Kırklareli'nde Saf Kıvırcık Irkı Koyun Yetiştiriciliği Yapan İşletmelerin Yapısal Ve Teknik Özellikleri

Öz

Yürütülen çalışmada saf Kıvırcık koyun işletmelerinin mevcut genel yapısının, yetiştiricilerin temel sorunlarının ve yetkililerden beklentilerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. 47 çiftlikte koyun yetiştiriciliği ile ilgili anket uygulanmış ve ağıllarda çeşitli ölçümler/gözlemler yapılmıştır. Yetiştiricilerin çoğunun yaşam boyu koyun yetiştirme tecrübesine sahip olduğu ve birçok aile üyesinin koyun yetiştiriciliğine katkıda bulunduğu tespit edilmiştir. En sık kullanılan kaba yem kuru mera otu ve saman olup, kesif yem olarak daha çok fabrika yemi ve buğday tercih edildiği gözlenmiştir. Çalışma sonucunda belirlenen anaç koyun (0.704) ve anaç koyun + bir kuzu (1.260) başına düşen alanı miktarları yetersiz bulunmuştur. Yetiştiriciler tarafından en sık bildirilen hastalıklar koyunlar için Mavi dil (%45.65), solunum sistemi hastalıkları (%30.43) ve enterotoksemi (%10.87) ve kuzular için ishal/sindirim sistemi (%45.65) ve solunum sistemi hastalıkları (%36.96) olmuştur. Yetiştiricilerin yaklaşık yarısı koyun yetiştiriciliğinden memnun olduklarını belirtirken, büyük çoğunluğu (%81'i) yetiştiricilik yapmaya devam edeceklerini beyan etmiştir. Yetiştiriciler karşılaştıkları en önemli sorunları yem fiyatlarının yüksek, ürün fiyatlarının ise düşük olması, hastalıklar/ölümler, çoban bulamama ve örgütlenme eksikliği olarak belirtmişlerdir. Yetiştiriciler, yetkililerin çözüm getirmesine ihtiyaç duydukları en önemli konuların; sağlık sorunlarının çözümü, pazar sorununun çözümü, ürün fiyatlarının ve desteklerin artırılması şeklinde ifade etmişlerdir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kırklareli
• koyun yetiştiriciliği
• yapısal özellikler
• yetiştirici beklentileri

Structural and Technical Characteristics of Purebred Kıvırcık Sheep Enterprises in Kırklareli Province

Öz

It was aimed to determine the current general structure of purebred Kıvırcık sheep enterprises, main issues of breeders, and their expectations from the authorities. A questionnaire was applied to farmers in 47 enterprises regarding sheep breeding and various measurements/observations were conducted in the sheepfolds. It has been determined that most of the breeders had a near-lifetime sheep breeding experience and many family members contribute to the breeding. The most commonly used roughage was dry pasture grass and straw, and factory feed and wheat were mostly preferred as concentrate feed. As a result of the study, the amount of area per mother sheep (0.704) and rootstock sheep + one lamb (1.260) was found to be insufficient. Most reported diseases were Bluetongue (45.65%), respiratory system diseases (30.43%) and enterotoxaemia (10.87%) for sheep, and diarrhea/digestive system (45.65%) and respiratory system diseases (36.96%) for lambs. While nearly half of the breeders stated that they were satisfied with sheep farming, the vast majority (81%) stated that they would continue to breed. Most important problems stated by the farmers were feed prices, low product prices, diseases/deaths, finding a shepherd, lack of organization. Most important expectations from authorities were stated as solutions for health issues, marketing problems, increasing product prices and financial support.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kırklareli
• sheep breeding
• structural characteristics
• breeder expectations

