secondary guidelines for development of national farm ... · 2.4.2.5 better market access and...

for Development of National Farm Animal Genetic Resources Management Plans

Animal Recording forMedium Input

Production Environment

Secondary Guidelines

Initiative pourla Diversitédes AnimauxDomestiques

Initiative for Domestic AnimalDiversity

Iniciativa parala Diversidadde los AnimalesDomésticos

FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations

OrganisationdesNationsUniespourl'alimentationetl'agriculture

Organizaciónde lasNacionesUnidaspara laAgriculturay laAlimentatción

Table of ContentsSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification ii

Table of Contents

Foreword 1

Section 1. Introduction 3

Section 2. Animal Recording in Development 7

2.1. What is “Animal Recording”? 7

2.1.1. Objectivity and accurate data measurement and recording 72.1.2. Utility of the data relative to the goals of the programme 82.1.3. Use collected data to make management decisions 8

2.2. Reasons for Animal Recording 9

2.2.1. Animal recording to establish baseline animalperformance levels 9

2.2.2. Animal recording to compare specific productionsystem alternatives 12

2.2.3. Animal recording for individual animal management 142.2.4. Animal recording for genetic improvement 17

2.3. Animal Recording in Medium-Input Production Environments 22

2.4. Benefits and Beneficiaries of Animal Recording 24

2.4.1. Consumers 242.4.2. Farmers 27

2.4.2.1 Direct payments. 272.4.2.2 Increased production (i.e., greater production but requiring

more inputs) or greater productivity (i.e., the same orgreater production with fewer inputs). 29

2.4.2.3 Increased product value through improved quality. 302.4.2.4 Greater reliability of production. 302.4.2.5 Better market access and marketing techniques. 30

2.4.3. Rural communities 312.4.4. Governments and the nation as a whole 33

2.5. Planning for Success—Ensuring the Long-Term Success ofthe Animal Recording Scheme 35

Table of ContentsSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification iii

Table of Contents

Section 3. Guidelines For Planning Animal Recording Schemes 38

3.1. Identify the Development Objective 38

3.2. Identify Anticipated Benefits and Beneficiaries ofAnimal Recording 38

3.3. Identify Potential Participants 41

3.4. Identify the Traits to be Measured 45

3.5. Animal Identification 47

3.6. Who will Measure the Animals and Record the Data? 50

3.7. Data Editing and Accreditation – Who will Vouch for the Data? 51

3.8. What Sort of Data Processing and Handling is requiredand how will it be accomplished? 53

3.9. Putting Data to Work: Using Results of Animal Recordingfor Animal Management and Genetic Improvement 55

3.10. Documentation of Benefits 56

3.11. Development of Farmer Participation in Establishing the Scheme 57

3.12. Institutional Support for Animal Recording 59

3.12.1.Field level technical support 603.12.2.Analytical support 623.12.3.Data management, processing, computing, and storage 623.12.4.Research 623.12.5.Training 633.12.6.Management of the animal recording scheme 643.12.7.Integration of programmes 64

3.13. Who Pays? - The Costing of Animal Recording Schemes 65

Table of ContentsSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification iv

Table of Contents

3.14. Potential for Privatisation 67

3.14.1.Planning for privatisation 673.14.2.Animal recording as a business 683.14.3.Long-term public involvement in animal recording 69

Section 4. The Conduct of Animal Recording 71

4.1. Getting Started: The Implementation of Animal Recording 71

4.1.1. Identification of the institutions that will provide support foranimal recording, and of the responsibilitiesof each institution. 71

4.1.2. Employment of staff 734.1.3 Procurement of equipment to support field operations 734.1.4 Definition of operating procedures for field staff 734.1.5. Training of field staff, including both technical training and

training in the objectives of the scheme 744.1.6. Identification of participating farmers 744.1.7. Schedule the flow of data to allow for timely transmission,

processing, summarisation, and return of data 754.1.8. Animal identification 75

4.2. The First Cycle of Recording 75

4.3. Maintenance: Sustaining Enthusiasm and Commitment 76

4.4. Review 77

4.4.1. Annual review 774.4.2. Strategic review 78

4.5. Further Development 78

4.5.1. Enhancements to the recording process 784.5.2. Greater farmer responsibility for recording 794.5.3. New opportunities for benefit 79

4.6. Building Farmer Involvement 80

Table of ContentsSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification v

Table of Contents

Section 5. Animal Recording in Medium Input Production Environments—Special Operational Issues and Opportunities 81

5.1. What to Measure. 82

5.1.1. Measurement of output 825.1.2. Measurement of product quality 855.1.3. Measurement of inputs 875.1.4. Direct measures of productivity 885.1.5. Measurement of life history traits 89

5.1.5.1. Reproductive traits. 915.1.5.2. Health-related traits. 91

5.1.6. Measurement of adaptation 92

5.2. When to Measure: The Scheduling of Animal Recording 93

5.2.1. Milk recording 935.2.2. Egg recording 955.2.3. Meat recording 95

5.2.3.1. Effects of pattern of parturitions on animal recording. 965.2.3.2. Marketing patterns and animal recording. 97

5.2.4. Fibre recording 985.2.5. Draught recording 995.2.6. Life history recording 100

5.3. How to Measure: The Tools for Animal Recording 100

5.3.1. Tools that reduce cost and complexity 1015.3.2. Tools that reduce complexity but increase costs 1025.3.3. Tools that increase complexity but reduce costs 1025.3.4. Tools that increase both complexity and cost 103

5.4. Comparing Animals Born in Different Years and/or onDifferent Farms: The Contemporary Group 103

Table of ContentsSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification vi

Table of Contents

5.5. The Prediction of Genetic Merit 105

5.5.1. Use of information on relatives 1075.5.2. Measurement of multiple traits and selection for a

multi-trait development objective 1085.5.3. Repeated records 1095.5.4. Evaluation of animals in different contemporary groups 110

ForewordSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification 1

Foreword

1 Foreword

3 These Guidelines

In recognition of the importance of animal genetic resources (AnGR) to sustainingand developing food and agriculture production, and of the sizeable portion ofAnGR that is currently at risk of loss, and in keeping with FAO’s mandate and theConvention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the development of a strategicframework to assist countries in the Management of Farm Animal GeneticResources was launched by FAO in 1992.

One of the constituents of this strategy is the development of Guidelines forcountry use.

Primary Guidelines, mainly targeted towards policy makers, serve as the ‘umbrella’for Secondary Guidelines being developed for use in advancing each of the spectrumof areas involved in the sound management of AnGR.

The Primary Guidelines are designed to help countries get started to identify themain elements and objectives of an animal genetic resources management plan, andto outline the strategic policy directions required to fulfil these objectives.

The Secondary Guidelines are directed mainly at those who implement policy,administratively and technically.

This Secondary Guideline documentation concerns the Animal Recording area ofsustainable use and development. Emphasis is on medium input productionenvironments for, whilst most of the basic principles of animal recording applyirrespective of production environment, emphases in the planning of andoperational approaches to animal recording schemes will often differ appreciablybetween high, medium and low input production environments.

These Secondary Guidelines have been developed to date using a process of seminaldocumentation concerning fundamental areas of animal recording, through a broadbased workshop of 40 experts from all regions, conducted in collaboration with theInternational Committee on Animal Recording (ICAR) and the National DairyDevelopment Board (NDDB) of India; with all resulting material then beingutilized to prepare the draft documentation which was then considered by theInformal Panel of Experts on the Development of the Global Strategy for theManagement of AnGR. The seminal documents were prepared by Professor John

ForewordSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification 2

Foreword

W James of the University of New South Wales, Australia, Dr Jean-Claude Flamantof Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, France, Dr Geoffrey E Pollottof Wye College, United Kingdom, and Dr Robert Banks of the University of NewEngland, Australia. Professor David R Notter, of the Virginia Polytechnic Instituteand State University, worked tirelessly with FAO staff in drafting this Guidelinedocumentation. Ir Wim M G Wismans, President of ICAR, of RegelgevingVeeverbetering, The Netherlands, Dr Kamlesh R Trivedi of NDDB, and ProfessorJean Boyazoglu, Secretary General of ICAR particularly with the development ofthe workshop and the publication of its substantial proceedings.

Refinement of this Secondary Guideline documentation will continue with field useof the Guidelines, particularly with the assistance of the National Focal Points forAnGR and their country networks; and the documentation will be periodicallyreviewed incorporating the information and experience that accumulate.

The Guidelines focus on:

• The role of animal recording in development, with emphasis on theidentification of beneficiaries and on the opportunities to use animalrecording schemes as both a source of information to improve animalproduction and productivity and as a platform for rural economicdevelopment;

• The planning and conduct of animal recording schemes, providingstep-wise and detailed guidance on institutional and operationalorganisation of such schemes; and

• Special issues involved in managing animal recording schemes and theutilisation of information resulting therefrom in medium-inputproduction systems.

The Guidelines are available both as hard copy and in the Reference module of theDomestic Animal Diversity Information System (DAD-IS) both on the Internetand on CD-ROM.

IntroductionSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification 3

Introduction

1 Section 1. Introduction

The establishment of sustainable systems of food production to meet theneeds of an expanding world population will be one of the greatchallenges of the next century. This challenge will be particularly acutefor livestock production systems. Ample evidence now exists todemonstrate that global economic development is being accompanied byincreased demand for meat, milk, eggs, and other animal products andmore efficient use of scarce resources or inputs to the production system.Meeting these imperatives also raise important issues regardingalternative sources of livestock feed (forages and crop by-products versuscereal grains and oil seeds); management of grazing lands to avoidoverexploitation and environmental degradation; disposal of wastesgenerated from the production and processing of animal products; anddevelopment of a transportation and market infrastructure that cansupport a vital rural economy while permitting efficient delivery ofanimal products to expanding urban centres.

Sustainable development of more productive and efficient livestock herdsand flocks will be required to meet these challenges. This developmentwill involve both identification of immediate tactical managementactivities to improve production and productivity (output per unit ofinput) of current herds and flocks as well as establishment of long-termstrategic programmes for comparative evaluation and continued geneticimprovement of livestock. In both cases, accurate and consistentdecisions based on objective information and a thorough understandingof the key input-output relationships involved in animal production willbe required. Recording of animal performance is required to provideinformation for sound decision-making and to establish key input-outputrelationships. It is also particularly important to provide thecomprehensive and consistent information that is necessary to fairlycompare native versus exotic germplasm and to support long-termgenetic improvement toward an appropriate bioeconomic developmentobjective.


Introduction

Benefits of sustainable livestock development will accrue to farmers,through increased income, better management of risk and themaintenance of a vital, expanding rural economy; to consumers, throughimprovements in quantity and quality of animal products at affordableprices; and to governments through enhanced national food security,more favourable trade balances involving animal products and feedgrains, and greater social and environmental stability.

The establishment of animal recording schemes in rural communitiescan serve as an important platform for economic and communitydevelopment. The organisational structures required to supportanimal recording schemes provide important collateral opportunitiesfor educational programmes; development of co-operative, value-based marketing schemes; and creation of a more informed andassertive rural population.

Methods and institutional mechanisms for animal recording aregenerally well established within the high-input production systems ofthe developed nations. Yet more than 75% of global animal productionoccurs within the developing nations, primarily under low- to medium-input production conditions. Further, the need for increases in bothanimal production (output) and animal productivity (output per unitinput) is greatest within the developing nations.

Only recently have the long-term importance and unique aspects ofanimal production within medium- and low-input productionsystems been recognised. With this recognition has come therealisation that successful animal recording cannot be viewed aslimited only to high-input production systems. Instead, animalrecording procedures and institutional mechanisms must be adapted,or, when necessary, developed to involve farmers and enable them tocollect appropriate information within existing medium-inputproduction systems, and to interpret and act on the results.

This document will provide guidelines for the planning and conduct ofanimal recording schemes in medium-input production systems. Focuswill be on:


Introduction

1 TrivedAnand

• The role of animal recording in sustainable development, withemphasis on the identification of beneficiaries of animalrecording and on the opportunities to use animal recordingschemes as both a source of information to improve animalproduction and productivity and as a platform for ruraleconomic development;

• The planning and conduct of animal recording schemes,providing detailed guidance on institutional and operationalorganisation of such schemes; and

• Special issues involved in managing animal recording schemesin low- to medium-input production systems.

As an input to this document, a workshop on animal recording in low-to-medium input production systems was held in India in October 1997(Trivedi, 1998).1

This document is a draft component of the FAO Guidelines forDevelopment on National Farm Animal Genetic ResourcesManagement Plans (Figure 1.1). In particular, the current document onAnimal Recording is one of secondary technical documents that providedetailed guidance on the active use and development of farm animalgenetic resources. Complementary secondary documentation is beingdeveloped covering the establishment of development objectives, thestructuring of livestock breeding systems, genetic evaluation of livestockand costing breeding systems. This documentation is intended to providecomprehensive technical decision aids for sustainable livestock geneticresource development, for country use.

i, K.R. 1998. Ed. International Workshop on Animal Recording for Smallholders in Developing Countries,, India, 20-23 October 1997, ICAR Tech. Series No. 1, ICAR, Rome, Italy, pp 436.


Introduction

Figure 1.1: Animal Recording in the Context of Farm AnGR Management Guidelines

Agenda 21 Convention onBiolo gical Diversit y

Fao Global Strate gyof Farm AnGR

Guidelines for theManagement of AnGR

Primar y Document

Secondar y Documents

Characterizationof AnGR

Livestock ProductionSystem Descri ption

Active Breed Use and

Develo pment

Managing Populationsof AnGR at Risk

Breedin gObjectives

AnimalRecordin g

Breedin gSystems

Animal Recording in DevelopmentSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification 7

Animal Recording in Development

1 Section 2. Animal Recording in Development

2 2.1. What is “Animal Recording”?

Animal recording involves the measurement of various indicators ofanimal performance and the use of that information in the decision-making process. Key elements of the animal recording process include:

• the measurement of performance or production systemcriteria

• the recording of the data

• the processing of that data to extract the desired information,and

• the use of the data to make management decisions.

These four steps are inherent in the animal recording process, but it iscritical to recognise that it is the application of the process itself that isimportant, not the number, precision, or detail of the measurementstaken or the sophistication of the data processing.

The most important aspects of animal recording are:

2.1.1. Objectivity and accurate data measurement and recording

Data recording procedures need not be complex or requiresophisticated equipment, but must be accurate and objective.It is far better to accurately determine body size using heartgirth or other simple measures than to attempt to recordbody weights using malfunctioning or improperly calibratedscales. Likewise, reliance on memory to ascertain animalbirth dates in recording systems requiring birth dates cannotsubstitute for accurate records of parturitions.



2.1.2. Utility of the data relative to the goals of the programme

It is critical that the reasons for a particular animalrecording activity be clearly stated and that themeasurements taken be those that are necessary to supportprogramme goals. Animal recording is time-consumingfor both farmers and programme technicians. Collectionof information that is not applicable to programme goals isinefficient and diverts attention from more importantinformation. Farmers must readily experience the benefitsof their involvement. One of the principles of conduct ofanimal recording schemes is to restrict the amount of data tobe collected in the early stages of the programme to only themost important items, with expansion to more detailed datacollection as the experience and enthusiasm of theparticipants increase.

2.1.3. Use collected data to make management decisions

The recording of animal performance is useless unless thedata are subsequently used to improve production,productivity or product quality. Appropriate use of animalrecording data relies upon:

• an understanding of the value and utility of themeasurements taken;

• timely and appropriate processing of data to make itunderstandable and useful;

• technical support at the farm level to assist ininterpretation of the processed data;

• feedback mechanisms to document the benefits gainedfrom use of the data; and

• an organisational structure at the farmer level to providefor interaction among, and feedback from, programmeparticipants.



2 2.2. Reasons for Animal Recording

There are a number of reasons for establishing animal recording schemes,and these serve to group schemes into four broad types. Keycharacteristics of these types of recording are summarized in Table 2.1.Common to all is the need for greater understanding of, and ability tocontrol, the production process in order to increase production, enhanceefficiency and sustainability of resource use, and identify opportunities toimprove management. However, the beneficiaries, structuralrequirements, and organisational requirements of animal recordingschemes will differ depending upon programme objectives. Reasons foranimal recording include:

2.2.1. Animal recording to establish baseline animal performancelevels

In any nation, there is a need to understand the currentrealised productive capacity of the main livestock typeswithin each of the major production systems and ecologicalregions. This information is useful primarily to policymakersand agricultural planners as they develop strategies andprogrammes to enhance national food security and increaselivestock productivity. Benefits of such schemes are toidentify factors that limit animal production and to identifyopportunities for research and development.

Characterisation of the productive capacity of native andexotic germplasm under various production conditions alsofacilitates better strategic planning with regard to farmanimal genetic resources and identification of unique andendangered breeds of livestock.

Table 2.1: Types of Animal Recording and their general characteristics

Characteristic Animal recordingto establishbaselineperformance

Animal recording tocompareproductionalternatives

:

Animal recordingfor animalmanagement

Animal Recordingfor geneticimprovement

Primary Uses

Main beneficiaries

Participants

Duration

Identify opportunitiesand challenges.Meet internationalreporting obligations.Compete for donorfunds.

Government and theNation.

A broad sample offarmers.

Short-term.

Identify bestmanagementprocedures.Farmer education.

All Farmers, consumers.

A few carefully selectedfarmers.

Usually a singleproduction cycle.

Better individual animalmanagement.Better farmerorganization.Increased productionand productivity.

Participating farmers,consumers, ruralcommunities.

Initially a few farmers;eventually, manyfarmers.

Ongoing, acrossmultiple productioncycles.

Genetic improvement.Provide better breedinganimals to commercialfarmers.Better farmerorganization.

Farmers, consumers,rural communities.

A nucleus of seedstockproducers.Eventually, manycommercial farmers tovalidate results.

Ongoing, across animalgenerations.

Continued

Table 2.1� Continued

Characteristic Animal recordingto establishbaselineperformance

Animal recording tocompareproductionalternatives

:

Animal recordingfor animalmanagement

Animal Recordingfor geneticimprovement

Who will take themeasurements?

Animalidentification

Traits to bemeasured

Data analyses

Technical staff / Fieldtechnicians.

None or temporary.

Many simplemeasures.

Summaries ofaverages andmeasures of variability.Identify elite animals.

Technical staff / Fieldtechnicians.

Temporary, usually for asingle production cycle.

Key measures of animalresponse to productionalternatives.

Appropriate comparativestatistical analyses.

