SNAIL PRODUCTION IN BAYELSA STATE, NIGERIA: TECHNOLOGIES, PRODUCTIVITY AND ENHANCEMENT MEASURES BY SUWARI, GOD’STIME SAMUEL PG/Ph.D/04/35563 DEPARTMENT OF VOCATIONAL TEACHER EDUCATION (AGRICULTURAL UNIT) UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA SUPERVISOR: DR. R.O. MAMA OCTOBER, 2010. 2 TITLE PAGE SNAIL PRODUCTION IN BAYELSA STATE, NIGERIA: TECHNOLOGIES, PRODUCTIVITY AND ENHANCEMENT MEASURES BY SUWARI, GOD’STIME SAMUEL PG/Ph.D/04/35563 A THESIS REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF VOCATIONAL TEACHER EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA; IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF Ph.D DEGREE IN AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION SUPERVISOR: DR. R.O. MAMA OCTOBER, 2010. 2 3 APPROVAL PAGE This thesis has been approved for the Department of Vocational Teacher Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. By ………………………….. ………………………… Dr. R.O. Mama (Supervisor) Internal Examiner ………………………… ………………………. Prof. E.E. Agomuo External Examiner (Head of Department) …………………………… Prof. S.A. Ezeudu (Dean, Faculty of Education) 3 4 CERTIFICATION SUWARI, GOD’STIME SAMUEL, a postgraduate student in the Department of Vocational Teacher Education (Agriculture) with Registration Number PG/Ph.D/04/35563, has satisfactorily completed the requirements for the research work for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Agricultural Education. The work embodied in this thesis is original and has not been submitted in part or full for any Diploma or Degree of this University or any other University. ………………………………….. ……………………… SUWARI, GOD’STIME SAMUEL DR. R.O. MAMA Student Supervisor 4 5 DEDICATION To: Almighty God from whom mercy, knowledge, wisdom and understanding come and who has made me what I am today. 5 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The researcher wishes to express his profound gratitude to the project supervisor, Dr. R.O. Mama for his patience and devotion in going through this work and more so, for his objective suggestions, fatherly counseling and encouragement in the production of this thesis. The following lecturers deserved commendation for their various professional inputs made in the project. Worthy of note are, Prof. S.O. Olaitan, Dr. E.C. Osinem, Dr. F.M. Onu, all in the Department of Vocational Teacher Education (Agriculture), University of Nigeria, Nsukka and Dr. S.O.C. Ugwu of the Department of Animal Science, University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Special appreciation also goes to the members of staff of Bio- Technology Research Centre, Odi, Bayelsa State, particularly messers Joledo, O., Cletus Ezidi and Millatus, D. Others include messrs Emmanuel, Andrew E. and Mrs. Azua Helen, for their invaluable assistance, and provision of useful materials, equipments and experimental farms for t he study. The researcher is highly indebted to members of his family for their support, encouragement, understanding and patience throughout the period of the study. Above all, the researcher is ever grateful to God Almighty for sparing his life and seeing him through the study. SUWARI, GOD’STIME SAMUEL Department of Vocational Teacher Education (Agricultural unit) University of Nigeria, Nsukka. October, 2010. 6 7 7 8 8 9 LIST OF TABLES Table Pages 1. Senatorial (Agric) Zones and Corresponding L.G.A.s ………….. ………127 2. Distribution of Snail Farmers in the agric. zones…………………………128 3. Decision Rule Table……………………………………………………….133 4. Farmers Mean Scores on the Level of Application of Site Preparation Technologies…………………………………………………138 5. Farmers Mean Scores on the Level of Application of Stocking Technologies ……………………………………………………………...140 6. Farmers Mean Scores on the Level of Application of Feed Management Technologies………………………………………………..142 7. Farmers Mean Response on the Level of Application of Pests and Diseases Control Technologies……………………………………….145 8. Farmers Mean Scores on the Level of Application of Harvesting and Marketing Technologies…………………………………………………..147 9. Mean Rates of Input Application by Farmers…………………………….149 10. Mean Value of Cost of the Inputs Applied……………………………….152 11. Mean Yield in Snail Production by Farmers……………………………..156 12. Farmers’ Mean Value of Sales and Revenue from Adult Snails…………158 13. Gross Margin Analysis of Snail Production……………………………...160 14. Depreciation Analysis of Fixed Assets, Original Cost, Useful life and Age…………………………………………………………………...161 15. Profit Analysis in Snail Production………………………………………164 16. Farmers/Extension Agents Mean Response on the Constraints of Farmers’ in Snail Production…………………………………………..166 17. Mean Scores of Farmers/Extension Agents on Measures for Enhancing Farmers’ Productivity………………………………………...169 18. t-test Analysis values of Non-literate and Literate Snail Farmers on the Level of Application of Site Preparation Technologies……………………………………………………………..171 