Agriculture & Food Security (Sep 2018)

Small ruminant fattening practices in Amhara region, Ethiopia

  • Shewangzaw Addisu Mekuria,
  • Aschalew Assefa Teshager,
  • Addis Getu Endeshaw,
  • Malede Birhan Atinaw,
  • Assemu Tesfa Sendeku

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-018-0218-9
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 7, no. 1
pp. 1 – 9

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background In Ethiopia, small ruminant had a great role in the economic development for farmers or producers, food-insecure areas and one of the main sources of meat production. The study was conducted in five small ruminant potential zones of Amhara region from November to June, 2017, with the objective of assessing small ruminant fattening practices in Amhara region, Ethiopia. Twenty representative kebeles were selected purposively. From each of selected kebeles, 10 small ruminant fatteners were selected purposively based on their fattening experience. A total of 200 households were selected for interviewing. Data were analyzed by using SPSS version, 20. Results Majority of (47%) small ruminant fatteners can read and write. Mean and SD of family size per household was shown to be 5.22 ± 2.00. Mean and SD of private and communal grazing lands and total land for traction was 0.30 ± 0.60, 0.81 ± 1.81 and 1.84 ± 2.90, respectively. From the total of 100% respondents only 46.6% had there owen private grazing land this mean the remaining 53.4% were utilizing communal grazing land. Among the 46.6% of respondents only 74.5% were primarily grazed fattening animals. About 59% of respondents responded that the status of grazing land was decreased from the previous status, but the remaining 31.5 and 9.5% responded that there was no change and that it was increasing, respectively. Mean and SD of sheep and goat fattening per household was 2.86 ± 2.90 and 1.65 ± 4.67, respectively. Majority (71.5%) of producers preferred fattening sheep species to goat. In Amhara region, the purpose of small ruminant fattening was mainly income source (81.5%) and the remaining 12, 2, 1.5, 1, 1, and 1% were risk/benefit, meat, social or cultural function, sacrifices/rituals, saving and others, respectively. Natural pasture grazing and stubble grazing were the major feed sources in the wet and dry seasons, respectively. Fatteners were provided with supplementary feeds for small ruminant fattening twice a day (36%), once in a day (31%) and whenever available (12%). Majority of respondents (77.6%) were not provided with supplementary feed scientifically recommended due to the low supply and high cost of concentrate feed in the market. The main water source was pipe water. The average distance of water from their home was less than one km, and watering frequency was twice a day. Conclusions In general, the present study showed that fatteners in the region did not fatten small ruminants scientifically recommended, because there were high cost of supplementary feed in the market and lack of enfaces on the development of small ruminant fattening in Amhara region. So, there should be given more enfaces by the government and researches should be done on alternative and non-conventional feeds with low price by considering the export standard of meat production.

Keywords