Field technicians /Farmers.

Usually requirespermanent individualanimal identification.

Easily measured traitsdirectly associated withindividual animal profitor productivity.

Monitoring ofperformance.Easily interpretedindividual animalsummaries.Provide assistance andadvice to interpret.

Field technicians /Farmers.

Permanent, uniqueidentification; usuallyrequires pedigreeinformation.

Easily measured traitsassociated with geneticimprovement indevelopmentobjectives.

Predictions of geneticmerit.Monitoring ofperformance.Individual animalsummaries.Provide assistance andadvice to interpret.



Animal recording schemes to establish baseline performancelevels should be of eventual benefit to farmers, but are notlikely to provide much immediate benefit through eitherincreased production or reduced costs. The cost of theseanimal recording schemes must therefore usually be coveredwith public or institutional funds of some sort and mayinclude payments or other incentives to participatingfarmers.

Animal recording schemes to establish baseline productionlevels have often been implemented as short-term (1 to 5year) survey activities designed primarily to measure suchthings as net productivity (number of animals and weight ofproduct marketed annually relative to total livestockinventory), reproductive capacity (number of offspringproduced per breeding female per year), age and sexdistribution within the population, major causes of mortalityand morbidity, total population size, and gross productionlevels (liters of milk per d, weight of adults and offspring) ofvarious genetic types under prevailing environmental andmanagement conditions. This sort of baseline data onrealised animal performance and on the main factors limitinganimal performance can be particularly useful to developingcountries seeking donor support for livestock developmentprojects.

2.2.2. Animal recording to compare specific production systemalternatives

Animal recording schemes may be designed to comparespecific feeding strategies, health care options, germplasmsources, housing alternatives or other management variables.Traditionally, many of these comparisons were conducted onstate farms or experiment stations, but today there isincreasing interest in conducting these comparative trials onprivate farms. This trend has both positive and negativeaspects. On the positive side, conduct of comparative studieson cooperating farms helps to ensure that experimental



conditions are similar to those that are likely to beencountered in the field and generally accelerates acceptanceof results by participating farmers. On the negative side,levels of experimental control are reduced when comparativestudies are done on farms instead of in public facilities, andthe infrastructure for data collection is usually less welldeveloped.

Benefits from results of animal recording schemes tocompare specific production alternatives generally accrueto the farming community as a whole, not just to thefarmers who participate in the animal recording activity.If effects of the treatments compared are large, meaningfulbenefits may also accrue to consumers. Thus, in commonwith animal recording schemes to establish baselineperformance levels, costs of animal recording to compareproduction alternatives must usually be covered using publicfunds.

One important characteristic of animal recording schemesdesigned to compare specific management alternatives is thatthey generally do not require that information beaccumulated beyond a single production cycle and do notrequire the maintenance of animal identification or pedigreeinformation beyond the duration of a specific project. Thus,for example, the decision on whether or not to adopt avaccine may involve evaluation of the cost and ease ofadministration; the efficacy in preventing overt diseasesymptoms, mortality, and morbidity; measuring changes inpertinent performance parameters; and assessing the netchange in value of product marketed from a specifiedresource base. Yet once this information has been collectedand a decision made regarding the value of the product,continued evaluation of performance is usually not necessaryuntil or unless other changes in the production systemrequire reevaluation of the efficacy of the intervention (e.g.,



if the disease is eradicated, vaccination may no longer beneeded or cost-effective).

2.2.3. Animal recording for individual animal management

Animal recording for animal management involvesmonitoring of each animals’ performance and use of thatinformation in normal, day-to-day farm management. Itrepresents the integration of objective performance data intothe farm management process and permits more effectivedecision making at the farm level and on an on-going basis.

Animal recording for animal management has afundamentally different objective than animal recording toestablish baseline performance levels or animal recording tocompare specific management alternatives. The latter typesof animal recording are essentially field survey or researchactivities designed to address specific questions over finiteperiods of time. They require recording of information onan appropriate sample of animals, but once the primaryquestion is answered, continued animal recording is notnecessarily needed. Their objectives are to collect generalinformation, to identify meaningful trends and opportunitieswithin the livestock sector, and to identify and quantifyimportant input-output relationships within the productionsystem.

In contrast, animal recording for animal management seeksto utilise objective performance data at the individual animallevel to better manage reproduction, to customise health careand nutrition to individual animal needs, to cull animalswhich are likely to be comparatively costly to maintain, or toidentify and make use of superior animals to produce herdreplacements or offspring for sale as breeding animals.Decisions are based upon individual animal performancelevels and are applied to individual animals within the herdor flock.



For example, in small ruminants, breeding performance isassociated with body condition at the time the males areintroduced; as body condition declines, fertility andtwinning rates likewise decline. Body condition can beadequately evaluated by handling the animals, and animalsfrom the flock can be divided into groups based on bodycondition. Depending upon the relative costs of feed andanticipated returns from the flock, animals in poor bodycondition can be either provided with supplemental feed toimprove their body condition and enhance reproduction orcan be sold because they are unlikely to conceive. Animals ingood body condition, however, would not receivesupplemental feed.

The immediate benefits of animal recording for animalmanagement generally accrue to the farmers, althoughindirect benefits are also realized by consumers and thenation as a whole. Thus the planning, conduct, and fundingof animal recording schemes for animal management mustinvolve both the farmers and appropriate public institutions.However, it is of critical importance to recognise that thelevel of benefit realised by individual farmers from animalrecording for animal management will be modest, especiallyin small herds and flocks, and in low- to medium-inputproduction systems where changes in efficiency ofproduction may be difficult to quantify and objectivelydemonstrate. Recording of litter size in pigs and retention ofreplacement females from the largest litters may increaselitter size in the next generation by an average of perhaps 0.2pigs per litter. For an individual farmer with one or twosows, it may be difficult to actually observe this increase or torealise value from recording litter size. But in a village with5,000 sows, such a program would result in an additional1,000 pigs per year.

Experience worldwide has clearly shown that activeleadership of public institutions and significant public



funding are necessary to establish animal recordingschemes for animal management. While it is importantthat farmers share in the funding of these programmes, thenation that will achieve significant benefits in terms ofoverall food security and development of the rural economy,and the nation must be prepared to contribute in order toreceive these benefits. Experience has likewise shown that asthe benefits to the farmers of animal recording aredemonstrated, as the economic strength of farmers andtheir organisations increases, and as the farmers developleadership of these programmes, the farmers can beexpected to accept greater responsibility for their conductand funding. But the time required for this to happen issubstantial; a full human generation (20+ years) may berequired to establish the necessary recognition of benefitsand commitment to the animal recording programme.Failure of animal recording schemes for animal managementcan often be traced to failure to adequately provide forpublic support for the scheme during this criticalestablishment phase.

Animal recording for animal management is a powerfultool for livestock system development. Through its focuson key measures of performance, it provides perspective onopportunities for improving management and assists thefarmer in identifying needs and opportunities in the livestockproduction enterprise. When animal recording efforts of thissort are properly coordinated and integrated with othereducational activities, they also become a tool for ruralcommunity development by highlighting superiormanagement practices within the farming community.

Animal recording schemes for animal management alsoprovide a useful structure for associated programmes ofanimal recording to evaluate specific managementalternatives. When an ongoing capacity for animal recordingexists, it is easier to address new questions. Likewise, when



confidence exists among farmers in the value of animalrecording for animal management, they will be more willingand open to involvement in other projects designed toanswer specific management questions. Finally, the capacityto acquire baseline animal performance data may beimportant for decision-makers and planners for a variety ofreasons, some of which may involve only limited immediatebenefits to farmers. Yet the ability to collect such datadepends importantly upon the cooperation and good will ofparticipating farmers. Establishment of simple, useful,applied animal recording schemes with direct benefit tofarmers will assist in creating a cooperative environmentwhich will permit acquisition of other data as required.

2.2.4. Animal recording for genetic improvement

Animal recording for genetic improvement is specificallydesigned to acquire the information needed to permitsustained genetic change toward an objectively definedbioeconomic development goal. Animal recording forgenetic improvement has much in common with animalrecording for animal management, but there are a few keydifferences. First, the focus of animal recording for geneticimprovement is the breed as a whole, whereas the focus ofanimal recording for animal management is more likely to bethe individual herd. Second, there is a much greater need formaintenance of detailed records of parentage and of geneticrelationships within the animals that are being recorded. Andthird is the requirement that the recording program must besustained over time (animal generations) and maintained in arigorously consistent manner in order to be effective.

Unless individual production units are very large, oftendisadvantageous for other reasons, animal recording schemesfor genetic improvement will commonly be most effectivewhen they involve a number of farms and when theparticipating farmers cooperate to achieve the goals of theprogramme. This cooperation includes a willingness to



attempt to identify the best animals from among all farm andto develop methods for comparative evaluation of these eliteanimals, generally by testing the animals themselves or theiroffspring under the same conditions. Mechanisms must alsobe developed to permit the best animals, once they havebeen identified, to be used widely by participating farmers sothat all the participants may benefit from involvement in theanimal recording scheme. These mechanisms must permitfarmers who regularly breed superior animals to capture afinancial premium for those animals, but they must alsofacilitate access to those elite animals or their offspring byother farmers at a fair price. In this way, the breed as awhole, as well as the individual breeders, will capture thebenefits of genetic improvement.

The need for pedigree recording, on at least a limited basisand in many cases on an extensive, detailed basis, is one ofthe characteristics that distinguishes animal recording forgenetic improvement from other sorts of animal recording.In choosing among candidates for selection, there are twoparticular areas where pedigree information is important.The first is in applying appropriate attention to life-cycleproductivity which explicitly recognizes the long-termimportance of reproductive, health-related, and maternalproductivity traits to overall economic merit. These traits aretremendously important, especially in developing nationswhere the number of environmental stressors is often high,but can only be measured directly late in the animal’s life,and after initial selection decisions have been made. Forthese reasons, selection of young stock with high geneticmerit for reproductive and other fitness traits usually must bebased upon records of the dam and other female relativesthat are already in production. This requires a mechanism touse the performance of adult females to predict genetic meritof their offspring.



Pedigree information is also needed to evaluate theperformance of breeding stock, and particularly sires, withina breed. Sire selection accounts for a very high proportion ofthe genetic change which occurs within a breed, at leastwhen matings are adequately controlled and males areallowed to service reasonably large numbers of females. Thegenetic value of a sire is ultimately defined by the value of hisoffspring and the evaluation of males requires measurementsof their progeny.

The need for pedigree recording in an animal recordingprogramme for breed improvement becomes absolutelycritical when reproductive technologies such as artificialinsemination (AI) and embryo transfer (ET) are used topermit widespread use of selected parents across many herdsand, potentially, several production environments. Thesereproductive technologies create powerful opportunities forbreed improvement by increasing intensity of selectionthrough increases in the number of offspring produced byselected sires and by providing access to elite sires acrossmany herds. Yet they also magnify risks associated with use ofsires whose progeny are not adequately adapted to some orall of the production environments in which they may beused. Animal recording to objectively evaluate progeny of AIsires and ET matings across production environments isnecessary to permit monitoring of results of such programs.

Consistency in recording and in decision-making are criticalto animal recording for genetic improvement. Annual ratesof genetic improvement in performance are usually modest(2 to 3% per year) in relation to those that can be achievedthrough a major management intervention such as a vaccineor nutritional supplement. It is the cumulative nature ofgenetic changes that makes it a powerful mechanism forlivestock systems development; an increase inperformance of 2% per year yield a cumulative increase of22% after 10 years, which continues to be realized repeately



into the future without further costs. However, thisaccumulated superiority can only be realised throughrigorous selection based on appropriate and consistentmeasures of performance.

Because of the level of detail required in animal recordingschemes for genetic improvement, the proportion offarmers that fully participate in them has traditionallybeen relatively small. In most cases, a nucleus of elite,progressive breeders emerges and is able to commandpremium prices for their animals based on their presumedgenetic superiority. Purchase of breeding stock from thesebreeders by farmers outside the nucleus allows fordistribution of genetically superior animals throughout thelivestock sector and for benefits of genetic improvement toeventually be realised by consumers.

The importance of animal recording to this process is two-fold. First, use of animal records as a basis for geneticimprovements adds objectivity to the selection process, canaccelerate rates of genetic improvement in nucleus herds,and allows better documentation of the anticipated geneticmerit of breeding stock being offered for sale. Second, ifanimal recording for animal management is widely practicedamong farmers outside the nucleus, a mechanism is in placeto validate the claims of the nucleus breeders regarding thegenetic merit of their animals and to objectively comparebreeding stock from different nucleus breeders. Thus in anideal situation, animal recording schemes would both propelgenetic improvement in nucleus herds and provide apowerful feedback mechanism between commercial farmersand nucleus breeders.

Most of the marginal costs of the detailed recordingrequired for genetic improvement and most of theimmediate benefit from sales of breeding stock will flowto the farmers who participate in animal recording for



genetic improvement. Yet even here, the immediatebenefits achieved by farmers will likely not justify the fullcosts of animal recording for genetic improvement andsome subsidisation of the animal recording process will berequired, especially in regions without a tradition ofanimal recording.

In regions where a tradition of seedstock breeding and anucleus of breeders already exists, care must be taken toavoid the appearance of outright subsidies to farmers whomay already be viewed as affluent relative to their customers.Such a situation can generally be avoided by focusing publiccontributions to the animal recording scheme on technicaland educational support, development of data processingprocedures, and on use of animal recording for animalmanagement on customers’ farms to document the value ofbreeding stock produced by the nucleus breeders. However,in regions where a nucleus of seedstock breeders does notalready exist, there may be a need to encourage theestablishment of such a nucleus.

In many ways, the procedures required to conduct asuccessful animal recording scheme for genetic improvementare logical extensions of those required for a successfulanimal recording scheme for animal management. Indeed,an animal recording scheme for genetic improvement can,and usually should, provide information for improvedanimal management. The most successful animal recordingschemes for genetic improvement are usually those thatalso provide farmers with appropriate information foranimal management.

The record-keeping requirements of animal recording forgenetic improvement are more stringent than thoserequired for animal management. Thus in regions wherethere is no tradition of animal recording, it may be wise toinitially focus on animal recording for animal management,



even if the long-term goal is animal recording for geneticimprovement. Such a strategy allows an evolutionaryapproach to the animal recording activity. Emphasis caninitially be placed on the benefits which can be achievedthrough use of within-herd animal recording to improveanimal management and on the identification of the mostproductive animals within each herd or flock. Such anapproach builds familiarity and confidence in animalrecording, allows for documentation of benefits, raisesconsciousness regarding the superiority of the best animals inthe schemes, and permits identification of participants withthe skills and attitude consistent with more detailedrecording. From this beginning, a nucleus of breeders can beidentified who are prepared to expand their recordingprocedures and interact in ways that will allow more rapidgenetic improvement.

2 2.3. Animal Recording in Medium-Input Production Environments

Animal recording procedures are most highly developed for the high-input production systems, which may be defined as those in whichindividual animal inputs represent a large proportion of individualanimal value. Individual animal output must, therefore, correspondinglybe high in order to cover input costs, and monitoring of input-outputrelationships at the individual animal level is necessary to profitability.Animal recording is a recognised part of the production process in high-input systems.

For lower input production systems often key production inputs do nothave well-defined financial costs. Production often depends uponopportunistic use of land and feedstuffs that may vary widely in qualityand availability throughout the production cycle. At the extreme,production systems involve scavenging of feedstuffs that are not underthe control of the animals’ owner is common. Investments in health careproducts, nutritional supplements, housing, etc. are usually minimal, andcontrol of mating is commonly not practiced. Among grazing ruminants,



feedstuffs may be obtained through grazing of farmer-owned/leased land,from unregulated common lands, scavenging, or by utilizingopportunistic cut-and-carry systems. Among monogastrics, scavengingfor feedstuffs or use of kitchen wastes are often involved. Lower inputproduction systems are, by definition, characterized by being based inproduction environments where inputs are inherently scarce and perhapsalso unreliable in supply and likely to remain so. Very large areas,estimated to be 75% of the food and agriculture producing land of theworld, are characterized by such production systems. Two further keyelements characterising lower input production systems would bedifficulty in defining financial costs of production inputs plus outputlevels that provide minimal opportunity to assess or utilise individual-animal differences in productivity or value.

Between high- and low-input systems lies a range of medium-inputproduction systems that are the main target of these guidelines.Characteristics of these systems include relatively low levels of financialinputs relative to product output and associated modest to low levels ofoutput value per animal. Assignment of production costs to individualanimals or identifiable groups of animals within the larger herd of flock isdifficult (as for animals grazing common or public lands, or fed wastes orother feeds without explicit financial value). However, in contrast tolow-input production systems, provision of health care, nutritionalsupplements, or other identifiable, costed inputs is possible in medium-input systems, and evaluation of such management interventions shouldbe responsive to cost-benefit analyses. Some level of control of mating isusually possible, but may not be practiced. Some discrimination ofindividual animal value is likewise usually possible.

From these considerations, it is appropriate to note that manyproduction systems that are traditionally considered to represent “low-input” systems meet or approach the criteria set out here for medium-input systems, and animal recording will be considered to have potentialvalue and potential applicability to all but the most uncontrolledlivestock production systems.



Note also that“medium-input” systems may be very diverse. Manyrange-oriented commercial ruminant production systems in developednations would fall into the medium-input category, as would mostsmallholder production systems in developing nations. Ruraldevelopment activities in developing nations would often involvetransition from low (essentially unmanaged) to medium (strategicallymanaged) production. However, establishment of high-inputproduction systems should not be viewed as a logical progression ofrural development because of issues of sustainability, best use of localby-product feed resources, concentration of animal production andassociated wastes, and many others. In particular, for most grasslandproduction systems worldwide, it is likely that most commercialproduction systems will remain at a “medium-input” level.

2 2.4. Benefits and Beneficiaries of Animal Recording

A clear understanding of anticipated benefits and beneficiaries of ananimal recording scheme is essential in order to:

• plan key activities;

• develop mechanisms to document benefits;

• identify beneficiaries and ensure that those beneficiaries areconsulted, informed, and appraised of the activities andbenefits of the scheme; and

• properly apportion costs among the beneficiaries.

The primary beneficiaries and benefits of animal recording arediagrammed in Figure 2.1, and include:

2.4.1. Consumers

The nation’s consumer should be the ultimate beneficiariesof successful animal recording programmes. These benefitswill be realized directly through:



• access to more plentiful food supplies;

• increased quality of animal products;

• reduced costs and a more reliable supply of animalproducts.

