EFFECT OF LIVESTOCK REARING ON ADJOINING RESIDENTS


CHAPTER ONE

1.0 BACKGROUND INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION

The excellence of any urban management is the quality of its living standard and services. This has aided the socio-economic development of mostdeveloped countries such as United Kingdom. (Lewis et al, 1999) described environment quality from the view of pollution in which they emphasised that the quality of urban environment can be measure by the use of waste generation per day. However, it is ironically to note that as the nation carry on the management of its resources toward the stimulation of economic development, people are being expose to danger of environmental degradation through high huge solid waste disposal, high level of pollutant discharge into the atmosphere, untreated sewage into the river or water body among others by the heavy industries. This doesn’t mean that others small sectors such as small scale farming, market, pharmaceutical company and medical services don’t contribute to national environmental degradation but the level at which they have impacted depends on the level in which they operate their services (World Health Organization, 2000).

Agriculture is one of the most considerable sectors in the economic development sectors as it’s strengthened the security of a nation through production of food and cash crop for export (World Bank, 2000). At this junction, agriculture has several branches with specialised expert in each sector such as crop production, forestry, aquatic farming and livestock rearing. Livestock is the second most prominent branch of agricultural practices in most developed countries such as Netherlands and Australia. This is because they generated export goods from their livestock e.g. wool from sheep and milk from female cow (Pannarunothai, S and Mills A., 1996).

The rearing of livestock in Nigeria takes a different dimension from the way it is put in the developed worlds; this is because Nigerian use local system in rearing their domestic livestock as the system is called Free Range System of Livestock Rearing. Because of the system use in our locality, the livestock contribute to our environmental degradation such as dumping of by-products around our home surrounding and destruction of the farmlands etc. (Oduwaye, R. O., 1993).

The grazing system used by the Fulani in Nigeria in Nigeria has turn the soils to dead or non-fertilised soil because if the overgrazing by the livestock especially the cattle. This has led to deforestation, lost of soil fertility which results to depletion of oxygen in the atmosphere since plant aid the production of oxygen in the atmosphere (Barton, T. 1995). Thus, if oxygen continues to be depleted without control form the atmosphere, it will leads to depletion and removal of ozone from its layer and the earth surface and its ecosystem will be exposed to ultraviolet rays from the sunlight that can result to skin disease and others related illness (Barton, T. 1995).

The management of livestock as well as sustainability of the environment needs to be moving side-by-side because; livestock are also part of the living component of the earth ecosystem and they also will be affected by the environmental hazard. Management of livestock such as feeding, breeding and killing of livestock needs to be done with innovation at the tips of hands so as to sustain our immediate environment (Berry B., 1987). Livestock should be seen as part of our environment, because, we can be affected by the disease living inside the sick livestock if we consume it or stay closer to them. With the reference above vetenarian management of livestock should be put in high priority (Gish, O., 2005).

In a nutshell, Kara in Ogbomoso North Local Government is a typical example of a place where livestock are found for business purpose which also has one or more impact on the immediate environment. Therefore, in order to safe the masses from outbreak which can result from pollution, management of livestock needs to be improved or be relocated in a safe environment with the using of newly recognised innovation

1.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVES

1.2.1 Aim of the Term Paper

This term paper aimed at examined the problems and prospects of the effect of livestock rearing on the residents/inhabitants of Kara, Ogbomoso.

1.2.2 Objectives

Based on the above aim, objectives to be achieved are to:

1. Identify the types of livestock reared in the study area.

2. Examine the management procedures used in rearing the livestock in the study area.

3. Study the socio-economic important and impact of rearing livestock in the study area.

4. Identify the effect of livestock rearing animal on the environment of the study area.

5. Suggest the possible measures to improve the management of livestock in the study area.

1.3 HYPOTHESIS

This is to study if there is a significant relationship between different variables such as types of animals reared, management procedure, and effect of management, sanitation level and security. To test for significance, a critical limit of 0.05 was set, this implies that for tests that have a significance value less than 0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted, and vice versa.

Hypothesis to be tested for: Relationship between characteristics effects of livestock and level of living standard in the Study Area

Ho= There is no significant relationship between the characteristics effects of livestock rearing in Kara and the level of living standard of the residence in the neighbourhood.

Hi= There is significant relationship between the characteristics effects of livestock rearing in Kara and the level of living standard of the residence in the neighbourhood.

1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This involves the approaches adopted in carrying out this research work. The following methods were adopted:

Reconnaissance Survey

This survey was conducted in order to get familiarise with the study area. It has help to examine, the physical attributes, management and others attributes of the areas. Also, scope of the study was drawn as 100m distance from the Kara was as established as the boundary of the study area (i.e. 50m radius when analysed with the circle).

Data Collection

The data for this study were derived from both primary and secondary source.

Primary Source: these data were collected from the field with the use of questionnaire, oral interview and personal observation. Information collected includes;

Ø Characteristics of the study area.

Ø Management procedure use in the study area.

Ø Effect and socio-economic characteristics as well as impact of the operation.

The respondents administered to were the operator and inhabitants since operator are as well as the inhabitants.

Secondary Source: these data included record of livestock management, operation system, business services rendered and sources of funds for various animal health care facilities. The Nigerian Population Commission (NPC) was consulted to obtain population figure of the study area. Also, in addition, data such as hierarchy of livestock business map from both federal and state government to identify location of the study area. Finally, information regarding the research work was extracted from relevant textbooks, e-books, web pages, journals, bulletins, reports, monographs, proceedings and unpublished works like thesis to determine the extent of research about the study and improve on them.

SAMPLING FRAME AND TECHNIQUES

In reference to reconnaissance survey, the boundary of the study area was demarcated with 50m radius from the Kara in which it composes of 75 houses, shops and container shops. From the analysis above, 66.7% of the total structure and building was used in deriving the sample frame for the administration of questionnaire in the study as 66.67 percentages of the 75 houses was administered No of questionnaire to be administered: 66.67 × 75 = 50

100

ADMINISTRATION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE

Fifty questionnaires were administered for the purpose of this research work in order to get vital information on the research work such as characteristics, management procedure, effect and economic impact as the factors responsible for the study as well as recommended/ mitigation procedure in the in the study area. Questionnaires were administered using random sampling method to the respondents in the study area.

1.5 METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS

The data collected from both primary and secondary source were analysed using quantitative and qualitative analyses. The data were coded and further analysed with the use of descriptive techniques through the use frequency tables and percentages by the help of Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS). Hypothesis was tested using regression analysis of ANOVA to determine the level of significance of the effect of Kara on the residence in the study area. In addition, photography and maps were used to illustrate the operation system in the study area.

CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW AND EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS

Literature review is a body of text that aims to review the critical points of current knowledge out or methodological approached on a research. In this context, the research work need to be addressed with some under listed and explained literatures (ebook.com, 2007).

2.1 POLLUTION

Pollution is the introduction of the contaminants into environment that cause instability disorder, harm or discomfort to the ecosystem i.e. physical system or living organisms. It can take the form of chemical substances or energy such as noise, heat or light. Pollution makes people, other animal and plant sick or even kills them. It even contributes to the climate change. Human beings are the cause and also have to be held responsible for its solution especially the youth because they are the future. According to ( GESAMP) definition , pollution is the introduction by man, directly or indirectly of substance or energy into the environmental resulting in such deleterious health, hindrance to human activities, impairment of the quality of the environment( air, water, and soil) and other sources and reduction of amenities. Osuntokun, (1998) indicated the general concern globally in the uncontrolled emissions of greenhouse gases especially carbon-dioxide, this therefore shows that ignorance about the effects of pollution world wide is capable of destabilizing the human environment (Emergence of the Earth Summit Protection (ESP), 1988)

2.2 FORM OF POLLUTION

There are different forms of pollution; the major forms of pollution are listed below as follows in relevant to the type of pollutant they encompasses.

