JASEM ISSN 1119-8362 Full-text Available Online at J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manage.

https://www.ajol.info/index.php/jasem Vol. 22 (5) 725 – 729 May 2018

All rights reserved
http://ww.bioline.org.br/ja

Characterisation of Small Ruminant Production Systems in Semi-Arid Urban Areas of

Northern Nigeria
1YUSUF, A; 1*ARUWAYO, A; 2MUHAMMAD, IR
1
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology, Federal University Dutsin-ma, P.M.B 5001, Post
Code 821221, Dutsinma, Katsina State.
2
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Bayero University, Post code 700231 Kano.
*Corresponding Author Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT: A survey to characterise small ruminant system in semi-urban areas of Northern Nigeria with Katsina
state as a case study was carried out with use of structured questionnaires. A total of 147 livestock farmers were randomly
chosen for the study. The data obtained was analysed by descriptive statistics. The study revealed that majority (51%) of
small ruminant keepers were within the age range of 18-30 years and most of them (71%) were males. The results also
revealed that majority (71%) of the respondents had 1-10 years of experience in keeping sheep and goats, main source of
foundation stock was through purchase (56%) and majority (60%) kept mixed herds of sheep and goats. The research also
indicated that 44% of the farmers practise semi intensive system of management and that the respondents’ mode of feeding
the animals include grazing, grazing and browsing; and cut and carry. Grazing and browsing contributed 42% while
purchase of feed accounted for 77%. It was further revealed that the types of feeds consumed by the animals were forage
legumes with concentrates (53.4%) and forage grass with concentrates (26.1%) which accounted for 79.5% of the total
feed consumed. The farmers owned their stock mostly through purchase and were reared under semi-intensive system of
management for meat and milk production. Most of the animals were fed through grazing and browsing along with
supplementary feeds obtained through purchase. It was then concluded that ruminant production in the area of study has
a lot of prospect in productivity and profitability.

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/jasem.v22i5.18

Copyright: Copyright © 2018 Yusuf et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons
Attribution License (CCL), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.

Dates: Received: 24 March 2018; Revised: 23 April: 2018; Accepted: 27 April 2018

Keywords: Semi-arid, urban areas, small ruminants, characterization

Ruminant production has been recognised for its compounds and feed them soilage in the rainy season.
contribution to livestock production in Nigeria. Otchere et al. (1985) reported that pastoralists Fulani
Ruminants form a significant proportion of the in Giwa district of northern Nigeria allow sheep to
livestock production in Nigeria and possess obvious accompany cattle for grazing but tethered their goats
advantage over other livestock such as playing under shelter. Similar management have been reported
significant roles in the life of rural households by Wilson (1982), that the general consensus is that
(Aruwayo, et al., 2015). The importance of small after crops have been harvested, small stock are let
ruminants in the tropics in general is well recognized loose to feed on crop residues and fend for themselves.
(Williamson and Payne, 1978). Small ruminants are According to Ndamukong et al. (1989) a survey
reared mainly for four functions, namely; meat, milk, showed that in the North West province of Cameroun,
skin and wool according to order of importance. 92% of the farmers’ rear goats as against 21% who rear
Lebbie (2004) reported that sheep and goats play a sheep. The most widely practice system of keeping
significant role in the food chain and overall sheep and goats was housing at night and tethering in
livelihoods of rural households, where they are largely the day time especially during cropping season. Most
the property of women and their children. They are farmers gave their salt on a more or less regular basis
veritable sources of income generation, household (Ndamukong et al., 1989).
consumption, and hobby and as security against crop
failure. Other advantages include lack of social and The distribution of ruminant livestock population by
religious barrier to its production and consumption. ecological zones of Nigeria as reported by FDLPCS
(1992) shows that 71.50% sheep and 81.30% goats are
In Nigeria, Adu and Ngere (1979) described a found in the Savannah ecological zone. Winrock
compound system practiced by Hausas who are settled International (1992) reported an estimated population
and therefore keep their small stock tethered in their of sheep and goats in Africa as 127 million sheep and