9 10 19. t-test Analysis values of Female and Male Snail Farmers on the Level of Application of Stocking Technologies…………………..174 20. t-test Computation on the Level of Application of feed Management Technologies between Inexperienced and Experienced Snail Farmers………………………………………………..176 21. t-test Analysis values of Rural and Urban Snail Farmers on the extent of Application of Pests, and Diseases Control Technologies………………………………………………………………179 22. t-test Analysis values of Non-literate and Literate Snail Farmers on the level of Application of Marketing Technologies………………………………………………………………181 23. Calculated t-values of Subsistence and Commercial Snail Farmers on the Constraints of Farmers in Snail Production………………183 24. Calculated t-values of Farmers and Extension Agents on the Measures for Enhancing Farmers’ Productivity………………………….186 10 11 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Achatina achatina (Linneous)………………………………………………...3 2. Achatina fulica (Bowdich)……………………………………………………3 3. Archachatina marginata (Swainson)…………………………………………4 4. Polyplacophora (Chiton)……………………………………………………35 5. Scaphopoda (Dentalium)……………………………………………………35 6. Monopolacophora (Neopilina)……………………………………………...35 7. Cephalopoda (Naotilus)…………………………………………………….35 8. Cephalopoda (Octopus)…………………………………………………….35 9. Lamellibtrachia (Donax)……………………………………………………35 10. Gastropod (Trympanotonus)………………………………………………35 11. Gastropod (A. marginata)………………………………………………....35 12. Classification of Edible Land Snails ……………………………………..37 13. Raised Metallic Snailery…………………………………………………..57 14. Concrete Trench Snailery………………………………………………….58 15. Paddock Pen Snailery……………………………………………………...60 11 12 Abstract Snail production (heliciculture) is increasingly becoming popular in Bayelsa State, occasioned by the high demand for snail meat due to shortage of other sources of animal protein and the expected income from the increasing price of snail. However, there is dearth of documented empirical research record on the level of application of heliciculture technologies as well as the productivity of farmers’ which could form basis for improving this area of food production. The study was thus designed to determine the level of application of snail production technologies by the farmers, farmers’ productivity, constraints and measures for enhancing their productivity. The study was guided by ten research questions and seven null hypotheses. Descriptive survey research design was adopted for the study. There was no sampling as the entire population of 153 registered snail farmers was used for the study. The instrument used for data collection was a 214 items questionnaire that was face validated by five experts. An internal consistency coefficient of 0.66 was obtained for the instrument through the Cronbach alpha procedure. Data collected were analyzed using the mean to answer research questions 1-5 and 9-10, while gross margin and profit analysis were employed to answer research questions 6-8. The null hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance using t-test. It was found that the following technologies were highly applied by the farmers in snail production: farm fencing, raised wooden snailery, Archachatina marginata species, feeding with plant parts, de-shelling, gutting, de-sliming and treading live snails with ropes for sale; whereas substrate liming, moating and trapping with nets were moderately applied. Technologies such as substrate inoculation, commercial feeding, egg candling, foot dipping and stocking Achatina achatina species, were seldomly adopted whereas purging snails, quarantine services, substrate sterilization, employing veterinary services, keeping farm records and stocking Achatina fulica species, were not applied by the snail farmers. Literacy, experience, location, gender and scale of production have no influence on the level of application of snail production technologies by the farmers. An average production cost of N6,449/m2/yr was incurred while a yield of 317 adult snails/m2/yr was produced. On the average, farmers realized a net profit of N13,162/m2/yr, as well as a proceed of N2.00/yr per naira outlay with a pay back period of 121/2 months. However, shortage of improved species, lack of heliciculture extension services, seasonal flooding of snail farms among others were identified as the major constraints of farmers. Thus, it was recommended among others that modern heliciculture technologies that can improve snail production should be packaged and made available at affordable price to agric. extension agents and farmers, regular workshops should be organized for farmers by ADP, state government should establish snail breeding centers and that good drainages be constructed in the farms to improve this area of food production in the study area. 12 13 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background of the Study Human