Air Pollution

The release of chemicals and particulates into the atmosphere, common gaseous air pollutant includes; Carbon (ii) oxides [CO], Sulphur (iv) oxides [SO2], Chlorofluorocarbon [CFCs] and Nitrogen (ii) oxides [NO] produced by industry and motor vehicle. Petrochemicals, ozone and smog are created as Nitrogen (ii) oxides [NO] and Hydrocarbon [CH-] reacts to sunlight. Particulate matters are characterised by their micrometer size.

Water Pollution

This is the release of waste products and contaminants into the surface runoff and river drainage system. Leading to ground-wastes, liquid spills, wastewater discharges, eutrophication and littering. Soil contamination occurs when chemical are released by spills or underground leakages. Others are oil spillage that kills the aquatic life.

Soil Pollution

This encompasses roadway noise, aircraft noise and industrial noise as well as high-intensity. Others are noise from ceremony, industry and cattle herds.

Light Pollution

This is also known as photo-pollution or luminous pollution is the excessive or obstructive artificial light. The adverse effects of this photo-pollution are; sky glow, glare, light trespass, light clutter which decrease visibility at night and energy wastes.

Land Pollution

Solid waste is the major source of solid waste or its otherwise called municipal or urban waste. To some people, solid waste is a type of waste that includes predominantly household waste (domestic waste). Waste from commercial centres are usually come inform of solid or semi-solid. Generally exclude industrial hazard wastes.

Thermal Pollution

It is a temperature change on the water body. Also, it is the degradation of water quality by any process that changes ambient water temperature. The common cause of thermal pollution is the use of water as a coolant by the power plants and industrial manufacturers. When water is use as a coolant is usually returned to the natural environment at higher temperature. This change in temperature has impact on the aquatic lives because it will decrease oxygen supply and affecting ecosystem composition. It can also be cause by the release of very cold water from the reservoir into WarmRiver and this affect aquatic life particularly their eggs, larvae and micro-invertebrates and river productivity.

2.3 POLLUTION CONTROL

Pollution control is the term used in environmental management. It means the control of emission and affluent into air, water and soil. Without pollution, the waste products from consumption, heating, agriculture, mining, manufacturing, transportation and other human activities, whether they accumulate or disperse will degrade the environment. In the hierarchy of control, pollution prevention and waste minimisation are more desirable than pollution control. At this junction, pollution control devices are as follows:

Ø Dust Collection System

Ø Vapour Recovery System

Ø Powdered Activated Carbon Treatment

Ø Bio filters

Ø Activated Sludges Biotreaters

Ø Dissolve Air Flotation

Ø Sedimentation

Ø API Oil Water Separators

Ø Sewage Treatment

Ø Wet Scrubber

Ø Spray Tower

Ø Mechanically Aided Scrubber

Ø Ejector Venturi Scrubber

Ø Cyclonic Spray Scrubber

Ø Baffle Spray Scrubber

Ø Scrubber

Ø Baghouses

Ø Electrostatic Precipitators

2.4 WASTE

Wastes are the unwanted materials found in any environment of human existence. Waste is generated in every human activity such as domestic activities, industrial activities, and agricultural activities and even in health and education environment. The quantity of waste generation in every human activity depends on the level of the operation. Wastes usually of different forms depend on their source, they are: solid waste, liquid waste, gaseous waste, hospital waste among others.

2.5 SOLID WASTE

Solid waste means any garbage, refuse, sludge from a wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant or air pollution control facility and others discarded material including solid, liquid, liquid, semi-solid or contained gaseous materials resulting from industrials etc. Also, solid waste are any discarded (abandoned or considered waste like) materials. Solid waste can be solid, semi-solid or liquid. Examples of solid waste are refuse, human waste, animal waste, municipal from industry and domestics.

2.6 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

In reference to United Nation Solid waste management policy, the following are solid waste management scheme.

Ø Reduction of solid waste generated from the sources.

Ø To reuse material for the purpose for which it was originally intended or to recycle materials that cannot be reused.

Ø To recover in an environmentally acceptable manner, energy from solid waste cannot be economically and technically reused or recycled.

Ø To dispose of solid waste that is not being reused, recycled or from which energy is not being recovered by land burial or other methods approved by the United Nation.

2.7 LIVESTOCK

Livestock are animals that are kept and reared for the purpose of making profit. They are of cattle, goat, sheep and pig amongst others as known and common in different localities. Livestock are also animals which one domesticated in a agricultural settings to multiply by reproduction and provision of food and upgrading of profit if put into full business.

2.8 LIVESTOCK WASTE

Livestock waste includes mainly the faeces from the livestock. They are usually in solid form because they are ruminant animals. When the faeces of the livestock change to liquid form, which means the animal has been affected with one or the other diseases.

Major Pollutants of Animal Wastes

Effects of air pollution vary depending on the specific pollutants involved, how they are vented into the atmosphere, and local conditions, such as weather patterns. Some of the principle air pollutants created by industrial livestock facilities are listed here, along with their effects.

· Hydrogen sulphide is a gas that limits the ability of cells to use oxygen. Exposure to hydrogen sulphide in high levels can cause skin, eye, and respiratory irritation, neurologic and cardiac disorders, seizures, comas, and death. Chronic exposure at lower levels can cause low blood pressure, headache, chronic cough, and psychological disorders. Hydrogen sulphide is generally associated with hog production facilities.

· Ammonia can cause irritation of the eyes, skin, and respiratory tract. It is released in large quantities by chicken and hog CAFOs.

· Particulate matter is a leading cause of bronchitis and asthma in people who are regularly exposed to it and can also be a cause of cardiac disorders including arrhythmia and heart attacks.

· Endotoxins, poisons produced by dying bacteria, are found in high concentrations on factory farms, but can cause respiratory problems even in extremely low concentrations.

· Carbon dioxide is a by product of decomposing manure that causes shortness of breath and dizziness in humans, and often kills confined animals by asphyxiation.

· Methane is a major contributor to climate change. According to the EPA, methane is 23 times as potent as carbon dioxide and is the second most important contributor to the greenhouse effect, now accounting for 16 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions from human activity.

Environmental Effects of Animal Waste

Air pollution from farms directly affects the environment, chiefly through the production of gaseous nitrogen and some of the greenhouse gases responsible for global warming. About 80 percent of U.S. ammonia emissions came from livestock manure. As a report from the National Academy of Sciences explains, atmospheric ammonia and nitric oxide both produced on farms contribute to what is known as the "nitrogen cascade," in which each ammonia molecule "can, in sequence, impact atmospheric visibility, soil acidity, forest productivity, terrestrial ecosystem biodiversity, stream acidity, and coastal productivity." Particulate emissions from factory farms also contribute to haze. Through the production of greenhouse gases-primarily methane and nitrous oxide-the agricultural industry was directly responsible for 6 percent of the U.S. contribution to global warming in 2004, according to the EPA.

2.9 LIVESTOCK MANAGEMENT

The management of livestock usually have one or more impact on the environment, such as:

The induction of environmental impact in extensive system, to sustain environment at this junction, better grazing management should be embarking upon with adapted mobility and adapting better waste management practices that allow to recover through recycling.

As livestock contribute directly or indirectly to climate change through the emission of greenhouse gases such as CO2, CH4 and NO. It is gathered from Ask.com (2009) that livestock contribute about 18% of the global anthropogenic greenhouse effect.

