Research Article
John Abakura Hyelda1, Michael Amurtiya 
2 , Mark Polycarp 2, Alfred Balthiya2
1Department of Animal Science and Range Management, Modibbo Adama University of Technology, Yola, Adamawa State Nigeria
2Department of Agricultural Economics and Extension, Modibbo Adama University of Technology, Yola, Adamawa State Nigeria
Abstract. The study assessed disease management and biosecurity measures among poultry farmers in Adamawa State, Nigeria. Specifically, the study identified the prevalent poultry diseases and parasites in the study area, assessed disease management and biosecurity measures, and also identified the constraints limiting poultry production among the farmers. Multistage sampling technique was used to collect primary data from 113 poultry farmers using a structured questionnaire. Data collected were analysed using descriptive statistics and a four-point Liker-scale. Findings of the study revealed that Salmonellosis, Coccidiosis, and Newcastle Disease were the most common diseases in the area. Similarly, regular change of litter, consistent washing of drinkers/feeders, and also cleaning of the surroundings of the poultry house were the common biosecurity measures among in the area. Foremost among these constraints affecting the farmers were; extreme weather conditions, high cost of feed and other inputs, and inadequate capital and/or credit. Key among the recommendations was the need for the employment of more agricultural extension agents in the area.
Keywords: poultry farmers, diseases management, biosecurity, Adamawa State
Across most developing nations, undertaking poultry production by farmers has substantially increased over the years [Adedeji et al. 2014Adedeji, O.S., Amao, S.R., Alabi, T.J., Opebiyi, O.B. (2014). Assessment of Poultry Production System in Ilesha West Local Government Area of Osun State, Nigeria. Sch. J. Agr. Vet. Sci., 1(1), 20–27. Google Scholar, Sadiq and Mohammed 2017Sadiq, M.B., Mohammed, B.R. (2017). The economic impact of some important viral diseases affecting the poultry industry in Abuja, Nigeria. Sokoto J. Vet. Sci., 15(2), 7–17. https://doi.org/10.4314/sokjvs.v15i2.2]. In Nigeria, the sector contributes to the nation’s economy due to how it has transformed into a commercial enterprise. Furthermore, apart from the economic contributions of the sector, it also contributes significantly to promoting food security by increasing the protein intake of the people [Mamza and Mshelia 2010Mamza, S.A., Mshelia, G. (2010). Small-Scale Family Poultry Production An assessment of some poultry management practices and disease. World's Poult. Sci. J., 66, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933910000334]. Despite this importance of the sector, the majority of the actors are small-holder farmers [Raheem and Ayanda 2011Raheem, R.A., Ayanda, W.K. (2011). Poultry farmers' awareness and knowledge of improved production practices in Afijio, local government area, Oyo state, Nigeria. J. Agr. Res. Dev., 1(1), 1–8. Google Scholar]. Poultry production activities vary with location across various parts of the country. In Adamawa state, for instance, it is undertaken by a wide range of people in the State due to its numerous benefits [Apuno et al. 2011Apuno, A.A., Mbap, S.T., Ibrahim, T. (2011). Characterization of local chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) in Shelleng and Song Local Government Areas of Adamawa State, Nigeria. Agr. Biol. J. North America, 2(1), 6–14 https://doi.org/10.5251/abjna.2011.2.1.6.14, FAO and ICRISAT 2019FAO and ICRISAT (2019). Climate-Smart Agriculture in the Adamawa State of Nigeria. CSA Country Profiles for Africa Series. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Rome, Italy. Google Scholar].
