economics of production, processing and …economics of production, processing and marketing of...
Post on 20-Mar-2020
22 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
AERC STUDY No. 29
ECONOMICS OF PRODUCTION, PROCESSING AND MARKETING OF FODDER CROPS IN INDIA
(CONSOLIDATED REPORT)
D.K. Grover Sanjay Kumar
Agro-Economic Research Centre
Department of Economics and Sociology Punjab Agricultural University
Ludhiana
August, 2012
STAFFING PATTERN
1. Dr. D.K.Grover Director
2. Dr. J.M. Singh Agricultural Economist
3. Dr. Jasdev Singh Agricultural Economist
4. Dr. Sanjay Kumar Agricultural Economist
5. Mr. Parminder Singh Sr. Research Investigator
6. Mr. Satwinder Singh
Sr. Research Investigator
7. Dr Tejinder Kaur
Sr. Research Investigator
TABLE OF CONTENT
Sr. No
Chapter Page No.
1 Introduction 1-13
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Livestock population 4
1.3 Livestock sector and agricultural economy 4
1.4 Feed and fodder scenario at national level 7
1.5 Role of fodders 11
1.6 Need of the study 12
1.7 Objectives of the study 13
2 Methodology 14-17
2.1 Sampling Design 14
2.2 Analytical framework 15
3 Status of Livestock Population and Fodder Crops Cultivation 18-72
3.1. Livestock population 18
3.2. Fodder crops cultivation 72
4 Socio Economic Characteristics of Sample Households 103-135
4.1 Demographic characteristics 103
4.2 Land resources 105
4.3 Farm implements and machinery 106
4.4 Livestock resources 108
4.5 Cropping pattern 111
4.6 Area, yield and production status of fodder crops 115
4.7 Status of Livestock population and milk or meat production of sample
households 121
4.8 Status of livestock milk or meat production 122
4.9 Feeding practices and feeding composition 124
4.10 Seasonal feeding composition 127
5 Economics of Production of Fodder Crops 136-147
5.1 Cost of cultivation for fodder crops 136
5.2 Economics of fodder crops vis-à-vis competing crops 142
6 Processing and Marketing System for Fodder Crops 148-154
6.1 Marketing of fodder crops 148
6.2 Fodder processing and cost involved 151
7 Problems Faced by Fodder Growers 155-159
7.1 Production problems 155
7.2 Marketing problems 158
8 Summary, Conclusions and Policy Implications 160
References 179-180
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title Page No. 1.1 Requirement and availability of fodder in the country - 2010 3
1.2 Livestock population in India-1951 to 2007 5
1.3 Shares of agriculture and livestock sector in GDP at India 6
1.4 Supply and demand of green and dry fodder in India 9
3.1 Number of livestock, selected states, India 21-23
3.1.1a District wise number of livestock in Gujarat and AAGR, 1997 to 2007 26-27
3.1.1b District-wise number of livestock, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007. 28-29
3.1.1c District-wise total livestock, Karnataka, 1992 to 2007 30-31
3.1.1d District-wise total number of livestock, Punjab, 1990-2007 32
3.1.2a District-wise number of cattle, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007 35-36
3.1.2b District-wise number of cattle, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007 36-38
3.1.2c District-wise number of cattle, Karnataka, 1992 to 2007 38-39
3.1.2d District-wise number of cattle, Punjab, 1990 - 2007 39-40
3.1.3a District-wise number of buffaloes, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007 42-43
3.1.3b District-wise number of buffaloes, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007 43-45
3.1.3c District-wise number of buffalo, Karnataka, 1992 to 2007 45-46
3.1.3d District-wise number of buffaloes, Punjab, 1990 to 2007 47
3.1.4a District-wise number of horses and ponies, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007 49
3.1.4b District-wise Number of Horses& Ponies in M.P. (1992-2007) 50-52
3.1.4c District-wise number of horses, ponies and donkeys, Punjab, 1990 to 2007 52
3.1.5a District-wise number of sheep, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007 54-55
3.1.5b District-wise number of sheep, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007 55-57
3.1.5c District-wise number of sheep, Karnataka, 1992 to 2007 58-59
3.1.5d District-wise number of sheep, Punjab, 1990 to 2007 59
3.1.6a District-wise number of goat, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007 61-62
3.1.6b District-wise number of goats, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007 62-64
3.1.6c District-wise number of goat, Karnataka, 1992 to 2007 64-65
3.1.6d District-wise number of goat, Punjab, 1990 to 2007 66
3.1.7a District-wise number of camels, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007 68
3.1.7b District-wise number of camels, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007 69-70
3.1.7c District-wise number of camel, Punjab, 1990 to 2007 71
3.2.1 Average area under major fodder crops, selected states, India 74-80
3.2.2 District-wise average area of Maize (kharif season) in different periods in
Madhya Pradesh
82-83
3.2.3 District wise average annual compound growth rate of area and their
coefficient of variance (CVs) of Maize (Kharif Season) in Madhya Pradesh
84
3.2.4 District-wise average area of sorghum fodder crop (kharif season) Punjab,
1990-91 to 2008-09 (Five year average)
85
3.2.5 Average annual compound growth rates of area and their coefficient of
variation (CVs*) of sorghum fodder crop (kharif season), Punjab, 1990-91 to
2008-09
86
3.2.6 District wise average area of Berseem (Rabi Season) in different periods in
Madhya Pradesh
88-90
3.2.7 District wise average annual compound growth rate of area and their
coefficient of variance (CVs) of Berseem (Rabi Season) in Madhya Pradesh
91-92
3.2.8 District-wise average area of Berseem fodder crop (Rabi season),
Punjab, 1990-91 to 2008-09 (Five years average)
93
3.2.9 Average annual compound growth rates of area and their coefficient of
variation (CVs*) of Berseem fodder crop (Rabi season), Punjab, 1990-91 to
2008-09
94
3.2.10 District wise average area of Jowar Chari (Summer Season) in periods in
Madhya Pradesh
96-98
3.2.11 District-wise average annual compound growth rate of area and their
coefficient of variance (CVs) of Jowar (Summer season) in different periods
in Madhya Pradesh
99-100
3.2.12 District-wise average area of maize fodder crop (summer season), Punjab,
1990-91 to 2008-09 (Five year average)
101
3.2.13 Average annual compound growth rates of area and their coefficient of
variation (CVs*) of maize fodder crop (summer season), Punjab, 1990-91 to
2008-09
102
4.1 General characteristics of sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09 104
4.2 Average size of land holdings, sample households, selected states, India,
2008-09
106
4.3 Farm power machinery and buildings, sample households, selected states,
India, 2008-09
107
4.4 Livestock population, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09 110
4.5 Cropping Pattern of an average fodder grower, sample households, selected
states, India, 2008-09
113-114
4.6 Status of area of fodder crops during last 10 years, sample households,
selected states, India, 2008-09
118
4.7 Status of production of fodder crops during last 10 years, sample
households, selected states, India, 2008-09
119
4.8 Status of yield of fodder crops during last 10 years, sample households,
selected states, India, 2008-09
120
4.9 Status of livestock population during last 10 years, sample households,
selected states, India, 2008-09
121
4.10: Status of milk and meat yield during last 10 years, sample households,
selected states, India, 2008-09
124
4.11 Livestock feeding practices, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-
09
126
4.12a Season wise feeding practices for livestock population, Gujarat, sample
households, 2008-09
129-132
4.12b Season-wise feeding practices for livestock population adopted by sample
households, Madhya Pradesh, 2008-09
132
4.12c Season wise Feeding Practices adopted by sample households, selected
states, Karnataka, 2008-09
133-34
4.12d Season-wise feeding practices for livestock population, sample households,
Punjab, 2008-09
135
5.1.1 : Cost of cultivation of important fodder crops during kharif season, sample
households, selected states, India, 2008-09
137
5.1.2: Cost of cultivation of important fodder crops during Rabi season, sample
households, selected states, India, 2008-09
139
5.1.3 Cost of Cultivation of Important fodder crops during summer season, sample
households, selected states, India, 2008-09
141
5.2.1 Economics of kharif fodder crop vis-à-vis competing crop, sample
households, selected states, India, 2008-09
145
5.2.2 Economics of Rabi fodder crop vis-à-vis competing crop, sample
households, selected states, India, 2008-09
146
5.2.3 Economics of summer fodder crop vis-à-vis competing crop, sample
households, selected states, India, 2008-09
147
6.1.1 Marketing costs, margins and price spread analysis of various fodder crops
during peak seasons through channel (Producer- local trader-consumer),
sample households, Gujarat, 2008-09
149
6.1.2 Marketing costs, margins and price spread analysis of various fodder crops 150
during peak seasons in different Channels, sample households, Punjab,
2008-09
6.2 Details regarding processing of fodder crops, sample households, selected
states, India, 2008-09
154
7.1 Problems related to the production of fodder crops, sample households,
selected states, India, 2008-09
156
7.2 Problems related to the marketing of fodder crops, sample households,
selected states, India, 2008-09
159
PREFACE
Although India has very large population of livestock, the productivity of milk and other
livestock product per animal is very low compared to other many countries in the world. One of the
main reasons for the low productivity of our livestock is malnutrition, under-nutrition or both, beside
the low genetic potential of the animals. The adequate supply of nutritive fodder and feed is a crucial
factor impacting the productivity and performance of the animals. The country is highly deficient in
respect of availability of green fodder, dry fodder and concentrates. Fodder deficit can mainly be
attributed to our limitations in increasing the area under fodder crops, limited availability of good high
yielding fodder varieties, lack of quality seeds of improved hybrids/ varieties, poor quality of dry
fodder like paddy/wheat straw, changing crop pattern in favour of cash crops etc. Besides, low
priority accorded to investment in fodder production, lack of post-harvest management for surplus
fodder, poor management of grazing/pasture lands and inadequate research, extension and manpower
support also aggravated the shortfall situation of fodders. Future development and growth of livestock
are highly associated with the scope of availability of fodder from cultivable land, forest, pastures and
grazing lands. Therefore, it is important to put more emphasis on fodder development programmes for
augmenting fodder /feed supply, while formulation of livestock development strategy.
The present report brings out such issues encompassing the status and economics of fodder
crops, its processing, marketing etc in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab states of India.
We are grateful to all the participating Agro Economic Research Centers/Unit for providing
very productive and useful inputs for the preparation of this report. Thanks are due to Mr. Satwinder
Singh, Senior Research Investigator for his assistance. We express our gratitude to the Directorate of
Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi for their financial
support to take up this study.
Authors
ABSTRACT Livestock being, a key source of supplementary income and livelihood especially for small land
holders and landless rural poor plays an important role in the rural economy of the country. The desired growth
of agriculture sector can be accomplished only through enhancing overall productivity of the livestock sector.
This would require a steady and adequate supply of quality fodder for supporting the livestock population. For
development of livestock sector, the need of the hour is, therefore, to meet the current shortfall of fodder in the
country by adopting suitable measures for increasing the production of crop residues, green fodder and
agricultural by-products. Ensuring an adequate supply of reasonable quality feed and fodder is one of the major
challenges which Indian livestock sector is facing currently. In the present study, efforts have been made to
unravel the related issues covering the present status of fodder cultivation, profitability of fodder crops along
with its processing and marketing practices in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab states of India.
The study selected one most important fodder crop each in the kharif, rabi and summer seasons from these
selected states for in depth analysis. In Gujarat, generally farmers are not growing pure fodder crops; the most
important food grain crop (whose by product/residue is used as fodder) has been taken as study crop. The study
has been based on the experiences of 600 fodder growers, 150 from each state, scattered over different clusters
along with few associated with fodder processing. The primary data pertaining to the year 2008-09 was
collected by the personal interview method. The study has brought out that the size of livestock herd in Gujarat
increased from 196.7 lakh in 1992 to 237.9 lakh in 2007 indicating spectacular average annual growth rate
(AAGR) of 1.28 percent during period 1992-2007. Similarly, the livestock population in Madhya Pradesh
showed increasing trend over the years and the total livestock population was found to be increased with the
annual growth of 1.90 per cent in the year 2007 as compare to the year 1992 (32400.06 thousand). Likewise,
the total livestock population in the state of Karnataka has increased from 29.57 million in 1992 to 30.86 million
in 2007 with compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 0.29 per cent. Contrary to it, the livestock population in
Punjab has been decreasing continuously since 1990 showed tremendous decline from about 97 lakh in 1990 to
only 71 lakh during 2007, at the rate of 1.5 per cent per annum. The cattle population of Gujarat, which stood at
67.50 lakh in 1997 increased to 79.77 lakh in 2007 with an average annual growth rate of 1.68 percent. The
number of cattle found to be increased over the period of time with an annual growth rate of 0.56 per cent in
Madhya Pradesh. Karnataka showed decline in cattle population. The cattle population in Punjab has declined
from about 28 lakh in 1990 to about 17 lakh during 2007, decreasing at the rate of 2.29 per cent per annum. The
growth of buffaloes was sharp in Gujarat and increased at the average annual growth rate of 3.39 percent during
1997-2007. The population of buffalo also showed increasing trend over the years in Madhya Pradesh. Seven
districts of Karnataka have recorded positive growth in its population between 1992 and 2007. The buffalo
population in Punjab has declined from about 56 lakh in 1990 to 49 lakh during 2007, falling at the rate of 0.69
per cent per annum. In Madhya Pradesh, out of the total fodder area of 0.74 lakh ha in 2006-09, the cultivators
of Madhya Pradesh devoted their maximum area under the cultivation of bajra (20%) followed by Jowar (4%),
Berseem (2%) and Maize (1%). The area of fodder was found to be declining over the years from 0.97 lakh ha.
during 1990-94. The area of Jowar, Berseem, Loosarn, Jai were found to be increased over the years, while the
area under guar and other fodder decreased in Madhya Pradesh. In Punjab, on an average, about 5.83 lakh
hectare area was under fodder crops during the period 2005-09, which comes out to be about 7 per cent of gross
cropped area of the state. The area under fodder crops was found to decrease continuously from the average area
of 7.8 lakh hectare during the period 1990-94. During the period 1990-91 to 2008-09, most of the fodder crops
showed decrease in area except guara during kharif season and oats during rabi season. During kharif season,
maize fodder showed the highest decrease in area (-11.74 per cent per annum) during the period 1990-91 to
2008-09, while during rabi season, berseem showed the highest decrease in area (-2 per cent per annum) during
the same period. Maize fodder recorded increase in area during the recent years (2000-01 to 2008-09).The
relative profitability analysis has highlighted that in Gujarat, during kharif season, net return per hectare from
maize cereal crop came out to be Rs. 32775 which was higher by Rs.10821 compared to net return of Rs. 21954
from maize grown as pure green fodder. In rabi season, net return per hectare was Rs. 13828 for lucerne
whereas it was Rs. 33922 for competing crop - wheat. In summer season, net return for study crop lucerne was
only Rs. 6569 whereas it was Rs. 16246 for competing crop - jowar / sorghum grown as green fodder crop. In
Madhya Pradesh, there was found no competition of fodder crops with other crops in the area under study. The
comparative picture of fodder crops showed that the cultivation of beseem was found be more profitable in the
area under study in which an average fodder grower invested Rs.13835.66/ha and received Rs. 52521.47/ha
revealed that on the investment of Rs. 1.00, farmer got Rs. 3.80 as benefit over the variable cost, while received
only Rs. 1.80 and 1.69 on investment of Rs. 1.00 respectively from the cultivation of maize and jowar. The
returns over variable cost fetched from paddy on per hectare basis were Rs. 10300 as compared to Rs. 552 for
the jowar fodder in Karnataka. Farmers did not allocate higher area under fodder crops due to lower profitability
in relation to their competing crops. In Punjab, the returns over variable cost fetched from paddy on per hectare
basis were more than double than that of sorghum – the fodder crop. Berseem was found to be more
remunerative as compared to sorghum but still the returns over variable cost were only 65 per cent as compared
to the most important competing crop during the rabi season (wheat). The returns over variable cost for maize
fodder were only 70 per cent as compared to maize grain during the summer season. In Gujarat fodder is
generally sold by producers through one marketing channel, namely producer-Local Trader-Consumer and the
consumer’s price was Rs. 300/qtl. in kharif and it touched to Rs. 400/qtl. in summer. The net profit margin of
local trader on consumer’s price was highest at Rs. 52.31(9.17%) in rabi season and lowest at Rs. 26.67 (8.9 %)
in kharif season. In Punjab, the consumer’s price was Rs. 44/qtl. in kharif and it touched to Rs. 72/qtl. During
summer season. The marketing channel I in the state (Producer-Forwarding agent/Commission agent-Dairy
owner/Consumer), the producer’s share in consumer’s rupee varied between 74 - 77 per cent for the different
fodder crops, while in channel II (Producer-Forwarding agent/Commission agent-Chaff cutter-Consumer), it
varied between 65-70 per cent. The marketing/ processing practices of fodders were not found to be prevalent in
Karnataka and Madya Pradesh.In Gujarat, post harvesting operational costs of processing (hay making) one
quintal fodder was found highest for summer season. It was Rs. 27.34 for Lucerne and Rs. 27.24 for bajra
fodder. Whereas, processing cost was lowest at Rs. 21.42 for wheat straw in rabi season. It was Rs. 24.32 and
Rs. 24.57 for kharif maize fodder and kharif bajra fodder respectively. In Punjab, the post harvest operational
cost of processing (silage making) was about Rs. 11 per quintal. In Gujarat, inferior quality of seeds of fodder
crops, non-availability of adequate quantity of required brand HYV seeds, the lack of technical knowledge, non-
availability of market information in time and inadequate transport facility at reasonable rate were the major
problems in production of fodder crops. In addition to these, high expenditure in production due to power cuts
and high cost of labour were the reported problems in Madhya Pradesh. In Karnataka, the inadequate access to
credit, labour availability, and quality seed were the reported problems. In Punjab, poor quality and un-
recommended varieties of seed, shortage of labour especially during harvesting of the crop, lack the technical
knowledge and inadequate acquisition of credit were the major problems faced by the fodder growers. Similarly,
in Punjab, Low price in the market, less remuneration, lack of market information and delayed payment for the
produce by the commission agents in the market were reported as the major marketing problem. In Gujarat, it
was suggested that government must evolve an arrangement to produce HYV seeds for fodder crops in adequate
quantity and these should be made available at reasonable rate to the farmers. There is a need to adopt price
mechanism which ensures higher or equal net returns at least to the one from competing cereal crops in order to
divert more and more area to fodder crops. In Karnataka, concerted efforts should be made to encourage the
farmers to cultivate green fodder crops by providing subsidized seed material and fertilizer coupled with
technical trainings to group of potential farmers. In Punjab, availability of quality seedlings, high yielding
varieties for various fodder crops, adequate short-term credit facilities to cover the operational cost along with
required technical trainings can go a long way to augment the fodder area.
