Livestock Research for Rural Development 17 (3) 2005 Guidelines to authors LRRD News

Citation of this paper

Continuing veterinary education needs in zoo and wildlife management, livestock production and livestock products technology to the veterinary surgeons of Kerala State, India

K M Sakthivel and P J Rajkamal*

Division of Veterinary Extension Education, Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar - 243122, India
* Department of Extension, College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Mannuthy, Thrissur - 680 651, India
sakthivelvet@yahoo.com

Abstract

This study was designed to identify the Continuing Veterinary Education needs (CVE) of the veterinary surgeons of the Animal Husbandry Department (AHD) of Kerala state regarding zoo and wildlife management, livestock production and livestock products technology. Mailed questionnaire technique was adopted to collect data. A total of 130 veterinary surgeons formed the sample.

Management of domesticated elephants, breeding and management of pet animals and quality assurance of meat and meat products were the most needed areas of CVE. Among the three training modes viz., institutional, distance and integrated modes, the predominant preference was institutional for all the three major domains of subject matter viz., zoo and wildlife, livestock production, and livestock products technology. The predominant preference for resource persons was from outside the State for zoo and wildlife and livestock products technology. Similarly, the majority preferred premier institutes outside Kerala as institutions for long-term CVE on all the major domains.

Key words: Continuing Veterinary Education, Livestock production, Livestock products technology, Veterinary surgeons, Zoo and wildlife management


Introduction

There has been of late an increasing demand upon the veterinary surgeons to render service in the areas of zoo and wildlife management, livestock production and livestock products technology. The veterinary surgeons need to be proficient in these areas. Proficiency can be achieved through Continuing Veterinary Education (CVE) programmes that are designed appropriately. Krishnamurthy (1998) opinioned that "in Kerala the Veterinarians enjoy the confidence of the elephant owners who seek their services as and when need arises. Veterinarians play a major role in maintaining health of elephants. CVE programme helps to increase their job performance". According to the report of Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons/ British Veterinary Association Working Party (1984), Continuing Veterinary Education is a process by which the veterinary surgeon keeps up-to date with advances in their fields as well as maintaining and increasing their competence. Knowledge of learners' needs and preferences are important to developing an appropriate curriculum. Therefore, this study was conducted with the objective of identifying the CVE needs of the veterinary surgeons regarding zoo and wildlife management, livestock production and livestock products technology.


Material and Methods

Questionnaires were either sent by post or distributed in person during district level conferences to all the 764 veterinary surgeons of the State Animal Husbandry Department (AHD). One hundred and thirty veterinary surgeons returned the completed questionnaires and hence they formed the sample. In order to ascertain CVE needs, subject matter areas under zoo and wildlife management, livestock production management and livestock products technology were identified with the help of specialists. The respondents were asked to indicate the requirements in a three point continuum viz., required, somewhat required and not required with corresponding scores of 3, 2 and 1, separately for knowledge and skill. Later the separate scores were added to get a common score for knowledge cum skill based CVE program. The scores of all the respondents for each subject matter area were added. Mean scores were calculated as follows.

Table 1. Subject matter areas of preference for CVE programme

Sl. No.

Subject matter area

Mean score

Rank within
the domain

I.

Zoo and wildlife management

1.

Management of domesticated elephants

5.23

1

2.

Chemical immobilization of wild animals

5.22

2

3.

Wildlife diseases, diagnosis and treatment

5.18

3

4.

Management of zoo animals and birds

5.12

4

5.

Conservation of wild animals

5.02

5

II.

Livestock production

1.

Breeding and management of pet animals

4.92

1

2.

Production of meat animals

4.65

2

3.

Swine production and management

4.64

3

4.

Dairy cattle production and management

4.55

4

5.

Broiler production and management

4.51

5

6.

Goat production and management

4.49

6

7.

Fodder production

4.48

7

8.

Buffalo production and management

4.47

8

9.

Duck production and management

4.40

9

10.

Quail production and management

4.36

10

11.

Farm hygiene and sanitation

4.33

11

12.

Layer production and management

4.30

12

13.

Turkey production and management

4.26

13

14.

Sheep production and management

3.84

14

III.

Livestock products technology

1.

Quality assurance of meat and meat products

5.02

1

2.

Food borne infections and intoxications

4.98

2

3.

Wholesome meat production

4.96

3

4.

Disposal of carcasses and slaughter house waste

4.94

4

5.

Treatment and disposal of slaughter house byproducts and condemned materials

4.92

5

6.

Design and management of abattoir

4.92

5

7.

Milk and milk products technology

4.87

6

8.

Meat and meat products technology

4.84

7

9.

Transportation and marketing of livestock products

4.82

8

The data in Table 1 indicate that under zoo and wildlife management, the need for CVE programme in management of domesticated elephants was the most felt (ms 5.23) followed in the descending rank order by chemical immobilization of wild animals (ms 5.22), wildlife diseases, diagnosis and treatment (ms5.18), management of zoo animals and birds (ms 5.12) and conservation of wild animals (ms 5.02).

