other hand, Paraso et al. (2010) reported that dead birds from backyard farms were also mostly buried. The limited use of advanced disposal methods of dead birds in the study area might be due to limited skills, knowledge and lack of technology on how to properly dispose of dead birds. One of the main constraints of poultry waste disposal faced by majority of the small scale intensive poultry farmers were the nuisance odour that makes it difficult in the process of handling and disposal. In contrast to this, Moreki and Keaikitse (2013) and Adedayo (2012) reported that lack of transportation facilities was a major constraint in disposing of poultry waste from the farms in Botswana and Nigeria, respectively. Conclusion Kalu E (2015). Poultry Litter/Manure Management Practices in Intensively Managed Poultry Farms in Portharcourt. J. Agric. Vet. Sci. 8(3): Mijinyawa Y, Dlamini BJ (2007). Livestock and poultry wastes management in Swaziland. Livestock Res. Rural Dev. 18(6). Moreki JC, Keaikitse T (2013). Poultry waste management practices in selected poultry operations around Gaborone, Botswana. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci. 2(7): Moreki JC, Charipasi SC (2011). Poultry waste management in Botswana: A review. J. Anim. Feed Res. 1(6): Mokwunye U (2000). Meeting the phosphorus needs of the soil and crops of west Africa: the role of indigenous phosphate rocks. Paper presented on balanced nutrition management systems for the mosit savanna and humid forest zones of Africa at a symposium organized by IITA at Leuva at Cotonun, Benin republic, October Olumayowa O, Abiodun OO (2011). Profit efficiency and waste management in poultry farming: The case of Egba Division, Ogun State, Nigeria. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 10(2): Paraso MGV, Espaldon MVO, Alcantara AJ, Sevilla CC, Alaira SA, Sobremisana MJ, Ravalo RO, Macan KRD Valdez CA (2010). A survey of waste management practices of selected swine and poultry farms in Laguna, Philippines. J. Environ. Sci. Manag. 13(2): Sainsbury D (1992). Poultry Health and Management, Granada Publishing, USA. pp The study revealed that manure was the major poultry waste followed by litter/manure and dead birds. Manual scrapping with shovel was the main method of waste collection in small scale intensive system of poultry farming. Polythene and hessian sack were the means of transporting farm wastes into the dump site. The main method of disposal of manure and or/litter in the study area were depositing the waste in the dump site around their residence. Dead birds were disposed by throwing away to the dump site, burning and burial. The nuisance odour created by poultry manure and lack of convenient dump site were the main constraints seriously encountered in disposing poultry waste. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge the college of veterinary medicine and agriculture of Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia for funding the study. We also acknowledge the small scale intensive poultry farmers in Addis Ababa for their willingness to provide the necessary information. REFERENCES Adedayo V (2012). Poultry Waste Management Techniques in Urban Agriculture and its Implications: A Case of Metropolitan Lagos, Nigeria. Asian J. Agric. Sci. 4(4): Adeyemi OA, Malomo A (2014). Survey of Poultry Wastes Management in Abeokuta, Ogun State,Nigeria. Adv. J. Environ. Manag. 1(2): Alemu Y, Tadelle D (1997). The status of poultry research and development in Ethiopia, research bulletin No.4, poultry commodity research program Debrezeit agricultural research center. Alemaya University of agriculture, Ethiopia. pp. 62. Alemu Y (1995). Poultry production in Ethiopia. World Poult. Sci. J. 51: Amanullah MM, Sekar S, Muthukrishnan P (2010). Prospects and potential of poultry manure. Asian J. Plant Sci. 9(4): Cite this article as: Yemane N, Tamir B, Mengistu A (2016). Poultry waste management practices under small scale intensive urban poultry production in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Acad. J. Agric. Res. 4(4): Submit your manuscript at

1 ABSTRACT

1 ABSTRACT AGRICULTURE AND BIOLOGY JOURNAL OF NORTH AMERICA ISSN Print: 2151-7517, ISSN Online: 2151-7525, doi:10.5251/abjna.2016.7.3.146.152 2016, ScienceHuβ, http://www.scihub.org/abjna Constraints, opportunities