One of the major banes of poultry production across most parts of Nigeria is the high incidence of diseases [Jongur et al. 2009Jongur, A.A.U., Oji, S.N., Yahaya, M.S. Tashikalma, A.K. (2009). Profitability Analysis and Management Practices Among Poultry Farmers in Yola Metropolis of Adamawa State, Nigeria. Global J. Agri. Sci., 8(2), 237 -343. https://doi.org/10.4314/gjass.v8i2.51893, Adewole 2012Adewole, S.O. (2012). The efficacy of drugs in the treatment of coccidiosis in chicken in selected poultries. Acad. Res. Int., 2:20-24. Google Scholar, Yitbarek et al. 2016Yitbarek, M.B., Mersso, B.T., Wosen, A.M. (2016). Disease management and biosecurity measures of small-scale commercial poultry farms in and around Debre Markos, Amhara Region, Ethiopia. J. Vet. Med. Anim. Health, 8(10), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.5897/JVMAH2016.0515]. Poultry farming business can incur serious losses as a result of various pests and diseases. Specifically, it reduces the growth performance of the birds, which in turn affects the market value of produce. As a consequence, it can exacerbate unemployment in the country thereby affecting the livelihood of many people [Alabi 2012Alabi, S. (2012). Media Usage by Poultry Farmers in the Control of Avian Influenza in Lagos State, Nigeria. J. Comm., 3(1), 43–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/0976691X.2012.11884794]. Diseases occur due to lack of proper care and management and inadequate nutritious feeding among other factors [Yitbarek and Wosen 2016]. Therefore, disease prevention and control are veritable components of profitable poultry production [Okeoghene 2013Okeoghene, E.S. (2013). Competency Level and Training Needs of Poultry (Layers) Farm Attendants in Delta State, Nigeria. J. Nat. Sci. Res., 3(14), 21–29. Google Scholar, Maduka et al. 2016Maduka, C.V., Igbokwe, I.O., Atsanda, N.N. (2016). Appraisal of Chicken Production with Associated Biosecurity Practices in Commercial Poultry Farms Located in Jos, Nigeria. Scientifica, Article ID 1914692, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1914692].
Adopting strict biosecurity measures will go a long way in reducing the incidence of pests and diseases in poultry farms [Jibril et al. 2016Jibril, A.H., Bello, M.B., Bello, S.M., Saheed, Y., Balla, F.M. (2016). Biosecurity Measures and Constraints Among Rural Poultry Farmers in Zamfara State, Nigeria. Anim. Vet. Sci., 4(4), 47–51. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.avs.20160404.11, Odemero and Oghenesuvwe 2016Odemero, C.F., Oghenesuvwe, O. (2016). Mortality Risk Severity, Associated Factors and Appropriate Management Options in Poultry Agribusiness in Delta State, Nigeria. Int. J. Agr. Ext. Rural Dev. Stud., 3(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.22161/ijeab/1.2.10]. Biosecurity is viewed as a plan or set of actions taken to prevent the entry of a disease agent onto a farm (bio-exclusion) and spread among farms (bio-confinement). These measures are aimed at controlling both contagious and infectious poultry diseases. Biosecurity practices also contributes to human health safety. As opined by Yitbarek et al. [2016]Yitbarek, M.B., Mersso, B.T., Wosen, A.M. (2016). Disease management and biosecurity measures of small-scale commercial poultry farms in and around Debre Markos, Amhara Region, Ethiopia. J. Vet. Med. Anim. Health, 8(10), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.5897/JVMAH2016.0515 and Eze et al. [2017]Eze, C.O., Chah, J.M., Uddin, I.O., Anugwa, I.J., Igbokwe, E.M. (2017). Bio-Security Measures Employed by Poultry Farmers in Enugu State Nigeria. J. Agri. Ext., 21(3), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v21i3.9, such measures should be a routine practice on the farm. This is because poultry diseases are dynamic, and can be a recurrent decimal in farms. Hence, the practice of biosecurity has become very necessary to protect the poultry farms from the intentional and unintentional threat of any disease-producing agents on the farms [Ajewole and Akinwumi 2014Ajewole, O.C., Akinwumi, A.A. (2014). Awareness and Practice of Biosecurity Measures in Small Scale Poultry Production in Ekiti State, Nigeria. IOSR J. Agr. Vet. Sci. (IOSR-JAVS), 7(11), 24–29. https://doi.org/10.9790/2380-071112429, Ajewole and Akinwumi 2018Ajewole, O.C., Akinwumi, A.A. (2018). Effectiveness and Benefits of Biosecurity Practices in Small Scale Broiler Farmers in Ekiti State, Nigeria. J. Poult. Res., 15(1), 6–12. Google Scholar]. However, there is a need to improve the knowledge of poultry farmers and other actors in the sector on various biosecurity measures and other poultry risk factors [Malhaam and Rao 2011Malhaam, I.V., Rao, S. (2011). Impact of Globalization and Emerging Information Communication Technologies on Agricultural Knowledge Transfer to Small Farmers in India, in: World Library and Information Congress: 73rd Ifla General Conference and Council 19–23 August 2007, Durban, South Africa.. Google Scholar, Ameji et al. 2012Ameji, O.N., Abdu, P.A., Isa-Ochepa, M. (2012). Knowledge of poultry diseases, biosecurity and husbandry practices among stakeholders in poultry production in Kogi State, Nigeria. Sokoto J. Vet. Sci., 2(1), 36–31. https://doi.org/10.4314/sokjvs.v10i2.6, Tikwe et al. 2015Tikwe, K.M., Simon, B.P., Gbana, N.S.H. (2015). Information Sources and Utilization by Poultry Farmers in Jalingo Local Government Area, Taraba State, Nigeria. IOSR J. Agr. Vet. Sci. (IOSR-JAVS), 8(7), 8–12. Google Scholar, Odemero and Oghenesuvwe 2016Odemero, C.F., Oghenesuvwe, O. (2016). Mortality Risk Severity, Associated Factors and Appropriate Management Options in Poultry Agribusiness in Delta State, Nigeria. Int. J. Agr. Ext. Rural Dev. Stud., 3(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.22161/ijeab/1.2.10]. Having such improved knowledge will enhance the ability of farmers to strictly implement such measures.