1
Chapter-1
Introduction
1.1 Background:
India is basically an agricultural country and nearly three-fourth population depends
on agriculture, livestock and allied sectors for livelihood. Nearly 70 percent of country’s
population lives in rural areas. Furthermore, of the 40.7 crore poor in the country, about 80
percent are rural poor. Livestock plays an important role in the rural economy of the country.
Livestock is a key source of supplementary income and livelihood especially for small land
holders and landless rural poor households. Traditionally, in India, agriculture and livestock
are intertwined in such a manner that it ensures sustainable livelihood to a large proportion of
rural population even during sub-normal rainfall / scarcity years. Livestock is also an
important asset for them which provide employment to millions of rural people. Rapid
growth of livestock sector is therefore most desirable not only to sustain steady agriculture
growth but also to reduce rural poverty especially when a majority of land holders are less
than 2 hectares and about 30 percent of rural households are landless. Keeping in view this
pro-poor nature of agriculture and livestock sector and its importance in national economy,
the Eleventh Five Year Plan targeted 4 percent annual growth for agriculture sector and
emphasized livestock sector as an important driving force of this targeted growth.
The share of agriculture in national GDP has declined from 34.72 percent (at current
price, 2008-09) in 1980-81 to only 10.99 percent in 2008-09. However, the share of livestock
sector in national GDP showed uptrend between 1980-81 and 1993-94 and after that it
showed downtrend (Table 1.3). However, data shown in Table 1.2 clearly exhibit that the
growth in livestock sector has been much faster than the crop sector. The share of livestock
sector at current prices in agriculture jumped from 13.88 percent in 1980-81 to 29.63 percent
in 2008-09.
In rural areas, most of the livestock rearing activities are mainly performed by
women. As many as 750 lakh women are engaged in livestock sector as against only150 lakh
men. There is an increasing trend in respect of women participation in livestock development
activities. This has led to empowerment of women headed households in the rural
communities.
2
India has a very huge population of livestock. Of the total livestock population of the
world, India alone has about one-fifth cattle population. As per all India census estimate, total
livestock population (excluding poultry, dogs and rabbits) in the year 2007 was over 529
million (Table 1.2). Among the livestock products, milk is the most important. The
contribution of milk sector to the total output from livestock is about 68 percent and in some
states it is as high as 80 percent. Although, the quantity of milk production in the country
showing upward trend, annual growth rate of milk production showing positive but
downward trend after 1990-91. It dips form 5.48 percent during 1980-1990 to 3.77 percent
during period 2000-2010.
Although India has very large population of livestock, the productivity of milk and
other livestock product per animal is very low compared to other many countries in the
world. As against the minimum nutritional requirement of 201 gms/day/head of milk, its
availability is very low and varied across states. The growth attained in livestock sector
hitherto has been attributed largely to increase in animal numbers and to a little extent on
productivity enhancement. Owing to problem of severe shortage of fodder and feed, the
future growth of livestock has to be sustained primarily on enhancement of animal
productivity and not on increase in number of animals.
Future development and growth of livestock are highly associated with the scope of
availability of fodder from cultivable land, forest, pastures and grazing lands. Traditionally,
cattle grazed on the pastures and gauchar (grazing) lands and supported by feeding crop-
residues or straw of jowar, bajra, wheat, maize, paddy etc. either in the form of straw or a
bhusa supplemented with some green fodder. The economic viability of livestock husbandry
heavily depends on source(s) of feed and fodder as feeding cost account for about 65 - 70
percent of the total cost of livestock farming. The feed given to cattle comprises of dry
fodder, green fodder and concentrates. The adequate supply of nutritive fodder and feed is a
crucial factor impacting the productivity and performance of the animals. Currently, scarcity
of feed / fodder resources is a one of the major constraints impacting to livestock
development. Therefore, it is important to put more emphasis on fodder development
programmes for augmenting fodder /feed supply, while formulation of livestock development
strategy.
One of the main reasons for the low productivity of our livestock is malnutrition,
under-nutrition or both, beside the low genetic potential of the animals. From Table 1.1, it is
evident that the country is highly deficient in respect of availability of green fodder, dry
fodder and concentrates. The deficit gap of availability vis-à-vis the requirement of green
3
fodder is huge at 665.80 million MT (62.76 %) and 138 million MT (23.46 %) for dry fodder.
The deficit of concentrates also found to be more than 30 percent. The fodder and feed deficit
varies across states and found more acute and chronic in arid and semi-arid states where
farming is highly dependent on rainfall and have large livestock population.
Table: 1.1 Requirement and availability of fodder in the country - 2010
Type of fodder Green Dry
Availability (Million MT) 395.20 451.00
Requirement (Million MT) 1061.00 589.00
Deficit gap (Million MT) 665.80 (62.76 %) 138.00 (23.46 %)
Source: Report of the working group on Animal Husbandry and Dairying for the 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, GOI
For exploiting fully the production potential of our livestock, balanced and adequate
feeding is the most crucial. Without balanced feeding, it is difficult to economise the cost of
livestock production and to keep animals in good health. As discussed above, India suffers
from severe shortage of feeds and fodder. Due to fast industrialisation and increasing human
population, land available for gauchar, permanent pasture and fodder cultivation has been
decreasing. In addition, shift from forage crops to cash/commercial crops like cotton, cumin,
rapeseed and mustard, castor, fruits etc. also lead to shortage of feed and fodder. Further, on
account of diversified use of agricultural residues, the gap between the demand and supply of
fodder has widened further. Therefore, serious and intensive efforts are needed by all
concerns for augmenting the fodder resources and to fill up deficiency gap. Up till now,
government and non-government organisations paid very little attention towards quantitative
and qualitative development of feeds/fodder. In recent years, State/Central government and
Cooperative Dairy Organisations have realised that without mitigation of this acute shortage
of fodder and feed resources, expansion and development of livestock sector seems to be
uneconomical and not advisable. Therefore, to mitigate this problem, in the recent past,
central and state government implemented several programmes of fodder development. Of
these, major programmes are establishment of Central Fodder Seed Production Farm,
Regional Stations for Forage Production and Demonstration Central Mini-kit Testing
Programme on fodder crops, Establishment of Fodder Banks, Assistance to States for Feed
and Fodder Development and Enrichment of Straw and Cellulosic Wastes etc.
4
1.2 Livestock population:
India has the largest livestock population in the world. India has around 20 percent of
world’s livestock with only 2.3 percent of the world’s geographical area. India is the leader in
buffaloes (57%) population and has world’s second largest cattle (12%) and goat (20%)
population. According to all India livestock census-2007 (Table 1.2), the country had 529
million livestock population and 648 million poultry population. The cattle, buffalo and total
livestock population showing continuous uptrend during 1951-2007. However, cattle
population increased to a very little extent during 1997-2007. Total livestock population
increased from 485.39 million in 1997 to 529.70 million in 2007, an increase of 9.13 percent
in the last decade (Table 1.2). The poultry population also showing uptrend during 1951-
2007, but rate of increase was substantial during 1997-2007. It increased from 347.61 million
in 1997 to 648.88 million in 2007 showing an increase of 86.67 percent.
With adequate provision of feed and fodder for its large livestock population, India
has vast potential for meeting the growing needs of teeming millions, particularly in respect
of livestock products such as milk, milk products, eggs, meat and wool.
1.3 Livestock sector and agricultural economy:
Livestock /Animal Husbandry sector plays an important role in the national economy
and particularly agricultural economy. It also has impacts on the socio-economic
characteristics of the households. Livestock sector also plays a significant role in
supplementing family incomes and generating gainful employment for rural poor, particularly
among the landless labourers, small and marginal farmers and women. It also provides
balanced and cheap nutritional food in the form of milk to million people. Livestock serves as
insurance against crop failure and the vagaries like drought, famine and other natural
calamities. This is a sector where poor contributes to the growth directly instead of getting
benefits from growth generated elsewhere.
Of the total households in the rural area, it is estimated that about 73 percent own
some variant of livestock. More importantly, small and marginal farmers and landless
account for about three quarters of these households. The focus of the very poor households
is on small animals like goat, pig and poultry requiring less investment and the quick returns.
This multiple species animal husbandry system is
5
Table: 1.2 Livestock population in India-1951 to 2007 (Million)
Species 1951 1956 1961 1966 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2003 2007 $
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Cattle 155.30 158.70 175.60 176.20 178.30 180.00 192.45 199.69 204.53 198.88 185.18 199.08
Adult Female Cattle 54.40 47.30 51.00 51.80 53.40 54.60 59.21 62.07 64.36 64.43 64.51 72.95
Buffaloes 43.40 44.90 51.20 53.00 57.40 62.00 69.78 75.97 84.21 89.92 97.92 105.34
Adult Female Buffaloes 21.00 21.70 24.30 25.40 28.60 31.30 32.50 39.13 43.81 46.77 50.97 54.47
Total Cattle & Buffaloes 198.70 203.60 226.80 229.20 235.70 242.00 262.36 275.82 289.00 289.80 283.10 304.42
Sheep 39.10 39.30 40.20 42.40 40.00 41.00 48.76 45.70 50.78 57.49 61.47 71.56
Goats 47.20 55.40 60.90 64.60 67.50 75.60 95.25 110.21 115.28 122.72 124.36 140.54
Horses & Ponies 1.50 1.50 1.30 1.10 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.80 0.82 0.83 0.75 0.61
Camels 0.60 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.08 1.00 1.03 0.91 0.63 0.52
Pigs 4.40 4.90 5.20 5.00 6.90 7.60 10.07 10.63 12.79 13.29 13.52 11.13
Mules 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.13 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.18 0.14
Donkeys 1.30 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.00 1.00 1.02 0.96 0.97 0.88 0.65 0.44
Yaks NC NC 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.08
Total Livestock 292.80 306.60 335.40 344.10 353.60 369.00 419.59 445.29 470.86 485.39 485.00 529.70
Poultry 73.5 94.8 114.2 115.4 138.5 159.2 207.74 275.32 307.07 347.61 489.01 648.88
NC: Not Collected, $ Provisional derived from village level totals Source: Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics, 2010, Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Animal Husbandry Dairying & Fisheries, New Delhi
6
Table: 1.3 Shares of agriculture and livestock sector in GDP at India
(At Current Prices of 2008-09)
Year
GDP- Total
(Rs. in Billion)
GDP-Agriculture GDP-Livestock Sector
(Rs. in
Billion)
% to total GDP
(Rs. in Billion)
% to total GDP
% to Agri.
1980-81 1224 425 34.72 59 4.82 13.88
1985-86 2338 700 29.94 139 5.95 19.86
1986-87 2600 744 28.62 156 6.00 20.97
1987-88 2949 835 28.31 183 6.21 21.92
1988-89 3527 1041 29.52 217 6.15 20.85
1989-90 4087 1154 28.24 275 6.73 23.83
1990-91 4778 1352 28.30 308 6.45 22.78
1991-92 5528 1593 28.82 375 6.78 23.54
1992-93 6307 1779 28.21 432 6.85 24.28
1993-94 7813 2218 28.39 507 6.49 22.86
1994-95 9170 2552 27.83 577 6.29 22.61
1995-96 10733 2778 25.88 650 6.06 23.40
1996-97 12435 3340 26.86 747 6.01 22.37
1997-98 13901 3535 25.43 819 5.89 23.17
1998-99 15981 4064 25.43 911 5.70 22.42
1999-00 17865 4097 22.93 947 5.30 23.11
2000-01 19250 4089 21.24 1047 5.44 25.61
2001-02 20977 4425 21.09 1093 5.21 24.70
2002-03 22614 4255 18.82 1149 5.08 27.00
2003-04 25382 4830 19.03 1183 4.66 24.49
2004-05 29676 3460 11.66 1106 3.73 31.97
2005-06 34023 4024 11.83 1190 3.50 29.57
2006-07 39419 4488 11.39 1306 3.31 29.10
2007-08 45410 5254 11.57 1475 3.25 28.07
2008-09 52286 5744 10.99 1702 3.26 29.63
Source: Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics, 2010, Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries, New Delhi
7
also environment friendly. This sector plays an important and vital role in providing nutritive
food which is rich in animal protein to the general public and also supplementing family incomes
and generating gainful employment in the rural households more particularly among the landless,
small, marginal farmers and women. Income from livestock production accounts for significant
percentage in their total household’s income. In view of notable increase in demand for livestock
products, there is a good opportunities for rural households for raising their income level and
living standard through expansion of animal husbandry. And expansions of animal husbandry
largely rely on adequate availability of feed and fodder.
In India, the livestock production and agriculture are intrinsically linked and each one
being dependent on the other. Both are crucial for the overall food security of the people. In
2008-09, at current prices, livestock contribution was 29.63 percent in agricultural GDP of the
country and contribution in national GDP was to the extent of 3.26 percent only (Table 1.3).
Over the years, the contribution of agriculture sector in total GDP showing significant downtrend
whereas contribution of livestock sector to agriculture sector has been showing significant
uptrend. Livestock sector has considerable potential to contribute towards alleviation of problem
of unemployment and poverty. Also, it can provide large scale self-employment opportunities. In
India, 70% of the rural households own livestock and for them livestock sector is an important
source of employment especially for women. In spite of the fact that the average holding of
livestock per household is small, even though, livestock sector has considerable potential for
generating additional employment through milk, meat, wool and eggs production activities. Milk
production activity alone involves more than 30 million small producers.
1.4 Feed and fodder scenario at national level:
The adequate uninterrupted availability of fodder is a pre-requisite for improving the
productivity of livestock and to make livestock production cost efficient. Without ensuring an
adequate supply of quality feed and fodder, the achievement of targeted growth of livestock
sector in the coming years looks almost impossible. The data system for collecting fodder
production information is far from adequate and hence data /estimates of fodder production and
demand in the country vary widely. Feed and fodder production and its utilisation depend on the
cropping pattern, climate, socio-economic condition and livestock type. The cattle and buffaloes
are normally stall-fed species and fed on the fodder available from cultivated land and
8
supplemented to a small extent by harvested grasses. Grazing in pastures and commonly fallow
lands and harvested grasses are the main fodder source of small ruminants like sheep and goat.
Camels are fed on lopping of trees and shrubs. They also browse on standing trees and shrubs.
Horses are stall fed with dry and green fodder. Concentrates feeding is restricted to lactating high
yielding bovines and work animals. Stall- feeding largely confines to buffaloes, cross-breed
cattle and draught animals. The major sources of fodder supply are crop-residues (by-products of
cereals and pulses), cultivated fodder and grass/tree leaves/ fodder from common property
resources such as gauchar land, forest, permanent pastures and grazing lands.
Fodder crops may be classified as temporary or as permanent crops; the former are
cultivated and harvested like any other crop, the latter relate to land used permanently (five years
or more) for herbaceous forage crops, either cultivated or growing wild (wild prairie or grazing
land / gauchar land). They may include some areas of forest lands that are used for grazing.
Temporary crops grow in artificial meadows which are normally used very intensively, with
various cuttings every year. They contain three major groups of fodder: grasses, including
cereals harvested green; legumes including pulses harvested green; and root crops that are
cultivated for fodder purpose. Through processing, the fodder can be feed to animals as green
feed; as hay, i.e. crops harvested dry or left to dry if harvested green; or as silage products. Silage
or ensilage is a method of preservation of green fodder through fermentation to retard spoiling
and this method of processing is more popular in many states of India as compared to hay
making.
On the other hand, if we examine the land resources available for growing fodder and
forage crops, it is estimated that the average cultivated area devoted to fodder production is
around 4 to 5 per cent of the total cultivated area. The total area under cultivated fodders is 8.3
million hectares on individual crop basis (ICAR, 2011). Sorghum amongst the kharif crops (2.6
million hectares) and berseem amongst the rabi crops (1.9 million hectares) occupy about 54 per
cent of the total cultivated fodder cropped area (Appendix-I). Similarly, the area under
permanent pastures and cultivable wastelands is approximately 13 and 15 million hectares
respectively. Likewise, the total area under forests is 2.51 crore hectares and from that open to
grazing is 2.1 crore hectares. All these resources are able to meet the forage requirements of the
grazing animals only during the monsoon season and initial months of winter season. But for the
9
remaining periods of the year, the animals have to be maintained through stall-feeding by
feeding crop residues or straws of jowar, bajra, ragi, wheat, barley, etc. either in the form of
whole straw or a bhusa, supplemented with some green fodder or as a sole feed. The crop
residues are available mainly from wheat, maize, paddy, bajra, jowar, ragi, sugarcane trash, etc.,
which are relatively poor in nutritive value. The green fodder resources for livestock are mainly
derived from grazing in grasslands and pastures, fodder crops from cropped lands, weeds, bund
grasses, tree leaves and mixed forages. Green fodder is the essential component of feeding high
yielding milch animals to obtain optimum level of milk production. The technology of growing
year round fodder production has helped the dairy farmers to sustain milk production at 6-7 litres
per day per milch animal with economical use of concentrates and reduction in cost of milk
production.