*Corresponding Author Email: [email protected]

Characterisation of Small Ruminant Production…... 726

147 million goats. Lombin (2007) reported an revealed that majority (51%) of small ruminant
estimated population of Nigerian goats as 40.8 million keepers were within the age range of 18- 30 years. The
against 27 million sheep, 163 million cattle, 151 other categories were 31-43 years that accounted for
million poultry, 3.5 million pigs, 900,000 donkeys and (31%) while from 57-81 years the percentage was 21.
90,000 camels. Majority of the respondents were males (71%) and
others were females. It was also discovered that most
In subsistent production systems, in which the primary of the respondents (69%) were married, 22% were
purpose is to meet family needs, many urban families single while others were widows (6%) and divorced
indeed keep a few chickens, two to three sheep and (39%). The respondents had primary school education
goats for occasional consumption. The animals and tertiary level education 36% each, followed by
scavenge for a large part of their required feed, but are those with secondary school education who had 28%.
supplemented with household food processing wastes
and therefore performance is poor and mortality rate is Majority of sheep and goats keepers in the study area
high (Maxwell, 1994). In urban livestock production, were within the age range of 18-30% with average age
the system is mostly semi-intensive, where little feed of 24 years in sample population. This indicated that
is given to the animals as a supplement and later majority of sheep and goat keepers were within their
allowed to go out to search for basal feeds. This study active age with strength and potential for improved
was therefore conducted to characterise ruminant production practices. Ajala et al. (2008) reported that
farmers in Katsina metropolis and ascertain the active age range of stock owners is expected to make
ruminant production systems adopted by them. them more receptive to innovations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS Sheep and goat keeping in the study area is a male
Description of the Study Site: The study was carried dominated activity and majority are married. This was
out in Katsina Local Government Area of Katsina supported by Aruwayo et al. (2015) that ruminant
State which lies between 12o15N" and 7o3E" in the production is male dominated in Katsina state. This
Sudan Savanna Zone of Nigeria (Nkromah, 2007). It could be attributed to the fact that keeping sheep and
covers an estimated land area of 49,895 square goat requires men who are energetic youth that can
kilometres. The population of the State is 5.8 million endure the stress and capital requirements of ruminant
during the 2006 National Head Count (NPC, 2006). production. The study also revealed that 71% of the
Katsina State has hot and dry climatic conditions for owners from the study area had 1-10 years of
most of the year. The hottest months are March to May experience in keeping sheep and goats which could be
with temperature ranging from 23oC to 42oC. The an advantage in terms of vigour for the work and
annual rainfall varies from 700mm-1000mm and rainy ability to imbibe new farming techniques.
season is usually from June to September. The people
of Katsina State are mainly farmers, petty traders and It could be deduced from the study that 36% had
civil servants (Katsina State Diary, 2002). tertiary level of education while 28% had secondary
level of education. It therefore implies that the sheep
Data Collection and Statistical Analysis: The survey and goat keepers were formally educated. Education is
was conducted using structured questionnaires that necessary tool for knowing proper ways of keeping
were designed and administered to one hundred and livestock.
fifty (150) ruminant farmers in Katsina metropolis,
using a stratified random sampling technique. Data Aruwayo et al. (2015) reported that farmers’ low level
was collected on biodata of the farmers, animal kept of education will make farmers find it difficult to adopt
and number, duration of involvement in ruminant modern methods of ruminant production. It can then
farming and purpose, system of management, flock be deduced from the study that farmers will have
composition and feeding regime of the animals. Data access to latest information on improved livestock
obtained from the structured questionnaires were production.
analysed for descriptive statistics in all the parameters
using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). It was observed that majority (62%) of the sheep and
goats keepers in the area were married males and
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION female which can be an advantage in stabilizing the
Biodata of respondents Respondents: Table 1 presents production through the use of family labour and ability
biodata of respondents keeping sheep and goats in to harness family labour. The dominance of married
Katsina Metropolis as of 2011. The data obtained male may foster more careful and more accurate