In the semi-arid lands in Africa and Asia, land degradation was caused by complex set of factors involving livestock which encroaching the marginal areas through over grazing. Livestock also follow deforestation where ranching pushes into remain rain forest frontiers. This has been reported in South America. Significant biodiversity losses and gas emission are associated with such deforestation.

In the dense populated areas of Europe, USA and East Asia, municipal waste production had exceeded the absorptive capacity of land and water. Therefore, the continuous nutrient import result in over-saturation of nutrients with a series of negative implication on the environment including diversity losses, groundwater contamination and soil pollution.

In the main highlands of the tropics, high human population densities are traditionally sustained by complex mixed farming systems. Continuing human population pressures lead to decreasing farm size. Livestock, often large ruminants can no longer be maintained on the farm. The nutrients and farm power balance runs into a widening deficit and disinvestment occurs as natural resource degrade.

Similarly, in developing countries, slaughterhouses release large amounts of waste into the environment polluting land and surface waters as well as posing a serious human risk. Because of weak infrastructure, slaughterhouse often operates in urban settings where the discharge of blood, offal and other waste products is uncontrolled.

At this point, environmental factor may need to be addressed wherever intensification of livestock production is underway or where changes of livestock production practices are implemented.

2.9.1 LIVESTOCK IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT

The challenge is to reconcile two conflicting demands: for animal food products and environmental services... A new report from FAO says livestock production is one of the major causes of the world's most pressing environmental problems, including global warming, land degradation, air and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity. Using a methodology that considers the entire commodity chain, it estimates that livestock are responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, a bigger share than that of transport.

However, the report says, the livestock sector's potential contribution to solving environmental problems is equally large, and major improvements could be achieved at reasonable cost. Based on the most recent data available, Livestock's long shadow takes into account the livestock sector's direct impacts, plus the environmental effects of related land use changes and production of the feed crops animals consume. It finds that expanding population and incomes worldwide, along with changing food preferences, are stimulating a rapid increase in demand for meat, milk and eggs, while globalization is boosting trade in both inputs and outputs.

In the process, the livestock sector is undergoing a complex process of technical and geographical change. Production is shifting from the countryside to urban and peri-urban areas, and towards sources of animal feed, whether feed crop areas or transport and trade hubs where feed is distributed. There is also a shift in species, with accelerating growth in production of pigs and poultry (mostly in industrial units) and a slow-down in that of cattle, sheep and goats, which are often raised extensively.

Today, an estimated 80 percent of growth in the livestock sector comes from industrial production systems. Owing to those shifts, the report says, livestock are entering into direct competition for scarce land, water and other natural resources.

The livestock sector is by far the single largest anthropogenic user of land. Grazing occupies 26 percent of the Earth's terrestrial surface, while feed crop production requires about a third of all arable land.

Expansion of grazing land for livestock is a key factor in deforestation, especially in Latin America: some 70 percent of previously forested land in the Amazon is used as pasture, and feed crops cover a large part of the reminder. About 70 percent of all grazing land in dry areas is considered degraded, mostly because of overgrazing, compaction and erosion attributable to livestock activity.

At the same time, the livestock sector has assumed an often unrecognized role in global warming. Using a methodology that considered the entire commodity chain (see box below), FAO estimated that livestock are responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, a bigger share than that of transport. It accounts for nine percent of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions, most of it due to expansion of pastures and arable land for feed crops. It generates even bigger shares of emissions of other gases with greater potential to warm the atmosphere: as much as 37 percent of anthropogenic methane, mostly from enteric fermentation by ruminants, and 65 percent of anthropogenic nitrous oxide, mostly from manure.

Livestock production also impacts heavily the world's water supply, accounting for more than 8 percent of global human water use, mainly for the irrigation of feed crops. Evidence suggests it is the largest sectoral source of water pollutants, principally animal wastes, antibiotics, hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilizers and pesticides used for feed crops, and sediments from eroded pastures.

While global figures are unavailable, it is estimated that in the USA livestock and feed crop agriculture are responsible for 37 percent of pesticide use, 50 percent of antibiotic use, and a third of the nitrogen and phosphorus loads in freshwater resources. The sector also generates almost two-thirds of anthropogenic ammonia, which contributes significantly to acid rain and acidification of ecosystems.

The sheer quantity of animals being raised for human consumption also poses a threat of the Earth's biodiversity. Livestock account for about 20 percent of the total terrestrial animal biomass, and the land area they now occupy was once habitat for wildlife. In 306 of the 825 terrestrial eco-regions identified by the Worldwide Fund for Nature, livestock are identified as "a current threat", while 23 of Conservation International's 35 "global hotspots for biodiversity" - characterized by serious levels of habitat loss - are affected by livestock production.

The future of the livestock-environment interface will be shaped by how we resolve the balance of two demands: for animal food products on one side and for environmental services on the other. Since the natural resource base is finite, the huge expansion of the livestock sector required to meet expanding demand must be accomplished while substantially reducing its environmental impact.

Greater efficiency in use of resources will be "the key to retracting livestock's long shadow". Although a host of effective technical options - for resource management, crop and livestock production, and post harvest reduction of losses - are available (see box below), current prices of land, water and feed resources used for livestock production do not reflect true scarcities, creating distortions that provide no incentive for efficient resource use. "This leads to the overuse of the resources and to major inefficiencies in the production process," FAO says. "Future policies to protect the environment will therefore have to introduce adequate market pricing for the main inputs."

In particular, water is grossly under-priced in most countries, and development of water markets and various types of cost recovery will be needed to correct the situation. In the case of land, suggested instruments include grazing fees, and better institutional arrangements for controlled and equitable access. The removal of livestock production subsidies is also likely to improve technical efficiency - in New Zealand, a drastic reduction in agricultural subsidies during the 1980s helped create one of the world most efficient and environmentally friendly ruminant livestock industries.

Removal of price distortions at input and product level will enhance natural resource use, but may often not be sufficient. Livestock's long shadow says environmental externalities, both negative and positive, need to be explicitly factored into the policy framework. Livestock holders who provide environmental services need to be compensated, either by the immediate beneficiary (such as downstream users enjoying improved water quantity and quality) or by the general public. Services that could be rewarded include land management or land uses that restore biodiversity, and pasture management that provides for carbon sequestration. Compensation schemes also need to be developed between water and electricity providers and graziers who adopt grasslands management strategies that reduce sedimentation of water reservoirs.

Likewise, livestock holders who emit waste into waterways or release ammonia into the atmosphere should pay for the damage. Applying the "polluter pays" principle should not present insurmountable problems for offenders, given the burgeoning demand for livestock products. Finally, FAO says, the livestock sector is usually driven by diverse policy objectives, and decision-makers find it difficult to address economic, social, health and environmental issues at the same time. The fact that so many people depend on livestock for their livelihoods limits the policy options available, and leads to difficult and politically sensitive trade-offs.

Information, communication and education will play critical roles in enhancing a "willingness to act". With their strong and growing influence, consumers are likely to be the main source of commercial and political pressure "to push the livestock sector into more sustainable forms",

Livestock's long shadow says. Already, growing awareness of threats to the environment is translating into rising demand for environmental services: "This demand will broaden from immediate concerns - such as reducing the nuisance of flies and odours - to intermediate demands for clean air and water, then to the broader, longer-term environmental concerns, including climate change and loss of biodiversity".

