ABSTRACT This study was conducted in two localities in Kordofan State one of them En-nuhoud locality, West Kordofan State and Aldebibat locality South Kordofan state during 2015 - 2018 to Adoption of Draught Animals by Farmers. The study based on a cross-sectional survey with a sample of 200 farmers that was selected from ten different villages around En-nuhoud and Aldebibat areas. Villages were selected using the simple random sampling technique, while individuals from each village were selected using the systematic random sampling technique by selecting the first of each four farmers along a survey line across the area starting by the upper and of the farming area until ten farmers were selected. Data were collected using a formal survey questionnaire. The questionnaire was filled by interview in a face to face for literacy reasons and by direct field measurements. Some information was recorded as observations to avoid farmers’ bias on issues they can be considered “sensitive”. Survey data were thereafter entered into SPSS 20.) Computer programme (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) and analysed to produce frequency tables and chart, also chi-square was calculated at level of significance 0.05 to measure the significant of the relation between farmers skills and adoption of animal traction technology. The dominant type of harness was the collar and saddle. All most the farmers (80%) used light mouldboard plough. The results showed that farmers in targeted area do not have extension services .Extension faces many constraints and problems; the most important of which are: Lack of development organization, service do not meet farmers need, neglecting the extension side, majority of services was provided by agriculture extension foundation. The agriculture extension concentrates in two activities service improve seed distribution and visit farm. This reflected on a weak role and negative impact on the farmers’ and their husbandry and management practices were less than optimal and consequently field performance. More than half of a respondent was cultivated groundnuts to increase their income. All the farmers believe the use of animal traction useful for soil, convenient for small farmer, increase production, easy to use and available. The result showed half of the target farmers use the animal traction for ploughing, while the rest for planting. Farmers owned their knowledge and received training about animal traction for long time by different institution and NGOs and peer farmers.

Subject Page

Dedication I

Acknowledgment II

Table of Contents III

List of Tables VI

List of figures IX

List of abbreviations X

Abstract XI

Abstract in Arabic XIII

Chapter One: (Introduction)

1.1Background 1

1.2 Previous Studies 2

1.3 Problem Statement 5

1.4 Objectives 7

1.5 Research Questions 7

1.6 Research hypotheses 7

1.7 Organization of the study 7

Chapter Two (Literature Review)

2.0 Preface 8

2.1 History of Animal traction 8

2.2 Adoption of Technology 8

2.3 Factors influencing adoption of animal traction technology 9

2.3.1 Shortening fallow period 9

2.3.2 Expanding the area cultivated 9

2.3.3 Availability of suitable animals 9

2.3.4 Feed supplies 10

2.3.5 Semi-arid areas 10

2.3.6 Soil type, crop type and associated risks 10

2.3.7 Suitable equipment 10

2.3.8 Sociological factors 11

IV

2.4 Animal traction selection 11

2.4.1 Determining Power Requirements 11

2.5 Selection of individual draught animal 11

2.6 Training of draught animal 11

2.6.1 Before training begins 12

2.7 Animal Traction Extension 12

2.8 Animal traction extension (extension education) 13

2.9 Animal traction as a technological innovation 13

2.10 Skill levels in societies currently relying on animal power 14

2.11 Draught Animals Management (Husbandry) 14

2.12 Feeding 17

2.13 Veterinary care of draught animals 19

2.14 Housing 20

2.15 Animals Watering 22

2.16 Work strategy 22

2.17 Animal Harness 24

2.17.1 The breast-band harness 24

2.17.2 Collar harness 25

2.17.3 Hitching 26

2.17.4 Halter and bridles 26

2.17.5 Singletree 26

2.17.6 Halter, bit 27

2.18 Field operation and implement 28

2.18.1 Field Capacity and Field Efficiency 28

2.19 Factors effecting field Capacity 29

2.19.1 Implement type and condition 29

2.19.2 Soil moisture content and Condition 20

2.19.3 Operator’s Experience 29

2.19.4 Animal Power 29

2.19.5 Animal training 29

2.19.6 Harness Condition 30

2.19.7 Field operating Method 30

2.20 Contribution of AT to Agricultural Development 31

2.20.1 Animal Traction and Crop Production and Yields 31

V

2.20.2 Animal Traction and Farming Systems 31

2.20.3 Animal Traction and Farmer Preferences for Animals 32

2.20.4 Animal traction and Different Ages and Gender of

Farmers

32

2.20.5 Animal Traction and Ownership of Draft Animals 33

2.20.6 Animal Traction and Quality of life of Farmers 33

2.20.7 Animal Traction and Animal Population 33

2.21 Relative Advantage of the Technology 34

2.22 Constraints to the Adoption of AT Technology 34

Chapter Three: (Methodology)

3.1 Study population 36

3.2 Study duration 36

3.3 Sampling 36

3.4 Data Collection and Analysis 37

Chapter Four:(Results & Discussion)

 Chapter Five: (Conclusion and recommendation)

5.1 Conclusion and Recommendations 72

5.2 Conclusion 73

5.3 Recommendations 74

References 75

Appendixes 82