CHARACTERIZATION OF PIG PRODUCTION SYSTEMS IN EMBU WEST SUB COUNTY, EMBU COUNTY, KENYA

* Kithinji R. Kirima 1 , Kanui T. Ikusya 2 , Ndathi J. N Aphaxard 2 and Mwobobia R. Murangiri 3 . 1. Private Researcher, P.O Box 1897-60200, Meru, Kenya. 2. School of Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences, South Eastern Kenya University, P .O. Box 170-90200, Kitui, Kenya. 3. Ministry of Agriculture, Water and Irrigation, Kitui County, P.O. Box 289-90200, Kitui, Kenya. ...................................................................................................................... Manuscript Info Abstract ......................... ........................................................................ Manuscript History

In addition to daily nutrient required by the pig for maintenance, growth and reproduction, other pig nutrients requirements depend on the size and the physiological state. Formulating a feed ration is a complex procedure which any farmer might not be able to perform. It is only prudent for pig farmers to purchase already prepared rations from reliable commercial sources (Rangoma, 2013). Leaves from shrubs such as cassava and mulberry, from vegetables such as sweet potato and cocoyam, together with water plants such as duckweed and water spinach can successfully be used in diets for pigs to replace at least the protein usually supplied as soybean and fishmeal (Preston, 2006).
The pig production systems practiced in Kenya are; scavenging or backyard production, traditional free range system, small scale intensive production and commercial pig farms (FAO, 2012; The Kenya Meat Sector Report, 2014). The Large White is the main breed kept due to its desirable growth potential and high fecundity (Wanjaiya, 1999;Githinji et al., 2007).
The free-range system is characterized by high mortality rates, low off take, low reproductive rates, minimal health care or supplementary feeding, lack of proper housing and high levels of inbreeding (FAO, 2012).
The intensive pig production systems are the commercial method of pig production under which economic considerations are the sole determinant of herd size. It involves the farmer growing or buying feeds, proper housing with adequate shade, pen space. Feed and water facilities are provided to meet requirements of pigs at various stages. High performance breeds or their crosses are used. Access to credit facilities is possible. Intensive pig production may be small, medium or large (FAO, 2012).This study was aimed at establishing the type of production systems in the study area.

Methodology:-
A descriptive survey research design was used. A sample of 104 respondents was obtained from a target of 142 households by simple random sampling according to Yamane (1967:886). Data was collected through observations, physical inspection of households, photography and using structured questionnaires. These were then analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). Descriptive statistics including frequency counts, means and percentages were used to analyze the data. The results of the data were presented in frequency tables and charts.

Results and Discussion:-
The characteristics of households keeping pigs are presented in Table 1. In the study area, the age range of pig farmers was 31-70 years with a mean age of 49 years. Nsoso et al., (2006) found that 62.5% of respondents in Botswana who kept pigs were over 41 years old. In Tanzania  Pigs were reared under a mixed farming system involving crops, other livestock and poultry. This can be explained by the fact that resource poor people should not derive their income or food security from a single source; they need a number of safety nets or livelihood diversifications (Dietze, 2011). These farmers are considered as smallholder often characterized by intensive labour, few acres of land, diversified production systems using crop and other livestock species (Waters-Bayer and Bayer, 1992). This is in addition to limited access to capital, equipment and feed supplies (Lukefahr and Preston, 1999).
The family size ranged from 2 -8 persons with 70% of the households composed of 2-5 persons. Family labour constituted (86.5%) with hired labour constituting only 5.8%. Utilization of family labour is regarded as one of the key investments for family farms (Barlett, 1980). This also provides additional employment opportunities for the farm family (Dietze, 2011;Deka et al., 2007).
All the household heads had attended school with 59.6 % having primary level of education, the rest had secondary and post secondary levels of education. This indicates that all the household heads can easily adopt new technologies. There was significant positive correlation (p=0.01, r=0.335) between the level of education of household heads and the application of supplemental iron to piglets. This agrees with Nyangito (1986) who notes that adoption of new improved technologies in agriculture is positively correlated to education.
The study area had 40.4 % post primary education. This is in comparison to Nsoso et al. (2006) in Botswana that 25% of respondents had secondary education; Kamuribo et al. (2011) in Tanzania that only 14% had secondary 1530 education. In Bangladesh, Hossain et al. (2011) found that only 20.8% of pig farmers had post-primary education.
All the respondents in this study were Christians comprising of Protestants (81.7%) and Catholics (18.3%).

Fig 1:-Other crops grown in the study area
Cash crops grown include Coffee (58%), Macadamia (70.2%), and Mangoes (15.4%). Food crops like maize and beans were grown by all the farmers. Other crops grown were bananas (46.2%), traditional crops such as cassava (88.5%), pumpkins (81.7%), sweet potatoes (100%) and yams (33.7%). Some traditional food crops and their byproducts were also used as pig feeds. Other animals kept were: poultry, mostly under free range (97.1%), cattle, mainly for dairy (93.3%), shoats (16.3%) and fish (1.0%). Pigs were competing with poultry for the available feed resources like leftovers. The study concluded that pigs were kept under intensive systems under integrated crop-livestock production systems. Table 2 presents pig production and management practices in study area.  Main pig breeds were large white (52%) and land race (34%). The most preferred pig breed was large white by 65% of the farmers. It was preferred because; it's prolific (64.4%), local availability (45.2%), fast growth rate (32.7%) and good mothering ability (25%).
It has been noted that a high percentage (95.2%) of replacement stock for breeding were purchased locally. This agrees with other studies by Kagira et al., (2010) and Madzimure et al., (2013). This predisposes to inbreeding and subsequently low production, reproduction and poor health. When available, good breeding stock was expensive to most of the smallholder pig farmers. Lack of good quality breeding stock been reported by other studies in Kenya (Mutua, 2010;FAO, 2012).In Colombia, Ocampo et al., (2005) reported that farmers did not control breeding at all and that led to farmers being unable to know the performance potential of individual pigs.
Routine pig husbandry practices included; Iron injection (16%), tooth clipping on piglets (12%) and castration of all male piglets not intended for reproduction. All farmers kept pigs under intensive production system. The major constraints identified were; lack of quality breeding stock (with 95.2% sourcing the local breeds), high feed cost (95%) , lack of suitable pig housing structures (87.5%), diseases and pests management (83.7%), poor marketing (6.7%), non membership to farmers' groups or associations (49%), and no record keeping (2%).

Conclusion and Recommendations:-
The preferred production system is the intensive mixed production system. Large white was the preferred pig breed. The major constrains to pig production were; lack of high quality breeding stock, high cost of commercial feeds, poor pig housing and diseases and pest management.