Small Scale Family Poultry

The future of small-scale family poultry production: proposals for global groups

Minutes of the joint workshop held during the World Poultry Congress, Salvador, Brazil.

9 August 2012, 10.30 am – 12.30 pm


Patricia Givisiez, Dr Mda Saleque, Vincent Guyonnet, Fallou Guèye, Alan Gibbins, Elijah Kiarie, Elizene Damasceno Rodrigues Soares, Fábio Cunha, Edwin Gutiérrez-Ruiz, Lenani Godwin, Brigitte Bagnol, Jemima Estrella-Tec, Salimata Pousga, Rosa Costa, Janine de Campos Ferra, Jean Claude Fotsa, Fernando Tavares, Angela Boni, Ceferiano Coheno Aveiro, Diana Rovira, Elsio Figueiredo, Olaf Thieme, Bob Pym, Robyn Alders, Jeruza Indiara Ferreira, Sonia M.B. Marques Quirino, José Gama, Fasina F. Oludayo, Agbede J. Oluwasola, Masaaki Toyomizu, S.M. Rajiur Rahman, Auvijit Saha Apu, Michèle Tixier-Boichard, Moacyr de Oliveira, Funso Sonaiya, Hamid Ali India, Dinesh Prasad Singh, Harry Swatson, Chih-Feng Chen, Gislaine G. Romano, Ivan Camilo Ospina, Guilhermo R. Do Nasamento, Leonardo Willian de Freitas, Momen Bhuiyan, Edi Widodo.

Participant details are available in Annex 1.

Chair: Robyn Alders welcomed everyone to the discussion and asked that all feel free to contribute to ensure a good spectrum of ideas coming from different countries, professions and genders.

Panel Moderator: Bob Pym noted that this morning’s session builds on discussions held during the WPC 2008 and to take discussions to the next level to develop meaningful action plans. He indicated that some specific actions had already been proposed during earlier gatherings during the WPC:

·Systematic review of family poultry; define progress on improving family poultry production - suggested by Jonathan Rushton,

·Members to provide technical advice to development programs - suggested by Bob Pym, and

·Development and publication of agreed definition of terminology used to describe the various types of family poultry production – suggested by Robyn Alders

Contributions to discussion

Edwin: lack of published scientific information; need site to post published papers (especially those published in regional journals)

Fasina: INFPD has dedicated website that can be used to post documents; good to have links between relevant sites

Agbede: Important to have material reviewed before it is posted.

Fallou: INFPD website has been hosted on FAO website but will shortly be transferred to its own domain; aim to populate site with as much information as possible

Vincent: Using members to support NGO projects is a great idea. Frequently NGOs have little technical knowledge relating to poultry production

Bob: Members can act as honest brokers

Fallou: INFPD has 3 official languages: English, French and Spanish. It would be good to see increased contributions by Spanish/Portuguese speakers

Saleque: Anyone can contribute to website to increase sharing of activities; links to other networks can also be arranged

Bob: All members of WPSA will have electronic access to all WPSA publications. Printing and mailing of WPSJ is a major cost and so WPSA is moving to electronic format

Rajiur: Good practices of family poultry can be posted; practices vary between climatic zones

Vincent: could family poultry articles be open access?

Jean Claude: Information that can be posted there should be implementable research results; important to review contributions to ensure good standards

Fasina: The original idea was to post publish papers and so review of published papers is not required

Alan: we have to think of a way to have contributions submitted; need to raise profile of family poultry; create a clear statement from all groups to provide information relating to the potential of FP to alleviate poverty and improve general wellbeing to appeal to funding bodies; a higher profile will help people interested in FP to become members of WPSA in order to access INFPD

Lenani: Important for women farmers to be able to contribute to discussions via their local WPSA members

Rosa: How can WPSA help to systematise the information currently available (done to date and also presented during this WPC); perhaps the areas that we are researching are not the priorities of farmers; how can WPSA help to prioritise activities?

Bob: uptake is key. WPSA has a potential role to play, especially in the technical aspect of projects being designed/implemented. How might this be achieved?