Table: 1.4 Supply and demand of green and dry fodder in India
(Million MT)
Source: Report of the working group on Animal Husbandry and dairying for the Eleventh five year plan (2007-2012), Planning Commission, Government of India
As the area under fodder producing crops remained by and large at constant, the
increasing requirement of fodder has to be met compulsory through improved productivity by
development and use of high yielding varieties having better nutritive value, fodder conservation
and its better utilisation and improvement of pasture land. Therefore, at this stage, there is a need
Year
Supply Demand Deficit as % of Demand
(actual demand)
Green Dry Green Dry Green Dry
1995 379.30 421 947 526 59.95 (568) 19.95 (105)
2000 384.50 428 988 549 61.10 (604) 21.93 (121)
2005 389.90 443 1025 569 61.96 (635) 22.08 (126)
2010 395.20 451 1061 589 62.76 (666) 23.46 (138)
2015 400.60 466 1097 609 63.50 (696) 23.56 (143)
2020 405.90 473 1134 630 64.21 (728) 24.81 (157)
2025 411.30 488 1170 650 64.87 (759) 24.92 (162)
10
to focus more on research of development of forage varieties which are high yielding, pest of
high resistant and have better nutritive value. The inadequate production and availability of
quality seed yielding varieties of fodder crops is also acting as one of the major constraints in
enhancing fodder production.
Owing to increasing pressure of population on land and higher benefit-cost ratio,
currently Indian farmers focusing more on growing food grains, oilseeds and cash crops and
production of fodder remains highly neglected. The current priorities given by farmers to food
grains, oilseeds and cash crops are likely to worsen supply position of fodder. There are several
reports and studies showing demand and supply position of feed and fodder in the country. The
data/estimates of demand and supply of fodder given in several reports/sources for the same
period differ widely. However, most of such reports showed that there exists a large gap between
the demand and supply of feed and fodder in the country. This gap is likely to increase as
requirements of feed and fodder are increasing year after year owing to increase in the country’s
livestock population. The deficit of fodder varies across states. The most of the fodder -deficit
states are in arid and semi-arid agro ecological zones. The Gujarat is also fodder deficit state.
According to report of the working group on Animal Husbandry and Dairying for the
Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-12), Planning Commission, GOI, there is a huge deficit in the
country in green fodder and dry fodder. Over the years, deficit of green and dry fodder is
showing upward trend (Table 1.4). The deficit of green fodder expected to move up further from
62.76 percent (666 million MT.) in year 2010 to 64.21 percent (759 million MT.) in year 2020.
According to report, huge deficit gap of fodder is expected to be aggravated in the years to come.
Further, on account of diversified use of crop residues and declining trend in land availability for
forage / fodder production, the gap between demand and supply of fodder is likely to be widen
further. The quantitative and qualitative deterioration of common grazing land owing to
overgrazing and lack of proper maintenance resulted in low biomass production and increased
the fodder deficit. The area under fodder crops in the country has also remained almost static
(around 5%) for last two decades and it look uncertain whether this will increase in future.
Owing to severe shortages of feed and fodder and its higher prices, large number of
India’s livestock population, particularly in the arid and semi-arid regions suffer from
underfeeding problem. Thus, feed and fodder deficit in fact have been the main limiting factor in
11
raising livestock productivity and achieving targeted growth of livestock sector. Thus, to ensure
an adequate supply of quality feed and fodder is one of the major challenges faced by the India
where dairying is largely the avocation of poor, especially women. The need of the hour is
therefore, of sincere efforts to reduce gap between the requirement and availability of feeds and
fodder which include technological interventions to enhance productivity, bringing more area
under fodders, use of high yielding seed for improving fodder productivity, improvement of
pasture and grazing lands, formulation of balanced rations, feeding of unconventional feed etc.
All are agreed on the fact that quality and quantity of feeds and fodders supply will be the key
factor for sustaining the future growth and development of the livestock and dairy sector of
India.
1.5 Role of fodders:
Fodder plays an important role in economising the cost of production of livestock
products especially of milk. Fodder comprises a major protein of dairy ration of milch animals
and therefore cultivation of nutritious and high yielding fodder is inevitable. Profitable livestock
farming depends mainly on adequate availability of fodder with reasonable price. With increase
in number of animal population & shrinking land resources, the problem to provide adequate
feed and forage become so acute.
1. Feed & fodder cost constitute about 60-70% of cost of milk production. Thus cultivated
fodder has an important role in meeting requirement of various nutrients & roughage to
produce milk most economically.
2. Feeds given to animals not only meet nutrient requirement but fills the rumen to satisfy
the animal.
3. In view of microbial digestion system, feeds have to meet requirement of cattle
production and microbes to promote digestion.
4. Fodder crops provide all the critical elements like highly digestible protein,
carbohydrates, fats and minerals. Green fodders are a very good source of B-carotene
(precursor of vitamin A).
12
5. Common cereal fodder crops like Maize, Sorghum and Oats are rich in energy. And the
leguminous crops like Lucerne, Berseem & Cowpea are rich in proteins and good source
of minerals which are critical for rumen microbes as well as animal system.
6. Fodder cultivation has been traditional in most parts of the country. Since generations
farmers cultivate certain varieties and crops for fodder production and area allocation to
these crops depending upon availability of land, water and requirement for own livestock.
1.6 Need of the study:
The livestock sector in India contributes in the range of 30 to 35 percent in total
agricultural output. The desired annual growth of agriculture sector can be accomplished only
through enhancing overall productivity of the livestock sector. This would require a steady and
adequate supply of quality fodder for supporting the livestock population. Having only 4 - 5
percent of total cropping area under fodder cultivation and low productivity of fodder crops has
resulted in a severe deficit of green fodder, dry fodder and concentrates. For development of
livestock sector, the need of the hour is, therefore, to meet this shortfall of fodder (which is over
55%) by adopting suitable measures for increasing the production of crop residues, green fodder
and agricultural by-products. Fodder deficit can mainly be attributed to our limitations in
increasing the area under fodder crops, limited availability of good high yielding fodder
varieties, lack of quality seeds of improved hybrids/ varieties, poor quality of dry fodder like
paddy/wheat straw, changing crop pattern in favour of cash crops etc. Besides, low priority
accorded to investment in fodder production, lack of post-harvest management for surplus
fodder, poor management of grazing/pasture lands and inadequate research, extension and
manpower support also aggravated the shortfall situation of fodders.
With increase in the pressure on land due to urbanisation and industrialisation and
decrease in the area under fodder and food crops coupled with increasing demand for milk and
milk products, the dependency of livestock / dairy farmers on external or purchased inputs has
also increased and it is putting pressure especially on the resource poor dairy farmers. Efforts are
being made and underway for reducing the gap between the requirement and availability of feeds
and fodders through technological interventions to increase the yields, bringing more area under
fodder crops, conservation of feeds and fodders, improving the nutritive value of the poor quality
roughages, formulation of balanced rations, feeding of unconventional feeds etc. But “fodder
13
scarcity” continued and it has becomes a challenging issue in most of the developing countries
including India.
Ensuring an adequate supply of reasonable quality feed and fodder is one of the major
challenges which Indian livestock sector is facing currently. While there is some debate on the
exact size of the current deficit, there is general agreement that the quantity and quality of feed
and fodder supply will be of vital importance in sustaining the growth of the livestock sector in
future.
The costs and returns analysis for various fodder crops will be helpful to examine the
relative profitability of these crops in the region. The farmers will get the remunerative prices for
their surplus produce only when the effective and efficient processing and marketing system of
fodder and feed is in place.
1.7 Objectives of the study:
The following are the specific objectives of the study:
1. To study the status of fodder crops cultivated in India;
2. To estimate the costs of production and returns associated with the cultivation of important
fodder crops;
3. To examine the present processing and marketing system of fodder crops and to estimate
costs and returns across different channels of fodder crops;
4. To study the problems faced by the producers in production, marketing and processing of
these fodder crops and remedial measures thereof.
14
Chapter 2
Methodology
The study was conducted by 4 Agro Economic Research Centres in states of India to
assess the status of fodder crops in the state, cost of production and net returns from cultivation
of fodder crops, marketing and processing system of fodder production and problems of
cultivation of fodder crops. This common study was conducted in 4 states and co-ordinated by
Agro Economic Research Centre, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. The survey
instruments, tabulation, technical inputs and guidance for the study were provided by AERC,
Ludhiana.The common methodology was adopted for the selection of study area, sampling
design, data collection and analytical framework used in the light of specific objectives of the
study is discussed in this chapter.
2.1 Sampling Design
2.1.1 Selection of sample farm households
The study was conducted in the Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab states of
India. Important fodder crops in the India include berseem, sorghum, guar, maize, cowpea, oats,
chari, bajra, moth, lucerne, jowar etc. In the present study, one most important fodder crop each
in the kharif, rabi and summer seasons for the selected states were selected for the in depth
analysis. In Gujarat, generally farmers are not growing pure fodder crops. Hence, the most
important food grain crop (whose by product/residue is used as fodder) has been taken as study
crop. Amongst different districts of each state, three districts with the highest area of fodder in
the state were selected purposively. Amongst the selected districts, two blocks from each district,
one block near and one distant to the periphery of district headquarter were selected randomly to
realise the effect of distance factor in the findings. From each block, a cluster of 3 to 5 villages
were randomly chosen. Finally, a sample of 25 farmers was selected randomly from each
selected cluster, making a total sample of 150 households from each state. The primary data
pertaining to the year 2008-09 was collected by the personal interview method. Though, fodders
processing practices were not commonly found in India, yet hay/silage method of fodder
processing was used by a few farmers. A sample of processors associated with the processing
15
were randomly chosen from the selected blocks to know the different stages of the fodder
processing and to assess the costs involved at each stage.
2.1.2 Selection of traders
Different marketing channels for the disposal of fodder crops in the study area were
examined to assess the cost and margins of different functionaries involved in the disposal of
fodder crops till the produce reaches in the hands of the consumers. Ten market functionaries
involved in the disposal of fodder crops like forwarding agents/commission agents/chaff
cutters/dairy owners/consumers, were selected from each local market in the selected blocks for
data collection.
2.1.3 Secondary data/information
The secondary data on area, production and productivity under fodder crops and livestock
population in selected states of India and its different districts and blocks were collected from the
various published sources. The growth rates in area under fodder crops were calculated over
three period of time, viz. 1990-91 to 1999-00 (Period I); 2000-01 to 2008-09 (Period II) and
overall Period, 1990-91 to 2008-09 (Period III).
2.2 Analytical framework
Tabular analysis was adopted to analyze the cost and returns associated with different
fodder crops and the marketing efficiency of different marketing channels. Multiple response
technique was used to study various problems faced by the sample households.
2.2.1 Calculations of AAGR (Average Annual Growth Rates)
The AAGR for livestock population over two periods of time (1990/1992 and 2007) have been
calculated as follow:
AAGR= (Livestock population in 2007- Livestock population in 1990/1992)×100
Livestock population in 1990× No. of years
For Karnataka state, the compound annual growth rate (CAGR) was estimated to analyse the
growth pattern between the inter-census periods. Formula for calculating CAGR can be specified
as follows.
16
Where, Pt the current period population, P0 is the base period population, n the number of years
and r growth rate.
2.2.2 Cost and return analysis
The cost of cultivation has been worked out by following variable cost components
classification and standard cost concepts. The variable cost included value of hired and family
labour, owned and hired machinery, seed, manure, fertilizer, pesticides, irrigation, interest on
working capital and other miscellaneous expenses. The gross return has been calculated as by
multiplying total production with average price. The net returns over variable cost have been
calculated as the difference between the gross return and variable cost.
In Gujarat, generally farmers are not growing pure fodder crops. For estimating the cost
of cultivation of fodder residue (by- product) in selected food grain crops (Main and by-product)
the method used is stated below:
BPC= (BPR/TR)*TC
Where,
BPC= Total cost of cultivation of by- product (Fodder residues).
BPR= Farm Harvest Price of by- product (Fodder residues).
TR= Total value of crop-output (Main + by- product)
TC= Total cost of cultivation of crop.
2.2.3 Price spread
To study the price spread and marketing efficiency in different marketing channels, the
marketing costs and margins for each link of the chain were worked out as using methodology
developed by Acharya and Agarwal, 2005.
Marketing cost
Total cost of marketing was calculated as under:
C= CF +Cml + Cm2 + Cm3 …………. + Cmn
Where,
C= Total cost of marketing
CF= Cost borne by the producer in marketing the produce
Cm= Cost incurred by the middlemen in the process of buying and selling
I= 1, 2, 3 ………n
17
n is the number of middlemen involved in the channel.
Absolute and percent margins
Absolute and percent margins for each middleman involved in the supply chain system
were calculated as under:
Absolute margin = PRi – (Ppi + Cmi )
PRi – (Ppi + Cmi)
Percentage Margin = --------------------------×100
PRi
Where,
PRi= Total value of receipts (sale price)
Ppi= Total purchase value of goods (purchase price) , and
Cmi= Cost incurred in marketing
Producer’s share in consumer’s rupee
The producer’s share in the consumer rupee was worked out as under (Acharya and
Agarwal, 2005):
PF
Ps = ------ X 100
Pc
Where,
Ps= Producer’s share in consumer’s rupee,
PF= Price of the produce received by the farmers, and
PC= Price of the produce paid by the consumer.
Apart from percentage, absolute values were also used to make the picture clearer.
18
Chapter 3
Status of Livestock Population and Fodder Crops Cultivation
In India, Livestock is one of the important components of the primary sector of
economy. In 2008-09, at current prices, livestock contribution was 29.63 percent in agricultural
GDP of the country and contribution in national GDP was to the extent of 3.26 percent only.
Over the years, the contribution of agriculture sector in total GDP is showing significant
downtrend whereas contribution of livestock sector to agriculture sector has been showing
significant uptrend. India has the largest livestock population in the world. India has 20 percent
of world’s livestock with only 2.3 percent of the world’s geographical area. India is the leader in
buffalo (57%) population and has world’s second largest cattle (12%) and goat (20%)
population. Due to heavy pressure of growing commercial crops, the area under fodder has been
squeezing, and so as the composition of the live-stock population. Present chapter highlights the
status of livestock and fodder crops cultivation in the selected states of India i.e. Gujarat,
Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab.
3.1. Livestock population
The comparative status of livestock population in the selected states of India i.e. Gujarat,
Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab was studied and presented in Table 3.1. The Gujarat
state accounts for about 4 percent share in total livestock population of the country. This share
has remained by and large constant during the study period 1992 to 2007 with marginal up and
down. The size of livestock herd increased from 196.7 lakh in 1992 to 237.9 lakh in 2007
indicating spectacular increase in livestock population of Gujarat. Overall, the livestock
population increased at an average annual growth rate (AAGR) of 1.28 percent during 1992-
2007. Among milch animals of the state, buffalo have top position. The buffalo population in
Gujarat showed continuous uptrend and it increased from 52.66 lakh (26.8 percent) in 1992 to
87.74 lakh (36.9 percent) in 2007, showing average annual growth rate of 3.46 percent during
this period. Among different categories of livestock, the annual average growth rate was found
highest for buffalo. Cattle are a next important category of livestock in the state. The total cattle
population increased from 68.06 lakh (34.6 percent) in 1992 to 79.77 lakh in 2007 showing
19
annual average growth rate of only 1.06 percent. However, during 1992-1997, cattle population
showed negative trends. This has happened due to drastic reduction in bullock population owing
to farm mechanisation and high cost of feeding. Thus, shift in bovine population witnessed in
favour of crossbreed cows and buffalo. It is interesting to note that the total cattle population
increased over a period of time but the share of cattle in total livestock population declined from
34.60 percent in 1992 to 33.50 percent in 2007. Except horses and goats, population of other
species of livestock showing down trend during 1992-2007 and recorded negative annual growth
rate. In Gujarat, owing to higher feeding cost, keeping of livestock species such as donkey,
horse, sheep and camel has become more uneconomical and hence population of these species
showing down trend.
The livestock populating in Madhya Pradesh showed increasing trend over the years. The
total livestock population found to be increased by 1.90 per cent in the year 2007 as compare to
the year 1992 (32400.06 thousand) with an annual growth rate of 1.90 per cent. As regards to the
population of different livestock is concerned the population of cattle, buffalo and goat found to
be increased with growth of 0.56 per cent, 7.07 per cent 3.58 per cent per annum respectively,
while the population of horse and pony (-4.09%), donkey (-4.18%), sheep (-2.65%), camel (-
4.20%) and mule (-6.16%) showed negative growth rates over the years. Among the different
livestock, the population of buffalo (7.07%) showed maximum annual growth rates followed by
goat (3.58%) and cattle (0.56%).
The total livestock population in the state of Karnataka has increased from 29.57 million
in 1992 to 30.86 million in 2007 with compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 0.29 per cent.
But, livestock population has marginally declined during the inter-census periods of 1997 and
2003. Cattle population has surprisingly declined from 13.18 million in 1992 to 10.83 million in
1997, 9.23 million in 2003 and then to 10.50 million in 2007. The CAGR in cattle population has
registered negative growth between 1992 and 2007. However, buffalo population has increased
marginally between 1992 and 1997, but declined during 2003 due to drought in the previous
period. Interestingly, its population has increased marginally again in 2007. These changes in
bovine population indicate that the importance of buffalo among farmers is increasing for
dairying, although cattle continue to remain as the predominant species. Small ruminants (sheep
and goat) constitute the second largest species after the bovines. Among small ruminants, sheep
20
population has increased considerably from 5.43 million in 1992 to 9.6 million in 2007 with the
CAGR of 3.84 per cent. But, goat population has by and large declined with the CAGR of -0.14
per cent. Pigs are generally reared by marginalised and downtrodden sections of the society. The
pig population has also declined quite dramatically between 1992 and 2007 registering negative
growth rate. While horses and ponies population has remained almost stagnant with marginal
decline during recent census, the population of donkeys has decreased considerably.