In addition, animal recording schemes facilitate greaterorganisation among participating farmers and animproved understanding of consumer needs and marketopportunities. Resulting cooperatives and farmers’organisations are much more sensitive to market needs thanare individual farmers. Consumers will thus benefit indirectlyfrom resulting improvements in organisation of productionand marketing through:

• access to a greater diversity of animal products;

• reduced seasonality of production; and

• more efficiencient transportation and marketing,especially in supplying animal products to expandingurban centers.

The nation’s consumers thus have a very real long-term stakein the establishment of efficient, effective animal recordingschemes, particularly in nations where food security istenuous, and public support for animal recording schemeswill often be justified based upon national consumerbenefits.



Figure 2.1: Beneficiaries and Benefits of Animal Recording

ANIMAL RECORDING

-More animal product-Better product quality-Reduced food costs-Greater product diversity-Reduced seasonality-More efficient markets

CONSUMERS FARMERS

-Increased production-Greater productivity-Increased product value-More reliable production-Better marketing-Direct payments

RURAL COMMUNITIES GOVERNMENT ANDTHE NATION

-Rural development-Educational opportunity-Farmers’ organisations-Marketing cooperatives-Minority enpowerment-Women in development-Youth programmes

-Sustainable development-Environmental stability-Enhanced food security-Improved trade balances-Enhanced research and development capacity-Compliance with international agreements-Greater social stability



2.4.2. Farmers

Participating farmers must benefit directly if animalrecording schemes are to be successful. Otherwise, thefarmers will not participate fully in the animal recordingscheme and potential benefits will not be achieved. Farmersmay benefit from participation in an animal recordingscheme through:

2.4.2.1 Direct payments.

Direct payments to cover costs of animal recording andencourage participation in animal recording schemes havebeen widely used, but should only be implemented aftercareful consideration of the long-term goals and anticipatedbeneficiaries of the animal recording scheme. Paying farmersto collect data on their animals does little to build a sense ofpride or ownership in the animal recording scheme, or tomotivate farmers to make use of resulting information inmanagement decisions. Also, it is difficult to convincefarmers to continue participation in the scheme if paymentsare withdrawn.

However, direct payments for recording are justified when alarge share of the benefits from the animal recording activityare expected to accrue to someone other than theparticipating farmers. Thus animal recording schemes toestablish baseline performance levels or to compare specificproduction alternatives may provide little immediate benefitrelative to participating farmers. These farmers musttherefore be reimbursed or otherwise rewarded for theirparticipation.

Animal recording for animal management or for geneticimprovement, in contrast, is expected to confer directbenefits to participating farmers, and direct payments dolittle to facilitate the long-term success of the animalrecording scheme. However, it is likewise critical to



recognise that the initial benefits of animal recording willoften not be sufficient to motivate farmers to participatewithout some sort of subsidies. Even if benefits are sufficientto cover costs, farmers may be unprepared or otherwiseunable to accept higher costs of production, or to recognise,quantify, or wait for anticipated benefits. This is especiallytrue in medium- to low-input production systems wheremarketing is often seasonal and where cash inputs havetraditionally been low. It is likewise true for animalrecording schemes for genetic improvement because thebenefits of such schemes rely in part on the ability of farmersto create, document, and successfully market superiorbreeding stock to other farms. The time required toaccomplish these goals may create a substantial delay in therealisation of significant benefits from animal recording.

A better alternative to direct cash payments as an incentiveto participate in animal recording schemes is the provision ofsubsidised labor, equipment, or other production inputsnecessary to develop the animal recording activity. Such anapproach places the benefit of animal recording in thecontext of the animal production enterprise rather thanseparating it from the production process. The benefits ofthe recording activity, if properly measured, can then becompared to the cost of the subsidised materials todemonstrate the value of the activity.

Examples of subsidies that may be necessary and appropriateat the farm level include:

• recording equipment such as recording forms, measuringtapes, containers, simple scales, etc.;

• labor to demonstrate how to take measurements and toassist in handling the animals;

• feed, health care products, semen for artificialinseminations, etc.;



• assistance in transporting and marketing animals or theirproducts.

In all such cases, however, it is critical to begin immediatelyto document the value of the animal recording activityper se in a way that will justify and encourage itscontinuation if subsidies are withdrawn. It is also critical torecognise that long-term maintenance of some level ofsubsidies may, in some cases, be justified based on thecontributions of the animal recording scheme to consumersand to the nation’s food security.

2.4.2.2 Increased production (i.e., greater production but requiringmore inputs) or greater productivity (i.e., the same orgreater production with fewer inputs).

Increases in production and/or productivity are a primarygoal of most animal recording schemes, and are the preferredmethod of allowing farmers to realise benefits from animalrecording. Documentation of increased production (amountof all products harvested/sold) may be easier thandocumentation of increased productivity, especially inmedium- to low-input production systems where cash inputsare limited. However, productivity gains often contributemore to improving profitability and sustainability ofproduction, particularly when herd and flock productivity isdetermined on an animal lifecycle basis.

Animal recording may also improve productivity by allowingbetter allocation of inputs such as feed, health care, andother management inputs to animals who can benefit mostfrom them. In low- to medium-input systems, thesediscretionary inputs are often in short supply, difficult toobtain, or expensive. Their use must therefore be restrictedto animals who are most capable of using them in aprofitable manner.



2.4.2.3 Increased product value through improved quality.

Increases in product quality may lead to benefit through higherprices or through access to new markets. However, realisation ofbenefits from improved product quality assumes that existingmarkets adequately discriminate between inferior and superiorproducts. A number of development projects have successfullyreduced fibre diameter in wool, mohair, or cashmere, but beenunable to benefit from these improvements in existing markets.Increasing leanness of meat products may or may not increasevalue, depending upon preferences in local markets or upon theability of the farmers to reach new markets. Thus an importantaspect of animal recording schemes to improve product qualitymay be to identify and gain access to markets that will provide apremium price for those products.

2.4.2.4 Greater reliability of production.

In many nations, extreme climatic conditions, and in particularperiodic drought, lead to major fluctuations in animal numbersand productivity. The ability to maintain production underdifficult conditions and to quickly reestablish previous productionlevels when conditions improve is a critical consideration. Animalrecording provides for both the opportunity to determine therelationships necessary to decide how to respond to climaticextremes (which animals to sell, which to keep, whether or not toprovide supplemental feed) and the information to make decisionsabout individual animals based on these relationships.

2.4.2.5 Better market access and marketing techniques.

The organisational structures required for conduct of aneffective animal recording scheme also provide opportunitiesfor cooperative marketing activities including marketdevelopment, cooperative price negotiation, pooling ofanimals or animal products for delivery to more distant



markets, further processing of animal products, value-basedmarketing, and forward pricing. If successful, these variousmarketing enhancements may generate direct and immediatefinancial benefits through higher prices for animal products.One of the main problems facing livestock producersworldwide, and particularly the small producers ofdeveloping nations, is inability to successfully negotiateprices for their products. Thus the integration of marketingcooperatives with animal recording schemes may provide away to achieve immediate benefits and farmer loyaltythrough better marketing while simultaneously establishingthe animal recording procedures needed for sustainedimprovements in production efficiency.

2.4.3. Rural communities

Animal recording schemes can be an important force forrural community development. Rural agriculturalcommunities often receive little benefit from nationaldevelopment programs because of their distances fromcenters of power and commerce, the limited educationalopportunities commonly afforded to rural youth, and themore visible, pressing needs of expanding urban centers. Yetthe need to strengthen rural agricultural communities andinvolve them fully in the national food production enterpriseis critical to maintaining and enhancing food security.Recent trends toward peri-urban animal production in largeproduction units have been justified as necessary in order toserve the demands of urban populations, but the associatedproblems of pollution and of disenfranchisement oftraditional agriculturalists are significant and will likelybecome acute in the future. Development of structures toincrease production and efficient delivery of high-qualityanimal products to increasingly concentrated markets is thusa priority in rural development.

Animal recording schemes, if combined with propereducational support, organisational structures, and



marketing assistance can aid in empowering rural peoples totake a greater responsibility for the animal productionenterprise. These schemes focus on exerting control over theproduction enterprise and on understanding andmanipulation of the elements of production. They generatepride and recognition among the best producers, andencourage others to follow their example. Likewise, theorganisational structures required for effective animalrecording also provides a structure for communitydevelopment and a voice for participating farmers.

Animal recording schemes may also aid in expandingopportunities for minority or otherwise disenfranchisedgroups. In many places, minority ethnic communities areoften involved in traditional agricultural or pastoral activitieswhich have exacerbated their isolation from national affairs.Establishment of farmers’ organisations for animal recordingcan aid in strengthening these ethnic communities and assistthem in marketing their animal products.

Similarly, in many nations the women are the primaryanimal caretakers. The role of women in animal productionis also increasing as more men commute to urban jobs,leaving their wives and daughters to maintain the small farm.The recognition accorded the owners of high-producing orotherwise outstanding animals reflects well on these women,is a source of pride and confidence, and can more activelyinvolve women in the development process. Researchevidence also indicates that women can be superior to menin the recording of animal data and in the maintenance ofrecorded information.

Youth programs are likewise an important component ofanimal recording schemes. In many places, adult literacy islow in rural areas, which makes both the recording ofperformance and the use of written material to provideinstructions, summarise results and provide



recommendations difficult. Rural youth, however, generallyhave better prospects for attaining a basic level of literacy, ifproperly motivated to continue their studies and maycontribute to family well-being by aiding in participation inanimal recording schemes. Recognition of the significance ofthose contributions by organisers of the scheme can supportthe value of continued education.

Two conditions are essential in order to realise a significantimpact of animal recording schemes on rural communitydevelopment. First, as discussed above, the farmers mustachieve a real and visible benefit from the recording activityin order to motivate them to be involved in the full range ofactivities associated with the recording activity. And, second,the individuals involved in the planning and conduct of theschemes must have the broad welfare of the participants andof their community as a priority. Animal recording must beviewed by all concerned as both a mechanism forimproving animal productivity and a broad platform forsustainable community development.

2.4.4. Governments and the nation as a whole

One important role of government is to allocate scarcepublic resources to areas of greatest potential benefit. Thisrole can be fulfilled effectively only if adequate informationis available to support the decision-making process. Animalrecording schemes are an important source ofinformation about the livestock sector of the nation andcan identify areas of greatest opportunity within thatsector.

The information obtained from well-designed animalrecording schemes can be extremely useful in meeting theresponsibilities of various international agreements and inobtaining collaborative development assistance frominternational donor agencies. For example, the Conventionon Biological Diversity mandates that each signatory nation



conduct an assessment of its biological diversity, includingagricultural biodiversity, and develop a plan to manage thatbiological diversity. Effective animal recording schemes willbe required to catalog and describe the nation’s livestockgenetic resources, to provide a comparative evaluation ofavailable breeds, and to identify possible contributions ofthose breeds to the livestock sector of the nation.

Throughout the developing world, funding from variousinternational collaborative agencies is critical to support awide range of agricultural development activities, includinganimal recording. Access to objective, persuasive informationto justify support of these various development activities islikewise critical to obtaining necessary funding. Effectiveanimal recording programs are a key source of suchinformation.

Increasing recognition worldwide of the importance ofidentifying and implementing sustainable agriculturalpractices and of the importance of sustainable agriculturalpractices to realizing food security and maintainingenvironmental integrity provides additional motivation foranimal recording. It is essential that all nations achieve abalance between sustainable livestock development whichencompasses environmental protection. Meeting thedemands of increasing animal production while maintainingenvironmental integrity requires information on theinterrelationships involved in animal production andquantification of how livestock production impacts theenvironment. Animal recording can provide suchinformation and allows agricultural agencies to takeleadership in developing livestock production systems thatare productive, environmentally responsible and sustainable.

Animal recording data and results also provide additionalopportunities for enhancing research and developmentcapacity, frequently raising important practical questions to



be researched, often contributing data for study of farmcommunity development, crystalising development issuesand contributing information for monitoring the progress ofdevelopment.

2 2.5. Planning for Success—Ensuring the Long-Term Success ofthe Animal Recording Scheme

One of the main challenges in establishing an animal recordingscheme is to ensure the continuity of support required to allow thescheme to become a recognized, accepted, and integral part of thelivestock sector of the nation. As mentioned before, in areas where atradition of animal recording has not already been established, a humangeneration (20 years or more) may be necessary to gain full acceptance ofanimal recording as an essential part of livestock production. In the high-input production systems of developed nations, animal recording is wellestablished, but that goal was achieved only through sustained public-sector assistance over periods of 10 to 20 years. Privitisation of animalrecording schemes has succeeded in some developed nations primarilybecause of the development over time of strong farmers’ organisationswith commitment to, and communal resources to support, animalrecording. Again, however, evolution of these farmers’ groups was aidedby long periods of public support. And finally, even those animalrecording schemes that have been successfully “privatised” still oftenreceive important levels of public support for research and development.

The early, and more easily obtained, benefits of an animal recordingscheme will in greater measure be societal, and therefore more easilyjustified in terms of public investment. In addition, many of theseearly benefits will be collateral to the animal recording scheme itself,encompassing rural community development, youth and adulteducation, formation of farmers’ organization and cooperatives, etc.

The model that emerges is thus one of initial investment in the ruralsociety and the food producing capacity of the nation. If successful,the infrastructure that results empowers the rural community.



Concurrently, the data collected should relatively quickly identify themajor constraints and opportunities to increasing animal productivityand, when these constraints are relieved and opportunities are seized, theresult can be a significant enhancement in the food security of thenation. These benefits may be difficult to quantify, but nevertheless ifachieved in reasonable measure can do much to justify the initial costs ofestablishing the animal recording scheme.

The scheme then enters a phase where the main benefits becomethose directly associated with the animal recording activity per se.These include the greater efficiencies of production through betteranimal management and genetic improvement. The most cost-effectivemanagement changes have been made and a nucleus organisation ofparticipating farmers has been established. Yet this is also the time whenthe scheme is most vulnerable to premature attempts at completeprivitisation. Management changes, even if cost-effective, have not yetbecome integral parts of the production system. Farmers’ organisationsmay exist but still lack the maturity to manage recording schemes ontheir own, and societal gains in both rural community development andfood security are tenuous. It is in this phase that schemes such as this aremost often charged with “subsidising” the farmers when, in fact,commitment to program continuity is now most necessary toconsolidate the societal gains and to place the recording scheme on asolid footing.

Planning for the long-term success of an animal recording schemethus becomes a key consideration in all other activities involved inthe scheme. Some general principles in planning for success include:

• Make the success of the animal recording scheme anational priority. While donor funds may be necessary toinitiate programmes and may provide key supplementalfunding, the importance of animal recording programmes tonational food security and rural development dictates thatbase funding for such schemes should be a part of the nation’sdevelopment budget.



• Involve farmers fully in the planning and onduct of theanimal recording scheme. The full support of participatingfarmers will aid in maintaining support for use of public fundsas well as in convincing the farmers to contribute to theprogramme. Make sure farmers feel a sense of pride, loyalty,and ownership towards both the animal recording schemeitself and the institutions that support it. Develop leadershipamong the farmers and effective farmers’ organisations.

• Make documentation of benefits an integral part of theanimal recording scheme, using all available mechanisms(reports, farm visits, fairs, competitions, awards, comparisonswith nonparticipating farms and regions).

• Focus on key goals necessary for success, and avoidunnecessary or less-productive activities. Separate key activitiesnecessary for functioning of the scheme from those that areoptional based on availability of funds. Avoid activities that donot contribute directly to programme goals.

• Recognise collateral benefits involving education, ruralcommunity development, market development, social andenvironmental stability, and national food security.Document these benefits.

Guidelines for Planning Animal Recording SchemesSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification 38

Guidelines for Planning Animal Recording Schemes

1 Section 3. Guidelines For Planning Animal Recording Schemes

A number of tasks must be accomplished in order to successfullyestablish an animal recording scheme. These activities will define theoverall structure of the scheme and do much to define its long-termsuccess or failure. Specific tasks are diagrammed in Figure 3.1, andinclude:

2 3.1. Identify the Development Objective

Specify reasons for implementing an animal recording scheme. Identifyhow the scheme is expected to contribute to the nation’s economy andfood security. Place the opportunities for sustainable developmentthrough animal recording in the context of existing productionresources, markets, social structures, and human resources. Identify theconstraints to improved animal production and productivity that may beidentified and/or relieved through animal recording. Define howremoval of these constraints would benefit the nation’s farmers andconsumers.

2 3.2. Identify Anticipated Benefits and Beneficiaries ofAnimal Recording

Define how the animal recording scheme will contribute to thedevelopment objective. Specify who is expected to benefit from theanimal recording activities and how those benefits will be realised.Whenever possible, identify ways to measure and quantify those benefits,preferably in economic terms. Project both short-term and long-termcost—benefit relationships; in both cases, continue to focus on howbenefits will be measured.



Figure 3.1: The Planning of Animal Recording Systems

1. Define the developmentobjective

2. Identify beneficiaries

ConsumersFarmersRural communitiesGovernment & the nation

3. Identifyparticipating

farmers

4. Traits to measure

OutputProduct valueInputProductivityLife-history traitsAdaptation indicators

5. Animalidentification

6. Measurement by:

TechniciansPrivate contractorsFarmers

11. Farmer participation & Rural community development

Farmers organisationsCooperativesMarketing schemesEducational programmes

10. Measurablebenefits

9. Use of results

By participatingand non-participating

farmers

9. Data interpretation andrecommendations

7. Data recording 7. Data accreditation

8. Data processing

On-farmLocal institutionsCentral institutions

( Numbered boxes correspond to material addressed in sections 3.1 through 3.11.)



Identify both primary benefits and beneficiaries (i.e., those who willrealise direct measurable benefits through increased production, reducedcosts, or lower food prices) and indirect benefits (i.e., reducedenvironmental degradation, rural community development) and identifyways to quantify indirect benefits.

Clearly identify how participating farmers are expected to benefit fromthe animal recording scheme. Recognise that some sort of immediatebenefit will be required to entice participation. If anticipated benefits areprimary medium- to long-term, identify ways to also generate short-termbenefits, using such things as production subsidies, cooperativemarketing opportunities, or access to better germplasm.