As for livestock production, the need for CVE programme in breeding and management of pet animals (ms 4.92) was the most felt followed in the descending rank order by production of meat animals (ms 4.65), swine production and management (ms 4.64), dairy cattle production and management (ms 4.55), broiler production and management (ms 4.51), goat production and management (ms 4.49), fodder production (ms 4.48), buffalo production and management (ms 4.47), duck production and management (ms 4.40), quail production and management (ms 4.36) and farm hygiene and sanitation (ms 4.33).

As for livestock products technology, the need for CVE programme in quality assurance of meat and meat and meat products (ms 5.02) was the most felt followed by food-borne infections and intoxications (ms 4.98), wholesome meat production (ms 4.96), disposal of carcasses and slaughter house waste (ms 4.94), treatment and disposal of slaughter house byproducts and condemned materials (ms 4.92), design and management of abattoir (ms 4.92), milk and milk products technology (ms 4.87), meat and meat products technology (ms 4.84) and transportation and marketing of livestock products (ms 4.82).

Of late there has been an increasing demand upon the veterinarians for elephant practice as well as pet animal practice in Kerala. There is a considerable number of captive elephant populations in the state and rearing of pets and public consumption of meat and awareness of the importance of its quality have gone up. Hence the importance of the subject, quality of meat and meat products. These could be the reasons for the predominant demand for CVE programmes in management of captive elephants, pet animals as well as quality assurance of meat and meat products. Moreover, the veterinary undergraduate syllabus prevalent in the country seriously lacks opportunities to acquire knowledge and skill of these aspects.

Table 2. Preference for mode of CVE programme

SI. No.

Subject matter area

Distance Learning

Institutional
(face to face)

Integrated

F

%

F

%

F

%

1

Zoo and wildlife management

10

7.69

75

57.6

45

34.6

2

Livestock production

35

26.2

57

43.8

38

29.2

3

Livestock products technology

30

23.0

57

43.8

43

33.0

Data in Table 2 show the mode of CVE preferred by the respondents. Institutional mode was the predominant choice obviously because of the opportunity for face to face interaction and hands on training.

Table 3. Preference for resource persons

SI. No.

Subject matter area

From the organization (AHD)

From outside the organization

From outside the state

F

%

F

%

F

%

1

Zoo and wildlife

14

10.77

27

20.77

89

68.46

2

Livestock production

24

18.46

58

44.62

48

36.92

3

Livestock products technology

16

12.31

53

40.77

61

46.92

Data in tTble 3 indicate the preference for resource persons. Preference for resource persons from outside the state could be because of the feeling that such expertise lacks within the state.

Table 4. Preference for venue of institutional CVE programme

SI. No.

Subject matter area

Institutes of KAU

Institutes other than KAU

Premier institutes outside Kerala

F

%

F

%

F

%

I

Short term CVE (2-4 weeks

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

Zoo and wildlife

14

10.77

56

43.07

60

46.15

2

Livestock production

32

24.61

55

42.31

43

33.08

3

Livestock products technology

60

46.15

31

23.85

39

30.00

II

Long term CVE (8-12 weeks)

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

Zoo and wildlife

7

5.38

26

20.00

98

75.39

2

Livestock production

25

19.23

28

21.54

77

59.23

3

Livestock products technology

37

28.46

19

14.62

74

56.92

Data in Table 4 indicate the preference of venues for short term as well as long term CVE programs. Regarding short term CVE program on zoo and wildlife majority (46.15%) preferred premier institutes outside Kerala followed by 43.07 per cent preferring institutes other than agricultural university and 10.77 per cent preferring institutes of agricultural university. In the case of livestock production, majority 42.31 per cent preferred institutes other than agricultural university followed by 233.08 per cent preferring premier institutes outside Kerala and 24.61 per cent preferring institutes of agricultural university. In the case of livestock products technology, majority (46.15 %) preferred institutes of agricultural university followed by 30 per cent preferring premier institutes outside Kerala and 23. 85 per cent preferring institutes other than agricultural university.

Regarding long term CVE program on zoo and wildlife,the majority preferred premier institutes outside Kerala followed by those preferring institutes other than agricultural university and least preferring institutes of agricultural university. In the case of livestock production, the majority preferred premier institutes outside Kerala followed by institutes other than agricultural university and institutes of agricultural university. In the case of livestock products technology, the majority preferred premier institutes outside Kerala followed by institutes of agricultural university and institutes other than agricultural university. Opportunity for learning in premier institutes could be the reason for opting them for a long term CVE programme.


Implications

Continuing veterinary education programmes have to be organized keeping in mind the priority accorded to different subject matter areas. Generally, an institutional mode of training is the predominant choice and the resource persons may be preferably from outside the state in the case of zoo and wildlife as well as livestock products technology and they may be from outside the organization in the case of livestock production. For a long term CVE program, the predominant choice was institutes outside the state for all subject matter areas whereas for a short term CVE program in the subject zoo and wildlife alone that it was institutes outside the state.


References

Anonymous 1984 Report of the Joint RCVS/BVA Working Party. Veterinary Record, 115(3): 65-68.

 

Krishnamurthy V 1998 Captive elephant management in India under different systems - Present trends .Zoos' Print8(3): 1-4.


Received 9 December 2004; Accepted 19 December 2004; Published 1 March 2005

Go to top