The livestock population in Punjab has been decreasing continuously since 1990 showed
tremendous decline from about 97 lakh in 1990 to only 71 lakh during 2007, at the rate of 1.5 per
cent per annum. It shows that people are losing interest in rearing livestock in the state. The
number has decreased for all the livestock animals. Presently, Punjab is dominated by buffalo
population, as its share in total livestock population was about 69 per cent during 2007. It is
mainly due to consumers’ preference towards buffalo milk due to its high fat content. The
buffalo population showed increase in number till 1997 after which it decreased sharply. On the
other hand, cattle population has declined from about 28 lakh to 17 lakh during this period and
its share in total livestock population also declined from about 29 per cent to 24 per cent during
the period. The population of sheep is reduced almost to one third, while population of goat is
reduced almost to half as compared to their population of about 5 lakh in 1990. The share of
sheep and goat in total livestock population has reduced to 3 and 4 per cent respectively in 2007.
To conclude, the size of livestock herd in Gujarat increased from 196.7 lakh in 1992 to
237.9 lakh in 2007 indicating spectacular average annual growth rate (AAGR) of 1.28 percent
during period 1992-2007. Similarly, the livestock population in Madhya Pradesh showed
increasing trend over the years and the total livestock population was found to be increased with
the annual growth of 1.90 per cent in the year 2007 as compare to the year 1992 (32400.06
thousand). Likewise, the total livestock population in the state of Karnataka has increased from
29.57 million in 1992 to 30.86 million in 2007 with compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of
0.29 per cent. On the contrary, the livestock population in Punjab has been decreasing
continuously since 1990 showed tremendous decline from about 97 lakh in 1990 to only 71 lakh
during 2007, at the rate of 1.5 per cent per annum.
21
Table 3.1: Number of livestock, selected states, India
(Thousand)
Animal/State Gujarat* Madhya Pradesh
Karnataka* Punjab
Cattle
1990 6806
(34.6)
20207.04
(62.37)
13175
(44.56)
2841
(29.26)
1997 6750
(33.9)
19496.87
(57.25)
10831
(37.97)
2564
(26.66)
2003 7425
(32.5)
19512.61
(53.46)
9234
(36.47)
1933
(23.63)
2007 7977
(33.5)
21915.44
(52.64)
10503
(34.03)
1668
(23.54)
AAGR (%) 1.06 0.56 -1.50 -2.29
Buffalo 1990 5266
(26.8)
4430.60
(13.67)
4251
(14.38)
5597
(57.64)
1997 6286
(31.5)
6648.26
(19.52)
4367
(15.31)
6096
(63.37)
2003 7142
(31.3)
7575.31
(20.75)
3991
(15.76)
5743
(70.22)
2007 8774
(36.9)
9129.15
(21.93)
4327
(14.02)
4902
(69.17)
AAGR (%) 3.46 7.07 0.12 -0.69
Horses & Ponies 1990 13
(0.1)
84.85
(0.26)
13
(0.05)
33
(0.34)
1997 15
(0.1)
75.14
(0.22)
16
(0.06)
33
(0.34)
2003 18
(0.1)
41.79
(0.11)
14
(0.05)
27
(0.33)
2007 14
(0.1)
32.76
(0.08)
11
(0.04)
27
(0.38)
AAGR (%) 0.5 -4.09 -1.24 -0.99
Donkeys 1990 80
(0.4)
70.65
(0.22)
33
(0.11)
36
(0.37) 1997 74
(0.4)
63.51
(0.19)
28
(0.10)
20
(0.21) 2003 66
(0.3)
46.75
(0.13)
25
(0.10)
5
(0.06)
2007 51
(0.2)
26.31
(0.06)
26
(0.08)
5
(0.07)
AAGR (%) -2.96 -4.18 -1.48 -4.85
22
Mules 1990 NR 8.60
(0.03)
NR 16
(0.16)
1997 NR 7.12
(0.02)
NR 17
(0.18)
2003 NR 4.64
(0.01)
NR 8
(0.10)
2007 NR 0.65
(0.00)
NR 9
(0.13)
AAGR (%) NR -6.16 NR -2.26
Sheep
1990 2027
(10.3)
760.67
(2.35) 5431
(18.37)
509
(5.24)
1997 2160
(10.8) 788.02
(2.31) 8003
(28.05)
378
(3.93)
2003 2062
(9.0)
689.40
(1.89) 7256
(28.66)
184
(2.25)
2007 2004
(8.4)
458.54
(1.10) 9558
(30.97)
189
(2.67)
AAGR (%) -0.08 -2.65 3.84 -3.49
Goat 1990 4239
(21.6)
6384.69
(19.71)
6285
(21.26)
538
(5.54)
1997 4385
(22.0)
6472.05
(19.01)
4875
(17.09)
391
(4.06)
2003 4541
(19.9)
8143.99
(22.31)
4484
(17.71)
252
(3.08)
2007 4640
(19.5)
9810.70
(23.57)
6153
(19.94)
260
(3.67)
AAGR (%) 0.6 3.58 -0.14 -2.87
Camels
1990 62
(0.3)
18.33
(0.06)
NR 43
(0.44)
1997 65
(0.3)
16.44
(0.05)
NR 27
(0.28)
2003 53
(0.2)
13.83
(0.04)
NR 3
(0.04)
2007 38
(0.2)
6.79
(0.02)
NR 2
(0.03)
AAGR (%) -3.21 -4.20 NR -5.29
Pigs
23
1990 NR 434.62
(1.34)
380
(1.29)
97
(1.0)
1997 NR 486.63
(1.43) 405
(1.42)
93
(0.97)
2003 NR 470.60
(1.29) 312
(1.23)
24
(0.29)
2007 NR 249.14
(0.60)
281
(0.91)
25
(0.35)
AAGR (%) NR -2.85 -2.01 -4.15
Others
1990 1175
(6.0)
NR NR NR
1997 194
(1.0)
NR NR NR
2003 1538
(6.7)
NR NR NR
2007 291
(1.2) NR NR NR
AAGR (%) -8.88 NR NR NR
Total livestock
1990 19668
(100.0)
32400.06
(100.00)
29569
(100)
9710
(100.00)
1997 19929
(100.0)
34054.03
(100.00)
28526
(100)
9619
(100.00)
2003 22845
(100.0)
36498.90
(100.00)
25315
(100)
8179
(100.00)
2007 23789
(100.0)
41629.46
(100.00)
30859
(100)
7087
(100.00)
AAGR (%) 1.28 1.90 0.29 -1.50
Note: Figures in parenthesis denotes percentage to total livestock population in each column. * denotes the livestock population for the year 1992, NR is Not reported
3.1.1 District wise variations in livestock population
The district-wise composition of livestock population in each of the selected states of
India i.e. Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab was studied and presented in Tables
3.1.1a, 3.1.1b 3.1.1c and 3.1.1d, respectively.
In Gujarat, during 1997-2007, the livestock population as well as its share in state
livestock population increased remarkably for Anand, Gandhinagar, Banaskantha, Sabarkantha,
24
Panchmahals, Surendranagar, Kheda, Anand and Valsad districts. During 1997-2007, livestock
population increased at a faster pace in Banaskantha (47.30 %), Gandhinagar (57.33 %), Kheda
(35.01 %), Panchmahals (60.78 %), Surendranagar (34.82 %) and Sabarkantha (31.85 %)
districts and hence average annual growth rates (AAGR) of livestock population for these
districts also found higher than state AAGR of 1.79 percent. Compared to 1997, the livestock
population declined in 2007 in Amreli, Bhavnagar, Narmada, Navsari and Bharuch districts and
as a result, these five districts recorded negative AAGR during 1997-2007. The livestock
population of Dahod, Jamnagar, Junagadh, Kutch, Rajkot, Porbandar and Vadodara districts
recorded positive AAGR during period 1997-2007 despite decline in their percent share to state
livestock population in 2007. Thus during 1997-2007, the livestock development across districts
found uneven but for the state as a whole it was remarkable.
The total population of livestock was found to be increased over the period of time in all
the district of Madhya Pradesh. The maximum annual growth rate of population of total
livestock was found to be in Rajgarh (6.12%) , followed by Datia (5.67%), Bhopal (3.47
%), Tikamgarh (3.19 %), Ujjain (3.01%), Khargone (2.46 %), Sidhi (2.14%), Morena (2.05%) ,
Damoh (1.99%), Sagar (1.97%), Ratlam (1.92 %), and Satna (1.91%) districts of Madhya
Pradesh. In other districts of M.P., the growth of total livestock was also found to be increased
over the period of time but these annual growths were found to be less than the state (Table
3.1b).
It can be observed from the Table 3.1.1c that the districts falling in dry land tracts have
the large livestock population in Karnataka. Among districts, Belgaum has the largest livestock
population (3.0 million) followed by Gulbarga (2.53 million) and Tumkur (2.43 million). The
livestock population has consistently increased in Belgaum, Bagalkot, Davanagere and Koppal
across inter-census periods. The share of these districts in the state population was 9.72 per cent,
5.47 per cent, 3.61 per cent and 3.38 per cent, respectively. Gulbarga and Tumkur accounted for
8.21 per cent and 7.89 per cent of the total livestock population, respectively. The CAGR was
high in Koppal and Bagalkot. The other districts that showed positive growth in livestock
population were Belgaum, Bellary, Chitradurga, Davanagere, Gadag, Gulbarga and Tumkur.
However, some districts have shown decline in livestock population over time. These included
Dharwad and Shimoga which are characterised by relatively developed crop agriculture and thus
25
there is limited availability of grazing land for livestock rearing. In Dharwad, total livestock
population was 1.96 million in 1992, which declined continuously to 0.44 million in 1997 and
then to 0.38 million in 2003. There is some increase in population in 2007. In Shimoga, livestock
population has fallen by about 60 per cent between 1992 and 2007. However, there is also
marginal increase in population during 2007. Apart, Kodagu has also showed steep decline in
livestock population during the census periods under study.
The livestock population in Punjab has been decreasing continuously since 1990 showed
tremendous decline from about 97 lakh in 1990 to only 71 lakh during 2007, at the rate of 1.5 per
cent per annum (Table 3.1.1d). It shows that people are losing interest in rearing livestock in the
state. Sangrur and Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of total livestock population in the
state as their share in total cattle population was about 12 per cent each in 2007. All the districts
in the state showed declining trends in total livestock population except in Faridkot which has
shown positive growth of 0.30 per cent per annum. The maximum decline was in Jalandhar
district (-7.30 per cent per annum).
To conclude, in Gujarat, the district-wise data on livestock population for period 1997-
2007 increased remarkably for Anand, Gandhinagar, Banaskantha, Sabarkantha, Panchmahals,
Surendranagar, Kheda, Anand and Valsad districts. In most of the districts of M.P. the growth of
total livestock was also found to be increased over the period of time but these annual growth
was found to be less than the Madhya Pradesh. In Karnataka, Belgaum, Gulbarga, Tumkur
Bagalkot, Davanagere and Koppal were the important livestock rearing districts of state which
accounted for 9.72 per cent, 8.21 per cent, 7.89 per cent, 5.47 per cent, 3.61 per cent and 3.38 per
cent, of the total livestock population, respectively. The CAGR was high in Koppal and Bagalko
and the other districts that showed positive growth in livestock population were Belgaum,
Bellary, Chitradurga, Davanagere, Gadag, Gulbarga and Tumkur. Sangrur and Amritsar are the
leading districts in terms of total livestock population in Punjab as their share in total cattle
population was about 12 per cent each in 2007. All the districts in the state showed declining
trends in total livestock population except in Faridkot.
26
Table: 3.1.1a: District-wise number of livestock in Gujarat and AAGR, 1997 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1997 2003 2007 AAGR
(2007 over 1997)
Ahmedabad 584 731 717
2.07 (2.9) (3.2) (3.0)
Anand 504 553 653
2.62 (2.53) (2.42) (2.74)
Amreli 746 766 742
-0.05 (3.7) (3.4) (3.1)
Bhavnagar 1165 1246 1141
-0.21 (5.9) (5.5) (4.8)
Banaskantha 1467 1862 2161
3.95 (7.4) (8.2) (9.1)
Bharuch 425 467 423
-0.05 (2.1) (2.0) (1.8)
Dahod 1422 1165 1429
0.05 (7.1) (5.1) (6.0)
Dang 125 164 136
0.85 (0.6) (0.7) (0.6)
Gandhinagar 375 534 590
4.64 (1.9) (2.3) (2.5)
Jamnagar 902 1041 1002
1.06 (4.5) (4.6) (4.2)
Junagadh 937 1031 1025
0.90 (4.7) (4.5) (4.3)
Kutch 1652 1573 1707
0.33 (8.3) (6.9) (7.2)
Kheda 751 893 1014
3.05 (3.8) (3.9) (4.3)
27
Mahesana 745 806 896
1.86 (3.7) (3.5) (3.8)
Narmada 281 351 272
-0.32 (1.4) (1.5) (1.1)
Navsari 335 410 331
-0.12 (1.7) (1.8) (1.4)
Patan 545 550 664
1.99 (2.7) (2.4) (2.8)
Porbandar 229 251 241
0.51 (1.2) (1.1) (1.0)
Panchmahal 1048 1687 1685
4.86 (5.3) (7.4) (7.1)
Rajkot 1150 1298 1241
0.76 (5.8) (5.7) (5.2)
Surendranagar 715 855 964
3.03 (3.6) (3.7) (4.1)
Sabarkantha 1391 1750 1834
2.80 (7.0) (7.7) (7.7)
Surat+Tapi 907 1107 1085
1.81 (4.6) (4.9) (4.6)
Vadodara 1092 1271 1271
1.53 (5.5) (5.6) (5.3)
Valsad 436 483 565
2.63 (2.2) (2.1) (2.4)
Gujarat 19929 22845 23789 1.79
(100.0) (100.0) (100.0) Note: Figures in parenthesis denotes percentage share to Gujarat
28
Table 3.1.1b: District-wise number of livestock, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007
(Thousand)
Districts 1992 1997 2002 2007 AAGR (%)
Jabalpur (+ Katni ) 1317.99
(4.07)
1520.09
(4.46)
1089.63
(2.99)
1351.07
(3.25)
0.17
Balaghat 897.99
(2.77)
913.73
(2.68)
936.49
(2.57)
1006.61
(2.42)
0.81
Chhindwara 1107.34
(3.42)
1163.83
(3.42)
1176.19
(3.22)
1308.78
(3.14)
1.21
Seoni 727.97
(2.25)
768.25
(2.26)
716.45
(1.96)
837.78
(2.01)
1.01
Mandla +Dindori 1005.09
(3.10)
1056.08
(3.10)
1051.84
(2.88)
2081.86
(5.00)
7.14
Narsinghpur 509.32
(1.57)
505.27
(1.48)
625.99
(1.72)
587.32
(1.41)
1.02
Sagor 978.64
(3.02)
959.32
(2.82)
851.40
(2.33)
1267.61
(3.04)
1.97
Damoh 634.60
(1.96)
702.99
(2.06)
734.46
(2.01)
823.80
(1.98)
1.99
Panna 749.05
(2.31)
713.41
(2.09)
976.61
(2.68)
869.24
(2.09)
1.07
Tikamgarh 923.57
(2.85)
830.44
(2.44)
920.18
(2.52)
1365.54
(3.28)
3.19
Chhatarpur 1278.82
(3.95)
1232.36
(3.62)
1137.37
(3.12)
1369.87
(3.29)
0.47
Rewa 1179.27
(3.64)
1152.40
(3.38)
1056.87
(2.90)
1418.07
(3.41)
1.35
Sidhi 1377.72
(4.25)
1371.94
(4.03)
1670.52
(4.58)
1820.09
(4.37)
2.14
Satna 1146.17
(3.54)
1085.08
(3.19)
1094.60
(3.00)
1474.90
(3.54)
1.91
Shahdol (+Anuppur+
Umaria)
1395.19
(4.31)
1369.20
(4.02)
1386.98
(3.80)
1614.87
(3.88)
1.05
Indore 466.84
(1.44)
507.42
(1.49)
476.47
(1.31)
534.99
(1.29)
0.97
Dhar 977.94
(3.02)
1084.92
(3.19)
1527.37
(4.18)
1232.05
(2.96)
1.73
Jhabua 934.40
(2.88)
1108.58
(3.26)
1260.31
(3.45)
1490.46
(3.58)
3.97
Kargoan (+ Badwani ) 1379.73
(4.26)
1547.41
(4.54)
2019.14
(5.53)
1888.40
(4.54)
2.46
Khandwa (+ Burhanpur) 792.81 874.75 798.24 1006.64 1.80
29
(2.45) (2.57) (2.19) (2.42)
Ujjain 642.08
(1.98)
728.77
(2.14)
794.27
(2.18)
932.20
(2.24)
3.01
Mandsour (+ Neemuch ) 1041.89
(3.22)
1108.61
(3.26)
1240.86
(3.40)
1248.15
(3.00)
1.32
Ratlam 537.92
(1.66)
625.51
(1.84)
764.46
(2.09)
693.11
(1.66)
1.92
Dewas 625.49
(1.93)
687.56
(2.02)
693.13
(1.90)
789.06
(1.90)
1.74
Shajapur 689.50
(2.13)
738.92
(2.17)
844.53
(2.31)
877.14
(2.11)
1.81
Morena (+ Sheopur ) 1072.24
(3.31)
1295.34
(3.80)
1156.49
(3.17)
1402.08
(3.37)
2.05
Bhind 601.86
(1.86)
699.12
(2.05)
706.40
(1.94)
706.82
(1.70)
1.16
Gwalior 792.06
(2.44)
678.44
(1.99)
612.92
(1.68)
837.15
(2.01)
0.38
Shivpuri 1119.37
(3.45)
1126.73
(3.31)
1195.33
(3.27)
1509.70
(3.63)
2.32
Gunna (+ Ashoknagar) 892.58
(2.75)
922.73
(2.71)
1001.78
(2.74)
1219.56
(2.93)
2.44
Datia 271.93
(0.84)
296.85
(0.87)
414.19
(1.13)
503.11
(1.21)
5.67
Bhopal 234.56
(0.72)
247.01