Therefore, the main objective of this study is to assess disease management and biosecurity measures among poultry farmers in Adamawa State, Nigeria. The study’s specific objectives were to: describe the socio-economic characteristics of poultry farmers in Adamawa State; identify the prevalent poultry diseases and parasites in the study area; assess disease management and biosecurity measures being adopted in the farms; and identify the constraints limiting poultry production among the farmers in the study area.
Adamawa State is located in North-East Nigeria, and it lies between Latitudes 70°N and 110°N and between Longitudes 11°E and 140°E. The State covers a landmass of about 38,700 km$^{\text{}2}$, and that the area has a tropical climate that is characterized by high temperatures and humidity as well as marked wet and dry seasons [Adamawa State Government 2016Adamawa State Government (2016). About Adamawa State. Retrieved August 8, 2020, https://www.adamawastate.gov.ng (Accessed 20 July 2020). Google Scholar, FAO 2002FAO (2002). Report of the second consultation on agricultural information management; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/005/y7963e/Y7963e00.htm (Accessed 20 July 2020). Google Scholar]. The mean annual rainfall is between 197 mm and 700 mm along with the Southern and North-Western parts of the State. The climatic condition of the State suits poultry production [FAO and ICRISAT 2019FAO and ICRISAT (2019). Climate-Smart Agriculture in the Adamawa State of Nigeria. CSA Country Profiles for Africa Series. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Rome, Italy. Google Scholar]. Similarly, the state has a population of about 4.4 million people, which implies a huge market for the produce.
A multistage sampling technique was adopted to select respondents for the study. In the first stage, all the three senatorial zones of the State were purposively selected. In the second stage, the snowball sampling technique was used to select 113 poultry farmers from whom primary data was collected using a semi-structured questionnaire. In analysing the data, descriptive statistics involving the use of frequencies means, and percentages were used. Similarly, a three-point Likert scale was used for the analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the respondents’ socio-economic characteristics, while the respondents’ prevalent poultry diseases and parasites, disease management, and biosecurity, and also constraints were assessed using the Likert-scale. The three-point Likert-scale model is presented as follows;
$$\bar{x} = \frac{\sum{F}}{Nr}$$
where:
\( \bar{x} \) – mean score,
\( \sum \) – summation,
\( F \) – frequency of respondents,
\( N \) – mean value,
\( Nr \) – number of respondents to the item.
The decision rule is computed thus:
$$3+2+1=\frac{6}{3}=2.0$$
The respondents’ socio-economic characteristics are presented in Table 1. These characteristics are key determinants in poultry production [Ja'afar-Furo and Gabdo 2010Ja'afar-Furo, M.R., Gabdo, B.H. (2010). Identifying Major Factors of Poultry Production as Sustainable Enterprise among Farmers Using Improved Methods in Rural Nigeria. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 9(5), 459–463. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2010.459.463]. The result shows that 76.1% of the poultry farms are located in urban areas, while 23.9% are in rural areas. The distribution of the respondents’ gender revealed that 85% were male, and 15% of the farmers were females. Based on age, 22.1% were aged 20–29 years, while 56.6%, 14.2%, and 7.1% were between the age range of 30–39 years, 40–49 years, and 50 years and above respectively. In terms of the respondents’ marital status, the majority (57.5) were married, while the singles, widowed, and the divorced constituted 35.4%, 5.3%, and 1.8% respectively. In the same vein, the household size of the respondents revealed that most (53.1%) of the households have 6–10 persons, followed by those with 1–5 persons (36.3%), and those with more than 10 persons (10.6%). In terms of the respondents’ educational attainment, the majority (77.9%) attended tertiary schools, while those with no formal education were 0.9%. The distribution of the respondents by farm size shows that 39.3% have less than 100 birds, 32.1% have between 100–199 birds, while 20.2%, 6.0%, and 2.4% had 200–299 birds, 300–399 birds, and those with 400 or more birds respectively. This suggests that the majority of the respondents were small-scale farmers. With respect to farming experience, 72.6% had an experience of 1–5 years, while those with 6–10 years, and above 10 years were 23% and 4.4% respectively.
