Assessment of pig production, feed and feeding practices in three main agro-ecological zones of Cambodia

Kong Saroeun, Seng Sokerya, Pok Samkol, Chhay Ty, Seng Theara, Sok Sunnara, Huy Sokchea, Meas Soveasna and Khieu Borin

Center for livestock and Agriculture Development (CelAgrid)
PO Box 2423

Main office: #05, street 181, Sangkat Tumnop Tek

               Khan Chamcar Morn, Phnom Penh, Cambodia

celagrid@celagrid.org

Abstract

The pig survey on feeding practices, feed resource and its utilization in three main agro-ecological zones (AEZ) of Cambodia was conducted in 2006 in eight villages from eight districts of four provinces, with the participation of eighty one farmers for the structured interview (9 households per village) and 20 to35 other farmers participating  in the group discussions.

Majority of farmers in the Great Lake Floodplain (75%) and Costal zone (55.5%) kept diverse species of animals such as cattle, pigs and poultry. In the Mekong floodplain (66.7%) kept cattle and pigs. The confinement system was commonly practiced by farmers in Great Lake Floodplain (GLF) while about half of the respondents in Mekong Floodplain (MF) and Coastal Zone (CZ) practiced semi-confinement. Most farmers in the three AEZs kept fattening pigs but about 10% kept sows for breeding. Kandol, Hainam and Domrey are common local pig breeds kept by most farmers in all three AEZs. The reason of keeping local breeds of pigs was because piglets were easily accessible, were resistant to diseases and climate, could be fed on local available feed resources, were prolific and the meat was accepted by local consumers. However, farmers knew their disadvantages such as slow growth, high fat content and lower price for the   meat.

Farmers understood the advantages and disadvantages of keeping pigs in the free range system and the reasons for this. Most farmers particularly in MF and GLF zones said they practiced free range because there was no crop and they were also afraid of pigs getting stress. There were several local feed resources which could be scavenged by pigs in the free range system or were being fed to pigs by farmers in the three AEZs. Roots and earthworm in MF and CZ while aquatic plants and amaranths in GLF were commonly available to pigs in the free range system. Rice bran and broken rice were the common feeds used by farmers for their pigs and only a small proportion was bought.

Feed used for pig production were rice, rice bran, broken rice, cassava leaves, water plants, vegetables, kitchen waste, fish waste, concentrate feed, banana stem, and rice wine waste. Feed access for pig production was: rice 2-26%, rice bran 19.5-43.5%, broken rice 8.5-29%, water plants 8-24.5%, banana stem 4-13%, rice wine residue 3-8.5%.

Farmers started to raise pigs from the piglet stage to finished animals and the normal time for raising pigs was variable depending on the resources in the village. In Takeo, farmers started raising pigs in February or May. In Pursat, farmers started to raise pigs from July and for farmers in Koh kong, they can raise pigs any time in the whole year depend on the resources. The time for sale is during the whole year at around 60-75kg. Sales were to middlemen who went to the village every day.

The  main problem which occurred in pig production was the low price of the live animal, lack of technique, disease outbreaks, culture influences, expensive feed, low market demand and not enough capital. Based on these problems, the farmers requested help such as in disease prevention by access to a reliable village animal health worker, technical training on animal production, prohibition of pig importation from other countries, local feed utilization, capital support from NGOs and digging of wells for water usage.

It is concluded that

• Farmers prefer to raise many types of animal and animal numbers are variable depending on the family situation.
• Farmers start to change their habit from free raising system to confinement system. In some zones they practice semi-confinement system.
• The main purpose of pig raising is to gain meat for sale and local breeds are still kept to produce crossbreed pigs
• The farmers’ awareness of local breeds and crossbreeds are variable depending on their experience and knowledge.
• The farmers still use local feed for their animal and still practice feeding on traditional feeds which are insufficient for pigs to grow well.
• There are several problems in pig production in the three zones and the major problem is disease.