(0.73)
286.26
(0.78)
356.49
(0.86)
3.47
Sehore 542.42
(1.67)
594.32
(1.75)
625.04
(1.71)
622.22
(1.49)
0.98
Raisen 552.57
(1.71)
558.67
(1.64)
659.78
(1.81)
682.41
(1.64)
1.57
Vidisha 556.97
(1.72)
574.82
(1.69)
1119.62
(3.07)
654.79
(1.57)
1.17
Betul 788.19
(2.43)
821.83
(2.41)
916.97
(2.51)
976.10
(2.34)
1.59
Rajgarh 675.38
(2.08)
794.32
(2.33)
779.93
(2.14)
1294.93
(3.11)
6.12
Hosangabad (+ Harda) 735.49
(2.27)
802.44
(2.36)
851.56
(2.33)
833.85
(2.00)
0.89
Madhya Pradesh 32400.06 (100.00)
34054.03 (100.00)
36498.90 (100.00)
41629.46 (100.00)
1.90
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
30
Table 3.1.1c: District-wise total livestock, Karnataka, 1992 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1992 1997 2003 2007 CAGR (%)
Bagalkot** - 1137
(3.99)
1145
(4.52)
1689
(5.47)
4.04
Bangalore Urban 459
(1.55)
386
(1.35)
283
(1.12)
265
(0.86)
-3.59
Bangalore Rural 1257
(4.25)
1929
(6.76)
909
(3.59)
1131
(3.67)
-0.70
Belgaum 2402
(8.12)
2519
(8.83)
2649
(10.46)
3000
(9.72)
1.49
Bellary 1520
(5.14)
1554
(5.45)
1185
(4.68)
1542
(5.00)
0.10
Bidar 763
(2.58)
662
(2.32)
644
(2.54)
750
(2.43)
-0.11
Bijapur 2278
(7.70)
1052
(3.69)
999
(3.94)
1287
(4.17)
-3.73
Chamarajanagar** - 608
(2.13)
518
(2.05)
552
(1.79)
-0.97
Chikmagalur 878
(2.97)
636
(2.23)
579
(2.29)
658
(2.13)
-1.90
Chitradurga 1682
(5.69)
1439
(5.05)
1430
(5.65)
1847
(5.99)
0.62
Dhakshina Kannada 1085
(3.67)
453
(1.59)
383
(1.51)
444
(1.44)
-5.79
Davanagere** - 970
(3.40)
885
(3.50)
1113
(3.61)
1.39
Dharwad 1960
(6.63)
439
(1.54)
381
(1.51)
453
(1.47)
-9.31
Gadag - 641
(2.25)
511
(2.02)
730
(2.36)
1.31
Gulbarga 2108
(7.13)
2134
(7.48)
2092
(8.26)
2533
(8.21)
1.23
31
Hassan 1418
(4.79)
1140
(4.00)
964
(3.81)
1161
(3.76)
-1.32
Haveri** - 864
(3.03)
754
(2.98)
855
(2.77)
-0.11
Kodagu 328
(1.11)
232
(0.81)
178
(0.70)
180
(0.58)
-3.91
Kolar 1723
(5.83)
1592
(5.58)
1439
(5.69)
1628
(5.27)
-0.38
Koppal** - 689
(2.42)
715
(2.82)
1042
(3.38)
4.22
Mandya 1419
(4.80)
1143
(4.01)
983
(3.88)
1153
(3.74)
-1.38
Mysore 2078
(7.03)
1007
(3.53)
935
(3.69)
1140
(3.69)
-3.92
Raichur 1897
(6.42)
1186
(4.16)
1195
(4.72)
1561
(5.06)
-1.29
Shimoga 1425
(4.82)
925
(3.24)
793
(3.13)
862
(2.79)
-3.30
Tumkur 2242
(7.58)
2133
(7.48)
1915
(7.56)
2434
(7.89)
0.55
Udupi** - 477
(1.67)
379
(1.50)
349
(1.13)
-3.07
Uttara Kannada 648
(2.19)
579
(2.03)
471
(1.86)
502
(1.63)
-1.69
Karnataka 29569 28526 25315 30859 0.29
Note: Figures in parenthesis are percentage to total * CAGR is between 1992 and 2007 and ** between 1997 and 2007
32
Table 3.1.1d: District-wise total number of livestock, Punjab, 1990-2007
(Thousand)
Note: Figures in parentheses are percentage to total
District 1992 1997 2003 2007 CAGR (%)
Gurdaspur 740
(7.65)
705.2
(7.15)
601.9
(6.99)
444..46
(6.03) -6.79
Amritsar 1093.6
(11.30)
1130.2
(11.47)
997.5
(11.59)
850.97
(11.55) -3.77
Kapurthala 261.1
(2.70)
274.1
(2.78)
247.9
(2.88)
199.77
(2.71) -3.99
Jalandhar 854.9
(8.83)
919.36
(9.33)
623.13
(7.23)
487.63
(6.62) -7.30
Hoshiarpur 642.4
(6.64)
620.44
(6.29)
546.87
(6.35)
456.88
(6.20) -4.91
Rupenagar 355
(3.67)
358.7
(3.64)
323.6
(3.76)
309.79
(2.70) -2.16
Ludhiana 953.4
(9.85)
995.42
(10.10)
848.29
(9.85)
743.68
(10.10) -3.74
Ferozepur 945.4
(9.77)
945.5
(9.59)
692
(8.04)
667.35
(9.06) -5.00
Faridkot 832
(8.60)
924.8
(9.38)
1068.4
(12.41)
846.77
(11.50) 0.30
Bathinda 912
(9.42)
975.9
(9.90)
811.9
(9.43)
782.06
(10.62) -2.42
Sangrur 983
(10.16)
1119.63
(11.36)
1015.4
(11.80)
896.15
(12.17) -1.50
Patiala 1105
(11.42)
992.14
(10.07)
831.61
(9.66)
697.65
(9.47) -6.27
Punjab 9678.3
(100)
9857.3
(100)
8607.9
(100)
7365.27
(100) -4.06
33
3.1.2 District-wise cattle population:
District wise data on cattle population along with calculated AAGR in percentage of the
selected states of India i.e. Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab are presented in
Tables 3.1.2a, 3.1.2b, 3.1.2c and 3.1.2d, respectively.
Table 3.1.2a shows that the cattle population of Gujarat, which stood at 67.50 lakh in
1997 increased to 79.77 lakh in 2007 with an average annual growth rate of 1.68 percent. As
compared to buffaloes, the AAGR of cattle for the state found much lower mainly because of
significant reduction in bullocks population and non-increase in indigenous cow population. This
table also indicates that AAGR for cattle during period 1997-2007 found positive for all districts
except for three districts namely Bharuch, Dahod and Patan. As against 1.68 percent AAGR for
Gujarat state, AAGR of selected districts found higher at 3.87 (Panchmahals), 3.44
(Sabarkantha) and 5.68 percent (Banaskantha) respectively. Across districts, cattle population
shows wide variation. It ranged from 0.70 lakh in Dangs districts to 6.60 lakh in Banaskantha
district. In terms of cattle population (2007), Banaskantha, Sabarkantha and Panchmahals
districts occupied first three ranks.
The number of cattle was found to be increased over the period of time with an annual
growth rate of 0.56 per cent in Madhya Pradesh. Amongst the different districts of Madhya
Pradesh the district Shahdol (2.50 %), Mandla (2.30 %), Damoh (2.13 %), Rajgarh (2.01 %),
Satna (1.93 %), Sidhi (1.88 %), Sagar (1.69 %), Jhabua (1.54 %), Rewa (1.37 %), Tikamgarh
(1.06 %), Khargone (1.03 %), Panna (0.73 %), and Narsinghpur (0.65%) showed positive
growth rates over the year 1992, while Bhind (-2.71%), Gwalior (-2.22%), Chhatarpur (-1.53%),
Morena (-1.06%),Indore (-0.47%), Hoshangabad (-0.46%), Mandsaur (-0.17%), Balaghat (-
0.13%), and Vidisha (-0.05%) showed negative annual growth rates. The districts namely;
Tikamgarh (1.06%), Khargone (1.03%), Panna (0.73%), and Narsinghpur (0.65%) showed more
annual growth as compared to Madhya Pradesh (0.56%), while other districts of Madhya Pradesh
showed less growth as compared to Madhya Pradesh (Table 3.1.2b).
Table 3.1.2c presents the district-wise cattle population in Karnataka. Among districts,
Gulbarga has the largest cattle population followed by Hassan, Mysore and Belgaum. But, cattle
population in all these districts has recorded negative CAGR between 1992 and 2007.
Notwithstanding, all other districts except Bagalkot (1.17 per cent) and Davanagere (0.39 per
34
cent) have shown decline in cattle population. In terms of absolute numbers, there is some
marginal increase in cattle population in 2007 when compared to the inter-census periods 1997
and 2003, but lower than the population level recorded in 1992. The lowest cattle population was
present in Kodagu. Overall, the widespread decline in cattle population across the districts does
not augur well for development of dairying in the state.
The cattle population in Punjab has declined from about 28 lakh in 1990 to about 17 lakh
during 2007, decreasing at the rate of 2.29 per cent per annum (Table 3.1.2d). The indigenous
cattle have been replaced by the crossbred cattle, but still buffaloes remained more preferred in
the state. Ferozepur and Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of cattle population in the
state as their share in total cattle population was about 11 per cent each in 2007. All the districts
in the state showed declining trends in cattle population with maximum in Patiala district (-3.16
per cent per annum) and minimum in Bathinda district (-1.60 per cent per annum).
To sum up, the cattle population of Gujarat, this stood at 67.50 lakh in 1997, increased to
79.77 lakh in 2007 with an average annual growth rate of 1.68 percent. In terms of cattle
population (2007), selected Banaskantha, Sabarkantha and Panchmahals districts occupied first
three ranks. AAGR for cattle during period 1997-2007 found positive for all districts except for
three districts namely Bharuch, Dahod and Patan. The number of cattle found to be increased
over the period of time with an annual growth rate of 0.56 per cent in Madhya Pradesh.
Amongst the different districts of Madhya Pradesh, the highest population of cattle found to be
annually increased in Shahdol (2.50 %) district followed by Mandla (2.30%), Damoh (2.13%),
and Rajgarh (2.01%). in Karnataka. among districts, Gulbarga has the largest cattle population
followed by Hassan, Mysore and Belgaum. All the districts except Bagalkot (1.17 per cent) and
Davanagere (0.39 per cent) have showed decline in cattle population. The cattle population in
Punjab has declined from about 28 lakh in 1990 to about 17 lakh during 2007, decreasing at the
rate of 2.29 per cent per annum. Ferozpur and Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of cattle
population in the state as their share in total cattle population was about 11 per cent each in 2007.
All the districts in the state showed declining trends in cattle population.
35
Table: 3.1.2a: District-wise number of cattle, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
Ahmedabad 188
(2.79)
226
(3.04)
217
(2.72)
1.44
Anand 117
(1.73)
132
(1.78)
147
(1.84)
2.31
Amreli 268
(3.97)
255
(3.43)
269
(3.37)
0.04
Bhavnagar 328
(4.86)
336
(4.53)
340
(4.26)
0.36
Banaskantha 380
(5.63)
495
(6.67)
660
(8.27)
5.68
Bharuch 134
(1.99)
142
(1.91)
122
(1.53)
-0.93
Dahod 657
(9.73)
515
(6.94)
589
(7.38)
-1.09
Dang 67
(0.99)
84
(1.13)
70
(0.88)
0.44
Gandhinagar 84
(1.24)
124
(1.67)
148
(1.86)
5.83
Jamnagar 319
(4.73)
349
(4.70)
350
(4.39)
0.93
Junagadh 434
(6.43)
456
(6.14)
481
(6.03)
1.03
Kutch 375
(5.56)
335
(4.51)
389
(4.88)
0.37
Kheda 185
(2.74)
201
(2.71)
227
(2.85)
2.07
Mahesana 154
(2.28)
160
(2.15)
216
(2.71)
3.44
Narmada 139
(2.06)
171
(2.30)
141
(1.77)
0.14
Navsari 136
(2.01)
165
(2.22)
156
(1.96)
1.38
Patan 132
(1.96)
117
(1.58)
131
(1.64)
-0.08
Porbandar 76
(1.13)
83
(1.12)
83
(1.04)
0.88
Panchmahal 403
(5.97)
645
(8.69)
589
(7.38)
3.87
Rajkot 417
(6.18)
439
(5.91)
452
(5.67)
0.81
36
Surendranagar 272
(4.03)
294
(3.96)
347
(4.35)
2.47
Sabarkantha 443
(6.56)
588
(7.92)
621
(7.78)
3.44
Surat +Tapi 362
(5.36)
404
(5.44)
442
(5.54)
2.02
Vadodara 447
(6.62)
461
(6.21)
482
(6.04)
0.76
Valsad 233
(3.45)
248
(3.34)
308
(3.86)
2.83
Gujarat 6750 (100.00)
7425 (100.00)
7977 (100.00)
1.68
Note: Figures in parenthesis shows percentage share to state total
Table: 3.1.2b: District-wise number of cattle, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007
(Thousand)
Districts 1992 1997 2002 2007 AAGR (%)
Jabalpur (+ Katni ) 894.42
(4.43)
1094.41
(5.61)
687.67
(3.52)
922.03
(4.21)
0.21
Balaghat 581.51
(2.88)
574.35
(2.95)
541.46
(2.77)
570.60
(2.60)
-0.13
Chhindwara 724.43
(3.59)
761.54
(3.91)
720.79
(3.69)
778.36
(3.55)
0.50
Seoni 498.96
(2.47)
513.47
(2.63)
427.46
(2.19)
539.77
(2.46)
0.55
Mandla +Dindori 708.92
(3.51)
721.69
(3.70)
734.58
(3.76)
953.77
(4.35)
2.30
Narsinghpur 341.30
(1.69)
325.95
(1.67)
403.56
(2.07)
374.48
(1.71)
0.65
Sagor 702.65
(3.48)
675.93
(3.47)
601.10
(3.08)
880.30
(4.02)
1.69
Damoh 448.21
(2.22)
478.92
(2.46)
515.89
(2.64)
591.15
(2.70)
2.13
Panna 493.58
(2.44)
463.16
(2.38)
545.60
(2.80)
547.59
(2.50)
0.73
Tikamgarh 517.58
(2.56)
449.55
(2.31)
443.15
(2.27)
600.14
(2.74)
1.06
Chhatarpur 736.13
(3.64)
652.24
(3.35)
504.96
(2.59)
567.26
(2.59)
-1.53
Rewa 800.79
(3.96)
793.33
(4.07)
704.86
(3.61)
965.59
(4.41)
1.37
Sidhi 856.84
(4.24)
822.26
(4.22)
970.73
(4.97)
1098.22
(5.01)
1.88
37
Satna 769.31
(3.81)
711.28
(3.65)
715.44
(3.67)
991.77
(4.53)
1.93
Shahdol (+Anuppur+
Umaria)
968.62
(4.79)
904.72
(4.64)
945.16
(4.84)
1131.71
(5.16)
2.50
Indore 236.14
(1.17)
213.47
(1.09)
199.68
(1.02)
219.46
(1.00)
-0.47
Dhar 549.92
(2.72)
543.44
(2.79)
739.29
(3.79)
584.15
(2.67)
0.41
Jhabua 569.16
(2.82)
620.60
(3.18)
629.97
(3.23)
700.92
(3.20)
1.54
Kargoan (+ Badwani ) 805.61
(3.99)
834.13
(4.28)
1227.53
(6.29)
929.69
(4.24)
1.03
Khandwa (+
Burhanpur)
513.59
(2.54)
521.51
(2.67)
460.39
(2.36)
546.95
(2.50)
0.43
Ujjain 360.15
(1.78)
336.58
(1.73)
359.69
(1.84)
373.93
(1.71)
0.26
Mandsour
(+ Neemuch )
575.18
(2.85)
521.23
(2.67)
521.31
(2.67)
560.88
(2.56)
-0.17
Ratlam 305.33
(1.51)
277.03
(1.42)
280.68
(1.44)
306.76
(1.40)
0.03
Dewas 400.45
(1.98)
369.38
(1.89)
385.82
(1.98)
404.05
(1.84)
0.06
Shajapur 412.48
(2.04)
382.33
(1.96)
388.76
(1.99)
417.00
(1.90)
0.07
Morena (+ Sheopur ) 534.28
(2.64)
524.17
(2.69)
335.87
(1.72)
449.36
(2.05)
-1.06
Bhind 257.38
(1.27)
213.77
(1.10)
153.05
(0.78)
152.87
(0.70)
-2.71
Gwalior 325.04
(1.61)
255.69
(1.31)
198.85
(1.02)
216.74
(0.99)
-2.22
Shivpuri 669.61
(3.31)
602.38
(3.09)
518.27
(2.66)
695.18
(3.17)
0.25
Gunna (+
Ashoknagar)
597.56
(2.96)
542.03
(2.78)
542.48
(2.78)
642.33
(2.93)
0.50
Datia 137.35
(0.68)
120.61
(0.62)
139.67
(0.72)
142.28
(0.65)
0.24
Bhopal 144.93
(0.72)
110.98
(0.57)
134.74
(0.69)
149.74
(0.68)
0.22
Sehore 385.31
(1.91)
367.10
(1.88)
349.27
(1.79)
399.82
(1.82)
0.25
Raisen 423.84
(2.10)
375.95
(1.93)
393.70
(2.02)
437.82
(2.00)
0.22
Vidisha 405.99
(2.01)
364.45
(1.87)
644.91
(3.31)
403.19
(1.84)
-0.05
Betul 593.79 525.44 569.48 620.58 0.30
38
(2.94) (2.69) (2.92) (2.83)
Rajgarh 416.14
(2.06)
415.59
(2.13)
351.61
(1.80)
541.58
(2.47)
2.01
Hosangabad
(+ Harda)
544.60
(2.70)
516.20
(2.65)
525.21
(2.69)
507.42
(2.32)
-0.46
Madhya Pradesh 20207.04 (100.00)
19496.87 (100.00)
19512.61 (100.00)
21915.44 (100.00)
0.56
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
Table: 3.1.2 c: District-wise number of cattle, Karnataka, 1992 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1992 1997 2003 2007 CAGR (%)
Bagalkot** - 272
(2.51)
231
(2.51)
305
(2.91)
1.17
Bangalore Urban 232
(1.76)
185
(1.71)
156
(1.69)
127
(1.21)
-3.93
Bangalore Rural 587
(4.46)
754
(6.96)
396
(4.29)
431
(4.10)
-2.04
Belgaum 660
(5.01)
499
(4.61)
498
(5.40)
599
(5.70)
-0.65
Bellary 625
(4.74)
426
(3.93)
363
(3.94)
391
(3.73)
-3.07
Bidar 352
(2.67)
276
(2.55)
256
(2.77)
277
(2.64)
-1.58
Bijapur 673
(5.11)
252
(2.33)
230
(2.49)
280
(2.66)
-5.68
Chamarajanagar**
-
317
(2.92)
257
(2.79)
274
(2.61)
-1.45
Chikmagalur 550
(4.18)
391
(3.61)
357
(3.87)
386
(3.68)
-2.34
Chitradurga 590
(4.48)
319
(2.95)
308
(3.33)
341
(3.25)
-3.59
Dhakshina Kannada 837
(6.35)
355
(3.28)
332
(3.59)
397
(3.78)
-4.85
Davanagere**
-
380
(3.51)
343
(3.72)
395
(3.76)
0.39
Dharwad 855
(6.49)
222
(2.05)
191
(2.07)
220
(2.09)
-8.66
Gadag
-
212
(1.96)
137
(1.48)
159
(1.51)
-2.85
Gulbarga 1000
(7.59)
823
(7.60)
805
(8.72)
907
(8.64)
-0.65
Hassan 760
(5.77)
614
(5.67)
511
(5.54)
633
(6.03)
-1.20
39
Haveri**
-
337
(3.11)
300
(3.25)
312
(2.97)
-0.77
Kodagu 202
(1.54)
138
(1.28)
114
(1.24)
119
(1.14)