If animal recording is implemented primarily for the benefit ofgovernment (such as animal recording to establish baseline performancelevels or to catalog and characterise farm animal genetic resources) or forthe benefit of the livestock sector as a whole (such as animal recording tocompare specific production alternatives), then payments to participatingfarmers may be warranted because benefits will accrue to others besidesthe immediate participants. In contrast, when animal recording isimplemented for animal management or for genetic improvement,emphasis should be placed upon realisation of benefits within the contextof the production and marketing system and use of cash payments shouldbe minimised.

Do not expect farmers to acknowledge or realise subjective benefits fromthe knowledge obtained from animal recording or to apply thatknowledge without assistance. In particular, recognise situations wherestructural changes in the livestock sector may be required in order forfarmers to realise benefits of animal recording and be prepared tosupport such changes. Examples would include changes in pricingstructures to reward improvement in product quality and developmentof markets for breeding stock to cover the greater costs of animalrecording for genetic improvement.



2 3.3. Identify Potential Participants

Who should participate in the animal recording scheme? Different levelsof participation are required for different types of animal recording.

Animal recording to establish baseline performance levels generallyrequires either short-term screening of animals from a number of farmsto attain a broad sample of all farms in a region or a more in-depthrecording scheme involving a limited number of carefully selected farms.In the latter case, care should be taken to ensure that the chosen farmsare representative of the region as a whole. In particular, reliance onlarger, “elite” farms should be avoided, even though these farms are ofteneasier to work with.

Animal recording to compare specific production alternatives likewiseshould involve only a limited number of farms in the region. Since thistype of recording is essentially a form of on-farm research, farms shouldbe carefully chosen to maximise the anticipated attention to detail inrecording and quality of resulting data. Again, however, the chosen farmsmust be representative of others in the region.

In animal recording for animal management, realised benefits on anational level are generally proportional to the number of farms andanimals involved in the scheme. Widespread participation is thus theeventual goal. However, it will likely be necessary to limit the initialnumber of participating farms, and these initial participants should, tothe extent possible, include influential and progressive farmers tomaximise opportunities for success and to aid in developing support andrecognition within the communities. It is likewise better to identifygroups of participants from a single area than to choose participants indifferent villages or areas. In this way, the farmers can help and supportone another and develop a sense of community pride in theiraccomplishments.

Animal recording schemes for genetic improvement generally require asubstantial commitment of resources to the animal recording activity inorder to be effective, and may additionally require sales of breeding stock



at premium prices to capture full benefits of detailed recordingprocedures. Thus in evaluating the benefits and beneficiaries of animalrecording for genetic improvement, two elements must be considered:

• benefits realised by all farmers and consumers through geneticimprovement of commercial animals, and;

• benefits which accrue to a more restricted group of eliteseedstock breeders, and which may be necessary to capture themore general benefits within the commercial sector.

At issue is the way in which superior genetic material will be identified,comparatively evaluated, multiplied, and distributed to farmers, and thebenefit structure that will support this process. The initial step, theidentification of superior animals, can occur within any type of animalrecording schemes, and the identification of elite animals should berecognized as an important component of animal recording.

The benefit structure required to support animal recording forgenetic improvement will depend upon the breeding structure of theindustry. If a subsector of seedstock breeders already exists, the mostlikely model will involve relatively detailed recording of animals on thesefarms to identify genetically superior individuals, public support tofurther compare elite animals under comparable conditions and todocument their genetic superiority, demonstration and quantification ofthe value of that genetic superiority to other farmers, and documentationof genetic superiority under commercial conditions, usually as a part ofan animal recording scheme for animal management. In this way:

• progressive seedstock breeders who most effectively use animalrecording as a tool for genetic improvement will creategenetically superior animals;

• the animal recording scheme will aid in recognising thatgenetic superiority and in demonstrating its potential value tocommercial farmers;



• the seedstock breeders will be able to ask and receive higherprices for their animals, as required to cover their higher costsof animal recording;

• the commercial farmers will benefit from the greaterproduction and productivity of the genetically superioranimals; and

• the animal recording scheme will document these benefits tothe commercial farmers, justifying the higher prices that mustbe paid for improved breeding stock.

If a nucleus of seedstock breeders does not exist within the livestocksector, then some other structure must be developed to play that role.Options include:

• use of public institutions to generate and distribute improvedgermplasm;

• cooperative arrangements within the commercial farms toidentify, evaluate, propagate, and distribute improvedgermplasm. In essence, the commercial farmers would formtheir own breeding nucleus, either independently orcooperatively with some public institution; or

• development of a subsector of nucleus breeders from withinthe commercial farmers.

Use of public institutions to generate and distribute improvedgermplasm has been a popular model, especially in developing nationswhere most farmers do not have the number of animals, physical andfinancial resources, and technical skills to manage the geneticimprovement and marketing of germplasm without assistance.Advantages include the ability to use public resources to screen existingfarms to identify animals with the most favorable productioncharacteristics, to purchase such animals, and to collect them in a singlelocation for comparative evaluation. Public institutions also can betterjustify purchases of both the equipment required for animal recording.Public institutions are also often better prepared to use advanced



reproductive technologies such as artificial insemination, both as a partof the improvement program and as a way to distribute improvedgermplasm.

However, the use of public institutions as centers for geneticimprovement has often been strikingly unsuccessful. In order to beeffective, it is essential that the public institution establish and maintain astrong interactive relationship with local farmers. An animal recordingscheme must be established among local farmers to provide a mechanismto demonstrate the benefits to be gained from use of improvedgermplasm, and the public institutions involved must deliverdocumentably superior breeding stock. Farmers must be provided with amechanism to have input into the management and the breeding policiesof the public institution. Farmers must see the institution as a uniquesource of genetically superior animals and must be willing to pay fairprices for that material. If these things do not occur, then a differentmodel of animal recording for genetic improvement is needed.

Cooperative development of genetic improvement schemes by localfarmers can be successful, but generally requires strong, well targettedcontributions from public institutions, farmers’ organisations, orcooperatives to provide necessary structure and coordination. Suchprograms usually grow out of successful programs of animal recordingfor animal management as the sophistication of participating farmers andtheir organisations develops to a point that will permit the program tobecome actively involved in genetic improvement. Benefit toparticipating farmers under this scenario comes primarily from increasedproduction and productivity in their own herd, but if the coordinatinginstitution or organisation can establish a successful program formarketing breeding stock to nonparticipants, additional benefits can becaptured.

The development of a nucleus of seedstock producing farmers within thebroader animal recording scheme is a long-term endeavor, but maynonetheless be the most appropriate strategy for capturing the fullbenefits of animal recording. Such development usually must occur in anevolutionary way, with emergence of the most capable and progressive



farmers as candidates to implement the more detailed and necessarilycooperative animal recording needed for genetic improvement. Oncesuch a nucleus is established, it may serve as a source of germplasm forothers, providing optimum benefit to both seedstock breeders andcommercial farmers. As in all such cases, however, the animal recordingscheme must provide for documentation of quantifiable benefits fromuse of improved germplasm. Otherwise, the newly established seedstockbreeders will be unable to establish the markets necessary for them to besuccessful.

2 3.4. Identify the Traits to be Measured

The choice of traits to measure will be dictated by two mainconsiderations:

• the importance of the trait to the breeding objective, and

• the feasibility of measuring the trait on participating farms.

The traits that will actually be measured in an animal recordingscheme usually will not correspond exactly to the traits in thedevelopment objective. That situation occurs because many of the traitsthat affect life-cycle productivity and profitability as well as thesustainability of the livestock enterprise are not easily measured, eitherbecause it is difficult to make the measurement or because the characteris only expressed late in life or in the presence of a stressor. For example,length of productive life may be an important component of thedevelopment objective, but cannot be directly measured until the animaldies or is culled, at which time there is no longer an opportunity to usethat animal in genetic improvement. Similarly, resistance to infectiousdiseases may be important but can only be measured objectively byexposing all animals to the disease.

Most animals recording systems in both developed and developingnations instead rely on relatively easily measured indicator traits thatprovide less expensive or more timely information on the traits in the



breeding objective. Improvement of these indicator traits is expected tolead to improvement in the characters in the development objective.

In deciding what to measure, the following questions should beaddressed:

• What biological characters should be improved in order tomove toward the development objective?

• Which of these can be measured directly on the farm,including considerations of cost, time, farmer skills andattitudes, and access to skilled technicians, equipment, andlaboratory facilities? Which others cannot reasonably bemeasured directly? It is important that this question beaddressed realistically.

• What alternative characters can be reasonably measured andare expected to provide indirect information on the traits inthe development objective? What classes of animals can theybe measured on?

• For traits in the development objective that cannot bemeasured and for which there are no obvious indicator traits,what options are available for eventual assessment of thesetraits? What equipment, technical skills, organisation,laboratory facilities, etc., could be developed that mightpermit cost-effective recording of these traits? How can theanimal recording scheme evolve to encourage eventual captureof this information through demonstrations of benefit,provision of technical support or equipment, or integrationwith other animal recording activities? What is a reasonabletime scale for this evolution?

• What measures need to be taken to determine relationshipsbetween potential indicator traits and the traits in thedevelopment objective? Where (on farms, on researchstations, in university herds, etc.) can the necessary data beobtained, and who will pay for its collection?



2 3.5. Animal Identification

The identification of individual animals is a necessary component of ananimal recording scheme. However, the specific requirements foranimal identification and the means used for animal identificationcan vary widely among schemes and must be tailored to match thespecific objectives of the animal recording scheme.

Specific issues include:

• Must each animal have its own unique identification, or is itsufficient to simply distinguish among groups of animals? Forexample, it is sufficient to identify animals only with respectto their sire? Or only with respect to the management theyreceive (e.g., vaccinated or not vaccinated; provided withsupplements or not)? Or with respect to birth year to allowidentification of animals by age?

• For how long must the animal be identified? Is identificationrequired only for the current production cycle (e.g., alactation) or must identification be maintained across multipleproduction cycles (e.g., several lactations)?

• Is unique animal identification required for animals ondifferent farms, or is unique identification required only foranimals on the same farm?

• When must the animals be identified: at birth, at weaning, atbreeding, at the start of a production cycle (e.g., shearing orthe start of lactation)?

• Are identification “devices” (ear tags, neck chains, leg bands,tatoos, brands) required? If individual farmers own only a fewanimals (perhaps not more than 10), the farmer may be quitecapable of distinguishing among the animals. Some sort ofanimal identification number normally will be required forprocessing records and summarising performance but anidentification device may not be required.



• What sort of identification devices are appropriate to thespecies, breed and production system?

• Can key indicators of performance be physically attached tothe animal using, for example, a system of ear notches? Suchan approach allows animals to “carry their records with them”where they are readily available to the farmer. For example, ifthe ears of single ewe lambs or doe kids are notched at birth,these animals can be distinguished from twins later in life and,if appropriate, not kept as replacements. Breeding females canhave an ear notched for each time they fail to produceoffspring. If a system of notches in the other ear identifies thebirth year, it becomes easy to identify and cull infertilefemales, or to preferentially keep offspring of highly fertilefemales as breeding stock.

• Does the farmer choose how the animal will be identified orare identification numbers assigned as a part of the recordingscheme?

• Must the animal’s identification also allow for identificationof the animal’s parents? Is identification of both parentsrequired? How important are detailed pedigrees? Is single-siremating to establish paternity required?

The system of animal identification must be consistent with the goalsand objectives of the animal recording scheme. Thus when animalrecording is used to establish baseline performance levels or to comparespecific management alternatives, temporary identification is oftensufficient. If animals are measured only once to establish performancelevels (e.g., screening of animals to determine litter sizes), noidentification may be required. However, some sort of temporaryidentification is required if the scheme dictates returning to the farm toacquire additional data (e.g., weaning weights of animals born in littersof different sizes).

In animal recording to compare management alternative, it is oftensufficient to only identify animals with regard to the treatment received



(e.g., bred A.I. or by natural service). Identification is likewise oftenrequired only for a single production cycle. However, if the managementalternatives being tested have potential effects on future health, fertilityor other life history traits, data collection and identification may have tobe maintained across multiple production cycles.

Animal recording for animal management generally requires that animalsbe uniquely identified for at least a full production cycle, and permanentidentification is often required. Animal recording for animalmanagement has as its goal the evaluation and use of individual animaldifferences. Also, in most cases the development objective will involveseveral traits, including life history traits expressed at different ages. Forthese reasons, some form of permanent identification is generally desired.However, in some cases this requirement can be met using simplesystems of ear notches to identify key performance differences.Identification of parentage may or may not be required in animalrecording for animal management, but is necessary if selection ofreplacement animals is to be based in part on the past performance ofparents.

In animal recording for genetic improvement, identification and use inbreeding of superior individuals is a specific goal. Attainment of this goalwill usually require unique, permanent, individual identification ofanimals, although in some cases group identification (e.g., identificationof daughters of a specific sire) may be sufficient. Control of paternity andaccurate birth records are often required. Modern statistical proceduresfor prediction of genetic merit can use performance records of relatedanimals to increase accuracy of the genetic evaluation if relationships areknown.

Even if individual animal identification is not absolutely required tomeet the goals of the animal recording scheme, accurate animalidentification can enhance the value of the collected data. One of theuses of animal recording is to define key production relationships. Studyof such relationships is often possible only when records taken on thesame animal at different times can be identified. Examples would include



use of animal recording data to evaluate if traits measured early in lifecan predict later productive or life history traits.

2 3.6. Who will Measure the Animals and Record the Data?

The actual measurement of animal performance may be done by thefarmers themselves or by field technicians employed by the animalrecording scheme. In newly established animal recording schemes, it willusually be necessary to have technicians make most of the animalmeasurements, at least for the first few years of operation of the scheme.This approach enhances both accuracy and consistency of measures and,especially, of recording. Equally important, it provides for regular closeinteractions between farmers and technicians. These interactions provideopportunity for instruction of farmers in the reasons for animalrecording, the technique used to accurately evaluate the animals, and theinterpretation and use of data following processing. The importance ofthese interactions should be emphasized in selection and training oftechnicians.

Technicians should be physically located in close proximity toparticipating farms and should be assigned a regular list of farmers toserve. If possible, technicians may be chosen from the local community,but they must also be thoroughly indoctrinated in the goals andobjectives of the animal recording scheme. In this way, rapport andconfidence between farmer and technician can be maximised.

As discussed further in Section 3.10.1. below, technicians should beassigned some sort of local institutional affiliation to provide support andcommunications services and to strengthen their sense of involvementwith the animal recording scheme.

Even if technicians take the actual measurements, the farmers should beactively involved in the measurement process because in most cases it isdesirable to eventually shift much of the responsibility for measurementand recording to the farmers themselves. An important task for thetechnician is to prepare farmers to accept this responsibility, and to



encourage them to become actively and critically involved in the animalrecording scheme.

If farmers are to make the measurements and do the recording, there areseveral critical issues to consider. These include:

• Do the farmers have a clear understanding of why eachmeasurement is being taken, how to make the measurement,and what use will be made of the measurement?

• Do the farmers possess the necessary equipment, and do theyunderstand how to maintain that equipment?

• What is the literacy rate among the farmers? Can they dealwith written instructions and reports? Do they have the skillsto accurately record data?

• How will the farmers be instructed in animal recordingmethods? Equally important, who will help them interpretresults of the animal recording activity and provide advice onhow to use those results to improve animal management?

• What sort of convenient support system can be set up toanswer questions and address problems? How will enthusiasmfor the animal recording activity be maintained?

Each of these questions must be addressed before farmers can beexpected to take over responsibility for animal measurement andrecording.

2 3.7. Data Editing and Accreditation – Who will Vouch for the Data?

Data editing and accreditation are designed to identify erroneous orfabricated data. Data editing is an important component of any animalrecording scheme and involves identification of errors in the data, usuallyarising from misunderstanding of measurement and recordingprocedures, improper training of farmers and/or technicians, orrecording errors. A principal: the closer editing is to the data source,



the better. When farmers do the recording, an initial inspection of thedata should be made when it is picked up or delivered to the processingcenter. Subsequently, data processing procedures should include checksfor reasonableness and consistency of reported data. Methods should alsobe put in place to quickly address apparent errors without compromisingtimely processing of data and return of results to the farmer.

Data accreditation involves certification that the data is correct andaccurate as reported and is designed to identify both erroneous andfabricated data. Among existing animal recording schemes, theimportance and effort attached to data accreditation varies widely. Insome schemes, data accreditation is considered to be a critical step and iscited as one of the major reasons for using technicians instead of farmersfor recording. In others, farmers are given primary responsibility foraccurate data reporting under the assumption that benefit will be realisedfrom an animal recording scheme only if proper data reporting ispracticed.

In animal recording for animal management, problems of dataaccreditation can generally be minimised by ensuring that benefits of therecording activity are captured primarily in the context of theproduction and marketing system rather than through cash payments orother subsidies not tied to animal productivity. In this way, farmers mustcollect and use animal data to capture benefits, and the accuracy ofcollected data is directly related to the size of the anticipated benefit. So,when all farmers involved understand the value to them of reliabledata, separate accreditation will commonly not be seen as particularlyimportant to the scheme’s success.

Data accreditation can be particularly challenging in animal recordingfor genetic improvement because such schemes normally seek to identifythe best animals and to obtain sale premiums for these animals and theiroffspring. Some form of data accreditation may be necessary in suchprogrammes, perhaps involving independent confirmation of reportedproduction levels before animals are sold. Also, if the animal recordingscheme is set up to validate claims of genetic superiority through



measurement of performance on cooperating commercial farms,fraudulent claims of exceptional performance are readily identified.

2 3.8. What Sort of Data Processing and Handling is requiredand how will it be accomplished?

“Data processing” involves the computations and data organisation thatare required to make the recorded data useful as a management and/orgenetic selection tool. Requirements for data processing can vary widelyamong animal recording schemes, depending upon the kind of traitsbeing measured and the objectives of the scheme. However, in mostcases data processing should be no more complicated or time-consumingthan absolutely necessary. In some schemes data processing maycomprise only data inspections and calculations by the farmer or afield technician whilst visiting the farm; whilst at the other extremecomplex, centralized time series analyses may be done utilizing allavailable data for the breed.

The speed with which data can be processed beyond the farm andreturned to the farmer for use is a critical issue in designing successfulanimal recording schemes. It is absolutely necessary that the processed,summarised data be returned in time to be used to make managementdecisions. Failure to process and return data in a timely manner is one ofthe main reasons for failure of animal recording schemes.

