|
|
| The Context |
|
Who
Targeted at ...
|
The tool is aimed primarily at small scale producers who both grow cereals and keep livestock. All types of such producers can benefit but it might be more appropriate to farmers in the process of intensification or who already practise a relatively intensive system of production.
Secondarily it is directed to agricultural, livestock and veterinary extension and other advisory personnel (public and private sectors including NGOs). |
When?
|
The tool can be used at all times of the year but will be particularly useful at times of chronic livestock feed shortage. |
Where?
|
Most areas of the tropics have some production systems of this nature. As already indicated, however, the tool is likely to give best results in the more intensive systems. Areas of medium to high potential and peri-urban areas near to concentrations of human population are a particularly suitable target area. |
| Methods |
In sheep intake of sorghum stover was significantly increased by both of chopping and by offering more than actual intake. Male sheep selected for leaf and leaf sheath. There was no significant interaction between form of stover (chopped or unchopped) and amount offered.
In cattle the response to increasing the amount offered interacted with form (chopped or unchopped) such that intake was greater with unchopped compared to chopped – which intuitively might be a rather surprising result. Bulls, like male sheep, apparently selected leaf and leaf sheath which presumably were easier to obtain in unchopped than in chopped product.
The yield and composition of stovers are highly variable. They are, however, affected by variety (cultivar) and by site (place) of cultivation. Stripping of leaves for use as feed during the growing phase does not affect grain yield. Leaf is generally lost during storage of the harvested stover. |
| Resources Required |
Few resources additional to those already on the farm are required. Hand chopping can be practised on very small farms or a hand powered rotary chopper can be used for larger units. Appropriate storage of stover after harvest including some measures for collecting fallen leaves would increase the quantity and quality of feed available. |
| Support |
Some support will normally be required from public and private advisory services in order to ensure the technology is correctly transferred and properly used. The extension personnel themselves will need to be trained in the technology. |
| Costs |
Additional financial costs are small. Non financial costs in correct storage, chopping and offering feed increase as a result of application of the technology. As farmers do place an intrinsic value on their time it is important to ensure that the perceived benefits assume dominance over the perceived inconveniences. |
| Benefits |
Animals grow faster if fed the appropriate form of stover at the correct amount. Faster growth leads to earlier offtake for home consumption or for market and/or earlier sexual maturity leading to enhanced reproductive performance.
These translate to the producer as a higher and more stable income. More widely correct employment of the tool should lead to more sustainable livelihoods. Maximum use of local feed resources has beneficial local and global effects as it reduces overall costs to the environment in reducing the number of "food miles" involved between point of production and point of consumption. More assured supplies of high quality livestock products would improve the diets and the quality of life of consumers at a lower cost than the use of costly imports. |
| Risks |
There appear to be few risks associated with the use of the technology. |
| Alternatives |
The alternative to local production is import of products which is likely to be much more expensive in the long term. |
| Impacts |
The overall impacts are a more sustainable production system at least cost to the environment. |
| Policy Implications |
There are no major policy implications but national, regional and district administrations should include policy options that provide producers with information on the benefits of making more efficient and maximum use of local resources. |
|
| Research Findings |
Cereal stovers are relatively poor in nutritive value but are widely used for feeding ruminants, often when other feeds are inadequate or unavailable. This project considers a number of aspects of the nutritive value of sorghum stover in the context of their existing utilization in Ethiopia and the potential of farm-based approaches to their improvement.
Survey work carried out in the early stages of the project showed that farmers preferred to grow local varieties of sorghum in the belief that the quality and quantity of stover produced was better than with varieties selected for bird resistance.
Agronomic trials showed that there was no clear difference in stover-yield between resistant and non-resistant varieties and there appeared to be no difference in nutritive value of Stover from bird resistant and non-resistant varieties, provided the ratios of leaf-plus-sheath stem were comparable. Grain yields were higher for the bird resistant sorghums. The trials also confirmed that the farmers' practice of stripping leaves to feed to livestock did not affect grain yields at harvest.
Animal feeding experiments demonstrated that stover intake increased when animals were offered in excess (approx 50%) of intake to allow selection of the more nutritious components. Chopping stover also increased the intake of stover by small ruminants but had a negative effect in cattle. In an experiment with cattle, supplementation of long stover with cotton seed cake (16 or 32 g DM/kg LW 0.75/day) improved growth rate. Supplementation at the lower level increased intake relative to the unsupplemented animals but doubling the amount of supplementary cottonseed cake reduced intake.
|
|
| References and Further Reading |
| Influences on Nutritive Value of Cereal Crop Residues |
 |
| Husbandry strategies for improving the sustainable utilisation of forages to increase profitable milk production from cows and goats on smallholder farms in Tanzania |
|
| Box-Baling: CUT COSTS OF FEEDING STOVER |
|
Osafo ELK, Owen E, Said AN, Gill EM and McAllan AB. 1993. Feeding sorghum stover to Ethiopian sheep and cattle: effect of chopping and amount offered on intake and selection. In: Animal Production in Developing Countries (Gill M, Owen E, Pollott GE and Lawrence TLJ, eds). Occasional Publication No 16, British Society of Animal Production: Edinburgh . 204-206.
|
|
| Osafo ELK, Owen E, Said AN, Gill EM, McAllan AB and Kebede Y. 1993. Sorghum stover as ruminant feed in Ethiopia : effect of cultivar, site of growth, pre-harvest leaf stripping and storage on yield and morphology. In: Animal Production in Developing Countries (Gill M, Owen E, Pollott GE and Lawrence TLJ, eds). Occasional Publication No 16, British Society of Animal Production: Edinburgh . 188-198. |
|
| Osafo ELK, Owen E, Said AN, Gill EM, McAllan AB and Sherrington J. 1993. Feeding chopped sorghum stover to Ethiopian sheep: effects of sorghum variety and amount offered on intake, digestibility and live-weight change. Animal Production 56: 470 (abstract). |
|
| Wahed RA, Owen E, Naate M and Hosking BJ. 1990. Feeding straw to small ruminants: effect of amount offered on intake and selection of barley straw by goats and sheep. Animal Production 51: 283-289. |
|
|
