This study was carried out to assess the impact of animal healthcare services on poor donkey owners in Ethiopia. The services provided by the Donkey Sanctuary were used as a case study. A questionnaire survey was designed and carried out in the areas around Debre Zeit in the Highlands of Ethiopia. The staff carried out a survey at 10 sites. Six of these were in Donkey Sanctuary project areas and four were in control areas. The results showed that in project areas donkeys were significantly healthier and more productive than in non-project areas. Donkey owners in project sites felt better off for having access to animal healthcare services; donkey owners in non-project sites were less confident about their incomes and the health of their animals.

The large fluctuations seen in cattle populations during periods of drought in sub-Saharan Africa are not evident in the donkey population. Donkeys appear to have a survival advantage over cattle that is increasingly recognized by smallholder farmers in their selection of working animals. The donkey's survival advantages arise from both socioeconomic and biological factors. Socioeconomic factors include the maintenance of a low sustainable population of donkeys owing to their single-purpose role and their low social status. Also, because donkeys are not usually used as a meat animal and can provide a regular income as a working animal, they are not slaughtered in response to drought, as are cattle. Donkeys have a range of physiological and behavioural adaptations that individually provide small survival advantages over cattle but collectively may make a large difference to whether or not they survive drought. Donkeys have lower maintenance costs as a result of their size and spend less energy while foraging for food; lower energy costs result in a lower dry matter intake (DMI) requirement. In donkeys, low-quality diets are digested almost as efficiently as in ruminants and, because of a highly selective feeding strategy, the quality of diet obtained by donkeys in a given pasture is higher than that obtained by cattle. Lower energy costs of walking, longer foraging times per day and ability to tolerate thirst may allow donkeys to access more remote, under-utilized sources of forage that are inaccessible to cattle on rangeland. As donkeys become a more popular choice of working animal for farmers, specific management practices need to be devised that allow donkeys to fully maximize their natural survival advantages.

An experiment was carried out at Alemaya University in Ethiopia to investigate the effect of night kraaling on the dry matter intake (DMI), live weight gain (LWG) and foraging behaviour of Ogaden cattle. Three groups of four animals were given either 7 h access to pasture per day, simulating traditional grazing (TG) practice; extended grazing (EG) access for 11 h per day; or traditional grazing access plus a nocturnal forage supplement (TF). Live weight gain, DMI and foraging behaviour were measured during the late dry season (EP1) and the wet season (EP2). None of the treatments had any significant effect on either DMI or LWG during EP1 or EP2. Extending pasture access time from 7 h to 11 h did not significantly increase the amount time spent grazing, but grazing intensity was significantly (p < 0.05) reduced during the non-common grazing hours. Step rate was significantly lower (p < 0.01) during EP2 than during EP1 and bites per step were significantly higher (p < 0.001) during EP2 than EP1, indicating that animals had to travel a shorter distance before selecting material to eat during the wet season (EP2). Providing supplementary forage (TF) had no significant effect on any measured parameter. In this study neither of the two low-cost methods (EG and TF) of improving access to forage had any beneficial effect on cattle productivity. It is concluded that, under the prevailing conditions, the traditional grazing practices of this part of Ethiopia do provide sufficient pasture access time to achieve daily voluntary food intake.

A survey of donkeys arriving at markets in three localities in East and West Shewa regions of central Ethiopia was carried out during 2002. Total faecal worm egg counts and body condition scores were measured for a total of 963 donkeys over a 12-month period. Total faecal worm egg counts did not differ significantly between localities but there was significant (p < 0.001) seasonal variation within localities. Levels of helminth infection closely followed rainfall patterns, being lowest (956 eggs per gram of faeces, e.p.g.) at the end of the long dry season (February) and highest (2022 e.p.g.) in the middle of the long wet season (August). Body condition score was associated closely with level of helminth infection (Goodman-Kruskal measure of association 0.60-0.80). Seasonal variation in body condition score reflected the temporal changes in worm burden and the availability of forage. It is suggested that a body condition score of 3 or less could be used as a simple means of identifying donkeys that require therapeutic treatment with anthelmintic. It is further proposed that economically viable strategic control of helminths in donkeys could be achieved by administering a single annual dose of avermectin-based anthelmintic at the start of the long rainy season (May-June). This may allow donkeys to recover body condition when available forage is most abundant and nutritious. It is also recommended that protein-rich feed supplementation be provided during the later part of the dry season (November-January). This may help maintain body condition when forage is scarce and the helminth challenge is at its lowest.