In many cases, data can be processed directly on the farm at the time ofcollection using simple tables or other decision aids, permitting itsimmediate use in the decision-making process. For example, feedinglimited amounts of grain to a dairy animal may be economicallyadvantageous so long as daily production remains above some criticallevel. Weekly milk recording can allow the farmer to immediately adjustthe feeding level of individual animals. In selecting replacement ewelambs or doe kids, animals can be weighed or measured to determinebody size, and, if the twins were identified at birth using ear notches, theheaviest twins can easily be identified as replacement females.



When further processing is required, technicians may be equipped withportable computers or the facilities of local institutions may be used. Forexample, milk samples may be evaluated for fat and protein or fibresamples may be evaluated for fineness in local village collection pointsand prices received may be determined immediately based upon thesevalues.

Processing of data at a central (farm community, regional or national)level may be required in some cases, but raises major challenges in termsof timely return of results to the farmers. Use of a central processing siteis most often required when data from many farms are to be processedtogether, and must be accumulated from the various locations beforeprocessing. This is a particular concern in setting up comprehensive,breed-wide animal recording schemes for genetic improvement. Theseschemes may require sophisticated processing of large amounts of data tobe effective. In designing such schemes, the organisers must considerwhether or not the communications system can support centralprocessing of large amounts of data from many farms.

Even if data can be processed locally for use by the farmers, a centraldata storage and analysis capability will usually also be required.Accumulation of data in a central institution permits the higher-levelanalyses required for research, for documentation of benefits across theentire scheme, and for national planning and monitoring activities. Thusprovision should be made for accumulation of data in a uniform formatand for storage of that data at a central location. Large, well-managed,well-documented, and comprehensive data sets describing livestockperformance are an important and valuable resource, and should betreated as such.

Ownership of data collected in animal recording schemes is an issuewhich should be addressed when the scheme is established. Data fromanimal recording schemes are a valuable resource, at the farm, farmcommunity, regional and national levels. They originate with thefarmers, who in most cases should be considered to be the owners of thedata. Access to data from animal recording schemes should be managedto ensure that farmers have full access and opportunity to benefit from



results before they are provided to other users. Regulations on use of datashould be configured to permit relatively unrestricted use of records forvalid research and educational activities, for monitoring of performancelevels at the regional or scheme-wide levels, or for descriptive analyses.However, when recording involves individual-animal evaluations, as itmust when used for breed improvement, care must be taken to ensurethat the owners of the animals in question possess full information onthe estimated genetic merit of their animals before that information isconsidered for release to a wider audience.

2 3.9. Putting Data to Work: Using Results of Animal Recordingfor Animal Management and Genetic Improvement

A major challenge in designing animal recording schemes is to developprocedures that will encourage farmers to use results of animal recordingto enhance animal management and generate genetic improvement. Inorder for this to happen:

• results of animal recording must be returned to the farmersquickly. In many cases, decisions regarding the sale ormanagement of the animals in question will be made at thetime data is recorded, or very soon thereafter. Farmers musthave access to necessary results in time to make managementdecisions.

• farmers should have a clear idea of the anticipated benefitsof the animal recording scheme. They need to be clearly toldwhat actions they must take to acquire these benefits. It isnaïve to anticipate that farmers will see subjective benefitsfrom the knowledge obtained through animal recording.

• results must be presented in a form that the farmers canunderstand. It is not enough to simply return lists of adjustedmeasurements or average performance levels. Instead, resultsshould be placed in the context of recommendations formanagement and/or selection decisions. Presentation of



results should take into account the level of literacy andeducation among the farmers.

• assistance must be available to help farmers interpret andapply results. Someone must be available to explain results,answer questions, and direct farmers in making appropriatemanagement decisions. Ideally, that person will visit the farmson a regular basis and will often be the same person who helpswith data recording.

The process of animal recording is a cycle, as depicted in Figure 3.1.Data is recorded and processed. Results are returned, interpreted andused to make management decisions. The outcome of those managementdecisions are then measured in the next cycle of recording. The technicalstaff of the animal recording scheme must work with participatingfarmers at each step in the cycle to ensure the success of the scheme.

2 3.10. Documentation of Benefits

A structure for documenting benefits of animal recording should be anintegral part of the animal recording scheme. This can be done, in part,by choosing traits to measure that are directly associated with farmprofitability and by documenting positive changes in these traits overtime. However, results of monitoring of production, by itself, are oftennot enough to convince farmers of the benefits of animal recording.

Instead, the monitoring of production should be designed to specificallyinclude measures related to the well-being of participating farmers andtheir families. These measures should be financial, if possible, andexplicitly monitor increases sales, reduced costs, better use of limitedresources, etc. This is one reason why cooperative marketing schemes areoften a part of the animal recording scheme. In this way, marketinginformation is available to compare prices received and amount ofproduct marketed by participants of the scheme to those ofnonparticipants. When one of the benefits of the animal recording isimproved product quality, cooperative marketing schemes may be



particularly useful to document improved quality and receive appropriateprices.

Documentation of indirect benefits accruing to the families ofparticipants and to their community should be included in thedocumentation process. While more difficult to quantify, someimportant activities to support and document might include:

• setting up of farmers’ organisations

• conduct of village or regional educational programs

• youth recognition programs, scholarships, involvement ofyoung people in animal recording

• recognitions of outstanding producers, of the owners of thebest animals, and of the leaders of the animal recordingscheme

• cooperative marketing ventures, expanded market access,better marketing strategies

• sponsorship of fairs and sales of breeding stock that highlightthe genetic merit of animals as indicated from theirperformance and progeny records.

2 3.11. Development of Farmer Participation inEstablishing the Scheme

Farmer involvement and participation in the planning andimplementation of the scheme is critical to its long-term success. Thisstatement is true of any animal recording scheme, but is particularlycritical for animal recording for breed improvement because of the needfor consistent, long-term application of animal recording results in orderto achieve meaningful genetic change. The achievement of breedimprovement on participating farms absolutely requires a commitmentto the program from the farmers. Otherwise, data may be collected and



analysed with great sophistication, but will languish in folders and recordbooks.

Experience in developed countries has shown that it is not critical that allfarmers embrace an identical development objective, at least early in thelife of the recording scheme. It is far better that the farmers bepermitted and encouraged to identify the characteristics that theyrecognise as key to their own well being and be assisted indetermining what to measure in order to improve thosecharacteristics. Formal attention to definition of the developmentobjective is an essential exercise in animal improvement, but oncedefined initially it functions best as an educational tool to assist farmersin trait selection. The organisations involved in directing animalrecording schemes would do well to strive for progress towardconvergence of farmers’ goals and the goals of the objectively defineddevelopment objective. Indeed, farmers’ goals, while sometimes vaguelystated and defended, generally have strong pragmatic bases that may bemost consistent with the true limiting factors within the environmentand their consideration is important to configuration of both thedevelopment objective and the recording scheme.

Within any agricultural community, a leadership structure exists. Thatstructure may be formal, involving farmers’ organisations, villagecooperatives, social organisations or other entities, or may be informal,involving respected individuals or groups. The animal recording schemeshould actively involve that leadership structure in configuring thescheme. If no formal organisations exist, new organisations may need tobe created around influential, interested farmers.

Also, within any agricultural community, individuals and groups willexist that are essentially traditional and conservative in outlook versusthose that are essentially innovative and opportunistic. Perhaps one ofthe key indicators regarding the challenges that are likely to be faced inimplementing animal recording schemes will be the determination ofwhether the existing leadership structure is essentially conservative oressentially innovative. While agricultural leadership is often portrayed asconservative and traditional, groups of commercial or subsistence



farmers can often be surprisingly innovative if provided with clearevidence of real, sustained benefit from the innovation.

Farmers’ ideas on what constitutes genetic improvement within theproduction system and on how to achieve that improvement willneed to be acknowledged in order to develop a workable, effectiveanimal recording scheme. Technical personnel at all levels need to beinvolved in this process. Higher level technical inputs of theorists,geneticists and analysts need to be filtered through on-site technicalpersonnel to facilitate attainment of rapport across all levels of thescheme.

When the objective of the animal recording scheme is breedimprovement, consideration must also be given to identification andinvolvement as appropriate of existing producers of seedstock orgermplasm. It does little good to institute an animal recording schemeamong small farmers if they continue to purchase breeding males fromnonparticipating breeders. It likewise does little good to institute detailedanimal recording and breed improvement programs on state farms if nomechanism exists to demonstrate the value of the improved germplasmto farmers and to motivate them to use it at mutually acceptable prices.Thus those that participate in animal recording for breed improvementmust be encouraged and assisted to develop a vision of how theanticipated breed improvement will be marketed to assure an adequatereturn on the farmers’ investment.

2 3.12. Institutional Support for Animal Recording

Successful animal recording schemes require institutional support inseveral different areas. Some of these areas are best addressed by centraltechnical institutions, but many others can only be effectively addressedat the local level. The involvement of local institutions, or local offices ofa larger central institution, with good farmer involvement, is thereforecritical to the success of the animal recording scheme, diagrammed verygenerally in Figure 3.2.



An important part of planning for animal recording is the identificationof the institution(s) that will provide the various essential supportservices. These services include:

3.12.1. Field level technical support

On-farm technical support is required to implement, and insome cases to maintain, effective animal recordingprocedures. At a minimum, technicians must be available to:

• demonstrate data collection methods;

• familiarise farmers with the tools to be used in animalrecording (scales, tape measures, graduated containers,etc.); and

• familiarise farmers with the record-keeping requirementsof the animal recording scheme.

Recording of animal performance will often be done by localtechnicians who visit participating farms on a regular basis.These technicians must be located in close proximity to theparticipating farms, both to control costs of travel by thetechnicians and to permit development of a close workingrelationship between technicians and farmers. Wheneverpossible, field-level staff should be associated with existinglocal institutions. This arrangement allows the technicians totake advantage of both the physical facilities and thecredibility within the community of that local institution.Development of new institutional structures should beavoided if possible.



Figure 3.2: Country Institutional Structures for Animal Recording

ResearchInstitutes

Countr y-wide Focal Grou p(s)for Animal Recordin g

Universities

Local Institutions Local Institutions Local Institutions

Farmers Farmers Farmers Farmers Farmers Farmers

Local instutions

Farmers Farmers

Data

Inte

rpre

tativ

e s

umm

arie

s

Interpretative

summariesData

Dat

a

Interpretative

summ

aries

Interpretative

summaries

Data

DataInterpre summa

Dat

a

Dat

a

Dat

a Data

Data

Data

Data

Field Technical

Support

Field Technical

Support

Field TechnicalS

upport

Field Technical

Support

Field Technical

Support

Field TechnicalS

upport

Field Technical

Support

Res

ults

Res

ults

Res

ults

Results

Results

Results

Results



3.12.2. Analytical support

In some cases, simple analytical procedures may be requiredas a part of the animal recording scheme, and may have to bedone off the farm. Examples would be milk testing forprotein and fat content, or assessment of fibre qualitycharacteristics of wool, mohair, or cashmere. Unless a veryreliable system exists within the nation for transportingsamples to analytical facilities and for communicating resultsback to farmers, these analytical facilities must be establishedat the local level, preferably in association with existinginstitutions. If appropriate analytical facilities cannot beestablished in close proximity to participating farms, use ofsimpler alternative measures should be strongly considered.

3.12.3. Data management, processing, computing, and storage

Institutional responsibilities for data handling can varyconsiderably depending upon the overall structure of theanimal recording scheme (see Section 3.8.). Initial processingof data through a local institution is generally advantageousto allow errors or omissions to be promptly addressed at thelocal level. Institutional requirements for further processingof data and for production of data summaries, reports, andrecommendations will depend upon the technicalsophistication (in terms of both personnel and equipment)required. Whenever possible, data processing should occur atthe local level. If appropriate computing facilities andpersonnel are available, local institutions may also takeresponsibility for summarising collected data from allparticipating farms and producing summaries andcomparative reports.

3.12.4. Research

The capacity to use the data collected in an animal recordingscheme to address pertinent research issues is important andidentification of institutional support for continuing researchand development activities is an important consideration.



Mechanisms need to be established to allow farmers andlocal technicians to voice concerns and to translate thoseconcerns into specific research questions. Local institutions,by virtue of their more direct interactions with participatingfarmers, thus have an important role to play in theidentification of research priorities. The actual conduct ofdevelopmental research, however, generally requires access tohigher-level technical expertise characteristic of centralinstitutions. These central institutions may accomplishneeded research activities, either directly or throughcontracts or cooperative agreements with research institutesor universities.

3.12.5. Training

Training activities at different levels are required to establisheffective animal recording schemes. Each of the institutionsinvolved in the animal recording scheme must possessappropriately trained personnel to fulfill its specific mission.A part of that mission will involve the training of farmers,technicians, and intermediate-level professionals at variousother institutions.

In planning an animal recording scheme, appropriatetraining responsibilities must be allocated to each institutioninvolved with the scheme. The objective of that training is todevelop appropriate skills at each level of the animalrecording scheme. An important secondary objective is tobuild rapport and confidence among all support personnel inthe scheme. While training of farmers by field techniciansand of field technicians at local institutions will be mostcommon, involvement of personnel from local institutionsdirectly in farmer training and of technical staff from centralinstitutions in training of field staff and farmers is alsovaluable and serves to develop a feeling of connectednessamong staff and participants.



3.12.6. Management of the animal recording scheme

Overall management of the animal recording scheme will generally beassigned to a single central institution in a local area or country-wide.That institution, in consultation with other local institutions, farmers’organisations, and other stakeholders, will define the objectives and thescope of the animal recording activity. Operational management of thescheme, including the identification and recruitment of potentialparticipants, will be shared among the central institution and the variouslocal institutions, including farmers’ organisations, if they exist. Localinstitutions, including farmers’ organisations and cooperatives, willprovide mechanisms for farmer input into the operation of the schemethrough regular meetings, seminars, fairs, and other events.

3.12.7. Integration of programmes

Requests and opportunities for animal recording often arisein several agencies and organisations within the same regionor country. While these requests may all be valid and maylead to collection of useful data, animal recording activitiesshould be integrated under a single institutional structurewhenever possible. This often does not happen, as variousagencies involving farm planning, veterinary services, breedimprovement, etc., with different administrative structuresand funding sources all too often end up approaching thesame group(s) of farmers to implement specific animalrecording schemes. The result of such a piecemeal approachis to unnecessarily complicate the farmers’ management asdifferent agencies attempt to impose different schedules, usedifferent personnel, and utilise different methodologies.

It is far better if animal recording efforts can be integratedunder a single organisational and institutional structure, avery general schematic being given in Figure 3.2. While itwould be naïve to minimise the challenges inherent inintegrating recording activities across agencies andinstitutions, the advantages of clear lines of responsibility and



accountability, nonambiguous direction, and consistentmethodologies argue strongly for integration of animalrecording activities within each region and(or) productionsystem.

2 3.13. Who Pays? - The Costing of Animal Recording Schemes

Evidence from successful animal recording schemes is overwhelmingthat adequate external funding is necessary to implement an animalrecording scheme. The source(s) of funding may be government,various international agencies, nongovernmental organisations, or otherprivate sources, but clearly neither the farmers themselves, theirorganisations, nor the consumers of the nation have shown thewillingness and foresight to support the initial establishment of animalrecording schemes. However, the evidence is likewise very strong thatsuccessful animal recording schemes also involve at least somesignificant contribution by participating farmers toward covering theoperating costs of the scheme.

Animal recording is expensive. The actual costs of data collection on thefarms is only a small part of the total cost of animal recording. Even themost efficient animal recording schemes still require coordination,technical inputs to design and monitor data collection and storageprocedures, an analytical capacity, an educational and farmer liaisoncapacity, data processing and storage facilities, and equipment for datacollection, management, analysis and storage, and distribution of results.These costs of establishment of the animal recording scheme must beborne by government or other funding agencies. Farmers will notrecognise levels of benefit sufficient to justify the initial investmentthat is required, and, in fact, are unlikely to receive initial benefitssufficient to cover establishment costs. Thus the nation must recognisethat these schemes will have diffuse benefits to consumers, farmers, andthe rural economy as a whole which justify the use of public funds intheir establishment and initial conduct.



It is equally important, however, that the participating farmers providesome level of financial support for operation of the animal recordingscheme. Without such a commitment, the farmers have no stake in theoperation of the scheme, have little power to influence its operation, andhave little motivation to provide accurate, timely data. In many cases,the farmers’ initial contributions will be minimal, involving little morethan the time and effort required to provide access to the animals and toassist in data collection.

Successful establishment of an animal recording scheme should thereforeinvolve financial contributions from:

• Government, to provide baseline funding necessary foroperation of the scheme over the period of 10 to 20 yearswhich may be required to establish animal recording as anintegral component of livestock management. If this baselinepublic funding is not available, then organisers of the schemewill be challenged to:

♦ maintain funding from other external sources (donoragencies, nongovernmental organisations, private sources,etc.) for comparable periods of time, or

♦ accelerate farmer willingness to accept more responsibilityfor funding the scheme, which will require the scheme togenerate and document an exceptional level of benefit.

• Public and private donors and funding agencies, which mayplay a major role in initial establishment of the infrastructurerequired for animal recording (facilities, equipment, dataprocessing and storage capability). These funding sources mayalso contribute to important enhancements in the activities ofthe scheme by providing for research, educational programsand materials, key supplemental equipment, etc. However,funds of this sort often are provided for relatively shortperiods of time (5 or, rarely, 10 years). These periods are oftentoo short to allow an animal recording scheme to mature to apoint where it can be self-supporting. Thus the need forcontinued baseline funding from government.



• Farmers and their organisation, who should be assigned a partof the cost of animal recording from the beginning, even ifthose costs are initially waived and are subsidised for someadditional period.

A financial structure for collecting funds to support animal recordingis required. Charges can be assessed on a per animal measured basis, aper farm basis, in proportion to farm production, or some combinationof the above. It is often advantageous for contributions of farmers to theanimal recording scheme to be made through some farmers’ organisationto provide for greater accountability to farmers and a greater sense ofcontrol. If no such organisation exists, its establishment should beencouraged. Fees can be assessed by the farmers’ organisation and thenused to cover costs of recording. If benefits of animal recording are beingcaptured through organised marketing of greater amount of products orhigher prices received, some sort of assessment at marketing by thefarmers’ organisation or cooperative may be used as a source of farmerfunding.