Michelle: we have several objectives and maybe the same tool is not going to solve all problems; to influence funding bodies we need to have appropriate papers in appropriate publications to reach target organisations/people; FP can be studied as part of agro-ecological studies; always better to have others also advocating for you; more ambitious papers may be required for other communities of practice; paper on participatory approaches presented yesterday was interesting; is there a way to harmonise approaches to assist with review/comparison of studies; participatory approaches allow us to hear the priorities of people; it would be good to have a framework to set up this approach; not need to re-invent the method each time

Olaf: FAO has implemented IFAD-funded project in collaboration with INFPD over past 3 years; key activities: training, engaging younger researchers and developers, and exchange of information beyond scientific papers (especially what works and what doesn’t); big diversity regarding ideas about FP – there are a wide range of views about the way forward; important to provide evidence-based materials and approaches;

Elsio: we are far from these discussions; we don’t work much with scavenging chickens going to small poultry production systems that require technological inputs;

Robyn: it would be useful to have agreed definitions of the different terms used to describe the different types of FP; it would be useful for a group of people to work on definitions for publication in the WPSJ

Elsio: family poultry production is large, medium and small; there are local names to describe different production systems

Salimata: to meet the priority of people, there are many communication problems in many countries. Establishment of country fora to help to involve more people by INFPD would be useful

Janine: standards are being drafted in Mato Grosso do Sul;

Harry: Within countries, especially in Africa, it would be beneficial to more clearly define FP issues; sometimes difficult to bring FP issues into WPSA country discussions; agrees with Salimata’s suggestion to establish local FP fora;

Bob: electronic communication useful but always good to get people together. Regional meetings could include FP satellite meetings;

Alan: how can the structure of WPSA help to facilitate FP fora? WPSA has many branches throughout different regions. So long as there is sufficient interest in a country, such FP meetings could go ahead. WPSA has funds to support the participation of invited experts at such meetings (“speakers bureau”).

Bob: there are also branch development funds to facilitate meetings, etc in relation to FP development

Michelle: because INFPD is a global working group, each WPSA can involve FP topics in meetings. This could also strengthen the activities of different branches.

Brigitte: Development of a statement that would help to raise the profile of INFPD suggested by Alan is a very interesting idea. Michelle’s idea concerning working with agro-ecological experts is also good. In relation to the website, all the ideas are good. The website can also be used as a blog for Q&As.

Bob: WPSA is considering social media and making the WPSA interactive

Elsio: it would be good to hear of disease control activities in different countries; disease is one of the main problems and we need ideas how to deal with it; other things such as nutrition and management are not harmful and people can solve by themselves; social issues and disease issues would be good to discuss

Rosa: we (KF) have been working for several years in Southern Africa on the control of Newcastle disease (ND) using thermotolerant vaccine. ND is considered to be the major constraint by most rural communities in the region. Cold chain is a major problem with the distribution of conventional vaccines. Thermotolerant vaccine can withstand some breaks in the cold chain. Results to date are very encouraging. Community based program implemented using community vaccinators. Makes program more sustainable. Community vaccinators are selected by the communities themselves. Project/government supports monitoring and provides technical support. Once ND is control other diseases such as fowl pox and internal and external parasites can become a problem (but less of a problem than ND) and are then addressed by the ongoing program. Salmonellosis and fowl cholera are not a problem in Southern Africa. Flocks increase after sustainable ND control and so supplementary feed becomes necessary. The program focuses on the control of ND and addresses supplementary feeding and appropriate housing once farmers gain confidence that their birds will no longer die in large numbers.

Edwin: there are many technologies that are good for preventing diseases in commercial poultry but the problem is how to deliver them to family poultry. Thermotolerant ND vaccine has been useful in some places. Its probably not necessary in Mexico where cold chain is adequate. The problem is how to vaccinate all birds. Other diseases do emerge as a problem in backyard system. Backyard birds are used for family needs only; they are not sold. There is no support from the government except when there is an outbreak of one of the main diseases. There are many things that can be used to treat the animals by people. Local herbal remedies have been described in a number of places. Many have not been scientifically tested. Lucena has been mentioned as a treatment for fowl pox and Edwin is currently developing a trial to test this. Its important to look into local knowledge.