-3.46
Kolar 636
(4.83)
532
(4.91)
457
(4.95)
477
(4.54)
-1.90
Koppal**
-
260
(2.40)
225
(2.44)
245
(2.33)
-0.59
Mandya 483
(3.66)
343
(3.16)
259
(2.80)
350
(3.33)
-2.12
Mysore 1122
(8.51)
566
(5.23)
496
(5.37)
617
(5.87)
-3.91
Raichur 801
(6.08)
402
(3.71)
352
(3.81)
405
(3.86)
-4.44
Shimoga 924
(7.01)
577
(5.33)
525
(5.69)
580
(5.52)
-3.06
Tumkur 787
(5.97)
598
(5.52)
478
(5.18)
589
(5.61)
-1.91
Udupi** - 386
(3.57)
326
(3.53)
319
(3.03)
-1.91
Uttara Kannada 499
(3.78)
395
(3.64)
330
(3.57)
367
(3.50)
-2.01
Karnataka 13175 (100)
10831 (100)
9234 (100)
10503 (100)
-1.50
Note: Figures in parenthesis are percentage to total * CAGR is between 1992 and 2007 and ** between 1997 and 2007
Table 3.1.2d: District-wise number of cattle, Punjab, 1990 - 2007
(Thousand)
District 1990 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
Gurdaspur 271
(9.54)
213
(8.31)
190
(9.83)
144
(8.62)
-2.61
Amritsar 288
(10.13)
264
(10.30)
235
(12.16)
176
(10.54)
-2.17
Kapurthala 93
(3.27)
86
(3.36)
67
(3.47)
53
(3.17)
-2.36
Jalandhar 249
(8.76)
265
(10.34)
182
(9.42)
144
(8.62)
-2.35
Hoshiarpur 225
(7.92)
227
(8.86)
174
(9.01)
144
(8.62)
-1.99
Ropar 86
(3.03)
73
(2.85)
57
(2.95)
52
(3.11)
-2.24
40
Ludhiana 250
(8.80)
292
(11.40)
182
(9.42)
166
(9.94)
-1.86
Ferozepur 308
(10.84)
261
(10.19)
166
(8.59)
184
(11.02)
-2.24
Faridkot 231
(8.13)
173
(6.75)
146
(7.56)
139
(8.32)
-2.21
Bathinda 226
(7.95)
218
(8.51)
187
(9.68)
161
(9.64)
-1.60
Sangrur 295
(10.38)
256
(10.0)
185
(9.58)
169
(10.12)
-2.39
Patiala 320
(11.26)
234
(9.13)
161
(8.33)
138
(8.26)
-3.16
Punjab 2842
(100.00)
2562
(100.00)
1932
(100.00)
1670
(100.00)
-2.29
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
3.1.3 District-wise buffalo population
District wise data on buffalo population along with calculated AAGR in percentage for
the selected states of India i.e. Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab are presented in
Tables 3.1.3a, 3.1.3b, 3.1.3c and 3.1.3d, respectively.
The data reveal that the growth of buffaloes was sharp and positive in all the districts
(except Navsari) of Gujarat during 1997-2007. Overall, the buffalo population in the state
increased at the average annual growth rate of 3.39 percent during 1997-2007. During this
period, average annual growth rates in selected Banaskantha, Panchmahals and Sabarkantha
districts were 5.91, 5.97 and 2.78 percent respectively (Table 3.1.3a). In the state, buffalo
population increased at a faster pace and buffaloes become more popular milch animal among
milk producers because net return from milk production of buffaloes is much higher than other
type of milch animals.
The population of buffalo showed increasing trend over the years in Madhya Pradesh.
All the districts of Madhya Pradesh showed positive average annual growth rates during the
period under study. The highest average annual growth rate of buffalo was found to be in
Jhabua district (26.45 %) followed Rajgarh (23.55 %), Datia (23.10 %), Bhopal (16.08 %),
Shivpuri (15.61 %), Betul (13.42 %), Guna (12.67 %), Morena (12.65 %), Raisen (10.64 %),
Vidisha (10.50 %), Hoshangabad (10.39 %), Dhar (10.28 %), Dewas (10.07 %), Ujjain (9.79%),
41
Shajapur (9.43%), Mandsaur (9.36%), Gwalior (8.56%), Khandwa (7.82%), and Ratlam (7.37%)
districts ( Table 3.1.3b). The other districts had shown less annual growth as compared to
Madhya Pradesh (7.07%).
Seven districts of Karnataka have recorded positive growth in its population between
1992 and 2007 (Table 3.1.3c). The highest growth was registered in Belgaum at 2.51 per cent.
Other districts which showed positive growth rates were Bagalkot, Bellary, Bidar, Davanagere,
Gulbarga and Koppal. But, in Dhakshina Kannada the decline in the buffalo population was quite
sharp from 1,90,000 to 15,000 between 1992 and 2007. As compared to the cattle, buffaloes are
sparsely distributed across the districts. The buffalo population ranged from 11,000 in Bangalore
Urban to 8,60,000 in Belgaum during 2007. In fact, Belgaum has the largest buffalo population
followed by Bagalkot and Gulbarga. In terms of per cent distribution of buffaloes, Belgaum
accounted for the highest share of 20 per cent followed by Bagalkot and Tumkur in 2007.
Interestingly, in Belgaum the per cent share of buffalo in total state population increased
consistently since 1992. The per cent distribution of buffalo was low in Bangalore (Urban),
Dhakshina Kannada, Kodagu, Udupi and Chamrajanagar.
Presently livestock in Punjab is dominated by buffalo population, which is mainly due to
preference of consumers of the state towards buffalo milk due to its high fat content. The buffalo
population showed the increase in number till 1997 after which it decreased sharply. The buffalo
population in the state has declined from about 56 lakh in 1990 to 49 lakh during 2007, falling at
the rate of 0.69 per cent per annum (Table 3.1.3d). Sangrur and Amritsar are the leading districts
in terms of buffalo population in the state as their share in total population was about 14 and 13
per cent respectively in 2007. Most of the districts in the state showed decrease in buffalo
population, except the districts of Ropar, Bathinda and Sangrur. Bathinda showed the highest
increase (1.40 per cent per annum), while Jalandhar district of the state showed the highest
decrease in buffalo population (-2.14 per cent per annum) during the study period (1990-2007).
To conclude, the growth of buffaloes was sharp and positive in all the districts (except
Navsari) of Gujarat during 1997-2007. Overall, the buffalo population in the state increased at
the average annual growth rate of 3.39 percent during 1997-2007. The population of buffalo
showed increasing trend over the years in Madhya Pradesh. All the districts of Madhya Pradesh
showed positive average annual growth rates during the period under study. Seven districts of
42
Karnataka have recorded positive growth in its population between 1992 and 2007. In terms of
per cent distribution of buffaloes, Belgaum accounted for the highest share of 20 per cent
followed by Bagalkot and Tumkur in 2007. The buffalo population in Punjab has declined from
about 56 lakh in 1990 to 49 lakh during 2007, falling at the rate of 0.69 per cent per annum.
Sangrur and Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of buffalo population in the state as their
share in total population was about 14 and 13 per cent respectively in 2007. Most of the districts
in the state showed decrease in buffalo population, except the districts of Ropar, Bathinda and
Sangrur.
Table: 3.1.3a: District-wise number of buffaloes, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007 (Thousand)
District 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
(2007 over 1997)
Ahmedabad 244
(3.88)
277
(3.88)
344
(3.92)
3.49
Anand 303
(4.82)
291
(4.07)
407
(4.64)
2.99
Amreli 181
(2.88)
177
(2.48)
201
(2.29)
1.05
Bhavnagar 280
(4.45)
307
(4.30)
334
(3.81)
1.78
Banaskantha 538
(8.56)
715
(10.01)
955
(10.88)
5.91
Bharuch 131
(2.08)
133
(1.86)
154
(1.76)
1.63
Dahod 271
(4.31)
214
(3.00)
284
(3.24)
0.47
Dang 19
(0.30)
27
(0.38)
21
(0.24)
1.01
Gandhinagar 222
(3.53)
310
(4.34)
364
(4.15)
5.07
Jamnagar 173
(2.75)
210
(2.94)
257
(2.93)
4.04
Junagadh 301
(4.79)
305
(4.27)
377
(4.30)
2.28
Kutch 165
(2.62)
178
(2.49)
226
(2.58)
3.2
Kheda 414
(6.59)
488
(6.83)
628
(7.16)
4.25
Mahesana 467
(7.43)
478
(6.69)
568
(6.47)
1.98
Narmada 51 61 59 1.47
43
(0.81) (0.85) (0.67)
Navsari 106
(1.69)
117
(1.64)
102
(1.16)
-0.38
Patan 261
(4.15)
222
(3.11)
364
(4.15)
3.38
Porbandar 79
(1.26)
85
(1.19)
105
(1.20)
2.89
Panchmahal 345
(5.49)
517
(7.24)
616
(7.02)
5.97
Rajkot 246
(3.91)
274
(3.84)
362
(4.13)
3.94
Surendranagar 165
(2.62)
203
(2.84)
290
(3.31)
5.8
Sabarkantha 589
(9.37)
683
(9.56)
775
(8.83)
2.78
Surat+ Tapi 329
(5.23)
408
(5.71)
423
(4.82)
2.54
Vadodara 338
(5.38)
386
(5.40)
462
(5.27)
3.17
Valsad 68
(1.08)
76
(1.06)
96
(1.09)
3.51
Gujarat 6286 (100.00)
7142 (100.00)
8774 (100.00)
3.39
Note: Figures in parenthesis shows percentage share in total
Table 3.1.3b: District-wise number of buffaloes, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007
(Thousand)
District 1992 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
Jabalpur (+ Katni ) 186.294
(4.20)
208.911
(3.14)
165.953
(2.19)
200.385
(2.2) 0.50
Balaghat 134.841
(3.04)
135.566
(2.04)
139.843
(1.85)
153.723
(1.68) 0.93
Chhindwara 123.098
(2.78)
137.611
(2.07)
139.918
(1.85)
168.501
(1.85) 2.46
Seoni 102.379
(2.31)
114.801
(1.73)
125.752
(1.66)
123.654
(1.35) 1.39
Mandla +Dindori 145.162
(3.28)
156.423
(2.35)
118.218
(1.56)
147.318
(1.61) 0.10
Narsinghpur 88.993
(2.01)
100.136
(1.51)
118.31
(1.56)
132.531
(1.45) 3.26
Sagor 154.138
(3.48)
155.323
(2.34)
134.938
(1.78)
242.933
(2.66) 3.84
Damoh 83.256 97.151 101.217 130.882 3.81
44
(1.88) (1.46) (1.34) (1.43)
Panna 123.833
(2.79)
120.315
(1.81)
196.296
(2.59)
164.138
(1.8) 2.17
Tikamgarh 139.226
(3.14)
143.485
(2.16)
181.903
(2.40)
312.419
(3.42) 8.29
Chhatarpur 211.44
(4.77)
218.747
(3.29)
250.609
(3.31)
343.667
(3.76) 4.17
Rewa 154.487
(3.49)
140.382
(2.11)
152.862
(2.02)
232.962
(2.55) 3.39
Sidhi 165.765
(3.74)
170.807
(2.57)
194.035
(2.56)
240.412
(2.63) 3.00
Satna 157.192
(3.55)
153.844
(2.31)
161.022
(2.13)
229.23
(2.51) 3.06
Shahdol (+Anuppur+
Umaria)
217.311
(4.90)
230.548
(3.47)
203.982
(2.69)
231.614
(2.54) 0.44
Indore 116.337
(2.63)
186.013
(2.80)
162.663
(2.15)
220.981
(2.42) 6.00
Dhar 93.482
(2.11)
193.604
(2.91)
401.167
(5.30)
237.685
(2.6) 10.28
Jhabua 52.661
(1.19)
119.571
(1.80)
124.029
(1.64)
261.601
(2.87) 26.45
Kargoan (+ Badwani ) 132.344
(2.99)
269.393
(4.05)
193.954
(2.56)
319.441
(3.5) 9.42
Khandwa (+
Burhanpur)
77.635
(1.75)
148.15
(2.23)
141.153
(1.86)
168.683
(1.85) 7.82
Ujjain 133.431
(3.01)
236.875
(3.56)
227.731
(3.01)
329.4
(3.61) 9.79
Mandsour (+
Neemuch )
145.559
(3.29)
298.57
(4.49)
302.03
(3.99)
349.921
(3.83) 9.36
Ratlam 77.915
(1.76)
148.84
(2.24)
275.41
(3.64)
163.992
(1.8) 7.37
Dewas 97.63
(2.20)
177.339
(2.67)
151.937
(2.01)
245.099
(2.68) 10.07
Shajapur 115.295
(2.60)
201.076
(3.02)
235.225
(3.11)
278.372
(3.05) 9.43
Morena (+ Sheopur ) 200.038
(4.51)
442.694
(6.66)
480.369
(6.34)
579.688
(6.35) 12.65
Bhind 146.529
(3.31)
289.628
(4.36)
335.604
(4.43)
313.99
(3.44) 7.62
45
Gwalior 110.502
(2.49)
197.779
(2.97
226.765
(2.99)
252.305
(2.76) 8.56
Shivpuri 112.765
(2.55)
203.951
(3.07)
245.12
(3.24)
376.805
(4.13) 15.61
Gunna (+
Ashoknagar)
111.47
(2.52)
206.211
(3.10)
243.885
(3.22)
323.258
(3.54) 12.67
Datia 41.959
(0.95)
86.821
(13.31)
142.467
(1.88)
187.329
(2.05) 23.10
Bhopal 32.446
(0.73)
77.16
(1.16)
86.50
(1.14)
110.693
(1.21) 16.08
Sehore 71.077
(1.60)
142.216
(2.14)
184.463
(2.44)
127.288
(1.39) 5.27
Raisen 52.335
(1.18)
100.926
(1.52)
175.483
(2.32)
135.829
(1.49) 10.64
Vidisha 66.31
(1.50)
121.551
(1.83)
287.469
(3.79)
170.793
(1.87) 10.50
Betul 57.079
(1.29)
115.476
(1.74)
150.158
(1.98)
172.018
(1.88) 13.42
Rajgarh 122.566
(2.77)
239.77
(3.61)
228.999
(3.02)
555.576
(6.09) 23.55
Hosangabad (+ Harda) 75.824
(1.71)
160.591
(2.42)
187.866
(2.48)
194.036
(2.13) 10.39
Madhya Pradesh 4430.604
(100.00)
6648.255
(100.00)
7575.305
(100.00)
9129.152
(100.00) 7.07
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
Table 3.1.3c: District-wise number of buffalo, Karnataka, 1992 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1992 1997 2003 2007 CAGR (%) Bagalkot** - 198
(4.54)
201
(5.03)
254
(5.86)
2.50
Bangalore Urban 39
(0.92)
27
(0.63)
15
(0.37)
11
(0.26)
-8.02
Bangalore Rural 126
(2.95)
195
(4.47)
76
(1.90)
69
(1.59)
-3.92
Belgaum 593
(13.94)
651
(14.91)
701
(17.57)
860
(19.88)
2.51
Bellary 192
(4.51)
186
(4.26)
187
(4.70)
208
(4.80)
0.54
Bidar 152
(3.57)
161
(3.68)
169
(4.25)
177
(4.09)
1.03
Bijapur 312 152 146 191 -3.20
46
(7.34) (3.48) (3.66) (4.42)
Chamarajanagar** - 45
(1.03)
37
(0.94)
28
(0.66)
-4.49
Chikmagalur 121
(2.84)
115
(2.63)
106
(2.66)
98
(2.27)
-1.37
Chitradurga 281
(6.62)
173
(3.96)
179
(4.47)
193
(4.46)
-2.48
Dhakshina
Kannada
190
(4.47)
57
(1.31)
26
(0.65)
15
(0.35)
-15.53
Davanagere** - 222
(5.07)
219
(5.49)
224
(5.17)
0.09
Dharwad 293
(6.90)
90
(2.05)
90
(2.25)
100
(2.31)
-6.92
Gadag - 93
(2.13)
61
(1.52)
80
(1.85)
-1.46
Gulbarga 209
(4.92)
218
(4.99)
224
(5.62)
249
(5.76)
1.18
Hassan 211
(4.97)
208
(4.75)
194
(4.87)
191
(4.42)
-0.66
Haveri** - 128
(2.93)
123
(3.08)
120
(2.77)
-0.65
Kodagu 56
(1.32)
44
(1.00)
32
(0.79)
27
(0.62)
-4.82
Kolar 171
(4.03)
148
(3.38)
123
(3.08)
98
(2.27)
-3.64
Koppal** - 90
(2.06)
97
(2.44)
109
(2.52)
1.91
Mandya 235
(5.52)
192
(4.39)
170
(4.26)
169
(3.90)
-2.17
Mysore 175
(4.12)
84
(1.93)
70
(1.74)
66
(1.53)
-6.28
Raichur 221
(5.19)
152
(3.49)
176
(4.42)
211
(4.87)
-0.31
Shimoga 292
(6.86)
225
(5.14)
194
(4.86)
191
(4.42)
-2.78
Tumkur 259
(6.10)
269
(6.15)
216
(5.41)
242
(5.59)
-0.46
Udupi** - 86
(1.98)
49
(1.23)
27
(0.62)
-11.08
Uttara Kannada 123
(2.90)
159
(3.65)
109
(2.73)
119
(2.74)
-0.25
Karnataka 4251 (100)
4367 (100)
3991 (100)
4327 (100)
0.12
Note: Figures in parenthesis are percentage to total * CAGR is between 1992 and 2007 and ** between 1997 and 2007
47
Table 3.1.3d: District-wise number of buffaloes, Punjab, 1990 to 2007 (Thousand)
Districts 1990 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
1990-2007
Gurdaspur 414
(7.40)
445
(7.30)
384
(6.69)
281
(5.73)
-1.78
Amritsar 696
(12.43)
753
(12.35)
718
(12.50)
623
(12.71)
-0.58
Kapurthala 162
(2.89)
180
(2.95)
171
(2.98)
141
(2.88)
-0.71
Jalandhar 525
(9.38)
570
(9.35)
413
(7.19)
322
(6.57)
-2.14
Hoshiarpur 358
(6.40)
358
(5.87)
351
(6.11)
291
(5.94)
-1.04
Ropar 221
(3.95)
260
(4.27)
253
(4.40)
241
(4.92)
0.50
Ludhiana 601
(10.74)
637
(10.45)
637
(11.09)
548
(11.18)
-0.49
Ferozpur 531
(9.49)
614
(10.07)
455
(7.92)
392
(8.0)
-1.45
Faridkot 433
(7.73)
393
(6.45)
414
(7.21)
371
(7.57)
-0.81
Bathinda 405
(7.23)
494
(8.10)
548
(9.54)
507
(10.34)
1.40
Sangrur 595
(10.63)
786
(12.89)
778
(13.54)
672
(13.71)
0.72
Patiala 657
(11.74)
606
(9.94)
622
(10.83)
513
(10.47)
-1.21
Punjab 5598
(100.00)
6096
(100.00)
5744
(100.00)
4902
(100.00)
-0.69
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
3.1.4 District-wise horses and ponies population
District wise growth of horses and ponies population for Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and
Punjab states of India are presented in Tables 3.1.4a, 3.1.4b and 3.1.4c, respectively.