2.10 IMPACT OF URBANIZATION ON LIVESTOCK CONSUMPTION

By the year 2000, there will be more than 6 billion people in the world and half of these figures will be residing in urban areas. Demographic changes have been very rapid since the Second World War and have occurred mainly in the developing countries and it is projected that, by the year 2025, two-thirds of humankind will be living in towns (UNFPA, 1995). Urban expansion is the result of high natural internal growth rates and of rural-urban and international migratory flows. Urbanization is associated with changes in food consumption patterns; together with human population and income growth, it is a major driving force influencing the global demand for livestock products. The diet of rural communities is higher in calories but less diversified, whereas city dwellers have a varied diet that is rich in animal proteins and fats and characterized by a higher consumption of meat, poultry, milk, dairy products and fish (Delisle in FAO, 1989; Von Braun et al., 1993). Large quantities of carcasses and offal are introduced into towns every day, as high numbers of livestock from ranches or nomadic herds are slaughtered to satisfy the increasing demand for meat. In developed countries, the role of the veterinary profession in addressing needs of urban communities has long been focused on public health and hygiene (Bellani, et al, 1978; WHO, 1981).

2.11 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS OF UNHYGIENIC CONDITIONS OF ABATTOIR

Abattoirs are frequently located near urban centers and enormous amounts of wastes are produced in relatively small areas. In most abattoirs in Nigeria, the waste from the abattoir operations is a source of embarrassment as conventional methods for the disposal of animal wastes, carcasses and manure, as well as slaughterhouse and other animal industry wastes are now proving inadequate in Nigeria. At zoo town, in Port Harcourt slaughterhouse, wastes are channeled directly into a portion of one of the tributaries of the river Niger in Nigeria (Odeyemi, 1991).

Animals slaughtered in most Nigeria cities for instance, abattoir alone accounts for 65.93% of the total animal in Oyo state, Nigeria [Abiola, 1995]. The waste from the slaughtering and dressing grounds in Ogbomosho abattoir are washed into open drainages untreated and the leachates from the series of decomposition processes of these wastes can introduce enteric pathogens and excess nutrients into surface waters and also percolate into the underlying aquifers to contaminate the hand-dug wells [Abiola, 1995], which serves the dual purpose of drinking water for the butchers and others working in the abattoir, and dressing of the carcasses to be sold for human consumption.

In an undisturbed aquatic ecosystem, the quantity of organic material (detritus) is small and therefore the amount of oxygen utilized by the organic-matter decomposing microorganism is small. As a consequence, under natural conditions the concentration of dissolved oxygen remains relatively constant. This balance represents the smooth functioning of a natural purification process by which a river cleanses itself (Moran, et al1980). However, most municipal wastes dumped into waterways contain high levels of organic matter, which encourages rapid proliferation of oxygen consuming microorganism to deplete the water of its dissolved oxygen leading to septic condition and anoxia. Complete anoxia is lethal for aquatic fauna, while a partial reduction in the oxygen regime provides enormous stress on the fish population. Livestock waste contamination can increase the level of nitrates in ground water, which causes methaemoglobinemia or “blue baby syndrome” (Mitchell and Chet, 1978; Meadows, 1995). Furthermore, animal-waste pile up each year in the areas surrounding the abattoir causing pollution and, because they produce methane, intensifying the greenhouse effect.

2.12 SUSTAINABILITY OF ANIMAL PRODUCTION

Waste products are at best an embarrassment or nuisance and at worst serious pollutants. Such systems of production are not sustainable in the long-term and it is possible to develop integrated systems where local inputs are optimized and recycled, with a reduction in external inputs. Sustainable animal production means, that we are able to produce food animal and animal products without lasting damage to the environment, which means that essential elements like water, air and soil are left without dead loads and that by-products of animal production creates no animal and human health risks through environmental protection and animal waste management (Tielen, 2000). The role of livestock manure as a source of fertilizer should not be underestimated because all organic wastes are evidently needed in many parts of the world to restore the land to maximum productivity. If sustainable agricultural systems are to be developed that are largely independent of external inputs, solid waste from slaughtered animals can be fermented in a tank, this produces compost and biogas. Biogas was being produced as early as the 1920s in a number of communal sewage farms in central Europe; but the primary consideration was not so much how to obtain additional energy, but rather the problem of rational and hygienic waste disposal (SPORE, 1993).

2.13 EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS

Animal (livestock) waste mainly the faeces composed of different chemical substance in which if not well manage will result to environment degradation. The chemical composition is very in line with the chemical substance of the plant since they are herbivores. According to (wikipedia, 2009), the chemical substances of animal waste are as follows.

Ø Carbon

Ø Nitrogen

Ø Hydrocarbon

Ø Ammonium substances

Ø Hydrochloride substances.

The chemical analysis of the substances when react with air and other organic waste substances.

CARBON

Carbon reacts with Atmospheric air to form carbon (iv) oxides [CO2]

C(S) + O2(g) CO2(g)

If CO2 in the air react with excessive Carbon in the waste, it will turn to carbon (iv) oxides [CO] which is a poisonous gas.

CO2 (g) + C(S) 2CO(S)

If this carbon (iv) oxides [CO] is expose to the air, it will combines with the haemoglobin if inhale to form Carbonoxy-haemoglobin that will preventing the carriage of oxygen by the red blood corpuscles. Finally, lead to death of the carrier.

NITROGEN

Nitrogen reacts with atmospheric oxygen in the hot days to form nitrogen (ii) oxides [NO]

N + O2(g) 2NO(g)

This Nitrogen (ii) oxides [NO] reacts with excess air to form Nitrogen (iv) oxides [NO2] as shown in the equation below:

2NO(g) + O2(g) 2NO2(g)

Nitrogen (iv) oxides [NO2] will react water if rain fall to form trioxonitrate (v) acids [HNO3] and dioxonitrate (iii) acids [HNO2].

From the above,

A nitrogen (ii) oxide [NO] is a poisonous gas that can affect human health if in excess in the atmosphere. While trioxonitrate (v) acids [HNO3] is an acid that destroys organic matter, therefore, can cause death of decomposer in the soil/ecosystem.

HYDROCARBON

Hydrocarbons are substances that react with oxygen to produce CO2 in return. It is very clear that if this continues in the environment, there will be depletion of oxygen and increase in carbon (iv) oxides [CO2] in the atmosphere which is dangerous to human health. Also, the burning of hydrocarbon removed Ozone [O3] from its layer. If this persist for a long period, the earth surface will be exposed to dangerous ultraviolet ray from the sun.

AMMONIUM SUBSTANCES

Ammonium substances such as ammonia [NH3+] give out urine smell which is dangerous to human health because it can cause catarrh and headache and also aid the emergence of mosquito activities in human environment.

TABLE 2.1: EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF LIVESTOCK ON HUMAN HEALTH

CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES

EFFECTS

Carbon (ii) oxides [CO] from Carbon [C]

It is poisonous gas that can kill human being when reacted with haemoglobin to form Carbonoxy-haemoglobin that will prevent the carriage of oxygen by the red blood corpuscles.

Nitrogen (ii) oxides [NO] from Nitrogen [N]

It is poisonous gas that kills and affects the atmosphere in forming smog and fog.

Trioxonitrate (v) acids [HNO3] from Nitrogen [N]

Destroys organic matter and cause the death of decomposer in the ecosystem.

Hydrocarbons [CH]

Reduce oxygen and ozone layer in the atmosphere and increase carbon (iv) [CO2] as replacement.

Ammonia [NH3+] from Ammonium substances

It cause catarrh and headache if too exposed to man.

CHAPTER THREE

3.0 THE STUDY AREA

The study area is Ogbomosho North which is located in Kara Ogbomosho in Oyo State, Nigeria.