YUSUF, A; ARUWAYO, A; MUHAMMAD, IR

Characterisation of Small Ruminant Production…... 727

system of keeping the animals and capital mobilisation in the area had 1-40 years of experience in keeping
for improved ruminant production. sheep and goats. Majority (71%) of the respondents
had 1-10 years of experience while the least (0.7%)
Table 1: Biodata of respondents keeping sheep and goats in had 26-30 years of experience.
Katsina Metropolis
Variables Frequency Percentage (%)
Table 3: Respondents experience in keeping sheep and goats in
Age range Katsina metropolis
(Yrs)
Variables Frequency Percentage (%)
18-30 75 51
Years of Experience
31-43 45 31
in Keeping Sheep
44-56 21 14
and Goats
57-69 3 2
1-10 105 71.42
70-81 3 2
11-15 19 12.93
Total 147 100
16-20 11 7.50
Sex
21-25 4 2.72
Male 104 71
26-30 1 0.70
31-40 5 3.70
Females 43 29 Total 147 100
Total 147 100
Marital Table 4: Stock owned by the respondents
Status Variables Frequency Percentage (%)
Married 102 69 Years of Experience in
Single 32 22 Keeping Sheep and Goats
Widow 9 6 1-10 105 71.42
Divorced 4 3 11-15 19 12.93
Total 147 100 16-20 11 7.50
Level of 21-25 4 2.72
education 26-30 1 0.70
Primary 53 36 31-40 5 3.70
Secondary 42 28 Total 147 100
Tertiary 52 36 Variable Frequency Percentage (%)
Total 147 100 Purchase 82 56
Source: Field survey. Inheritance 41 28
Gift 19 13
Reasons for keeping Sheep and Goat: Reasons for Dowry 5 3
Total 147 100
keeping small ruminants is presented in table 2. They No. of animals possessed
are for milk, meat, prestige and for commercial by the keepers
purposes. Majority (58%) kept it for commercial
purpose, followed by those who kept it for meat and 1-10 81 55.10
11-15 25 17.0
milk (21%) while the remaining 14% kept it as 16-20 19 12.92
prestige. The result showed that 58% of the livestock 21-25 9 6.12
farmers kept the animals for commercial purpose, 26-30 6 4.08
21.1% keep for meat and milk. The study is therefore 31-35 1 0.70
Total 147 100
inconsistent with report of Williamson and Payne Flock Composition of
(1978) that small ruminants are reared mainly for four Sheep and Goat Kept
functions; namely: meat, milk, skin and wool
according to order of importance. Sheep and Goats 88 60
Sheep only 37 25
Goats only 19 13
Table 2: Reasons for sheep and goat
Ram only 3 2
Variables Frequency Percentage (%) Total 147 100
Milk production 2 1.3
Meat 8 5.4
Prestige 21 14.2 Respondent’s stock: Table 4 showed the stock owned
Meat and milk 31 21.1 by the farmers. The sources of foundation stock were
Commercial 85 58 purchase, inheritance, gift and dowry. But purchase
Total 147 100
Source: Field survey.
56% and inheritance 28% accounted for 84%. It was
also discovered that the respondents had 1-35 animals,
Respondents experience in keeping sheep and goats: but majority (55%) had 1-10, followed by 11-15 (17%)
Table 3 indicates the respondents experience in others were lowest with (0.7%). The table also
keeping sheep and goats in Katsina metropolis. The indicated that the composition of the animal flock was
data obtained revealed that small ruminants’ keepers either sheep, goat, ram or the combination. Majority
YUSUF, A; ARUWAYO, A; MUHAMMAD, IR
Characterisation of Small Ruminant Production…... 728