Introduction

Livestock plays an important role in rural area of Cambodia especially pig because it is a major source of family income, festivity events, paying a debt or as a ‘savings bank’ (Steinfeld 1998). Pig production in rural area of Cambodia is related to rice growing and availability of by-products from rice, rice bran and broken rice for feeding. The report on the pig survey in 1999-2000 by (Barker 1990) found that there were more than 2.3 million pigs but that this number was not sufficient to satisfy the demand in the country. Slaughterhouses reported that many pigs were being imported from Viet Nam and Thailand. The estimated number imported from Viet Nam ranged from 200,000 to 300,000 heads passing through border posts such as Svay Rieng and Prey Veng province annually. The reason that Cambodia could not produce enough pig meat to meet requirement for customers, maybe it is because of farmers keeping their animal in traditional scavenging system, high mortality of young piglets, poor understanding of diseases, limited funds, and poor access to drugs and other veterinary services. Transport of infected animals and smuggling are often the causes of failures in disease control (Sovann and San 2002). Other problems were poor quality of feed and lack of quantity, raising local breeds of pigs and having to sell animals to market through middleman. Some small scale producers could not produce their own feed and used imported feed from the neighbor countries. As a result they could not get much profit from pig raising. There are only a few commercial pig farms in Cambodia, mainly located near Phnom Penh (Yu Tong and CP companies). They supply almost all the grandparent stock, breeding sows, and piglets to medium scale producers particularly around Phnom Penh and other larger cities. These farms are very well-equipped, well-managed and have a high productivity. Only exotic breeds are kept in this system and the breeds are mostly Yorkshire, Landrace and Duroc (Khieu Borin 2006, personal communication). The report of MAFF (2004) found that pig production increases year by year from 1,933,930 in 2000 to 24,842,501 heads in 2004 with increases of 11.9% due to the growth of medium scale farms around cities to satisfy the demand for meat of the increasing population in the cities.

Objectives of pig survey

• To investigate feed resources and pig production systems in different zones of Cambodia

• To identify problems and solutions for pig production

Methodologies

Location

As survey to assess feeding practices, feed resources and their utilization on pig production was conducted in threes main agro ecological zones, four provinces, eight districts, eight communes and eight villages with seventy two interviewees. The provinces represented different areas of Cambodia. Thus Takeo represents the Mekong floodplain zone, Siem Reap/Pursat represents the Great Lake floodplain zone and Koh Kong represents the Coastal Zone. In each province, interviews were conducted in two districts, two communes and two villages with nine household per village. Other participants (from 20 to 35) were invited for group discussion.

Tools

In this study, some tools were selected such as

• Secondary data

• Transect walk (mainly for pig feed)

• Case study (individual family interview using questionnaires) – 9 in each site

• Historical profile (raising system, breed, sex, feed, feeding)

• Seasonal calendar (availability of feed, diseases outbreak, selling time, start time)

• Focused group discussion (men and women – in relation to pigs and income from pigs production)

• Problem-cause analysis/problem tree    

Sample size

Four provinces, eight districts, eight communes and eight villages with seventy two households were selected, with all of them involved in pig rising.

Statistical analysis

For data analysis, means were compared through analysis of variance and t-test using ANOVA and Independent -Samples T Test of SPSS 1.5 (SPSS 2004). For qualitative data, frequency analysis and cross-tabulations were done to determine percentages between variables.   

Result and discussion

General information on village profile

Takeo, Siem reap, Pursat and Koh Kong province were selected for the survey on pig feeding practices, feed resources and their utilization.

Skul village is located in Smong commune, Traing district, Takeo province with land area of 309 ha, (land for village 30 ha, and land for rice cultivation 279 ha). Total total population is 1217 (men 608 and woman 609) in 226 households. The main activities in this village are rice cultivation (226 households), animal raising (pig with 1-3 heads in 150 household, cattle 279 heads in175 households and poultry), garment factory work (135 persons) and furniture work (53 households).

Potamok village is located in Ang Prasat commune, Kirivong district, Takeo province with land 316 ha (village’s land 16 ha, rice cultivation’s land 300 ha), total population is 677 (man 334 and woman 343) in 142 household. The main activities are rice cultivation (140 households) and in this village farmers can produce rice twice per year with yields of 3400 kg/ha and 1500 kg/ha for dry and wet season, respectively and fish and poultry production.

Prek 3 village is located in Sam Roung commune, Phnom kravagn district, Pursat province with land 146 ha (village land 29 ha, land for rice cultivation 112 ha, land for crop plantation 2 ha and land for forest 3 ha). The total population is 1062 (men 530 and women 532) in 208 households and total illiterate people 164 (men 55 and women 109). The main activities are rice cultivation, animal raising, crop plantation, rice wine production, sale of labor, motor taxi and small rice mill.

Dong Rong village is located in Koh Kum commune, Sampov Meas district, Pursat province, the total population is 694 (men 408 and women 286) in 129 households. Total illiterate people are 47 (20 men and 27 women).

Silamaneang village is located in Beun Preav commune, Sre Ambel district, Koh Kong province with total land 366.5 ha (land for village 35 ha and rice field and mountain 331.5 ha), the total population is 1375 in 283 households. The main activities are rice cultivation, animal raising (buffaloes 414, cattle 356 and pigs), motor taxi driving, rice wine production and fishing. There is nearly 70% illiteracy of the people.