2 3.14. Potential for Privatisation

3.14.1. Planning for privatisation

Under the economic conditions which prevail worldwidetoday, governments and other funding organisations havebecome increasingly reluctant to assume on-goingresponsibility for programmes such as animal recording, evenwhen those programmes may produce clear benefits to thenation as a whole (such as a more plentiful, higher quality,and less seasonal food supply). Instead, the prevalent modeltoday involves a finite investment in both funds and timetoward establishment of a programme, with eventualwithdrawal of those funds under the assumption that if theprogramme is successful, it will be maintained by itsbeneficiaries. While it has already been noted that the



duration of funding is often far too short to establish aworking animal recording scheme, the fact remains that apart of the planning for such a scheme must includeprovision for it to eventually become substantially, if notcompletely, self-supporting.

Assumptions necessary to permit consideration ofprivatisation are:

• that the recording scheme has generated, and iscontinuing to generate, genuine benefits for farmers, thatthose benefits have been documented and quantified, andthat the farmers recognise and accept that the animalrecording scheme is the source of those benefits;

• that an organisation has been established within the ruralcommunity that can manage the operations of the animalrecording scheme and that is committed to the overallgoals of the scheme;

• that the benefits of the scheme are, in fact, sufficient to atleast cover the operating costs of the scheme.

• when breed improvement is one of the goals of thescheme, privitisation also requires that a breedingstructure has evolved within the community that permitsidentification and marketing of genetically superioranimals generated within the animal recording scheme atpremium prices consistent with that genetic superiority.

3.14.2. Animal recording as a business

Privatisation is most commonly taken to mean theassumption of the responsibilities of the animal recordingscheme by farmers through their organisations, but theestablishment of independent private businesses to provideanimal recording services to farmers is another alternative.Models of privitising animal recording as a business areexpanding throughout both the developed and developing



nations. An important advantage of such a structure is thehigh level of accountability placed on the independentproviders who must serve their clients well to retain theirbusiness. A potential disadvantage is that competition amongpotential service providers may lead to inconsistentprocedures and offerings. This is a particularly seriousproblem in animal recording for breed improvement whereconsistency of methodologies and objectives is particularlyimportant. However, if animal recording is primarily foranimal management with little need for long-termmaintenance of records, pedigree recording, or accumulationof data across management units, private animal recordingschemes may be quite effective. On the other hand, whenneither public agencies nor farmers’ organisations are theprimary managers of the animal recording activity,correspondingly less attention is given to the importantcollateral goals of rural development and national foodsecurity.

3.14.3. Long-term public involvement in animal recording

Strong arguments can be made for ongoing participation in,and contributions to, animal recording schemes by public orquasi-public agencies. Particularly important roles that areunlikely to be taken on by individual service providers orbreeders’ organisations, particularly within developingnations, include the development and standardisation ofrecording methodology, development and implementationof analytical methodology, long-term maintenance of data,and the conduct of comprehensive multi-farm ormultiregional analyses. Much of this can be achieved withincentral institutions through appropriate agreements withprivate sector service providers and breeders’ organisations.Higher level organisations (“organisations of organisations”)may also play at least some of the coordinating roles, as theInternational Committee for Animal Recording (ICAR)currently does within the developed nations and is beginningto do within the developing nations.



Public involvement in animal recording schemes also permitseasier public access to the participants, resources, andinformation generated by the scheme when needed forplanning activities or when questions or issues arise that needto be addressed by a specific animal recording activity (e.g.,evaluation of a new vaccine, assessment of environmentalimpacts, etc.). Public involvement also facilitates greaterattention within the scheme to issues of public good such aseducation, rural development, and national food security.Continued provision of limited public funds and of access totechnical personnel on long-term basis is justified in order tocapture these benefits.

The Conduct of Animal RecordingSecondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification 71

The Conduct of Animal Recording

1 Section 4. The Conduct of Animal Recording

Certain additional guidelines are required for the conduct of the animalrecording scheme. These guidelines are summarized in Table 4.1 andrelate primarily to interactions between the staff of the scheme and theparticipating farmers. In all cases, conduct of the scheme should bedesigned to encourage the farmers to actively participate in thescheme, to become involved in its planning and management, and tointegrate results from the scheme into livestock management plans.

2 4.1. Getting Started: The Implementation of Animal Recording

Before the beginning of the animal recording process itself, severalactivities must be completed in order to lay the ground work for futuresuccess. These include:

4.1.1. Identification of the institutions that will provide support foranimal recording, and of the responsibilities of eachinstitution.

Including:

• commitments of space and facilities,

• procurement, delivery, and installation of laboratory,clerical, and data processing equipment,

• specification of responsibilities of each institution, of linesof communication among institutions, and of theadministrative structure that will govern interactionsamong institutions

• budgets for each institution for the animal recordingscheme including sources and amounts of funds andspecification of fiscal responsibilities for operations,equipment, salaries, etc.

Table 4.1: The Conduct of Animal Recording – Key Activities and Operating Guidance

Physical and InstitutionActivities

Staff Activities Farmer Activities

Implementation

Maintenance

• Institutional commitments ofspace and facilities.

• Procure equipment.• Develop and define

administrative structure.

• Develop budgets.

• Minimise data processingtime.

• Respond to farmers’concerns.

• Identify and publicise benefits.

• Conduct annual and strategicreviews.

• Develop facilities andequipment.

• Employ staff:- Administrative,- Technical,- Field staff.

• Procure supplies and equipment.

• Define expectations of field staff.

• Train staff.

• Build linkages among staff.

• Adhere to schedules.

• Solicit farmer feedback.

• Interpret results and provide advice.

• Provide backup support for field staff.

• Respond to farmers’ concerns.

• Identify benefits.

• Develop farmers’ organisations andcapabilities.

• Public meetings:– community groups,– farmers’ organisations,– potential partifcipants.

• Identify participants.

• Meetings with participants.

• Specify essential arrangements.

• Define responsibilities.• Preliminary visits by field staff:

– train farmers,– define who will do the,

recording,– identify animals.

• Provide clear and reliableschedules and expectations.

• Create opportunities for feedback.

• Schedule regular farmer meeting.

• Accept increasing levels ofresponsibility for recording and forfunding.



4.1.2. Employment of staff

Including:

• administrative staff with appropriate support

• technical staff, either directly employed by the animalrecording scheme or under contracts from other research,technical, or educational agencies

• field staff, located appropriately to serve the farmers

4.1.3 Procurement of equipment to support field operations

Initially the animal recording scheme should be prepared tosupply all equipment and supplies needed for the schemeincluding measuring tools, recording supplies and forms,mailers, educational material, decision aids, and animalidentification supplies.

4.1.4 Definition of operating procedures for field staff

Including:

• expectations for number of farms to be served by eachtechnician and the distribution of these farms. How manyfarms will be served, and will they be in a single village ormore widely distributed?

• assign each technician to a specific group of farms

• define expected duties of technicians in terms of animalmeasurement and recording, farmer education,monitoring of the scheme, and advice. Define a schedulefor the number of times each farm is to be visited and theactivities at each visit.

• define how transportation and communication supportwill be provided for technicians



• define how technicians will be employed and paid.Technicians might be either full-time employees of thescheme or part-time contractors hired from localcommunities. If technicians are contractors, they willlikely be paid based on performance (farms served,animals recorded, etc.). Define these arrangements.

4.1.5. Training of field staff, including both technical training andtraining in the objectives of the scheme

Opportunity should be provided for interactions among fieldtechnicians and between technicians and upper level staff.

4.1.6. Identification of participating farmers

Including:

• preliminary public meetings to inform farmers ofopportunities to participation, to get feedback fromfarmers, to build community enthusiasm, and to allowfarmers to get to know staff and technical personnel.Emphasis in these meetings should be on specific benefitsexpected from the scheme and on the expectations ofparticipants

• meetings with pertinent farmers’ organisations, when theyexist, to obtain support and feedback

• identification of the actual participants, followed byseveral small group meetings to define expectations,requirements, and services to be provided

• specification of all financial arrangements involvingparticipants, including clear statements of all fees andpayments involved and scheduling of these fees andpayments. Clearly distinguish short-term financialarrangements (e.g., initial waiver of fees or outrightpayments to farmers) from anticipated long-termarrangements (e.g., eventual farmer fees).



• specification of responsibilities of farmers (short- andlong-term) versus responsibilities of technicians

• preliminary farm visits by field staff

4.1.7. Schedule the flow of data to allow for timely transmission,processing, summarisation, and return of data

4.1.8. Animal identification

Specify how animals will be identified and acquire thenecessary supplies. Animal must be identified either beforerecording begins or on the first recording date.

2 4.2. The First Cycle of Recording

The first cycle of animal recording includes the initial measurement andrecording of data, the initial processing of that data, its return to thefarmers in summarised and interpreted form, the use of the data to makemanagement/selection decisions, and the documentation of theoutcomes of those decisions. It is critical that all steps in the first cycle becarried out in accordance with the plans and commitments made duringplanning of the scheme. Experiences by the farmers during this first cyclewill do much to define future performance and expectations. Specificconsiderations include:

• Scheduling. Farmers must be clearly informed about whentechnicians will visit the farms and those schedules must bemet.

• Expectations. Farmers must be clearly informed about what isexpected of them prior to, or at the time of, the technician’svisit. If farmers are doing some or all of the measurements, thetiming and nature of those measurements must be clear, andinitial compliance should be closely monitored.

• Initial feedback. On-farm training and education regardingmeasurement procedures, recording, and anticipated results



should be a major task at the initial farm visit. This visitshould be used as an opportunity to plan future visits andapplications of results.

• On-going feedback must continue throughout the cycle.Opportunities to communicate with farmers during this firstcycle should be maximised to maintain enthusiasm andsupport applications. Particular attention should be paid todocumenting results of data-based management decisions.

• Provide a support system for programme technicians.Technicians who visit the farms during this initial cycle ofrecording will encounter particular challenges. Provide a wayfor technicians to get help and advice from higher-level staff asneeded. Aid technicians in establishing credibility withfarmers.

• At the end of the first cycle of recording, meetings betweenparticipating farmers and staff should be scheduled to allowdiscussions among farmers regarding experiences andproblems. Key problems should be identified and promptlyaddressed. Positive results of the first cycle of recording shouldbe highlighted.

2 4.3. Maintenance: Sustaining Enthusiasm and Commitment

Operating guidelines applied during the first cycle of recording must besustained and updated as needed as the scheme continues. Key pointsare:

• Scheduling. Schedules must be tightly maintained, both interms of technician visits and timely reporting of data. Avoidcomplacency.

• Promote farmer involvement, training, and responsibility.Each interaction between farmers and technicians is anopportunity to encourage farmers to become more involvedin the recording process. Use these opportunities to support



development of farmers’ measurement skills andunderstanding of animal recording.

• Advice and education. Maintain an active program of helpingfarmers to interpret and apply results of animal recording.

• Listen to, and react to, farmer concerns. Technicians andadministrative staff should meet periodically to identify theseconcerns.

• Maintain an absolute commitment to timely processing andreturn of summarised and interpreted data.

• Make recording and documenting of benefits an integral partof the recording scheme. Include both direct benefits(increased profits, production, productivity) and indirectbenefits (community development).

2 4.4. Review

4.4.1. Annual review

Establish an efficient, concise annual review procedure,including:

• Documentation of animal recording activities includingnumbers of participating farms, numbers of animalsrecorded, numbers of records processed, educationalmaterials and decision aids developed and distributed.

• A one- or two-day meeting of the staff of the schemeincluding field technicians to review progress, concerns,and opportunities. This is also an opportunity to buildenthusiasm and consensus among field staff.

• A field day or similar program should be scheduled tohighlight accomplishments to the farmers. Focus oneducational activities, recognition of participants, and



summaries of benefits. Invite both participating andnonparticipating farmers.

• Provide an annual report to appropriate administrativeand government agencies (including local and villagegovernments) and to funding bodies.

4.4.2. Strategic review

A detailed strategic review should be conducted every 5 yearsor so. Particular objectives of this review should be:

• External evaluation. Experts from outside the schemeshould be involved to provide a neutral perspective.

• Detailed assessment of benefits. A comprehensive anddetailed listing of the benefits of the scheme should becompiled and critically evaluated.

• Identification of needs and opportunities to enhanceoperational procedures and benefits. Identify key successesand limitations. Assess progress and opportunities forimprovement.

• Evaluate opportunities to expand the number ofparticipants.

• Revise operating procedures as necessary.

2 4.5. Further Development

4.5.1. Enhancements to the recording process

At implementation, it is important that the animal recordingscheme be kept as simple and straightforward as possible.The traits to be measured should be those that are mostdirectly related to the development objective and are mosteasily measured on participating farms.



However, one of the development goals for an animalrecording scheme will be to expand the number and/or detailof the measurements recorded to provide better informationto the farmers. This can only occur as farmers see benefitsfrom animal recording and become willing to do more toobtain potentially more benefits. Thus a part of the conductof the animal recording scheme is to assist farmers to betterappreciate opportunities for additional benefits fromadditional measurements. A part of the development processcan be to identify subsets of participants who willdemonstrate new recording opportunities. These moreprogressive farmers can encourage others to adopt morecomprehensive recording procedures.

4.5.2. Greater farmer responsibility for recording

In most cases, one of the long-term (10- to 20-year) goalsof an animal recording scheme is to shift responsibilityfor measuring and recording from technicians to farmers.Expanded farmer involvement in conduct of the scheme isalso desired. Provision to shift more responsibility to farmersshould exist, but can only be achieved on a gradual basis.Substantial early investments in farmer training andeducation will be required.

4.5.3. New opportunities for benefit

Development of strong farmers’ organisations is desirable tosupport animal recording schemes. These organisationsshould be helped and encouraged to become involved in abroad range of activities to develop the rural economy.Development of cooperative marketing or purchasingprogrammes, educational programmes, or community-basedresource management programmes are examples. Schememanagers should be alert to opportunities for new waysfor farmers to benefit, either directly from the animalrecording activity or indirectly through better organisation.



2 4.6. Building Farmer Involvement

A sense of ownership of the animal recording scheme should bedeveloped among participating farmers. Thus the scheme should focuson the needs and desires of these farmers. Activities that can increaseparticipation of farmers in the conduct of animal recording include:

• Better communication among participating farmers andbetween farmers and staff members (both field and technical).Field days, farmer meetings, and educational events provideopportunities for such communications.

• Identification of successful farmers and their use as advocatesfor animal recording. Also identify community leaders andenlist their support.

• Enlist involvement of existing farmers’ organisations andcooperatives in the management of the scheme. If suchorganisations do not exist, encourage their formations. Be surethat they have a voice in the operations of the scheme.Farmers’ groups may be especially effective at collecting andmanaging farmers’ contributions to funding the scheme.When farmers’ organisations contribute to the costs of thescheme, try to identify areas that are both important to thescheme and of high priority to farmers, and focus use offarmers’ funds in these areas.

• Involve the animal recording scheme, either directly orindirectly, in youth education and improving the quality ofrural life.

• Build markets for animal products. In particular, when animalrecording is for genetic improvement, provide assistance inmarket of breeding stock at premium prices throughsponsored auctions or contract sales to other farmers.

Animal Recording in Medium Input Production Environments– Special Operational Issues and Opportunities

Secondary Guidelines – Sustainable Intensification 81


1 Section 5. Animal Recording in Medium InputProduction Environments—Special Operational Issues and Opportunities

This section of these guidelines will address specific issues involved inanimal recording in medium-input production systems. WhereasSections 3 and 4 dealt primarily with the planning and conduct ofanimal recording schemes, Section 5 will focus on the animal recordingactivity itself in terms of unique considerations in medium- inputproduction environments.

Animal recording in developed nations has, over time, become arelatively standardised process. Use of standardised methodologiesenhances communications, permits greater comparability of results, andhas aided in development of international genetic evaluation procedures.Organisations such as the International Committee on AnimalRecording (ICAR) have evolved to extend the concept of standardisedanimal recording procedures across national boundaries and have playeda strong facilitative role in globalisation of animal recording and geneticevaluation for some inportant species. Recent commitments from ICARto extend its activities into the medium- to low-input production systemsof the developing world bode well for the establishment of scientifically-based, cost-effective and suitable standardised and sustainable recordingprocedures in these critical regions of the world.

In establishing animal recording programs in both developing countriesand in the medium-input systems of the developed nations, it is notappropriate to simply apply the same techniques used for animalrecording in high-input production systems. Instead, existingmethodologies must be critically evaluated and adapted to fit these lessstructured, lower cost production systems; and possibilities for the use ofindigenous production system technologies should also be examined.The goals of animal recording should not, however, be compromised;the rigorous, objective characterisation of animal performance withthe subsequent use of that data to enhance the well-being of farmers,consumers, and their communities remains a priority.




Issues to be addressed in carrying out an effective animal recordingscheme include:

2 5.1. What to Measure.

Traits to measure may be categorized into six groups: Output, productquality, input, productivity, life history, and adaptation traits.Characteristics of these groups are summarized in Table 5.1.

5.1.1. Measurement of output

Animal production levels are an important component ofoverall animal merit, although, as discussed below, notnecessarily the most important component in low- tomedium-input production environments. Thus recording ofthe main output variables is indicated. In dairy production,this involves recording of milk production levels at variouspoints during lactation and of the duration of lactation. Sucha set of measurements allows estimation of total milkproduction. Changes in total milk production over time(years) also provide an indication of benefits from thescheme and, if a sizable proportion of the milk is marketed,of gross farm income.




Table 5.1: Animal Recording – What to Measure?

Trait Category Characteristics

Outputs

Product Quality

Inputs

Productivity

Life History Traits

Adaptation

• Relatively easy to measure• Directly related to production and income• May not be directly related to productivity and profit

• Usually relatively easy to measure• May require simple equipment to measure (milk composition; fibre

quality)• Important only if the markets reward quality

• Have a great impact on productivity and profit• Difficult to measure directly• Emphasise indicator traits

• Composite indicators of net merit may be relatively simple to measurebut can be complex to interpret

• Not necessarily ideal for use in genetic improvement programmes

• Involve reproductive and health-related measures• High economic importance• Important to maintain a favourable age structure• Requires careful recording

• Key trait controlling productivity and profit• Unique to each production environment• Difficult to measure directly• Emphasise indicator traits




When meat production is involved, measures of body size arethe main indicators of production. Body size is ideallymeasured in all animals at similar ages, and, assuming thatbirth dates are known, can be further adjusted to a constantage. Generally measures of body size may be taken atweaning, at times when animals are chosen for marketing,and at times when management or nutrition change (forexample at transitions from wet to dry seasons or whenanimals are brought in from summer grazing for winter). Inmost cases, an indicator of body size at a relatively young ageis desirable because, at least in suckling mammals, such ameasure provides information on both the growth potentialof the offspring and the mothering ability of the dam.