3.1 GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION

Ogbomosho lays approximately 8.07 north of the equator and 4.15 East of GreenwichMeridian. It is one of the most important towns of Oyo state and in fact Nigeria. The town now lies within the derived Savannah region and it is a gateway to the Northern part of Nigeria from the south .Ogbomosho is about 57km south west of Ilorin (capital of kwara state) 53km North East of Oyo, 58km North West of Oshogbo (capital of Osun state) and 104km North East of Ibadan (capital of Oyo state).

3.2 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF OGBOMOSO

Human settlement began in Ogbomosho around 1600AD. The pioneer settlers in Ogbomosho were Aale, Ohunsile, Orisatolu, Akandie and Soun Ogunola. Aale was the first settler. He was from Nupeland and he came before 1614 AD. He settled at the area now known as Okelerin .He hunted elephant on the hilly area, hence, Okelerin (Elephant hill). His descendants now occupied the positions of”Aale of Okelerin”. Ohunsile arrived before 1614AD too. He was from ota (in the present OgunState) and he settled at ijeruHill. His descendants fill”Baale ijeru”: chieftaincy title today .Orisatolu came third (late 1640s). He was an herbalist from BorguLand and he cultivated Roselle (Isapa) and so he was called “Baba Onisapa” and the area “Isapa” as it is known today. His descendants now reign as “Baale Isapa”. Akandie came in late 1640s.He was also from Borgu. His quarter at Isale Afon is now known as “Ebu Akandie”. The family line is however no more in existence. Soun was the last settler to move in came about 1650 to settle at the edge of scared grove known as Igbo IGBALE, where he did his hunting. The sacred grove is no longer in existence because it has been taken over by urban development. The present Oja-Igbo, the Soun palace, the Local Government Council Office, the central Mosque and the Town Hall now occupy the formal site of Igbo Igbale. The name Ogbomosho was derived form one of the heroic acts of the Soun. It was recorded that he fought on the side of Alaafin of Oyo against the neighboring Ogbomosho people and beheaded the Elemaso. The act carried the soun the appellation “Eyi ti o gbori Elemaso” which in translation means “The man who beheaded Elemaso”. The appellations has through period of time being shortened it was first Ogbori Elemaso, to Ogbeelemaso then to Ogbemaso and finally to Ogbomoso, the present name of the town.Many other warriors were attached to join the Alongo defence league for mutual protection. Ogbomosho later grew from the fusion of the separately developing harmlets into a large settlement with the same as the paramount head.

Early 19th century was a period of unrest throughout the Yoruba land due to inter ethnic rivalry and Fulani wars. This brought a list of refuge into Ogbomosho because of the strong defense. Several attempts were made by the Fulani’s to enter Ogbomosho, since they had over-run most of the Northern towns including Ilorin, but they are repelled by the warriors of the town. To attest to this fact, a shrine was erected in the heart of the town at Oja-Igbo with the inscription; “OGUN OJALU OGBOMOSO” which means Ogbomosho has never captured by war.

From then, people began to move into the town and other areas have today sprung up including the ten wards in Ogbomosho North that is Sabo/Tara, Masifa, Osupa, Isale Afon, Okelerin, Isale Ora, Abogunde, Alaasa, Aje and Jagun.

3.3 RELIGION IN OGBOMOSO

The first religion in Ogbomosho is the traditional religion. The wife of soun Ogunlola established Orisapopo, Oyekunle established Orisa Olomitutu and so on. Islam came second. It was introduced around 1780 by Abdul wariz and his two sons (Shuayb and Badru). They came from Bornu and the religion was first accepted by Baale Ajao Ikumoyede. Christianity came third by Rev and Mrs. Thomas Jefferson Bowen in 1855. The first man to accept Christianity faith in Ogbomoso was Daddy Fasanya. These three religions are still practiced in Ogbomosho up till date. None of these religions is an exception in Ogbomosho North.

3.4 PHYSICAL SETTING

Topography Ogbomosho region from part of the western the large part of this plateau lies between 300 and 600m above sea level. The main watershed is located approximately 20m north and only 10m east of Ogbomosho. Southwest of this water shed, the ObaRiver with its tributaries are flowing southwards and runs only west of Ogbomosho. North and East of the watershed Moro and AsaRiver with their tributaries flow Northeast wards of the Niger. The longitudinal slope of the River valley lies between 0.2 and 0.5 percent. The Ora River taker its source from about 20km northeast of the town and flow in south westerly direction acting as a strong check on residential expansion in the tributary, the river valleys, the slopes are often steeper than 1.0 percent.

3.5 Climate

The climate of the region is characterized by a fairy high uniform temperature, moderate to heavy seasonal rainfall and high relative humidity. Only daily rainfall records are kept in Ogbomosho but the measurement from closes climatolo0gically station which are situated in Ilorin, Offa and Oshogbo are considered to be representative of the region.

3.5.1Temperature

The mean annual temperature is about 26.20c. The lowest temperatures are experienced in August, which has a mean temperature of 24.30c and the highest in March, which has a mean temperature of 28.70c.

Rainfall

The regions around Ogbomosho have four seasons like most of the other area in the southern Nigeria. The long, wet season starts from March to July; it is the season of heavy rains and high humidity. The short dry season is normally in August. This is followed by short wet season and last September to October. The last season is that of harmmatan experience at the end of November to mid march. The mean annual rainfall is 1.24 7mm. The variation in rainfall quantities between different stations is rather in significant both on an annual and monthly basis.

Humidity

The relative humidity is high the early mornings throughout the year with a marked decrease in the afternoons. The highest relative humidity occurs from July through September and the lowest from December to February cloud cover over the area is usually extensive as a result of the relative humidity.

Winds

Ogbomosho is affected by both North East trade wind known as the harmmatan wind and the south west wind. The dry season is characterized by the dry North-East trade from the Sahara. It occurs between November and February and brings cold, dryness, and harsh weather conditions. The south west wind is from the Atlantic Ocean. It occurs between March and October and it brings moisture and rain

Vegetation

Ogbomosho is situated in the transitional some between the rain forest of Ibadan geographical region and the northern savannah zone. The area is therefore regarded as the derived savannah vegetation zone. The natural vegetation is considered to be low land rain forest but under the influence of a high agricultural activities comprising bush fallows system farming, little high forest remains outside the forest reserves.


CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

This chapter deals with the result of the data collected from the resident during the field work in Kara in line with the objectives of the study. The analysis focuses on the characteristics of the animals, management procedures, socio-economic impacts, and effect of Kara on the neighbourhood residence. Base on the objectives set, hypothesis is tested to determine the effect of Kara on the environment using ANOVA.

4.1 TYPES OF ANIMAL IN KARA

Table 4.1: Types of Livestock in Presents in the Kara

Animal

Frequency

Percentages

Cattle

33

66.0

Goat

7

14.0

Sheep

1

2.0

Cattle and Goat

3

6.0

Cattle and Sheep

1

2.0

Others

5

10.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

From table 4.1, which shows that highest percentage of 66.0 revealed that cattle only are reared in Kara while others with 14.0%, 2.0%, 6.0% and 2.0% show that Goat, sheep, cattle and goat as well as cattle and sheep were reared in Kara respectively. 10.0% responded others such as all the animals. It could be deducted that 3 types of animals were found in the Kara but cattle with highest number.

Table 4.2: Ratio of Cattle to Other Livestock

Ratio

Frequency

Percentages

50:50

6

12.0

60:40

11

22.0

70:30

28

56.0

80:20

5

10.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

Table 4.2 which shows the ratio of cattle to other animal such as sheep and goat is 56.0% as the highest choice of the respondents, while others revealed as 50:50, 60:40 and 80:20 with 12.0%, 22.0% and 10.0% respectively. It could be generalised from table 4.1 and 4.2 that cattle dominated the study area.