(60%) of the respondents kept sheep and goat, while goat in Katsina metropolis were forage legumes with
25% kept sheep only and 13% kept goat only. The concentrates, forage grass with concentrates,
sources of sheep and goats indicated that majority concentrate only and forage grasses. However, forage
(56%) of the farmers purchase their stock. This is legume with concentrate 53.4% and concentrate only
contrary to Alexander (1988) who reported that 26.1% accounted for 79% of the total feed.
livestock production in the rural areas of northern
Nigeria are normally characterized by inheritance as a Systems of Management and Type of Mineral
form of ownership which gives them opportunity. The Supplement Offered to the Animals: System of
flock composition of the study area revealed that management and type of mineral supplements offered
majority (25%) of the farmers rear sheep only as to the animals by respondents in Katsina metropolis
against (13%) of the farmers who rear goats only. This are shown in Table 7. It reveals that the systems of
is in contrast with a survey in the West province of management of sheep and goat practiced by the
Cameroun where 92% of the farmers rear goats as respondents were intensive system, semi-intensive and
against 21% who rear sheep (Ndamukong et al., 1998). extensive systems. Majority (44%) engaged in semi-
intensive, (38%) engaged in an intensive, others
Table 5: Respondents sources and method of obtaining Feed engaged in an extensive system. It was also observed
Variables Frequency Percentage that type of mineral supplements offered respondents
(%)
Methods of feeding animals were table salt and multinutrient block. But table salt
Grazing 16 11 (23%) and multinutrient (35%) accounted for 58%
Grasses and browses 62 42 against others with 42% that do not give any of them.
Cut and carry 39 27 The study indicated that most of the respondents
Any other 30 20
Total 147 100 (44%) engaged in the semi intensive system followed
Means of obtaining by 38% that engaged in the intensive system while
supplementary feeds only 18% engaged in an extensive system. This
Purchase indicated that small ruminant production in this area
Yes 113 77
No 34 23 has improved and could be more profitable.
Total 147 100
Table 7: Systems of management and type of mineral supplement
offered to the animals
Respondent’s sources of Feeding Sheep and Goats: Variables Frequency Percentage
Table 5 shows the respondents sources of feed for System of management
sheep and goats in Katsina metropolis. The sources of Intensive 56 38
feeding sheep and goat in Katsina metropolis include; Semi-intensive 65 44
Extensive 26 18
grazing, grazing and browses, cut and carry and any Total 147 100
other source. Grazing and browses contributed 42% Mineral supplements
while purchase of feed accounted for 77%. Majority Table salt 34 23
(42%) of the respondents interviewed indicated that Multinutrient block 51 35
None of the above 62 42
their source of feed is grass and browses. This is in Total 147 100
agreement with the report of Wilson (1982) who Source: Field Survey.
reported that the consensus is that after crops have
been harvested, small stocks are let loose to feed on The findings of this study contradicted that of Von
crop residues Kaufman (1989) who reported that in densely
populated areas, small ruminants are tethered or
Table 6: Type of feeds offered
confined to protect crops and are therefore hand-fed
Variables Frequency Percentage (%)
Types of feed offered albeit with the same feed resources as in free roaming
Forage legumes with 56 53.4 system and that of Ajala and Gefu (2003) who also
concentrates reported that small ruminants are mostly managed
Concentrates only 30 26.1 under extensive systems in Northern Nigeria. Greater
Forage grasses only 13 11
Forage grass with concentrate 5 4.3 percentage of the respondents interviewed (42%) said
Total 104 94.8 that they neither give multinutrient block nor table salt,
Source: Field Survey. probably due to economic down town in the country.
This is not in conformity with the report of
Type of Feeds Offered: Table 6 shows the type of feeds Ndamukong et al. (1989) that most farmers gave their
used for feeding sheep and goat within Katsina animals salt on a more or less regular basis. This might
metropolis. The types of feed consumed by sheep and

YUSUF, A; ARUWAYO, A; MUHAMMAD, IR

Characterisation of Small Ruminant Production…... 729

impede the productivity of the animals since the Lebbie, SHB. (2004). Goats under Household Conditions.
minerals are needed for their overall welfare. Small Rum. Res, 51: 131 – 136