Table
1. Socio-economic characteristics of the
respondents (n = 113) |
||
Variable – Zmienna |
Frequency – Częstość |
Percentage – Procent |
Farm Location – Położenie farmy |
|
|
Rural – Wiejskie |
27 |
23.9 |
Urban – Miejskie |
86 |
76.1 |
Gender – Płeć |
|
|
Female – Żeńska |
17 |
15.0 |
Male – Męska |
96 |
85.0 |
Age, years – Wiek, lata |
|
|
20–29 |
25 |
22.1 |
30–39 |
64 |
56.6 |
40–49 |
16 |
14.2 |
50 and above – 50 i więcej |
8 |
7.1 |
Marital Status – Stan cywilny |
|
|
Divorced – Rozwiedziony |
2 |
1.8 |
Married – Żonaty |
65 |
57.5 |
Single – Samotny |
40 |
35.4 |
Widowed – Owdowiały |
6 |
5.3 |
Household Size – Wielkość gospodarstwa domowego |
||
1–5 |
41 |
36.3 |
6–10 |
60 |
53.1 |
More than 10 – Więcej niż 10 |
12 |
10.6 |
Level of Educational – Poziom wykształcenia |
|
|
No formal education – Brak formalnego wykształcenia |
1 |
0.9 |
Primary – Podstawowe |
6 |
5.3 |
Secondary school – Szkoła średnia |
18 |
15.9 |
Tertiary level – Szkoła wyższa |
88 |
77.9 |
Farm Size (Number of Birds) – Wielkość gospodarstwa (liczba ptaków) |
||
< 100 |
44 |
39.3 |
100–199 |
36 |
32.1 |
200–299 |
23 |
20.2 |
300–399 |
7 |
6.0 |
400–499 |
3 |
2.4 |
Farming Experience – Doświadczenie rolnicze |
||
1–5 |
82 |
72.6 |
6–10 |
26 |
23.0 |
> 10 |
5 |
4.4 |
Source: Field Survey (2020) |
|
|
Table
2. Prevalent poultry diseases and parasites in
the study area (n = 113) |
||
Variable – Zmienna |
Mean – Średnia |
Standard Deviation |
Diseases – Choroby |
|
|
Salmonellosis – Salmonelloza |
2.89 |
0.411 |
Gumboro – Choroba Gumboro |
2.34 |
0.368 |
Newcastle Disease – Choroba Newcastle |
2.66 |
0.493 |
Coccidiosis – Kokcydioza |
2.72 |
0.383 |
Chronic Respiratory Disease – Przewlekła choroba układu oddechowego |
1.17 |
0.625 |
Ectoparasites – Pasożyty zewnętrzne |
|
|
Lice – Wszy |
2.84 |
0.411 |
Ticks – Kleszcze |
2.12 |
0.439 |
Mite – Roztocza |
2.04 |
0.368 |
Flea – Pchły |
2.76 |
0.602 |
Other Related Issues – Inne powiązane problemy |
|
|
Malnutrition – Niedożywienie |
0.32 |
0.602 |
Cannibalism – Kanibalizm |
0.79 |
0.432 |
Source: Field survey (2020) |
|
|
Table
3. Disease management and biosecurity measures
(n = 113) |
||
Variable – Zmienna |
Mean – Średnia |
Standard Deviation |
Regular change of litter material – Regularna zmiana materiału ściółkowego |
2.79 |
0.41 |
Regular washing of feeders and drinkers – Regularne mycie karmideł i poideł |
2.84 |
0.37 |
Proper brooding of birds – Właściwy odchów piskląt |
1.66 |
0.49 |
Regular cleaning of the house and surroundings – Regularne sprzątanie domu i otoczenia |
2.82 |
0.38 |
Proper stocking of birds (by age and species) – Właściwa obsada ptaków (według wieku i gatunku) |
2.12 |
0.53 |
Minimising water spillage – Minimalizacja rozlewania wody |
2.32 |
0.60 |
Daily inspection of flocks – Codzienna kontrola stada |
1.91 |
0.62 |
Adherence to the vaccination schedule – Przestrzeganie harmonogramu szczepień |
2.71 |
0.43 |
Regular Change of drinking water – Regularna wymiana wody pitnej |
2.84 |
0.36 |
Provision of adequate ventilation – Zapewnienie odpowiedniej wentylacji |
1.67 |
0.49 |
Regular administration of drugs during treatment of diseases – Regularne podawanie leków podczas leczenia |
2.16 |
0.42 |
Reporting of a disease outbreak – Zgłoszenie ogniska choroby |
2.02 |
0.56 |
Isolating and quarantining sick birds – Izolowanie i poddawanie kwarantannie chorych ptaków |
2.41 |
0.58 |
Provision of foot-dip with disinfectant at the entrance of the house – Zapewnienie kąpieli stóp ze środkiem dezynfekującym przy wejściu do domu |
1.43 |
0.69 |
Wearing of protective cloth/hand gloves – Noszenie odzieży ochronnej i rękawic ochronnych |
1.48 |
0.64 |