Kaynakça

1. Acar M, Ayhan V. A research on technical problems and current status in the member enterprises of Isparta Breeding Sheep Goat Association. Research Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 2012; 5(2), 98-101.
2. Akçapınar H. Koyun Yetiştiriciliği (in Turkish), Medisan Publication Series, No: 8, Ankara, 1994; pp. 1-4.
3. Anonymous (a). Welfare Standards for Sheep. RSPCA Horsham West Sussex RSPCA, U.K. http://www.rspca.org.uk/sciencegroup/farmanimals/standards/sheep. Accessed date: 9.11.2021
4. Anonymous (b). Sheep and goats in Turkey. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper, No: 60. https://www.fao.org/3/ah224e/ah224e00.htm. Accessed date: 9.11.2021
5. Ayvazoğlu Demir P, Adıgüzel Işık S, Aydın E, Yazıcı K, Ayvazoğlu C. Socio-economic importance of sheep breeding farms in Ardahan province. Van Veterinary Journal, 2015; 26(3), 141-146.
6. Bilginturan S, Ayhan V. A research on structural characteristics and problems of sheep breeding enterprises in Burdur Sheep and Goat Breeding Association. Journal of Animal Production, 2009; 50(1), 1-8.
7. Bostancı MM. Structural and breeding characteristics of sheep rearing in Kırıkkale province. Master Thesis, Ankara University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Animal Science, Ankara, 2006.
8. Ceyhan A, Şekeroğlu A, Ünalan A, Çınar M, Akyol E, Yılmaz E. A research on structural characteristics and problems of sheep breeding in Niğde. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi, 2015; 18(2), 60-68.

9. Dellal G, Eliçin A, Tekel N, Dellal İ. Structural Characteristics of Sheep Breeding in the GAP Region. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, General Directorate of Agricultural Research and Policies, TARP Project No: 82, Ankara, 2002.
10. Dönmez O. Sheep farming structure for breeding methods in Bursa province. Master Thesis, Namık Kemal University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Main Science Division of Animal Science, Tekirdağ, 2008.
11. Dwyer C. The welfare of sheep. Springer Science + Business Media B.V. ISBN: 978-1-4020-8552-9, 2008.
12. Ekiz B, Kecici PD, Ograk YZ, Yalcintan Y, Yilmaz A. Evaluation of the functionality of EUROP carcass classification system in thin-tailed and fat-tailed lambs, Meat Science, 2021; 181, 108603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2021.108603
13. Ekiz B, Yilmaz A, Ozcan M, Kaptan M, Hanoglu H, Erdogan I, Yalcintan H. Carcass measurements and meat quality characteristics of Turkish Merino, Ramlic, Kivircik, Chios and Imroz lambs raised under an intensive production system. Meat Science, 2009, 82, 64-70.
14. Gezer ON. The structural characteristics of sheep farms in Sivas province. Master Thesis, Selçuk University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Animal Science, Konya, 2010.
15. Kandemir Ç, Alkan İ, Yılmaz Hİ, Ünal HB, Taşkın T, Koşum N, Alçiçek A. General situation and development opportunities to the geographical locations of small ruminant farms in İzmir region. Journal of Animal Production, 2015; 56(1), 1-17.
16. Karadaş K. Socioeconomic status of sheep breeding farms in Şanlıurfa province: Case of Siverek district. Gümüşhane University Journal of Science and Technology, 2017; 7(2), 268-279.
17. Karakuş F, Akkol S. A study on the current status of small ruminant enterprises in Van province and determination of problems affecting productivity. Journal of The Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences, 2013; 18(1-2), 9-16.
18. Kızıloğlu S, Karakaya E. The organisational structure of small animal business in Bingol province. Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences, 2014; 1(4), 552-560.
19. Koyuncu E, Pala A, Savaş T, Konyalı A, Ataşoğlu C, Daş G, Ersoy İE, Uğur F, Yurtman İY, Yurt HH. Technical analysis of the enterprises registered with the Çanakkale Sheep and Goat Association. Journal of Animal Production, 2006; 47(1), 21-27.
20. Şahinli MA. Sheep flock management: Case of Karaman province. Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2014; 29(2), 113-120.
21. Tüfekci H, Olfaz M. Problems and Solution Proposals Related to Sheep and Goat Husbandry in Kastamonu Province. Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 2015; 3(7), 577-582.