Jimeal village is located in Ondong teuk commune, Botumsako district, Kok Kong province with total land 124.7 ha. The total population is 850 in 177 households and 20% of illiteracy. The main activities are rice cultivation, animal raising (cows 42, buffaloes 208 and pigs 228 heads), rice wine production and motor taxi driving.

Family profiles

All the interviewees were head of family or wife house-keeper. The information from individual interviews is in Table 2. In the report of the baseline survey in eight villages in three communes in Phnom Kravagn district, Pursat province (2006), it was found that the average member size per family was 4.00±0.001 which is less than in this survey (Table 2). There were only two villages in Pursat and maybe there was an effect of size of samples because in this survey only 9 households were selected for interview compared with baseline survey with 30 households selection.

Children in the target villages did not pay attention to study and most of them stopped their stgudy after class 5. The reason for the low level of education was because of the family situation: business work in tourist place (Siem Reap province, the Great Lake floodplain) and some sell labor in the border (the Coastal zone) and lack of labor for agriculture.

Working duration, Income generation and working type

Working time of the farmers and their incomes did not differ among the three zones (Table 3). Most incomes were from on-farm work rather than off-farm or non-farm work. However, through the group discussion in each province it was found that most of the income from on-farm activity was from rice cultivation and animal production (pig, cattle, and poultry).

Animal situation

More families in the three agro-ecological zones were raising pigs with cattle or pigs with cattle and poultry  than pigs alone (Table 4).

The average numbers of pigs, cattle, buffalo and poultry per household did not differ among the three zones (Table 4; Figure 1). The General Population Census (1998) reported that the overall average of pigs  per house in four districts in Prey Veng province was 2.22, similar to pig numbers in the Mekong floodplain zone (2.85 heads/household). The report of baseline survey in eight villages in three commune in Phnom kravagn, Pursat province (the Great Lake floodplain zone) in 2006 found that farmers kept only 1.4±0.417 pigs/household less than the number in this study (Table 4).Maybe it is because in our report, we selected only farmers raising pigs compare with the baseline survey which selected the farmers in general. Numbers of cattle were 4.9±0.547 and this number was similar to our study (Table 4). .

Chickens are small animals and easy to raise so numbers of this animal are higher than for other animals (Table 4).  The Baseline study in the Great Lake floodplain in the same zone reported smaller numbers of poultry (7.3±0.72). A few farmers raised 100-370 head of poultry for laying eggs especially in the Mekong floodplain zone.

Pig raising system

More farmers in the three agro-ecological zones raised pigs in confinement or semi-confinement system (Table 5; Figure 2).  Very few farmers practiced the free range system. There are two zones (Mekong floodplain and Coastal zone) where farmers still keep the pig free during the day and confined at night. Results from the group discussion in each zone indicated a similar situation on  the raising system, the farmers keeping the pigs in a pen with concrete or earth floor and walls made from wood or bamboo depending on resources. In some cases, the pigs were in free range especially in the dry season when there were no crops or rice cultivation.

Purpose of pig raising

In terms of purpose of pig raising, this was mainly for meat consumption and sale (Table 6; Figure 3). Barker (2000) reported that farmers in Prey Veng province raised pigs mainly for meat (77.8-82.2%), a finding similar to ours in the Mekong floodplain zone. As well as raising pigs for meat, some farmers have the habit of keeping a sow for breeding. The proportion (5.55-11%) was less than in the survey of Barker (2000) (17.2% for breeding stock and 16.7±3.79 farmers keep animal for breeding and meat). In the group discussion, most farmers reported raising either sex for meat.

Pig breed

According to the interviews and observations in the target zones it appeared that most of the farmers still keep the local breed (Table 7; Figure 4). In the group discussion, it was indicated that the local breeds were: Kandol (mouse), Hinam and Domrey (elephant). In some zones farmers began to raise crossbreed pigs, especially when they lived near a town with easy access to the market as in the Great Lake floodplain zone. In this areas, farmers are raising crossbreed pigs more than in other zones because this zone is located near the Thai border and it was easy to obtain  exotic breeds from Thailand. Another to keep crossbred pigs was because of advice from extension workers from NGOs, government or feed companies. According to Barker (2000), farmers raised more native breed pigs than crossbreds. He reported the three native breeds were  Kondol, Hainam and Domrey.

Understanding the advantages and disadvantages of local breeds of pig

Most farmers indicated that for the local breed it was easy to find piglets, that they were easier to feed with local resources, were more resistant to disease, could be raised with free range system and were accepted in the market (Table 8). The disadvantages were the slow growth, high fat content, low price and small size.