Distance between farm and potential disease transmission threats – Odległość między gospodarstwem a potencjalnymi zagrożeniami przenoszenia chorób |
1.55 |
0.57 |
Regular fumigation of poultry house and equipment – Regularna fumigacja kurnika i wyposażenia |
2.01 |
0.64 |
Restraining of visitors into the farm – Ograniczenie wstępu obcych osób |
1.56 |
0.56 |
Proper control of rodents and other migrating birds – Właściwa walka z gryzoniami i ograniczenie populacji ptaków wędrownych |
1.61 |
0.50 |
Provision of adequate feeding and drinking troughs – Zapewnienie odpowiednich karmideł i poideł |
2.43 |
0.63 |
Provision of adequate floor spacing to minimize overcrowding – Zapewnienie odpowiedniej przestrzeni, w celu zminimalizowania stłoczenia |
2.22 |
0.69 |
Debeaking of birds to reduce injury and cannibalism – Obcinanie dziobów w celu zminimalizowania obrażeń i kanibalizmu |
1.43 |
0.53 |
Source: Field survey (2020) |
|
|
Table
4. Distribution of respondents’ poultry
production constraints (n = 113) |
||
Variable – Zmienna |
Mean |
Standard Deviation |
Inadequate capital and/or credit – Niewystarczający kapitał i/lub kredyt |
2.74 |
0.49 |
Poor breeder stock and Day-Old Chicks – Słabe stado rozpłodowe i jednodniowe pisklęta |
2.66 |
0.93 |
The high cost of feed – Wysoki koszt paszy |
2.82 |
0.33 |
Poor nutritional standards of feeds – Uboga wartość żywieniowa pasz |
2.12 |
0.50 |
Availability of drugs and vaccines – Dostępność leków i szczepionek |
2.32 |
0.62 |
The high cost of drugs and vaccines – Wysoki koszt leków i szczepionek |
2.79 |
0.42 |
Extreme weather condition – Ekstremalne warunki pogodowe |
2.84 |
0.38 |
Low market demand – Niski popyt na rynku |
2.69 |
0.44 |
Inadequate extension or advisory services – Niewystarczające usługi doradcze |
2.50 |
0.57 |
High incidence of diseases – Wysoka zachorowalność |
2.46 |
0.68 |
Poor policy and political will by the government – Nieudolna polityka i brak woli politycznej rządu |
2.43 |
0.39 |
The high cost of veterinary services – Wysoki koszt usług weterynaryjnych |
2.48 |
0.64 |
Insecurity due to theft – Niebezpieczeństwo kradzieży |
2.55 |
0.57 |
Source: Field survey (2020) |
|
|
The respondents’ view on the prevalent poultry diseases and ectoparasites is presented in Table 2. The finding of the study revealed that Salmonellosis (X = 2.89), Coccidiosis (X = 2.72), Newcastle Disease (X = 2.66), and Gumboro (X = 2.34) were the most common diseases in the area. In terms of the ectoparasites, lice (X = 2.84), flea (X = 2.76), ticks (X = 2.12), and mites (X = 2.04) were the most prominent. Findings of this study lends credence to submission of Garba et al. [2010]Garba, A., Balajoko, B.M., Barde, I.J., Ahemed, A., Sa'adatu, I., Agang., I., Abdullahi, A.S., Bakari, H.A, Turaki, U.A., Abdurrahman, A., Goji, J.N. (2010). The Treatment of Salmonelosis to Commercial Poultry Production in Adamawa State, Nigeria. Sokoto J. Vet. Sci., 8(1–2), 52–60. Google Scholar who revealed that various diseases affect poultry production in the study area, and this can go a long way in limiting farmers’ gains. Similarly, the presence of parasites has a huge health implication on the poultry birds. As opined by Odenu et al. [2016]Odenu, R.A., Mohammed, B.R., Simon, M.K., Agbede, R.I.S. (2016). Ecto-parasites of Domestic Chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus) in Gwagwalada Area Council, Abuja, Nigeria-West Africa. Alexandria J. Vet. Sci., 51(1), 140–146. https://doi.org/10.5455/ajvs.220654, ectoparasites are generally considered as the primary cause of poor health conditions, growth retardations and decrease in production in local chickens in Nigeria.