A measurement of body size is usually also needed atmarketing time, because this is when replacement animalsare distinguished from market animals and because thesemeasures of body size will be most closely related to animalvalue and farm income. In many cases, and especially in low-input smallholder production systems, there will be strongpressure to sell the largest (i.e., most valuable animals), eventhough these may also be the best replacements. Carefulanalysis may be required to determine which of these is reallybest for the farmer, followed by an educational programmeto make results of the analysis known.

Other measures of body size may be useful, depending uponthe production environment and the pattern of parturitionsand marketing (see Section 5.1.2.). Measures of offspringgrowth should also not be neglected in dairy productionwhere sales of offspring may be an important source ofincome. However, it should be recognised that in dairyproduction, the number of offspring produced per year isprobably more important than their growth rate which willbe primarily influenced by how much milk they are allowedto drink. By-products of meat production, such as hides forleather may also be a source of income, and must be




recognised as important. Suitability of surplus males for draftmay also be an issue in both meat and dairy production.

In poultry production, both meat and eggs will usually bothbe important products, and scavenger birds may be animportant source of both food and income from sale ofsurplus products. With a short life cycle and reasonably largenumbers of animals produced in even smallholderproduction systems, identification, measurement andevaluation of individual birds is rarely practiced in medium-and low-input systems. However, use of animal recording tospecifically compare native and imported birds or otherdifferent germplasm sources may be important. Suchcomparisons will involve measurement of number of eggs,duration of lay (i.e., broodiness characteristics), and growthof offspring.

In fibre production, weight of fleece is commonly measured.If animals are all sheared annually at about the same time,duration of fibre growth is automatically standardised.However, if possible, it may be necessary to adjust forreproductive status (open, lactating, number of offspringsuckled) or for age.

5.1.2. Measurement of product quality

Definitions of product quality must be made in relation tocurrent and potential markets and family needs. Attention toproduct quality is appropriate only if improving productquality leads to increased food security and product prices orif measures of product quality are indicators of otherfavorable production characteristics (e.g., lean animalsusually have higher feed efficiency).

The most common measures of product quality in dairyproduction are fat and protein content of the milk. In fibreproduction, fibre diameter (“fineness”) is the most commonmeasure of value, although there are other potentially




important quality attributes (including scouring yield andfibre length, uniformity, color, strength, etc.). Thesemeasures are relatively simple to obtain, but require use ofsimple laboratory equipment and often cannot be evaluateddirectly on the farm. Instead, a common situation for milkand fibre recording is to evaluate quality measurements whenproduct is delivered to market. This is generally anacceptable approach, but does require that the identity of theanimals producing the product be recorded and maintaineduntil product quality traits have been measured.

Measurement of product quality in meat production systemsis more challenging. First, one must define what constitutes“quality” in a particular market. Increasingly, lean meatproducts are being favored, but fat is still not discriminatedagainst in many markets. An intermediate optimum amountof fat is commonly desired, and in harsh environments maybe difficult to attain. Even when freedom from externalwaste fat is desired, relatively high quantities of intramuscularfat may be desired to optimise eating quality of the lean. Thisis a particular issue in pig and poultry production indeveloping countries where very lean types may not bepreferred.

Sophisticated measures of meat quality involving directmeasurements of carcasses or meat samples or the use ofultrasonic equipment on live animals will generally not befeasible under developing-country conditions. In most cases,measures of product quality in meat production will berestricted, at least initially, to simple condition (fatness) andmuscling scores to accompany measures of body size. Ifpersons assigning the scores are properly trained, such scorescan provide reasonably accurate and repeatable indications ofbody composition. In pigs, simple physical measures ofbackfat depth can be obtained using a backfat probe.Research relating animal scores or backfat measurements toprices received in local markets can then be conducted and




used to better estimate animal value from recordedmeasurements.

Other measures of product value that may need to beconsidered, especially when comparing diverse genetic typesor exotic breeds, include color of hair, wool or feathers, andpelt and hide characteristics.

5.1.3. Measurement of inputs

Estimates of the inputs required to support production maybe critically important components of the developmentobjective, but are frequently very difficult to incorporatedirectly into an animal recording scheme. By far the mostimportant measure of a production input that might bedesired is a measure of feed intake. If feed intake informationwere available, then measures of production could beadjusted for the feed required to achieve that production,giving a better measure of animal productivity or efficiency.

Individual measurements of feed intake are rarely included inanimal recording schemes in developed countries and areessentially impossible on a large scale under developingcountry conditions. Estimation of feed intake is particularlydifficult for grazing or scavenging animals. However, in somedeveloping country situations, cut and carry feeding toindividual animals is employed and limited quantities ofenergy and/or protein supplements may be provided to someanimals for short periods of time. Recording of feed andsupplemental feed levels, when provided on an individualanimal basis (such as during lactation) may be useful,however, in evaluating production data.

Since feed intake will often not be measured, an alternative isto identify other measures which may serve as indicators offeed intake. Among practical measures, information on adultor near-adult body size may be most useful as it indicates theamount of feed required for animal maintenance. Simple




prediction equations can be used to estimate feedrequirements for animals of different sizes. Thus if twoanimals have the same level of production but differ in bodysize, the smaller animal is expected to have consumed lessfeed to achieve that production and to have higherproductivity. When larger animals also have higherproduction, it is more difficult to assess productivity andresearch may be required to define relationships among bodysize, condition scores, production levels, and feed intake inthe environment of interest.

Other inputs that may impact on productivity includerequirements for health care, housing and reproductivemanagement. While at least some of these inputs may bemeasurable in theory, their actual recording in practicalproduction systems has proven difficult. However,reasonable indicators of these inputs may be derived fromrecords of reproductive performance and life history traits(see Section 5.1.5.). Finally, differences among animals intime and labor requirements may be significant and maysignificantly impact on productivity. Although very difficultto measure, the value of “trouble-free” animals is greatindeed.

5.1.4. Direct measures of productivity

Several direct indicators of animal productivity (output perunit input), derived from simple animal measures, have beenproposed as both animal evaluation tools and selectioncriteria. These indicators are composite measures ofproductivity and are designed to summarise animalperformance across some production cycles. Examplesinclude:

• milk production per unit time, calculated by dividing thetotal lactation yield by the time between successivelactations to account for differences in interval betweencalvings.




• milk production per unit body size, calculated by dividingtotal lactation yield by a measure of body size to adjust foranimal feed requirements.

• weight of offspring weaned or marketed per unit timeand/or per unit of dam size to adjust productivity fordifferences in time between parturitions, litter size,offspring survival, and offspring growth.

• weight of product produced per day of age, calculated bydividing total lifetime production by animal age toaccount for time to first parturition. This variable isaffected by number of parturitions and so only animalswith the same number of parturitions can be directlycompared.

These measurements may serve to identify the mostproductive animals provided the indicator chosen adequatelyportrays key input-output relationships. They are particularlyuseful as culling tools to identify lowly animal with lowproductivity. These composite measures of productivitymust be used more carefully, however, as indicators ofgenetic merit. Because they are constructed by combininginformation on several different traits, their geneticproperties are difficult to define and may differ amongproduction systems and/or environments. It is not clear thatselection based on a single composite measure ofproductivity will be as effective as selecting on some otherfunction of the component traits. Thus definition of optimalselection criteria will require investigation of the geneticproperties of the composite trait and its components inrelation to the development objective in the productionsystem of interest.

5.1.5. Measurement of life history traits

Life history traits are those that define critical events in theanimal’s productive life. They are generally time-related,including such things as dates of birth, weaning, matings,




parturitions, sale, medical treatments, ending of lactation,and death. If animals are closely managed, as in dairyproduction, life history traits are easily observed but mustalso be properly recorded. One of the challenges in recordinglife history traits is that their measurement often cannot bescheduled and therefore must be recorded by the farmers. Itis therefore important to carefully identify the mostimportant life history traits, to impress upon the farmers theimportance of recording these traits, and to providenecessary directions and supplies for recording. Carefulmonitoring of recording will also be needed to ensure properdata collection.

Recording of life history traits is more difficult when thenumber of animals is large or animals are managedextensively, as in the case of grazing ruminants. Still, grazinganimals are often herded in many developing countrysituations and, if animal identifiers can be read from adistance (e.g., brands, large ear tags), information on birthdates and other life history traits may be able to be recorded.

Measurement of life history traits is particularlyimportant in low- to medium-input production systemsin developing countries. In these situations, animals oftendevelop slowly and enter production at relatively advancedages. For example, in these situations, cattle and buffalooften do not calve for the first time until 4 or 5 years of age.When animals do not begin their productive lives early, it isabsolutely essential that production subsequently bemaintained for many years. Thus if a cow calves for the firsttime at four years of age and then lactates for only two years,two thirds of her life has been spent in an unproductive stateand the number of offspring produced is barely able toaccommodate her replacement. Longevity is thus a veryimportant trait in developing countries and one that oftensuffers from introduction of exotic types of high-productionpotential. Though it is difficult to select directly for longevity




because it is not expressed until late in life, measurement oflongevity and choice of replacements from females with along productive history may make an importantcontribution to the development objective.

The main life history traits can be divided into:

5.1.5.1. Reproductive traits.

These are the traits that must be measured to characterise theanimals’ reproductive efficiency. At a minimum, records ofparturitions are required in most animal recording schemes.If births cannot be recorded daily, they must at least berecorded every few days, and usually at least weekly, toidentify groups of animals of similar age or stage of lactation.Other measures of reproduction such as dates of return tooestrus and dates of breeding may be recorded if animals arebeing closely observed and handled. Under extensiveproduction, it is important to at least know when males andfemales are together (see Section 5.2.).

5.1.5.2. Health-related traits.

The occurrence of disease and the need for health care canimportantly affect animal productivity and profitability.Thus it is desirable to identify animals that require higher-than-normal levels of health care. While health-relatedproblems are often fairly easy to observe, the incorporationof effective, efficient health recording procedures into animalrecording schemes has been difficult in both developed anddeveloping schemes. Some successes have been achieved inmilk recording when animals are handled daily, but successeshave been notably lacking in meat and fibre recording. Ifhealth-related traits are a key part of the developmentobjective, the appropriate strategy is to focus on only a veryfew key health problems and to try to get recording of theirincidence or treatment. Attempts to record a wide array ofhealth-related events should be deferred until farmers




become thoroughly familiar with recording procedures andmay never by very successful.

5.1.6. Measurement of adaptation

Adaptation, while difficult to define, is a criticalcharacteristic in many production systems. Adaptation is nota single trait; rather it involves different sets of characteristicsin each production environment. Thus evaluation ofadaptation must first involve identification of the mostimportant animal stressors, including diseases, climaticvariable, endo- and ectoparasites, dietary deficiencies, andseasonal feed shortages. Appropriate, measurable indicatorsof susceptibility to these stressors must then be identified.

Among the simple performance measures already discussed,measures of growth rate and body size, of reproductiveperformance, of survival of offspring, and of various health-related events can often be used as indicators of adaptation,especially if scheduled to correspond with high-stress periods.Poorly adapted animals do not produce, reproduce orsurvive well.

More specific measures of adaptation also can be defined andmay be practical under farm conditions if strongly related tothe development objective. Recording of specific health-related life history traits may be warranted for a few keydiseases. Scores or counts can be used to quantify resistanceto ticks. Simple laboratory determinations of egg counts infeces can quantify internal parasite loads. Measures ofchanges in body size during high-stress periods (e.g., winteror the dry season) can be used to indicate adaptation to thenutrient environment.




2 5.2. When to Measure: The Scheduling of Animal Recording

The issue of when to measure animals relates primarily to thecloseness of the relationship between the owner and the animals. Thecloser the relationship, the greater the potential to directly measure traitsof interest. The scheduling of measurements must also be related to theproduction cycle as depicted in Figure 5.1 for milk and meat recording.

5.2.1. Milk recording

Procedures for milk recording are relatively advanced in bothdeveloped and developing nations because the collection ofmilk requires intimate association between the farmer andthe individual animal. The product (milk) is available on aregular basis for evaluation and is easily associated with theanimal producing the product. Because milk collection forhuman use usually begins at or near the beginning oflactation, time of parturition is usually known withreasonable accuracy, and significant events occurring duringlactation (oestrus, health problems, rebreeding) may bedirectly observed. Access to animals for other measures is alsogenerally available, at least during lactation. Decisions onwhen to record performance of lactating animals is thereforeprimarily a function of determining what pattern ofrecording is optimal from a data collection/utilisationstandpoint and possible in terms of farmer willingness toparticipate.




Figure 5.1 : The Scheduling of Animal Recording for Milk and Meat Traits

MILK TRAITS MEAT TRAITS

Parturition

end of lactation

next parturition

mating

mating

removeoffspring

lactation

parturition

off spring

growth

weaning

linearpostweaninggrowth

sale or slaughtercarcass evaluation

seasonalcycles of

growth

damrebreeding

nextparturition

or




5.2.2. Egg recording

Egg production represents another situation where theanimal product is generally harvested daily. However,depending upon the production system and the number offemales involved, daily production may not be easilyassociated with individual females. Thus, as discussed insection 5.3., the use of “tools” of some sort may be requiredfor individual animal assessment unless the flock is very smalland the arrangement of the laying house is such that thefarmer can accurately assess individual production.

5.2.3. Meat recording

Production of meat and hides usually involves a singleharvest time which may be the same for all animals or maybe determined on an individual basis. Even though sale orslaughter is the time when meat is harvested, this is generallynot be the best time to assess meat production traits,especially in developing-country production systems. Onemust instead attempt to identify times in the productioncycle when cohorts of animals are accessible for evaluationand when the members of that cohort can be fairlycompared.

The primary trait used to evaluate rate of meat production isbody size at a fixed age or the increase in body size betweentwo or more fixed ages. For intensively managed or closelyheld animals, measurement of birth dates may be generallyfeasible and the choice of times for evaluation of body size orrate of growth may be defined largely by theoreticalconsiderations and the farmers’ willingness to cooperate.

The situation is more challenging in extensive productionsystems. Successful measurement of growth-related traitsunder these conditions often required integration ofrecording with other activities that involve mustering ofanimals. Factors to be considered in identifying times for




measurement of growth-related traits will include theseasonal pattern of parturitions and the nature of themarketing/harvesting process.

5.2.3.1. Effects of pattern of parturitions on animal recording.

In terms of the pattern of parturitions, the followingpossibilities may exist:

5.2.3.1.1. A single annual birthing season.In this situation, all young stock will be of roughly similarage and likely can be placed into one or a few cohorts basedon date of birth. Assessment of growth may then be based ona small number of measurements (perhaps 1 to 3). Thesemeasurements ideally would be synchronised with otheractivities that require or facilitate handling of animals, butmay require gathering of animals specifically for purposes ofrecording. The existence of a single annual birthing seasonalso generally suggests potential for rather accurate control ofmating.

5.2.3.1.2. Several annual birthing seasons.In this situation, the number of cohorts of young stock willbe increased, as will the number of measurement timesduring the year. The size of each cohort will becorrespondingly less, and may become quite small. Problemsin animal recording in this case primarily relate to the needto motivate farmers to record the necessary information onall animals in each cohort. Again, however, the existence offixed birthing seasons suggests potential for control ofmating.

5.2.3.1.3. Continuous births.This common situation, usually arising from failure orinability to control matings, is difficult to handle from ameat recording standpoint. The difficulties are practical, nottheoretical. In theory, animals can be grouped into cohortsbased on birth dates, compared within cohorts, and




differences among cohorts accounted for in data analysis.However, from a practical viewpoint, recording of birthsthroughout the year represents a substantial challenge unlessanimals are closely managed. Likewise, recording must occuron a more-or-less continuous basis to provide roughcomparability among birth cohorts in age at measurement.The situation is only a bit less difficult if parturitions tend tobe grouped within a season based on climatic orenvironmental (as opposed to management) variables. Thussheep and goats in temperate regions may express a fairdegree of synchrony in parturitions because of seasonality ofbreeding. However, without controlled matings, parturitionsis still likely to be spread over long periods and meatrecording will remain difficult.

5.2.3.2. Marketing patterns and animal recording.

Marketing patterns will also affect ease and timing of meatrecording activities. Consider the impacts of the followingalternative situations:

5.2.3.2.1. Seasonal marketing.In this situation, marketing is a seasonal activity, often tiedto either declines in feed supply or to culturally mediateddemand for specific animal products. Synchronisation ofanimal recording activities with marketing decisions is oftenadvantageous. Recording of young stock in association withmarketing provides opportunity for selection of replacementanimals, for decisions on which animals to market, and forprompt economic feedback on current and previousselection decisions. Within these seasonally constrainedmarketing systems, the actual decision on which animals tomarket may be based upon:

• age, with primarily surplus animals from the most recentbirth date cohorts marketed. This is generallyadvantageous in terms of animal recording, with youngstock evaluated and then divided into replacement and




market animals. However, for many medium- to low-input production systems this situation is not the norm.

• weight-based marketing is more common that age-basedmarketing in most developing nations. The key issues hereare that animals born at the same time are often notmarketed at the same age. Several years may be requiredfor animals to reach market condition, with birth datecohorts progressively thinned as they reach market weightor condition or as resource constraints require that animalnumbers be reduced. This situation is challenging from ananimal recording perspective because the totalinformation array develops over several years, withprogressive removal of animals from the cohort. Use ofearly indicators of body size and growth before any of theanimals are marketed is advantageous but may notprovide all of the desired information. Later measureswhich characterise the animals ability to maintain weightgain or minimise weight loss under conditions of stressmay be important to achievement of the breedingobjective.

5.2.3.2.2. Continuous harvesting/marketing.In this situation, animals are marketed or slaughtered forlocal use on an “as-needed” basis to provide cash or food.While accurate animal recording may be possible in suchsituations, logistical problems abound. If animal recordingcan be synchronised with periods of animal handling, and ifbirth dates are known, meaningful information can beobtained, but demonstration of benefits to participatingfarmers is difficult.

5.2.4. Fibre recording

Fibre recording programs present a different array of time-related considerations. On the positive side, fibre harvestingis often a seasonal activity, so recording of production andproduct characteristics can often be accomplished for all




animals in the flock at a single time. Likewise, removal offibre is an individual-animal process, with clear opportunityto attach information to the animal producing the fibre.Fibre is usually primarily harvested from adult animals, andso, in contrast to meat recording, may be less influenced byenvironmental factors during early development. Finally,fibre is a relatively nonperishable product that can besampled for later analysis of product characteristics.However, fibre-producing animals are often managed underrelatively extensive conditions, so many of the samechallenges involving knowledge of birth groups and animalidentity, and setting up of appropriate contemporary cohortsdescribed for meat recording also apply to fibre recording.Similarly, several nongenetic factors influence fibreproduction and quality, including reproductive status,number of offspring suckled, animal age, etc. Thus many ofthe life history traits of breeding females that are useful inmeat recording programs are also useful in fibre recordingprograms, but may be similarly difficult to obtain.