Table 4.3: Number of Livestock Present at Peak Period of the Day

No of Livestock

Frequency

Percentages

100

9

18.0

100-200

13

26.0

More than 200

28

56.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

In reference to table 4.3, at peak period, the number of livestock found in the Kara is more than 200 with percentage of 56.0% while some respondents revealed 100 and 100-200 with 18.0% and 26.0% respectively.

4.2 LIVESTOCK MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE IN KARA

Table 4.4: Management Procedure of Keeping Livestock in Kara

Procedure

Frequency

percentages

By Grazing

7

14.0

By keeping in the Kara all the times

41

82.0

Others

2

4.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

Table 4.4 shows that the owners/herdsmen in Kara usually keep the livestock in the Kara all the day and feed them there while those responded to those segment carried the largest percentage of 82.0, some revealed that they take them out for grazing and with percentage of 14.0, others with 4.0%. We can conclude that the owner of the livestock keep their livestock in the Kara and feed them where they were kept.

Table 4.5: Livestock Waste Products in Kara

Management Methods

Frequency

percentages

By Disposal in the Nearby River

1

2.0

By Burning

7

14.0

By Disposal in the Dumpsite

39

78.0

Others

3

6.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

Table 4.5 shows that animal waste products are usually dumped at the dumped site as revealed with 78.0% while others with 6.0% and 2.0% and 14.0% for those revealed that wastes are disposed in the nearby river and by burning respectively. From the analysis above, waste of the livestock in Kara were dumped at the disposal dumpsite.

Table 4.6: Security Impact of the Kara on the Environment

Security Impact

Frequency

Percentages

Keeping it intact

11

22.0

Influence theft

25

50.0

Others

9

18.0

No Response

5

10.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

Table 4.7: Security Method Used in Kara

Security Method

Frequency

percentages

By Using Vigilante

5

10.0

By Closing Iron Gate in the night

7

14.0

Others

2

4.0

No Response

36

72.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

From table 4.7, in which analysis of the security method used in Kara in keeping the livestock was discussed. Respondent especially those very close to the Kara and the workers in the Kara revealed that management board of Kara used vigilante and closing of Iron Gate in the night as method of providing security as they constitute 10.0% and 14.0% respectively. Others with 4.0% and 72.0% remain silent on the security. This is as a result of Table 4.6 which respondents revealed that presence of Kara constitute to theft outbreak in the study area as they are with 50.0% and other of 22.0% said it keeps it tight. 18.0% and 10.0% revealed as others and remain silent. From the results, we can deduce that people usually use influence of Kara to burgle the neighbourhood of Kara because the security of Kara is very tight which prevented them from its entry and stealing of the livestock.

4.3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPORTANT OF KARA IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD ENVIRONMENT

Table 4.8: Income Generation

Generation of Income

Frequency

Percentages

Generate

47

94.0

Not Generate

3

6.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

Table 4.9: Level of Income Generation

Level

Frequency

Percentages

High

7

14.0

Medium

33

66.0

Low

6

12.0

No Response

4

8.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

From table 4.8, respondents (neighbourhood residence) revealed that they generate income from the service of Kara, either by employment, buying and selling of meat as they are with 94.0% while 6.0% didn’t. in accordance to table 4.8, table 4.9 revealed the level at which respondents generate income from the services of Kara as 66.0% of the respondents generate income at medium level, 14.0% at high level and low with 12.0%. Since medium class is the highest, we can conclude that the neighbourhood benefited from the operation of Kara in the study area.

Table 4.10: Number of Livestock Purchase per Day

Number

Frequency

Percentages

Less than 5

-

0.0

6 – 10

1

2.0

11 – 20

3

6.0

More than 20

46

92.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

The market operation of livestock in the study area is in very high level as more than 20 livestock were sold per day as respondent of 92.0% revealed. 6.0% and 2.0% revealed 11 – 20 and 6 –10 livestock per day respectively. None of the respondent responded below 5 livestock were sold per day. In reference to table 4.10, we can gather that market of livestock in Kara is in effective operation.

4.4 EFFECT OF KARA ON THE NEIGHBOURHOOD ENVIRONMENT

Table 4.11: Waste Product Disposal

Variables

Frequency

percentages

Waste Product Effect

Give out Odour

Don’t Give out Odour

47

3

94.0

6.0

Total

50

100.0

Effect of Waste Product on the Residence

Irritating Smell

Eyesore

Disease

others

31

9

2

8

62.0

18.0

4.0

16.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

From table 4.11, the disposal of animal waste generate odour in conclusion. In reference to those with 94.0% which confirmed that it gives out odour and 6.0% said don’t. Also 62.0% said it has effect on them as it give out irritating odour, 18.0% for eyesore, 4.0% for disease especially airborne disease while 16.0% are others.

Table 4.12: Effect of Kara Operation on the Living Standard of the Residence

Effect

Frequency

Percentages

Noise

15

30.0

Odour

22

44.0

Land Degradation

7

14.0

Others

6

12.0

Total

50

100.0

Author field work, 2010

People living in Kara revealed that the services Kara produce high noise in the neighbourhood either from the animals or buyers and sellers as they constitute 30.0%, 44.0% for those revealed odour, 14.0% for land degradation and 12.0% for others. Therefore, generalisation can be drawn that Kara has great effect on the living standard of the environment in adverse effects.

Table 4.12: Contribution to Sanitation of Kara

Variables

Frequency

Percentages

Contribution of the residents

They docontribution

They don’tcontribution

45

5

90.0

10.0

Total

50

100.0

Their Contribution

Cleaning of the environment

Dumping of waste in the Kara

Others

2

47

1

4.0

94.0

2.0

Total

50

100

Author field work, 2010

Table 4.13 shows that people contribute to sanitation status of Kara with 90.0% while 10.0% don’t revealed as they dumped their wastes in the Kara with the constitution of 94.0%. Only 4.0% and 2.0% clean the environment and others activities respectively.

4. 5 HYPOTHESIS TESTING

Hypothesis was formulated to determine the effect of livestock on residence in Kara of Ogbomoso North Local Government. The information to suggest possible programmatic measures to improve livestock operation in Kara. It is necessary to upgrade the efficiency and effectiveness of operation in which Kara is pit in the health and living standard demanded by the residence in the study area.

The hypothesis includes:

Ho= There is no significant relationship between the characteristics effects of livestock rearing in Kara and the level of living standard of the residence in the neighbourhood.

Hi= There is significant relationship between the characteristics effects of livestock rearing in Kara and the level of living standard of the residence in the neighbourhood.

The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) was used to test the formulated hypothesis. An ANOVA table was derived as stated below.

Table 4.14: Model

Model

R

R Square

Adjusted R Square

Standard Error of Estimated

1

.153a

.024

.010

1.124

Predictors (constant) are types of animals reared, management procedure, and effect of management, sanitation level and security.

Table 4.15: ANOVA

Model

Sum of Squares

DF

Mean Square

F

Significant

Regression

1.538

1

2.269

1.795

.170a

Residual

47.308

36

1.264

Total

48.842

37

a = Predictors (constant) are types of animals reared, management procedure, effect of management, sanitation level and security.

b = Dependent variable is the level of standard of living of the residence.