In Gujarat, the horses and ponies are not important animals and their contribution to
livestock economy is very insignificant. Overall, growth of horses and ponies during 1997-2007
had been found negative (-0.69 %). Only Banaskantha district showed positive growth rates
48
(Table 3.1.4a). With the significant increase in fodder cost, horse keeping becomes
uneconomical. Hence, growth of horse population is negative.
There was observed drastic reduction in the population of horse and pony over the period
of time in all the district of Madhya Pradesh except in Sehore (32.09 %/year) district. The
population of horse and pony were found to be decreased with an average annual growth of (-
4.09 %/year) over the time in state. The maximum reduction in the population of horse & pony
was found to be in Sidhi (-6.54 %/year) district followed by Gwalior (-6.16% /year), Rewa (-
6.13%/year), Shajapur (-6.02 %/year), Jabalpur (-5.94 %/year) and Raisen (-5.91%/year) districts
during the period under study (Table 3.1.4b).
The population of horses, ponies and donkeys in Punjab has declined from about 33
thousand in 1990 to about 27 thousand during 2007, decreasing at the rate of 0.99 per cent per
annum (Table 3.1.4c). Gurdaspur and Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of population of
horses, ponies and donkeys in the state as their share in total population was about 14 per cent
each in 2007. Some of the districts in the state showed increase in their population. Kapurthala
district showed the highest increase (7.41 per cent per annum), while Jalandhar district showed
the highest decrease (-4.37 per cent per annum) during the period.
To conclude, in Gujarat, growth of Horses and Ponies during 1997-2007 had been found
negative (-0.69 %) and only Banaskantha district showed positive growth rates. Likewise, the
population of horse and pony were found to be decreased with an average annual growth of (-
4.09 %/year) over the time in Madhya Pradesh. Drastic reduction in the population over the
period of time was observed in all the district of Madhya Pradesh except in Sehore district. In
Punjab also their population has declined from about 33 thousand in 1990 to about 27 thousand
during 2007, decreasing at the rate of 0.99 per cent per annum. Gurdaspur and Amritsar are the
leading districts in terms of population of horses, ponies and donkeys in the state as their share in
total population was about 14 per cent each in 2007.
49
Table: 3.1.4a: District-wise number of horses and ponies, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%) (2007 over 1997)
Ahmedabad 2
(13.33)
1
(5.56)
1
(7.14)
-6.7
Amreli 1
(6.67)
1
(5.56)
1
(7.14)
0
Bhavnagar 1
(6.67)
2
(11.11)
1
(7.14)
0
Banaskantha 1
(6.67)
1
(5.56)
2
(14.29)
7.18
Bharuch 1
(6.67)
1
(5.56)
1
(7.14)
0
Jamnagar 1
(6.67)
0
(0.00)
0
(0.00)
-100
Junagadh 0
(0.00)
1
(5.56)
1
(7.14)
-
Kutch 2
(13.33)
2
(11.11)
2
(14.29)
0
Mahesana 0
(0.00)
1
(5.56)
1
(7.14)
-
Patan 1
(6.67)
1
(5.56)
1
(7.14)
0
Porbandar 0
(0.00)
0
(0.00)
1
(7.14)
-
Rajkot 1
(6.67)
1
(5.56)
1
(7.14)
0
Surendranagar 1
(6.67)
1
(5.56)
1
(7.14)
0
Sabarkantha 1
(6.67)
3
(16.67)
0
(0.00)
-100
Surat+Tapi 1
(6.67)
1
(5.56)
0
(0.00)
-100
Vadodara 1
(6.67)
1
(5.56)
0
(0.00)
-100
Gujarat 15 (100.00)
18 (100.00)
14 (100.00)
-0.69
Note: Figures in parenthesis shows percentage share in total
50
Table 3.1.4b: District-wise Number of Horses& Ponies in M.P. (1992-2007)
(Thousand)
District 1992 1997 2003 2007 AAGR
( %)
Jabalpur ( + Katni) 2.20
(3.52)
1.61
(2.94)
0.51
(1.61)
0.24
(0.94)
-5.94
Balghat 0.20
(0.32)
0.15
(0.27)
0.17
(0.54)
0.10
(0.39)
-3.33
Chhindwara 5.13
(8.22)
4.83
(8.83)
2.16
(6.84)
1.49
(5.82)
-4.73
Seoni 1.54
(2.47)
1.41
(2.58)
0.49
(1.55)
0.23
(0.90)
-5.67
Mandla ( + Dindori) 7.44
(11.92)
7.40
(13.52)
3.08
(9.75)
2.23
(8.72)
-4.67
Narsighpur 1.72
(2.75)
1.47
(2.69)
1.07
(3.39)
0.15
(0.59)
-6.09
Sagor 1.62
(2.59)
1.45
(2.65)
0.62
(1.96)
0.34
(1.33)
-5.27
Damoh 0.70
(1.12)
0.74
(1.35)
0.91
(2.88)
0.10
(0.39)
-5.71
Panna 0.80
(1.28)
0.71
(1.30)
1.11
(3.51)
0.36
(1.41)
-3.67
Tikamgarh 0.50
(0.80)
0.32
(0.58)
0.52
(1.65)
0.25
(0.98)
-3.33
Chhtarpur 0.58
(0.93)
0.60
(1.10)
0.66
(2.09)
0.45
(1.76)
-1.49
Rewa 0.74
(1.19)
1.05
(1.92)
0.08
(0.25)
0.06
(0.23)
-6.13
Sidhi 1.59
(2.55)
1.23
(2.25)
0.25
(0.79)
0.03
(0.12)
-6.54
Satna 0.56
(0.90)
0.48
(0.88)
0.30
(0.95)
0.19
(0.74)
-4.40
Shahdol ( +
Anuppur+ Umaria)
3.44
(5.51)
3.42
(6.25)
1.61
(5.09)
0.96
(3.75)
-4.81
Indore 1.13
(1.81)
0.85
(1.55)
0.45
(1.42)
0.48
(1.88)
-3.83
Dhar 1.05
(1.68)
0.93
(1.70)
0.46
(1.46)
0.16
(0.63)
-5.65
51
Jhabua 0.42
(0.67)
0.30
(0.55)
0.19
(0.60)
0.10
(0.39)
-5.08
Khargoan ( +
Badwani)
1.02
(1.63)
0.89
(1.63)
0.36
(1.14)
0.49
(1.92)
-3.46
Khandawa ( +
Burhanpur)
1.84
(2.95)
1.63
(2.98)
1.38
(4.37)
0.91
(3.56)
-3.37
Ujjain 1.43
(2.29)
1.27
(2.32)
1.03
(3.26)
0.38
(1.49)
-4.90
Mandsour ( +
Neemuch)
2.45
(3.92)
1.89
(3.45)
1.60
(5.06)
0.98
(3.83)
-4.00
Ratlam 1.33
(2.13)
1.29
(2.36)
0.56
(1.77)
0.37
(1.45)
-4.81
Dewas 0.93
(1.49)
0.75
(1.37)
0.32
(1.01)
0.16
(0.63)
-5.52
Shajapur 1.86
(2.98)
1.37
(2.50)
0.72
(2.28)
0.18
(0.70)
-6.02
Morena ( + Sheopur) 0.85
(1.36)
0.67
(1.22)
0.70
(2.22)
0.44
(1.72)
-3.22
Bhind 0.80
(1.28)
0.84
(1.54)
0.48
(1.52)
0.16
(0.63)
-5.33
Gwalior 4.60
(7.37)
3.28
(5.99)
0.75
(2.37)
0.35
(1.37)
-6.16
Shivpuri 0.44
(0.70)
0.30
(0.55)
0.24
(0.76)
0.13
(0.51)
-4.70
Guna ( + Ashok
nagar)
1.08
(1.73)
1.26
(2.30)
0.29
(0.92)
0.37
(1.45)
-4.38
Datia 0.19
(0.30)
0.16
(0.29)
0.26
(0.82)
0.10
(0.39)
-3.16
Bhopal 0.80
(1.28)
0.83
(1.52)
0.28
(0.89)
0.11
(0.43)
-5.75
Sehore 1.87
(2.99)
1.10
(2.01)
0.43
(1.36)
10.87
(42.49)
32.09
Raisen 2.63
(4.21)
2.02
(3.69)
1.92
(6.08)
0.30
(1.17)
-5.91
Vidisha 1.30
(2.08)
1.10
(2.01)
2.35
(7.44)
0.30
(1.17)
-5.13
Betul 2.35
(3.76)
2.65
(4.84)
1.56
(4.94)
0.34
(1.33)
-5.70
Rajgarh 1.23 0.77 1.01 0.15 -5.85
52
(1.97) (1.41) (3.20) (0.59)
Hosangabad
(+ Harda)
2.08
(3.33)
1.70
(3.11)
0.72
(2.28)
0.57
(2.23)
-4.84
Madhya Pradesh 84.85
(100.00)
75.14
(100.00)
41.79
(100.00)
32.76
(100.00)
-4.09
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
Table 3.1.4c: District-wise number of horses, ponies and donkeys, Punjab, 1990 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1990 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
1990-2007
Gurdaspur 5
(14.71)
6
(17.14)
5
(18.52)
4
(13.79)
-1.33
Amritsar 6
(17.65)
8
(22.86)
6
(22.22)
4
(13.79)
-2.06
Kapurthala 1
(2.94)
1
(2.86)
1
(3.70)
1
(3.45)
7.41
Jalandhar 6
(17.65)
6
(17.14)
2
(7.41)
1
(3.45)
-4.37
Hoshiarpur 2
(5.88)
2
(5.71)
1
(3.70)
1
(3.45)
-0.98
Ropar 1
(2.94)
1
(2.86)
1
(3.70)
1
(3.45)
1.11
Ludhiana 2
(5.88)
1
(2.86)
2
(7.41)
3
(10.34)
3.70
Ferozpur 2
(5.88)
2
(5.71)
2
(7.41)
2
(6.90)
1.11
Faridkot 2
(5.88)
2
(5.71)
2
(7.41)
4
(13.79)
4.72
Bathinda 4
(11.76)
4
(11.43)
2
(7.41)
3
(10.34)
-1.52
Sangrur 1
(2.94)
1
(2.86)
2
(7.41)
3
(10.34)
4.37
Patiala 2
(5.88)
1
(2.86)
1
(3.70)
2
(6.900
-1.45
Punjab 34
(100.00)
35
(100.00)
27
(100.00)
29
(100.00)
-0.99
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
53
3.1.5 District-wise sheep population
District wise population and average annual growth rate (AAGR) of Sheep population for
Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab states of India are presented in Tables 3.1.5a,
3.1.5b, 3.1.5c and 3.1.5d, respectively.
The growth of sheep population in Gujarat is negative (-0.75 percent) during period 1997
to 2007. The table also showed that Ahmedabad, Anand, Patan, Sabarkantha and Panchmahals
districts recorded the positive AAGR during period 1997-2007 whereas in remaining districts
growth in sheep population found either negative or stagnant (Table 3.1.5a). In Gujarat, sheep
and goat are non-stall fed species and are left for open grazing.
The population of sheep shows decreasing trend over the period of time in all the districts
of Madhya Pradesh (Table 3.1.5b) except Jhabua, Betul, Rajgarh. The annual growth of sheep
population was found to be increased in Rajgarh (7.43%), Jhabua (1.86%), and Betul (0.16%)
districts. The population of sheep was found to be decreased with an annual growth rate (-2.65%)
during the period of time in Madhya Pradesh. The maximum decrease annual growth of sheep
over the time were found to be in Balaghat (-6.25 %) district followed by Dewas (-5.77%), Sagar
(-5.75%), Raisen (-5.72 %), Dhar (-5.15 %), Indore (-5.13%) districts.
In Karnataka, among the districts, Tumkur accounted for the highest share of sheep
population with 11.2 per cent followed by Belgaum and Kolar. Although Tumkur and Kolar
accounted for relatively a high concentration of sheep in 1992, their share per cent share has
almost declined in the subsequent census periods. The share of Gulbarga in sheep population
more or less has remained constant across the study periods (Table 3.1.5c).
Sheep and goat rearing has a stigma attached to it among Punjab farmers as it is
considered to be an enterprise meant for Scheduled Castes and other poor farmers in the state.
The population of sheep has been reduced almost to one third in 2007, as compared to their
population of about 5 lakh in 1990 (Table 3.1.5 (d). More than 54 per cent of total population of
sheep in the state belongs to Ferozepur and Bathinda districts. All the districts in the state
showed similar picture with regard to sheep population except Ropar district which registered
growth in sheep population by 2.56 per cent per annum during the study period.