The various disease management and biosecurity measures being undertaken by the farmers are presented in Table 3. The study revealed that the majority of the farmers change litter regularly (X = 2.79), wash drinkers and feeders at regular intervals (X = 2.84), and also clean the surroundings of the poultry house (X = 2.82). Other practices include proper stocking of birds (X = 2.12), minimizing water spillage (X = 2.32), adherence to vaccination schedule (X = 2.71), regular Change of drinking water (X = 2.84), and administration of drugs during treatment of diseases (X = 2.16). Similarly, the study indicated that reporting of a disease outbreak (X = 2.02), quarantining sick birds (X = 2.41), fumigation of poultry house, and equipment before restocking (X = 2.01), and the provision of adequate feeding and drinking troughs (X = 2.43) were common practices among the farmers. However, some major disease management and biosecurity measures are not strictly undertaken in the area by the farmers. These practices include proper brooding of birds, Daily inspection of flocks, Provision of adequate ventilation, and the provision of foot dip and protective cloth/hand gloves. Others include restraining visitors and the control of rodents, provision of adequate spacing for the birds, and debeaking of birds to reduce injuries and cannibalism. The inability of farmers to adhere to all the necessary biosecurity measures makes these farms vulnerable to diseases, which greatly can affect the profit margin of the farmers. Findings of this study also agrees with the submission of FAO [2008]FAO (2008). Consultative Mission on Assessment of the Nigerian poultry market chain to improve biosecurity. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Abuja, Nigeria. Google Scholar where it was reported that biosecurity is still very weak among poultry farmers and there is need for improvement at all levels in Nigeria.
The distribution of constraints affecting the poultry farmers is presented in Table 4. Foremost among these constraints affecting the farmers were; extreme weather conditions (X = 2.84), high cost of feed and other inputs (X = 2.82), inadequate capital and/or credit (X = 2.74), and poor breeder stock and Day-Old Chicks (X = 2.66). Other challenges include low market demand, Inadequate extension or advisory services, high incidence of diseases, poor policy and political will by the government, high cost of veterinary services, and insecurity due to theft. The interplay of these challenges can substantially limit the potentials of farmers to maximise gains from the poultry farm. Findings of this study are in line with those of Jongur et al. [2009]Jongur, A.A.U., Oji, S.N., Yahaya, M.S. Tashikalma, A.K. (2009). Profitability Analysis and Management Practices Among Poultry Farmers in Yola Metropolis of Adamawa State, Nigeria. Global J. Agri. Sci., 8(2), 237 -343. https://doi.org/10.4314/gjass.v8i2.51893 and Ja’afar-Furo and Gabdo [2010] who also indicated that lack of extension services, inadequate market for stock ready for sale, lack of support from the government, high cost of feeds, high cost of medication and occurrence of diseases as key challenges to poultry farmers in Adamawa State.
This study has revealed that poultry farmers in Adamawa State adopt various measures to manage diseases in the farms. However, these management/biosecurity measures are not strictly adhered to leading to incidences of disease spread on the farm. Hence, the need for more awareness of biosecurity and disease management measures among poultry farmers in the area, to enable maximise gains from the venture. Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations were made:
We wish to appreciate persons that have actively participated in conducting the survey, particularly Mr. Celestine Andrew Lumbonyi and Mr. Atimi Andrew Atinga. The study was funded completely by the researchers.
Received: 5 Sep 2020
Accepted: 29 Sep 2020
Published online: 31 Oct 2020
Accesses: 922
Hyelda, J.A., Amurtiya, M., Polycarp, M., Balthiya, A., (2020). Assessment of disease management and biosecurity measures among poultry farmers in Adamawa State, Nigeria. Acta Sci. Pol. Zootechnica, 19(3), 85–92. DOI: 10.21005/asp.2020.19.3.11.