Conclusion: From this study, it was concluded that Lombin, L (2007). Analyzing News about African
Agriculture. Reviewed on 02-10-2010.
farmers rear sheep and goats which are mostly owned
through purchase under semi-intensive system of Maxwell, DG (1994). The Household Logic of Urban
management for meat and milk production. Most of Farming in Kampala. In Cities Feeding People; an
the farmers feed their animals through grazing and examination of Urban Agriculture in East Africa.
browsing, and purchase supplementary feed for the International Development Research Centre Ottawa,
animals. The productivity of the ruminants in the area Canada. Pp. 146.
of study could be improved through better
management practices like giving of multinutrients Ndamukong, KJ; Sewell, MM; Asangi, MF (1989).
block to them. Management and Productivity of Small
Ruminants in the West Province of Cameroun. Institute
of Animal Research, Mankon Station, Cameroun.
REFERENCES www.ncbinlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2749905.
Adu, IF; Ngere, LO (1979). The Indigenous Sheep of
Nigeria. World Review Animal J. 15:51-62 Nkromah, G (2007). Nigeria Fastened with Nails'' Al-Ahram
weekly. Retrieved on 24-042007.
Ajala, MK., Lamidi OS; Otaru, SM (2008). Peri-Urban
Small Ruminant Production in Northern Guinea NPC (2006). National Population Commission, Nigeria.
Savanna. Nigeria. Asian J. of Anim. and Vet. Adv. 3(3); Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey 2006.
138-146, 2008. Calverton Maryland: National Population Commission
and ORC Macro.
Ajala, MK; Gefu, JO (2003). Socio-economic factors
influencing small ruminant management practices in Otchere, EO.; Ahmed, HU; Adesipe, YM; Kallah, MS;
Kaduna State. Moor J. Agric. Res. 4:274-280. Muhammed, N (1985).Livestock Production Among
Pastoralists in Giwa District, Kaduna State,
Alexander, NO (1988). Behaviour and Adaptation of Nigeria.Unpublished Mimeo. Livestock System
Pseudo-Ruminants in the Tropics. Australian Centre of Research Project, NAPRI, Shika, Zaria.
Agricultural Research.
Von Kaufman, R; Francis; P (1989). The Elements of
Aruwayo, A; Tiri, GD; Yahaya, MA; Akinyemi, M (2015). Effective Extension Service to sheep goat production in
An Emperical Analysis of Ruminant Production In the Humid Tropics of West Africa In: Timon, V.M. and
Dutsinma Local Government Area, Katsina State, Nig Baker, R.P (Eds). Sheep and goat Meat Production in
Int J. Inov Agric & Bio. Res. 3(2):34-40. the tropics of West Africa. F.A.O Animal Production
and Health Paper 70. F.A.O (Food and Agricultural
FDLCPS (1992). Federal Department of Livestock and Pest Organisation of the United Nations), Rome, Italy. Pp.
Control Services. Nigerian Livesock Resources, 2, 128-141. www.fao.org./Wairdocs/ILRI/X5519blf.htm.
National Synthesis Report by Resources Inventory and
Management Limited, to FDLPCS, Abuja, Nigeria. Williamson, G; Payne, WJA (1978). An Introduction to
40pp. Animal Husbandry in the Tropics (3rd Ed) Longman,
London.
Garba, H. S., Dangi, A. I.and Bako, A. (1994). A Survival
of Small Ruminants on Refuse Dumps in Sokoto Wilson, RT (1982). Small Ruminant Breed Productivity in
Metropolis. 19th Animal Conference of the Nigerian Africa (ed.).R. M. Gatemby and JC. M Trail ILCA,
Society of Animal Production. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Wild Animal Rev. 53:8 – 14.

Katsina State Diary (2002). A publication of the Ministry of Winrock International (1992). Assessment of Animal
Information and Home Affairs. Agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa. Winrock
International Institute for Agricultural Development
Lakpini, CAM (2002). Feed and Feeding Strategies for Morrilton, Arkansas, U. S. A. pp. 125.
Small Ruminants in various Physiological States. In
Lakpini, C.A.M., Echoche, O.W and Gefu, J.O. (eds)
Small Ruminant Production Training Workshop.
National Animal Production Research Institute,
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria.

YUSUF, A; ARUWAYO, A; MUHAMMAD, IR