The estimation of dry matter intake (DMI) using the alkane pair technique has been validated in ruminants, but not in equids. The current paper reports the finding of three comparative validation studies carried out using a total of 12 cattle, 29 donkeys and 10 horses during which directly measured intake was compared to estimated intake using the alkane pair technique. Two methods were developed to dose the even chain alkanes that were used as external markers. Study I, carried out in Zimbabwe, compared the accuracy of estimated intake with measured intake in cattle and donkeys using hexatriacontane (C36) as the external marker. Studies II and III were carried out in the UK with horses and donkeys and compared the accuracy of estimated intake with measured intake using dotriacontane (C32) as the external marker. Study III also tested the effect on the accuracy of intake estimates of two marker dosing levels (mean daily dose of 224 mg per animal and 448 mg per animal) and two dosing frequencies (2× and 3× daily). Twice daily dosing of even-chain alkane at the lower dose level provided an estimate of DMI similar to that obtained by thrice daily dosing at this low level. The higher dose level given twice daily tended to produce large variation in faecal concentrations of dosed even-chain alkanes, this variation was reduced when dosing frequency was increased to thrice daily. The accuracy of estimated intake improved progressively as the number of faecal sampling days was increased from one to six with no significant difference between estimated intake based on day 5 or 6 of faecal sampling. The results of all three studies indicate that the alkane pair technique provides a robust method of estimating intake in equids with no significant difference between measured and estimated values in all but one case. Using C31 as an internal marker provided a more accurate estimated intake than using C33 as the internal marker in all cases. Faecal recoveries of alkanes in equids do not appear to show the same influence of carbon chain length that has been observed in ruminant studies. © 2007 Cambridge University Press

No abstract

The limited availability of food, together with the constraints that traditional management systems impose on the natural foraging behaviour of donkeys, often results in severe under-nutrition. Few studies have been conducted into the digestibility of different forages and little information exists on nutritional requirements of donkeys. In order to measure digestible energy requirements of donkeys under tropical conditions, an experiment was carried out at the Centre for Research in Agricultural Science (CICA) and the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine of the Universidad Aut6noma del Estado de México located in the Toluca valley, Central Mexico. Thirty-two donkeys of a body condition typical for Central Mexico were divided into four groups of 8 animals each according to their sex and live weight: group 1 (G1) comprised male donkeys below the average body weight (102+/-5 kg); group 2 (G2) comprised male donkeys of average body weight (121.5+/-4 kg); group 3 (G3) comprised female donkeys below average weight (111.8 +/- 5 kg); and group 4 (G4) comprised female donkeys of average weight (127.6 +/- 5 kg). A diet of oat straw or maize stover and 15% alfalfa hay was offered to meet exact maintenance requirements. The donkeys were monitored for 13 months. The live weight of all animals was recorded daily in order to monitor whether maintenance requirements were being met. Mean daily digestible energy (DE) requirements were measured during the winter, spring, summer and autumn of 2003-2004. Digestible energy requirements of all four sex and liveweight groups were significantly (p > 0.05) higher during the spring than during the other seasons of the year (13.5, 18.0, 10.4 and 14.3 MJ DE per day during winter, spring, summer and autumn, respectively). Predicted DE requirements of donkeys with a live weight range betweenn 90 and 150 kg using the data from the present study were less than those predicted using scaled-down horse feeding standards.

This paper is based on an impact assessment of a donkey provision programme in Ethiopia. The work was carried out in 2001 as part of a DFID Livestock Production Programme project 'Use and management of donkeys by poor societies in peri-urban areas in Ethiopia'. In order to establish whether donkey ownership was a cause or an effect of improved livelihoods, an investigation was carried out that compared non-donkey-owning households with households that had owned no donkey until they were given one by a local NGO. Indicators that poor people use to express their well-being, wealth and health status (components of their livelihoods) were identified and used to compare communities. Guidelines were prepared for project managers for carrying out livelihood indicator identification and impact assessment. The results showed that the informants used a range of indicators to assess their livelihoods. A selection of these were investigated in depth, including number of children per household attending school, number of people per household earning an income, type and quantity of staple foods bought, and ability to save. A trend was identified that demonstrated that donkey owners' livelihoods were improved compared to non-donkey owners.