The above table 4.14 shows that R2 = 0.024. Therefore, the coefficient of determination is equal to 0.024 × 100% that is 2.4%. This means that only 2.4% of the operation is explained by the effort of the regression. The result of the calculation indicated that cattle owners should put in place the improvement of their operational procedures, security and sanitation as well as management procedure so as to alter the improved functionality of the living standard.

It was further revealed that the calculated F value is 1.795. This is related to the table value at 0.05 level of significant value, then, we reject Ho and accept Hi. Therefore, the result shows that there is significant relationship between the characteristics effects of livestock rearing in Kara and the level of living standard of the residence in the neighbourhood. This called for improvement in the operation of livestock business in the study area.

CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

5.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

This research assessed the characteristics and management effect of Kara on the residence with a view of identify possible factors responsible for its environment impact effects and to suggest measures that will reduce the adverse effect of the environment as well as ways of Kara improvement. It is discovered from the table 4.1 that all the well known livestock (cattle, sheep and goat) are found in Kara but cattle in highest percentage of 66.0 which is in accordance to it ratio to others as cattle achieve 80.0% of the total livestock (80:20). At peak period livestock are found in highest number of more than 200 with 56.0% according to table 4.3.

All the livestock in Kara were usually fed in the Kara instead of livestock out for grazing as they constitute 82.0% according to the respondent while some said that they go for grazing but with 14.0%. Table 4.5 emphasised on waste products management as 78.0% of the respondents shows that the operators of Kara disposed the waste in the dumpsite of Kara. 14.0% exposed their mind that they burn, while 2.0% said they disposed in the nearby river.

Also, the operation of Kara influence low security level of the neighbourhood as residents of 50.0% as vigilante of the Kara restricted the thief to operate on the Kara, therefore, they bounce on the neighbourhood. This is as a result of low knowledge on the business when compared to world standard.

Because anybody have limited access to work in Kara, there work in Kara generate their daily income in service as the respondents are of 94.0% and the level of income generation is in medium level since those fall in this level are of 66.0%. This is as a result of mutual relationships that exist between the operators and the residents. This is in line with the number of cattle sold per day as more than 200 livestock were sold per day with 92.0% according to table 4.10.

Also from table 4.11, waste product when disposed give out odour when disposed by the operators and managers of the livestock in reference to 94.0% from the table and this odour and solid waste result to irritating odour with 62.0%, eyesore 18.0%, disease and others with 4.0% and 16.0% respectively. This is as a result that they don’t care for waste product. Similarly, the animal gives out high noise at the noise and when they are hungry, the waste also give out odour and degrades the land as they are of 30.0%, 44.0%, 14.0% respectively.

From the paragraph above, the operation of Kara contributed to the development and underdevelopment of the neighbourhood as the respondent who believe that it contributes are of 90.0% and the contribution is by dumping of waste in the surrounding.

In conclusion, it is very important to take into consideration the improvement of the Kara so as to support the improvement of the living standard of the people in Kara’s neighbourhood.

5.2 RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing summary on research findings on the operation of Kara, the following steps could be of help in order to improver and mitigate the rate of environmental degradation cause by Kara. Recommendation could split into two as alternatives.

Alternative One

In order to improve the living standard of the people in Kara environment, the concept of relocation should be embarked upon. Kara should be relocated to another safe site such as area along Ikose-Eyeba road after NTA Ogbomoso Telecommunication Station. This is because, it is also along Ogbomoso and newly Ibadan-Ilorin road, so that livestock from the North will be disposed there and will also reduce traffic jam in Sabo and the people of Kara will experience rest of mind and improved standard of living.

Alternative Two

If relocation of Kara is not possible in the study area, the following should be embarked upon to improve its operations:

1. Wastes of the livestock should be carried from the Kara to very far areas of the forest for proper disposal in which can be used as manure by forest management.

2. The wastes can be use in production of compose fertilizers.

3. Livestock should be treated medically every week and constant checking of animals should be done every week. This will call for employment of vetnary doctor. This will prevent disease outbreak from the animals.

4. Renovation of the Kara environment should be done as projects.

5. Disease affected animals should be redeployed to where it was purchased so as to prevent outbreak in the Kara.

6. Orientation should be done in every seasonal period.

7. Recycling of the waste can be another project done at Kara instead of burning of waste that can emit bad and dangerous air into environment.

8. Law should be enacted by the government environmentalist to restrict them to dispose waste around the Kara environment. This law will restrict both the Kara operators and the residents.

9. Security agencies should not only be looked into Kara alone but the entire neighbourhood to achieve strong security of the neighbourhood.

10. Those come to buy livestock should come with pick-up vehicles so that the livestock will not pollute the road with the by-products when taken along the road.

11. Government should encourage the operators in Kara to embark on the above recommendation by helping them reduce their paid taxes.

12. Other recommendations are as follows:

· Fermentation of animal waste in biogas plants

· Separation of animal waste into solid organic matter and liquid fractions

· Emission of ammonia and greenhouse gases from livestock buildings, storage and during application in the field.

Fermentation of animal waste in biogas plants

This includes fermentation of mixtures of animal waste and organic materials and catch crops. The aim is to improve the control of biogas plants though a better understanding of the interaction between chemical, physical and biological parameters and the technical potential for optimizing the processes using e.g. hybrid system theory. The research facilities are the laboratories and pilot-scale biogas reactors.

Separation of animal waste into organic matter and liquid nutrient fractions

This is essential for the development of new technologies to reduce the impact of animal waste on the environment. The knowledge on the physical/ chemical characteristics of animal waste is a crucial factor within the development of systems for the separation of slurry into liquid and solid fractions. Many factors, such as feeding and storage conditions, may affect animal waste composition. Therefore, in order to reduce the environmental effect of animal waste, modelling of waste variables such as pH solid phase chemistry (e.g. struvite formation, flocculation using additives), nutrient contents and ammonia stripping should be taken as focus. The models will to be used in optimisation of the separation processes.

Emission of ammonia and greenhouse gases from livestock buildings, storage and during application in the field

This area is essential for the environmentally sustainable management of emissions of ammonia and greenhouse gases (methane and nitrous oxide) from livestock buildings, waste stores and during field application. Research comprises different measuring techniques and the modelling of the interaction between the emission processes and fluid dynamics. The results will to be used in the design of new buildings, internal layouts, and ventilation and waste systems.

5.3 CONCLUSION

It was discovered that management of livestock for commercial purpose needs to be upgraded on the innovations so that it will not affect the nearby environment. In that wise, the government should make the effort of establishing recycling industries so as to reduce the effect of waste disposal on the environment. Moreover, the operator should widen their knowledge, orientation as well as management procedure. Thus, all these have been the major factors accountable for good management system that will leads to improvement of living standard of the people of Kara and this will aid the economic development of the study area.

REFERENCES

Abiola, S. S. (1995), Assessment of Abattoir and Slaughter Slab Operation in OyoStateNigerian Journal of Animal. Production (5), 54-62

Alonge, D. O. (1991), Textbook of Meat Hygiene in the Tropics Farmcoe Press, Ibadan, Nigeria: 58.

Barrett, J. R. (2001), Livestock Farming: eating up the Environment? Environ. Hlth. Perspec. 109 (7), A312-A317.

Barton, T. (1995): “Household waste management and pollution control: Plenary Discussion”. Proceedings of the Dissemination Seminar “domestic pollution in Uganda”, International Conference Centre, Kampala.

Bellani, l., Mantovani, a. and Ravaioli, l., Eds. (1978.), Proceedings of the WHO Expert Consultation on some Veterinary Public Health Problems. Annali Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome.

Berry, B. (1987): “Market Centres and commercial waste recycle system”. Prentice-Hall, Engle Wood Cliffs, New Jersey.