5.2.5. Draught recording

Many developing nations use animals for various forms ofdraught; providing an important added but also energydemanding animal product. The ability of an animal toprovide draught power varies according to, among others,breed, species, sex, type of work required, implements used,environmental conditions inlcuding feed and health andfrom animal to animal. This “draughtability” may bemeasured through simple observation while the animal isperforming a specif work as compared with others as usingmeasuring equipment that have been developed for thatpurpose.




5.2.6. Life history recording

These life history traits, including reproductive histories,survival data on offspring and individuals, and health recordscan be extremely important, especially in extensive orsubsistence production systems, but have been very difficultto incorporate into animal recording schemes, even indeveloped nations. They are generally not amenable toscheduled recording and their capture thus must often relyon farmers’ records. When animals are not closely heldand/or are maintained in large groups, it may be difficult torecord many of these life-history traits with high accuracy.However, if individual animal identity is maintained,recording of acceptable information on reproductivehistories may be possible. Early life survival andreproduction data can be very important for farmmanagement decisions for comparative evaluation of exoticand indigenous types in developing country medium inputproduction systems.

2 5.3. How to Measure: The Tools for Animal Recording

The tools used in animal recording may vary from the very simple to thevery sophisticated. The choice of tools should be based on the premisethat simple procedures and equipment always are to be preferred overcomplex procedures and equipment so long as both are sufficient tomeet the goals of the animal recording activity. In particular, use ofsimple tools to measure many animals on many farms is generallysuperior to measurement of smaller numbers of animals on fewer farmsusing more complex methodology. One of the goals of any animalrecording scheme is widespread participation, and the use of simple toolsand methods is usually helpful in reaching this goal. Even if morecomplex tools are advantageous in some situations, initial use of simple,straightforward equipment may be preferred until farmers have acceptedthe value of animal recording. Once the value of the information being




collected is recognised and acknowledged by the farmers, theintroduction of new, and better, tools becomes an opportunity ratherthan an imposition.

In developing nations, the choice of tools for animal recording must takeinto account the infrastructure of the region. Access to electricity,reliable batteries, pure water, electronic communications, and rapidtransportation of samples to laboratories and of results back to farmersare often lacking in rural areas of developing nations, and the tools usedfor animal recording must be consistent with these limitations.

In point of fact, credible, useful animal recording programs can bedesigned which require no use of measurement tools whatsoever. Formany fitness and reproductive traits, records of dates, times, numbers ofoffspring, offspring survival, and indications of reproductive events orthe occurrence of disease are the most important information. Simplescores, if properly applied, can adequately describe and discriminateamong animals, and provide very useful information for improvingproductivity of the herd and flock as a whole. Additional simple linearand volumetric tools such as tapes for measuring animal size andstandardised containers for measuring milk yields and egg size canprovide the basis for credible animal recording programs. It is theconsistency in application of the tools, not their sophistication, that willcontrol the success of the scheme.

In evaluating tools for animal recording, the following categories may beuseful:

5.3.1. Tools that reduce cost and complexity

Tools exist that permit simple, low-cost recording of animalperformance under essentially all conditions and withoutreliance on electronic or elaborate mechanical equipment.These tools are inexpensive, durable, and do not requireperiodic calibration. Examples include tape measures forlinear body measures (with associated weight conversiontables); simple balance beam scales for weighing smallanimals or animal products such as fleeces; and standard




volumetric containers for measuring milk yields. Use of thesetools, when coupled with recording of appropriate life-history traits, can form the basis for effective programs toimprove reproduction, growth, and fitness.

5.3.2. Tools that reduce complexity but increase costs

Tools in this category generally allow assessment of indicatortraits that may be used to evaluate other economicallyimportant traits that cannot be measured directly. From theviewpoint of the farmer, these tools are simple to apply butgenerally have substantial overhead or subsequent laboratoryprocessing costs that must be covered within the context ofthe overall animal recording scheme. Examples would be useof simple ELISA-based methods to assess antibody orhormone titres or any diagnostic procedures that involveonly collection of blood or a tissue sample. Central testing offibre quality and automated testing of milk compositionwould also fit into this category. Essentially all uses of DNAmarkers or diagnostic testing are included in this category oftools and may become important in the future. Screening forgenetic markers that have been demonstrated to influenceresistance to diseases or adaptation to various stressorspermits selection to be practiced without or before actualexposure to the disease or stressor. However, a disadvantageto use of this type tools is that they often do not allowimmediate feedback. Instead, information for decision-making must usually be returned to the farmer afterprocessing of the samples.

5.3.3. Tools that increase complexity but reduce costs

These are the tools that involve greater on-farm applicationof technology in order to capture information that wouldotherwise be difficult or impossible to obtain. Use ofultrasonic equipment to assess body composition or carcassmerit or of electronic identification and electronic scales areexamples of such tools. Widespread use of such tools requires




a careful assessment of the conditions that are likely to beencountered in the field, of the technical skills of programmetechnicians, and of reliability of access and cost of both theinitial equipment and replacement parts.

5.3.4. Tools that increase both complexity and cost

This category encompasses the use of very sophisticated toolssuch as whole-body scanners, laparoscopic procedures, andcollection of individual feed-intake data (either manually orelectronically). While potentially useful to address specificquestions in on-farm studies, these technologies are currentlynot well-suited to ongoing schemes of animal recording forimprovement. They are generally too expensive and difficultto apply to the large numbers of animals distributed acrossmany farms that are needed in such schemes.

2 5.4. Comparing Animals Born in Different Years and/or onDifferent Farms: The Contemporary Group

Animal recording for breed improvement requires separation of geneticeffects to be used in breed improvement from nongenetic effects that willnot be transmitted from parent to offspring. Concerns overaccomplishment of this separation led to development of the concept ofthe “contemporary group”: a set of animals that have been, for the mostpart, treated alike such that performance may be fairly compared amonganimals within the group without concern for major nongeneticdifferences among the animals. Thus animals born in the same seasonand raised under the same conditions are considered contemporaries, asare animals that give birth in the same season and lactate under similarconditions. In contrast, animals born or lactating in different seasons orunder different feeding conditions can differ greatly in performance, butthose differences are usually not indicative of differences in genetic merit.

When animal recording is primarily for animal management,management choices can either be made within recognisedcontemporary groups or, if level of production is the only concern,




can be made without concern for whether the factors influencingproduction are genetic or nongenetic. For example, if maximum milkproduction is the goal, retention of older females is preferred, even ifyounger females are anticipated to be genetically superior. On the otherhand, if genetic improvement is the goal, retention of the youngerfemales may be preferred, even though current production may bereduced.

A part of modern genetic evaluation methodology is the assignment ofrecorded animals to contemporary groups and the consideration ofnongenetic contemporary group effects in prediction of genetic merit.Inherent in these analyses are the assumptions that the resultingcontemporary groups are of reasonable size (to allow reasonably accurateestimation of the contemporary group effect and the ranking of animalswithin the group on performance) and that related animals appear acrossthe different contemporary groups (to permit separation of genetic andnongenetic effects among contemporary groups).

In milk recording, the contemporary group is often taken to include allfemales giving birth in the same herd, year, and season. Similarcontemporary group definitions exist for meat, egg, and fibre recording.However, when contemporary groups are very small, it becomes difficultto estimate contemporary group effects and to separate genetic andnongenetic effects. The problem of small contemporary group size isacute in many of the smallholder production systems of the developingnations where farmers may have from one to at most four or fivebreeding animals and where births from these animals may be spreadthroughout the year. In such a situation, the definition of thecontemporary group must somehow be modified or expanded if geneticevaluation is to be possible. One strategy that has been recommended isto consider an entire village or a neighborhood within a village torepresent a contemporary group. Such an approach can be acceptableprovided the treatment of animals among households within the village isfairly uniform. This will often be the case when livestock graze alleywaysor common lands with minimal supplemental feeding but becomes lesssatisfactory when households differ importantly in levels of feeding ormanagement.




When animal recording is practiced for breed improvement, it iscommonly desirable to be able to compare animals from different farms(or villages). The statistical methodology for such comparisons is wellestablished, but the organisational requirements impose another level ofcomplexity on the animal recording scheme. As the scope of the geneticcomparisons increases, it becomes necessary to make geneticcomparisons among animals in different contemporary groups. Toaccomplish this goal, there must be “genetic connections” among thegroups; i.e., a structure of genetic relationships must be present to linkthe contemporary groups. One common way to establish theseconnections is through the use of the same sires in many herds, oftenthrough artificial insemination. The presence of offspring of the samesires in many contemporary groups serves to genetically link the groupsand permits both direct comparisons of the linked sires as well as indirectcomparisons of other animals that may appear in only one herd or flock.While use of common sires among herds and flocks is the clearest way tovisualise creation of genetic linkages among contemporary groups, anymating system that leads to the presence of related animals has the sameeffect (provided the relationships are reasonably extensive) and isnecessary for across-farm genetic evaluations.

2 5.5. The Prediction of Genetic Merit

Prediction of genetic merit, or breeding value, within the high-inputproduction systems of the developing world has become a verysophisticated methodology. However, in planning animal recordingschemes for breed improvement, it is important to realise that evenwithin the developed nations, the recorded livestock populationremains a relatively small proportion of the total. Thus whilewidespread application of animal recording is desirable for a number ofreasons, in many cases the very detailed recording and genetic predictionprocedures used for genetic improvement will involve only a segment ofthe total population. One goal of animal recording may thus be theorganisation of that nucleus segment of farms. It should also beunderstood that useful prediction of genetic merit can be achieved using




a whole spectrum of prediction methods. The very sophisticatedprocedures of the developed nations are certainly attractive and arebecoming increasingly accessible with improvements in computingcapacity and reliability. However, relatively simple procedures may alsobe effective and more readily implemented across a wider range ofproduction environments.

At its simplest, estimation of genetic merit involves the measurement andranking within a single contemporary group of a set of candidates forselection. So long as the animals are contemporary and the samemeasurements are taken on all of them, ranking of the animals onperformance corresponds to ranking them on expected genetic merit forthat trait. Within the contemporary group, various types of simpleadjustments to the data may be applied for things such as birth type, ageof dam, or sex of animal for growth traits or for day of lactation in milkrecording to potentially modify rankings and improve accuracy, butadjustments such as these do little to complicate the process of predictionof genetic merit.

More sophisticated methods for prediction of genetic merit come intoplay when:

• information is available on related animals;

• more than one performance trait is measured, or selection isto be based on some multiple-trait breeding objective, and alltraits are not measured on all animals;

• animals have more than one observation for some traits, andthe number of observations may differ among animals;

• animals appear in more than one contemporary group.

If observations are taken carefully and systematically, contemporarygroups are properly formed, and appropriate genetic linkages existamong the contemporary groups, all of the above complications can behandled using available analytical methodology. Yet when one or moreof these complications occur along with failures to rigorously maintaindata collection protocols and animal identification, results can be




disastrous. Put simply, many forms of data structure and of missing datacan be accommodated analytically within the context of a well-structured animal recording scheme, but advanced analyticalmethodologies cannot make up for flaws in the organisation of thescheme.

5.5.1. Use of information on relatives

Use of information on relatives is both an opportunity toincrease accuracy of selection for traits that can be measureddirectly and an absolute necessity when selecting for sex-limited traits, for traits that are not expressed until late inlife, or for traits that are only expressed in the presence ofdisease or other stressors. Thus selection of males for milkproduction, egg production, litter size, etc., must be basedon records of related females. Likewise, selection of youngstock for life-history characters (longevity, adult fertility,litter size, ease of calving) can only be achieved through useof records on adult relatives. In both these cases, the largerthe number of available relatives’ records, the greater theaccuracy of genetic evaluation.

Use of relatives’ records is effective only if accuratepedigrees are available to link individual animals with theirancestors and descendants. This implies control andrecording of matings with good accuracy, which is often aserious problem in medium- to low-input productionsystems. At an absolute minimum, sire identification forlactating females used in milk recording and identificationand access to dam records when selecting young stock forreproductive and life-history traits are required if selection isto be effective for these kind of traits. Without suchinformation, one is limited to selection of young stock basedonly on indicator traits that can be observed directly early inlife. However, it is generally much easier in practice toincrease the genetic improvement realized by increasingthe amount of selection, and dissemination to all farmers




of improved stock, than by increasing the accuracy ofselection.

5.5.2. Measurement of multiple traits and selection for amulti-trait development objective

Single-trait selection is essentially never an appropriatestrategy for improvement of net economic merit. Thiswould certainly be the case in developing nations and inmedium- to low-input production systems where a balanceamong productive, reproductive, and fitness traits must bemaintained. Thus the development objective will alwaysinclude multiple traits and the animal recording schememust therefore accommodate measurement of more thanone character on each animal. If all traits are measured on allanimals, or if missing records occur strictly at random, traitscan be analysed separately without biasing resultingpredictions of breeding value. However, if the measuredtraits are intercorrelated or if selection is occurring (e.g., ifthe heaviest animals are sold whereas the rest are retained foranother season and have weights recorded at other ages, or ifsome animals die of disease leaving only the survivors tocomplete a milk record), then use of multiple-trait breedingvalue predictions may be used to increase accuracy and maybe necessary to avoid bias in genetic evaluations fromselection.

Conduct of multiple-trait analyses require estimates ofgenetic associations among the traits. Estimation of theseparameters is required for such analyses and may require asubstantial initial database. Tables of average relationshipsamong traits have been produced for a variety of traitcombinations and species using reports from developednations and generally high-input production systems, butthese parameter estimates may not be directly applicable tolow- to medium-input conditions in developing nations andoften do not include the fitness and disease-related traitswhich may be important in these environments. However,




use of conservative initial estimates is generally satisfactory toinitiate the system until sufficient information accumulatesto permit derivation of estimates that are specific to thesituation of interest.

5.5.3. Repeated records

Many performance measures may be repeated several timesduring the animal’s life. These would include information onlactation, fertility, litter size, fibre production, and eggproduction, among others. While each additional record is,in theory, a source of additional information and thereforegreater accuracy in genetic evaluation, a number ofsignificant pragmatic issues must be considered in decidinghow to use repeated records. A number of establishedprograms in the developed nations use only the first recordedexpression of a character for genetic evaluation. Subsequentrecords may be used for animal management but are notused for genetic evaluation. Examples include use of firstlactation records in dairy cows and yearling fleece data infine-wool sheep. The reason for this approach is related toissues of contemporaneity: at the time of the initial record,animals are most likely to have experienced similarconditions during development and to be most nearly truecontemporaries. After entering production, carryover effectsof previous events in the animals’ productive lives becomemore important and complicate the formation of truecontemporary groups. For example, a group of young cowsmay calve for the first time at similar ages, but as theybecome older, differences in fertility, duration of lactation,etc., will progressively spread out subsequent calving datesand introduce additional nongenetic variation. In ewes, adultfibre records are complicated by reproductive factors such asthe number of lambs produced and suckled and the intervalbetween lambings.

However, failure to use performance in adult females ingenetic evaluation may create serious problems in the low-




to medium-input production systems of developingnations and cannot be recommended. This situation existsbecause the ability of animals to sustain appropriate levels ofproductivity over time in the face of an array ofenvironmental stresses is an important component ofeconomic merit in such systems. Young introduced stock,in particular, are often given enough preferentialtreatment during the early growth phase to initiallyperform at relatively high levels, but may not besubsequently maintained at levels that will permitsustained high production. Thus early production levels inlow- to medium-input production systems may be lessindicative of adult performance than is the case in high-inputproduction systems. Yet the ability to sustain production iscritically important in low- to medium-input systems wheretotal reproductive rates are often modest and where highreplacement rates due to low production of adult females arenot acceptable. Thus use of repeated records on adultfemales in genetic evaluation should be encouraged, but willrequire careful modeling during analysis of data to assignanimals to contemporary groups and to accurately portraythe changes in performance that occur with age.

5.5.4. Evaluation of animals in different contemporary groups

As discussed previously, the ability to fairly compare thepredicted genetic merit of animals in different contemporarygroups depends on the presence of genetic connectednessamong the contemporary groups, and the documentation ofthese genetic linkages requires knowledge of animalparentage. Thus the ability to identify relationships amonganimals is important for accurate genetic evaluation.

When comparisons are to be made between animals withindifferent contemporary groups (e.g., birth years) but withinthe same herd, adequate genetic relationships to link thevarious groups will usually exist, provided they have beenrecorded and maintained. When comparisons are to be made




across different farms, however, a conscious effort to createand document relationships is usually required. The use ofsome of the same sires in the different herds is the mostpowerful method for creating these linkages. This can bedone very effectively across large areas and large numbers ofherds via artificial insemination (AI). When AI is notfeasible, physical transfer or exchange of males for use withhomebred sires is possible to create the linkages necessary tocompare homebred sires to one another. In smallholderproduction systems, the same males can be used throughouta village, with periodic exchange of some of the males amongvillages. However, when natural service sires are used acrossfarms or villages, care must be taken to avoid introduction orspread of disease. Genetic connections among farms can alsobe achieved through the use of related sires among herds, aswhen sons of the same group of sires are used across a set ofherds. However, since the animals providing the geneticlinkages are less closely related than they would be with useof common sires, larger numbers of connecting animals arerequired. Thus in setting up an animal recording schemedesigned to permit comparisons of genetic merit acrossfarms, the development of procedures to allow use of thesame sires across the farms is an important consideration.

In larger herds and flocks, the decision to use single sirematings or artificial insemination to permit recording ofparentage should not be entered into lightly, especially onextensive commercial farms and in stressful environments.The traditional use of multiple-sire breeding pastures in suchsituations generally yields higher levels of fertility than morerestrictive breeding policies and, unless progeny of individualsires, either through natural matings or AI, are clearly moreproductive or more valuable as breeding stock, overall farmprofits may suffer. In smallholder village production,however, use of AI by properly trained technicians may havelittle impact on female fertility. Still, as mentioned before,farmers that enter into the more detailed mating structures




and pedigree recording required for animal recording forgenetic improvement must also have a mechanism to capturepremium prices for breeding stock.