Olaf: Rosa explained it very nicely. Once ND is controlled other diseases will become important. Its important to look at all components of the production system. Its important to understand what are people willing to look into and what will give them profits. Genetics has not yet been discussed in FP sessions during this congress. 80% of success in commercial poultry has been assigned to genetic improvement. Important include genetics in considerations.

Fabio: control of internal parasites using pumpkin seeds is currently being studied; would like to encourage Latin Americans to investigate what is happening in our own countries and elsewhere in the world; would be good to look into cactus and cassava leaves and palm trees as supplementary feed;

Michelle: maintaining diversity of village chickens often rated highly in many projects and there is a lack of willingness to identify specific traits for which it would be useful to select.

Harry: good to have a holistic approach to R&D regarding FP production; e.g. a selected birds needs to be protected by good housing; good to get appropriate material together for use in schools to encourage interest in poultry.

Fasino: disease control in family poultry, from my experience in Egypt its important to be prepared to change approaches; biosecurity may appear better in intensive systems because it keeps birds off the streets; community approach also used in Egypt; important to carry small scale farmers along and not leave them behind; industry can sponsor training in biosecurity, etc

Robyn: The Australian Poultry Collaborative Research Centre is a useful model; it has a good schools program already developed; information available via

Bob: will circulate information coming from this session to all participants

Action plan

·Family poultry definitions – Robyn, Fallou, Edwin, Janine, Funso, Jonathan, Brigitte, Saleque, Jean Claude

·Systematic review – Jonathan, Robyn, Vincent, Harry, Toyomizu

·Website – provide information; links to other websites; opportunities for interactive website; WPSA, INFPD, IRPC/Kyeema, Poultry Hub – Saleque, Bob, Michelle, Fallou

·Publication issues – WPSJ, Family Poultry Communication, how to make best use of these – Fallou, Jean Claude, Agbede, Lucy, Bob, Elijah

·Developing interaction, especially physical interaction, how best to be able to bring people together; Improved communication and interaction – Fallou, Saleque, Bob, Fabio, Harry, Olaf, Jean Claude, Agbede, Salimata

·Sounding board role – how can we have an impact on project work? – Alan, Vincent, Bob, Funso, Rajiur, Salimata,

·Education and training programs – how can we achieve significant outcomes without too much expense; transport can be very expensive – FAO/IFAD/INFPD/IRPC working on making existing training material available more widely – Funso, Olaf, Harry, Rosa, Edwin, Saleque, Momen, Auvijit, Rajiur,

·Statement to raise the profile of the INFPD – Fallou, Rosa, Saleque, Salimata, Jean Claude

·INFPD – motivating participation across the globe – Fallou, INFPD executive committee

·Decision tools for family poultry development – includes definitions; ongoing through IFAD-funded project

Annex 1: Participant contact details



Email address

Patricia Givisiez


Dr Mda Saleque


Vincent Guyonnet

Fallou Guèye

FAO, Rome,

Alan Gibbins

New Zealand

Elijah Kiarie

Elizene Damasceno Rodrigues Soares


Fábio Cunha

Edwin Gutiérrez-Ruiz


Lenani Godwin

Sri Lanka

Brigitte Bagnol

South Africa/France

Jemima Estrella-Tec


Salimata Pousga

Rosa Costa


Janine de Campos Ferra

Jean Claude Fotsa


Fernando Tavares


Angela Boni

Ceferiano Coheno Aveiro

Diana Rovira

Elsio Figueiredo


Olaf Thieme

FAO, Rome

Bob Pym


Robyn Alders

Australia and Mozambique,,

Jeruza Indiara Ferreira

Sonia M.B. Marques Quirino


José Gama


Fasina F. Oludayo


Agbede J. Oluwasola


Masaaki Toyomizu


S.M. Rajiur Rahman


Auvijit Saha Apu

Michèle Tixier-Boichard


Moacyr de Oliveira

Funso Sonaiya


Hamid Ali India,

Dinesh Prasad Singh,

Harry Swatson

South Africa,

Chih-Feng Chen


Gislaine G. Romano

Ivan Camilo Ospina

Guilhermo R. Do Nasamento

Leonardo Willian de Freitas

Momen Bhuiyan

Edi Widodo