Delisle in FAO, (1989), Effects of environment on livestock survival and movements in central Idaho. Journal of Wildlife Management 67: 299–306.

Ebook.com, (2007), Literature Review

Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Draft Unified National Strategy for Animal Feeding Operation , September 11, 1998 (accessed March, 25, 201

ESP, (1988), Resolving Human-Wild­life Conflicts: The Science of Wildlife Damage Management. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, Florida, USA.

FAO. (1989), Urban Food Consumption Patterns in Developing Countries. By H. Delisle. Rome.

Filani, M.O. (1994), Ibadan Region, Re-Charles Publications in Conjunction with Connell Publications, Ibadan, Nigeria.

Gish, O. (2005): “livestock health delivery system”. International Journal of Animal Health Services, 3:74-80.

Lewicki, P. (1993), Higiena Produckcji. Czesc I. Przem. Spoz. 47 (10), 275-276

Lewis, M. S.; Gunnar, and Ximena, T. (1999): “Challenge after urban pollution”. Public Research Working Paper No. 2164. The World Bank, WashingtonD.C.

Meadows, R. (1995), Livestock Legacy Environmental Health Perspectives 103 (12), 1096 – 1100.

Mitchell, R. and Chet, I. (1978). Indirect Ecological Effects of Pollution, In R. Mitchell (Ed.), In Water Pollution Microbiology, John Wiley and Sons, New York, (2), 177-199.

Moran, Bangs, E. E., S. H. Fritts, J. A. Fontaine, D. W. Smith, K. M. Murphy, C. M. Mack, and C. C. Niemeyer, (1980). Status of gray wolf restoration in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. Wildlife Society Bulletin 26: 785–798.

Odeyemi, (1991), The Making of an Endangered Spe­cies. High-Lonesome Books, Inter Journal. Silver City, New Mexico, USA.

Oduwaye, R. O. (1993): “livestock in Africa tropics”. Omega A Hi-Tech Information Limited, Lagos.

Osuntokun, (1998), The challenge and op­portunity of recovering wolf populations. Conservation Biology 9: 270–278.

Pannarunothai, S and Mills, A. (1996): “Researching the livestock economic development in developed and developing countries: Methodological Approaches”. An Unpublished Paper, London School of Animal science and Medicine.

Tielen, (2000), Livestock and poultry wastes management in Swaziland Department of Animal Production and Health, University of Swaziland, Luyengo campus, Swaziland

UNFPA, (1995), Estimating Daily Forage Intake of Cows, University of Nebraska Animal Science. Paper presented in U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service

Von Braun, Norberg-Hodge, Helena , Todd Merrifield, and Steven Gorelick (1993). Bringing the Food Economy Home: Local Alternatives to Global Agribusiness. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press, Inc.

WHO, (1981). Compensation programs for wildlife damage in North America. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25: 312–319

Wikipedia, (2009): “pollution”. en dot wikipedia dot org/wiki/pollution. (retrieved on 7th March,2010)

Wikipedia, (2009): “form of pollution”. org/wiki/formofpollution. (retrieved on 7th March,2010)

Wikipedia, (2009): “pollution control”. en dot wikipedia dot org/wiki/pollutioncontrol. (retrieved on 7th MArch,2010)

Wikipedia, (2009): “waste”. en dot wikipedia dot org/wiki/waste. (retrieved on 7th March,2010)

Wikipedia, (2009): “solid waste”. en dot wikipedia dot org/wiki/solidwaste. (retrieved on 7th March,2010)

Wikipedia, (2009): “solid waste management”. en dot wikipedia dot org/wiki/solidwastemangement. (retrieved on 7th March,2010)

Wikipedia, (2009): “livestock”. en dot wikipedia dot org/wiki/livestock. (retrieved on 7th March,2010)

Wikipedia, (2009): “livestock waste”. en dot wikipedia dot org/wiki/livestockwaste. (retrieved on 7th March,2010)

Wikipedia, (2009): “livestock management and the environment”. en dot wikipedia dot org/wiki/livestockmanagementandtheenvironment. (retrieved on 7th March,2010)

Wikipedia, (2009): “empirical analysis of livestock waste”. en dot wikipedia dot org/wiki/empiricalanalysisoflivestockwaste. (retrieved on 7th March,2010)

World Bank, (2000): “Agriculture and environmental sustainability: Investing in Agriculture Development”. A commissioned Report, Office, Geneva.

APPENDIX

LADOKE AKINTOLAUNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, OGBOMOSO

DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING

QUESTIONNAIRE ON EFFECT OF LIVESTOCK REARING ON RESIDENCE IN KARA AREA, OGBOMOSO NORTH LOCAL GOVERNMENT, OYOSTATE.

Dear respondents,

This questionnaire is designed mainly for academic purpose; your co-operation is therefore solicited in answering the questions appropriately as information supplied will be treated confidentially.

SECTION A: SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESPONDET

1. Gender (a) male (b) female.

2. Age (a) below 20 years (b) 21 - 30 (c) 31 - 40 (d) 41-50 (e) Above 50.

3. Marital status (a) single (b) married (c) others (specify………………….).

4. Education (a) no formal education (b) primary education (c) secondary education (d) tertiary education.

5. Occupation (a) artisan (b) trading (c) civil servant (d) farming (e) farming.

6. Income (a) below #10,000 (b) #10,000 - #20,000 (c) above #20,000.

SECTION B: EVALUATION OF LIVESTOCK MANAGEMENT

7. What type of animal or livestock present in the Kara (a) cattle (b) goat (c) sheep (d) cattle and goat (e) goat and sheep (f) others (specify……………….).

8. If combination of 2 or more livestock, they are in what ratio percentages (a) 50:50 (b) 60:40 (c) 70:30 (d) 80:20

9. How many animal do you feel usually present at the Kara at the peak period (a) 100 (b) 100-200 (c) more than 200

10. How do you manage the cattle (a) by grazing (b) by keeping in the hurt (c) others (specify………………………….).

11. How do you provide security for the livestock in the night (a) by using vigilante (b) by closing the iron gate (c) others (specify………………………).

12. What is security impact of the Kara to this environment (a) keep if intact (b) influence theft (c) others (specify……………………….).

13. When do you open and close the service

Open (a) 6 am (b) 7 am (c) 7.30 am

Close (a) 6 pm (b) 7 pm (c) 8 pm

14. Do you generate income from the service of livestock rearing (a) yes (b) no

15. At which level do you generate income from this service (a) high level (b) medium level (c) low level

16. How many livestock does the buyer purchase per day (a) less than 5 (b) 6 – 10 (c) 11- 20 (d) more than 20.

17. Do the neighbourhood benefit from Kara (a) yes (b) no.

18. How? And in which way?............................................................................................................……………………………………………………………………………………

19. When disposed the waste product, do it give out bad odour to the environment (a) yes (b) no.

20. If yes (Q 19), what do you think is the effect of the disposal on your environment (a) irritating odour (b) eyesore (c) disease (d) others (specify…………………….).

21. Do the keeping of the livestock disturb your living standard (a) yes (b) no.

22. If yes, in what way (a) noise (b) odour (c) land degradation (d) others (specify………………).

23. Do you/people contribute to the sanitation status of Kara (a) yes (b) no.

24. If yes, how do they contribute (a) by disposing waste around Kara (b) cleaning of the environment (c) empty of waste to the Kara environment

25. What can you suggest to be done to improve the relationship that exists between Kara and its environment better?………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...……...………………………………………………………………………………............

Comments 1 comment

Matthew 4 years ago

This research work is amazing! I'm gonna research more of this work.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working