To conclude, the growth of sheep population in Gujarat is negative (-0.75 percent) during
period 1997 to 2007 and only Ahmedabad, Anand, Patan, Sabarkantha and Panchmahals districts
54
recorded the positive AAGR whereas in remaining districts growth in sheep population found
either negative or stagnant. The population of sheep also shows decreasing trend over the period
of time in all the districts of Madhya Pradesh except Jhabua, Betul, Rajgarh. In Karnataka,
among the districts, Tumkur accounted for the highest share of sheep population with 11.2 per
cent followed by Belgaum and Kolar. Although Tumkur and Kolar accounted for relatively a
high concentration of sheep in 1992, their share per cent share has almost declined in the
subsequent census periods. In Punjab, the population of sheep has been reduced almost to one
third in 2007, as compared to their population of about 5 lakh in 1990). More than 54 per cent of
total population of sheep in the state belongs to Ferozpur and Bathinda districts. All the districts
in the state showed decrease with regard to sheep population except Ropar district.
Table: 3.1.5a: District-wise number of sheep, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (2007 over
1997) Ahmedabad 17
(0.79)
21
(1.02)
23
(1.15)
3.07
Anand 9
(0.42)
16
(0.78)
11
(0.55)
2.03
Amreli 152
(7.04)
141
(6.84)
137
(6.84)
-1.03
Bhavnagar 303
(14.03)
290
(14.06)
258
(12.87)
-1.59
Banaskantha 167
(7.73)
180
(8.73)
161
(8.03)
-0.37
Bharuch 7
(0.32)
7
(0.34)
7
(0.35)
0.00
Dahod 7
(0.32)
5
(0.24)
6
(0.30)
-1.53
Dang 0
(0.00)
0
(0.00)
0
(0.00)
0.00
Gandhinagar 22
(1.02)
15
(0.73)
17
(0.85)
-2.55
Jamnagar 238
(11.02)
233
(11.30)
208
(10.38)
-1.34
Junagadh 59
(2.73)
56
(2.72)
47
(2.35)
-2.25
Kutch 615
(28.47)
495
(24.01)
575
(28.69)
-0.67
55
Kheda 33
(1.53)
38
(1.84)
29
(1.45)
-1.28
Mahesana 16
(0.74)
15
(0.73)
15
(0.75)
-0.64
Narmada 1
(0.05)
1
(0.05)
0
(0.00)
-100.00
Navsari 4
(0.19)
3
(0.15)
2
(0.10)
-6.70
Patan 38
(1.76)
48
(2.33)
54
(2.69)
3.58
Porbandar 42
(1.94)
34
(1.65)
23
(1.15)
-5.84
Panchmahal 2
(0.09)
4
(0.19)
4
(0.20)
7.18
Rajkot 259
(11.99)
275
(13.34)
217
(10.83)
-1.75
Surendranagar 100
(4.63)
101
(4.90)
134
(6.69)
2.97
Sabarkantha 53
(2.45)
69
(3.35)
67
(3.34)
2.37
Surat+Tapi 4
(0.19)
4
(0.19)
2
(0.10)
-6.70
Vadodara 7
(0.32)
7
(0.34)
4
(0.20)
-5.44
Valsad 5
(0.23)
4
(0.19)
3
(0.15)
-4.98
Gujarat 2160 (100.00)
2062 (100.00)
2004 (100.00)
-0.75
Note: Figures in parenthesis shows percentage share in total
Table 3.1.5b: District-wise number of sheep, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007
(Thousand)
District 1992 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
Jabalpur (+ Katni ) 15.602
(2.41)
14.707
(2.24)
4.703
(0.95)
4.073
(1.04)
-4.93
Balaghat 0.032
(0.00)
1.114
(0.17)
0.013
(0.00)
0.002
(0.00)
-6.25
Chhindwara 2.388
(0.37)
1.738
(0.26)
0.822
(0.17)
0.59
(0.15)
-5.02
Seoni 0.352
(0.05)
0.169
(0.03)
0.393
(0.08)
0.177
(0.05)
-3.31
Mandla +Dindori 1.247 1.41 1.001 0.719 -2.82
56
(0.19) (0.21) (0.20) (0.18)
Narsinghpur 1.265
(0.20)
1.189
(0.18)
0.241
(0.05)
0.328
(0.08)
-4.94
Sagor 4.915
(0.76)
4.653
(0.71)
1.747
(0.35)
0.673
(0.17)
-5.75
Damoh 5.814
(0.90)
5.565
(0.85)
7.166
(1.44)
5.504
(1.41)
-0.36
Panna 10.886
(1.68)
11.03
(1.68)
7.16
(1.44)
6.125
(1.57)
-2.92
Tikamgarh 71.166
(11.00)
58.927
(8.97)
4.237
(0.85)
55.832
(14.32)
-1.44
Chhatarpur 52.65
(8.13)
53.259
(8.11)
23.782
(4.78)
23.042
(5.91)
-3.75
Rewa 22.631
(3.50)
25.467
(3.88)
18.48
(3.72)
16.769
(4.30)
-1.73
Sidhi 25.665
(3.97)
28.696
(4.37)
18.153
(3.65)
19.686
(5.05)
-1.55
Satna 24.411
(3.77)
25.423
(3.87)
14.615
(2.94)
15.112
(3.88)
-2.54
Shahdol(+Anuppur+
Umaria)
11.27
(1.74)
15.338
(2.34)
10.576
(2.13)
8.735
(2.24)
-1.50
Indore 2.721
(0.42)
1.853
(0.28)
3.545
(0.71)
0.627
(0.16)
-5.13
Dhar 14.076
(2.17)
19.655
(2.99)
6.793
(1.37)
3.21
(0.82)
-5.13
Jhabua 7.994
(1.24)
11.124
(1.69)
14.694
(2.95)
10.223
(2.62)
1.86
Kargoan (+
Badwani )
14.721
(2.27)
11.502
(1.75)
130.029
(26.14)
7.972
(2.04)
-3.06
Khandwa (+
Burhanpur)
28.255
(4.37)
28.904
(4.40)
17.713
(3.56)
18.184
(4.66)
-2.38
Ujjain 10.123
(1.56)
7.48
(1.14)
10.596
(2.13)
5.326
(1.37)
-3.16
Mandsour (+
Neemuch )
47.415
(7.33)
39.027
(5.94)
28.624
(5.76)
22.322
(5.73)
-3.53
Ratlam 17.033
(2.63)
16.567
(2.52)
0.882
(0.18)
5.739
(1.47)
-4.42
Dewas 0.104
(0.02)
0.074
(0.01)
0.099
(0.02)
0.014
(0.00)
-5.77
57
Shajapur 5.225
(0.81)
3.352
(0.51)
19.89
(4.00)
0.912
(0.23)
-5.50
Morena
(+ Sheopur )
32.369
(5.00)
44.064
(6.71)
23.213
(4.67)
24.567
(6.30)
-1.61
Bhind 42.743
(6.60)
44.35
(6.75)
21.595
(4.34)
13.674
(3.51)
-4.53
Gwalior 63.066
(9.74)
48.814
(7.43)
22.531
(4.53)
29.613
(7.60)
-3.54
Shivpuri 75.215
(11.62)
74.396
(11.33)
23.561
(4.74)
64.576
(16.56)
-0.94
Gunna (+
Ashoknagar)
9.504
(1.47)
14.819
(2.26)
4.642
(0.93)
4.066
(1.04)
-3.81
Datia 14.902
(2.30)
16.57
(2.52)
14.656
(2.95)
12.547
(3.22)
-1.05
Bhopal 0.544
(0.08)
0.654
(0.10)
0.237
(0.05)
0.307
(0.08)
-2.90
Sehore 1.611
(0.25)
1.568
(0.24)
0.263
(0.05)
1.756
(0.45)
-0.60
Raisen 2.468
(0.38)
1.721
(0.26)
7.536
(1.52)
0.351
(0.09)
-5.72
Vidisha 1.939
(0.30)
3.787
(0.58)
12.187
(2.45)
0.466
(0.12)
-5.06
Betul 3.473
(0.54)
5.672
(0.86)
3.07
(0.62)
3.556
(0.91)
0.16
Rajgarh 1.008
(0.16)
11.551
(1.76)
17.767
(3.57)
2.132
(0.55)
7.43
Hosangabad
(+ Harda)
0.449
(0.07)
0.542
(0.08)
0.154
(0.03)
0.356
(0.09)
-1.38
Madhya Pradesh 760.669
(100.00)
788.017
(100.00)
689.397
(100.00)
458.535
(100.00)
-2.65
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
58
Table 3.1.5c: District-wise number of sheep, Karnataka, 1992 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1992 1997 2003 2007 CAGR (%)
Bagalkot** - 378
(4.72)
410
(5.65)
674
(7.05)
-4.34
Bangalore Urban 105
(1.93)
125
(1.56)
73
(1.00)
80
(0.84)
-1.80
Bangalore Rural 271
(4.98)
623
(7.79)
263
(3.63)
364
(3.81)
1.99
Belgaum 504
(9.27)
876
(10.95)
903
(12.44)
900
(9.41)
3.95
Bellary 318
(5.86)
529
(6.61)
397
(5.47)
656
(6.86)
4.94
Bidar 84
(1.54)
79
(0.99)
66
(0.91)
85
(0.89)
0.09
Bijapur 405
(7.45)
254
(3.18)
270
(3.73)
336
(3.51)
-1.24
Chamarajanagar** - 125
(1.56)
117
(1.61)
133
(1.39)
0.62
Chikmagalur 65
(1.20)
74
(0.93)
63
(0.87)
96
(1.01)
2.62
Chitradurga 407
(7.49)
716
(8.95)
716
(9.86)
931
(9.74)
5.68
Davanagere** - 241
(3.02)
205
(2.82)
334
(3.49)
3.30
Dharwad 293
(5.39)
51
(0.62)
34
(0.46)
57
(0.60)
-10.32
Gadag - 206
(2.58)
209
(2.88)
314
(3.28)
-
Gulbarga 353
(6.50)
488
(6.10)
460
(6.33)
582
(6.09)
3.40
Hassan 188
(3.47)
196
(2.44)
154
(2.13)
201
(2.10)
0.44
Haveri**
-
248
(3.10)
198
(2.73)
266
(2.78)
0.69
Kolar 563
(10.37)
725
(9.06)
633
(8.73)
787
(8.23)
2.26
Koppal** - 192
(2.40)
250
(3.45)
475
(4.97)
9.48
Mandya 393
(7.23)
363
(4.54)
340
(4.68)
383
(4.00)
-0.17
Mysore 340
(6.25)
215
(2.69)
199
(2.74)
257
(2.69)
-1.84
59
Raichur 422
(7.78)
379
(4.73)
383
(5.27)
552
(5.78)
1.80
Shimoga 33
(0.60)
19
(0.23)
14
(0.19)
25
(0.26)
-1.72
Tumkur 684
(12.59)
896
(11.19)
885
(12.20)
1068
(11.17)
3.02
Uttara Kannada 3
(0.06)
2
(0.03)
17
(0.24)
3
(0.03)
-1.18
Karnataka 5431 (100)
8003 (100)
7255 (100)
9558 (100)
3.84
Note: Figures in parenthesis are percentage to total; * CAGR is between 1992 and 2007 and ** between 1997
and 2007
Table 3.1.5d: District-wise number of sheep, Punjab, 1990 to 2007 (Thousand)
District 1990 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%) 1990-2007
Gurdaspur 20
(3.91)
14
(3.69)
7
(3.76)
4
(2.12)
-4.34
Amritsar 42
(8.22)
42
(11.08)
14
(7.53)
20
(10.58)
-2.91
Kapurthala 1
(0.20)
1
(0.26)
1
(0.54)
0.3
(0.53)
-2.78
Jalandhar 11
(2.15)
12
(3.170
4
(2.15)
3
(1.59)
-4.24
Hoshiarpur 2
(0.39)
3
(0.79)
1
(0.54)
1
(0.53)
-1.11
Ropar 3
(0.59)
3
(0.79)
1
(0.54)
4
(2.12)
2.56
Ludhiana 35
(6.85)
11
(2.90)
6
(3.23)
5
(2.65)
-4.75
Ferozpur 63
(12.33)
38
(10.03)
41
(22.04)
54
(28.57)
-0.80
Faridkot 98
(19.18)
47
(12.40)
21
(11.29)
13
(6.88)
-4.84
Bathinda 139
(27.20)
126
(33.25)
48
(25.81)
48
(25.40)
-3.62
Sangrur 49
(9.59)
48
(12.66)
20
(10.75)
19
(10.05)
-3.37
Patiala 48
(9.39)
34
(8.97)
22
(11.83)
17
(8.99)
-3.57
Punjab 511 (100.00)
379 (100.00)
186 (100.00)
189 (100.00)
-3.49
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column
60
3.1.6 District-wise goat’s population
District wise population and average annual growth rate (AAGR) of goat population for
Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab states of India are presented in Tables 3.1.6a,
3.1.6b, 3.1.6c and 3.1.6 d, respectively.
In Gujarat, the goat population increased from 43.85 lakh in 1997 to 46.40 lakh in 2007.
Thus, overall goat population increased at an average annual growth rate of 0.57 percent during
period 1997-2007. Out of 25 districts, goat population declined in 11 districts.
The number of goats was found to be increased in all the districts of Madhya Pradesh
except Indore. The highest and maximum average annual growth of goat population was found
to be in Mandla district (47.19 %) followed by Datia (7.48 %), Tikamgarh (7.34%), Bhopal (5.63
%), Jhabua (4.76 %), Balaghat (4.71 %), Ujjain (4.52 %), Ratlam (4.17 %), Khandwa (4.13%)
Chhattarpur (4.08%), Raisen (4.05%), and Bhind (3.70%) districts. The other districts had shown
less annual growth as compared to the state average (3.58%).
In Karnataka, large numbers of goats are present in Gulbarga, which recorded the CAGR
of 2.64 per cent between 1992 and 2007. Although goat population in Belgaum declined
marginally, it constituted the second largest populated district followed by Tumkur and Bijapur.
The decline in goat population in Dharwad and Shimoga was sharp across inter-census periods;
from 8.06 per cent in 1992 to 1.18 per cent in 2007 in Dharwad and from 2.69 per cent to 1.00
per cent in Shimoga between the same periods.
In Punjab, the population of goat got reduced almost to half in 2007, as compared to their
large population of about 5.38 lakh in 1990. More than 24 per cent of total population of goats in
the state belongs to Ferozepur and Bathinda districts. All the districts in the state showed
decrease in goat population with maximum decline in Ludhiana (-4.43 per cent per annum) and
minimum decline in Ferozepur district (-0.35 per cent per annum).
To sum up, in Gujarat, the goat population increased from 43.85 lakh in 1997 to 46.40
lakh in 2007 increasing at an average annual growth rate of 0.57 per cent during period. Out of
25 districts, goat population declined in 11 districts. The number of goats was found to be
increased in all the districts of Madhya Pradesh except Indore. The highest and maximum
average annual growth of goat population was found to be in Mandla district (47.19 %) followed
by Datia (7.48 %) and Tikamgarh (7.34%). In Karnataka, large number of goats is present in
61
Gulbarga, which recorded the CAGR of 2.64 per cent between 1992 and 2007. Although goat
population in Belgaum declined marginally, it constituted the second largest populated district
followed by Tumkur and Bijapur. In Punjab, the population of goat got reduced almost to half in
2007, as compared to their large population of about 5.38 lakh in 1990. More than 24 per cent of
total population of goats in the state belongs to Ferozpur and Bathinda districts. All the districts
in the state showed decrease in goat population.
Table: 3.1.6a: District-wise number of goat, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%) (2007 over 1997)
Ahmedabad 105
(2.39)
120
(2.64)
126
(2.72)
1.84
Anand 51
(1.16)
67
(1.48)
76
(1.64)
4.07
Amreli 141
(3.22)
141
(3.11)
134
(2.89)
-0.51
Bhavnagar 239
(5.45)
196
(4.32)
199
(4.29)
-1.81
Banaskantha 355
(8.10)
331
(7.29)
309
(6.66)
-1.38
Bharuch 135
(3.08)
136
(2.99)
134
(2.89)
-0.07
Dahod 486
(11.08)
383
(8.43)
505
(10.88)
0.38
Dang 38
(0.87)
43
(0.95)
37
(0.80)
-0.27
Gandhinagar 38
(0.87)
47
(1.04)
47
(1.01)
2.15
Jamnagar 156
(3.56)
173
(3.81)
173
(3.73)
1.04
Junagadh 121
(2.76)
122
(2.69)
107
(2.31)
-1.22
Kutch 468
(10.67)
459
(10.11)
485
(10.45)
0.36
Kheda 99
(2.26)
105
(2.31)
118
(2.54)
1.77
Mahesana 94
(2.14)
82
(1.81)
88
(1.90)
-0.66
Narmada 88
(2.01)
99
(2.18)
72
(1.55)
-1.99
Navsari 85 88 67 -2.35
62
(1.94) (1.94) (1.44)
Patan 102
(2.33)
113
(2.49)
103
(2.22)
0.1
Porbandar 29
(0.66)
25
(0.55)
22
(0.47)
-2.72
Panchmahal 287
(6.55)
450
(9.91)
447
(9.63)
4.53
Rajkot 213
(4.86)
218
(4.80)
197
(4.25)
-0.78
Surendranagar 164
(3.74)
180
(3.96)
191
(4.12)
1.54
Sabarkantha 291
(6.64)
315
(6.94)
344
(7.41)
1.69
Surat+Tapi 183
(4.17)
208
(4.58)
200
(4.31)
0.89
Vadodara 288
(6.57)
313
(6.89)
312
(6.72)
0.8
Valsad 129
(2.94)
127
(2.80)
147
(3.17)
1.31
Gujarat 4385 (100.00)
4541 (100.00)
4640 (100.00)
0.57
Note: Figures in parenthesis shows percentage share in total
Table 3.1.6b: District-wise number of goats, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007
(Thousand)
Districts 1992 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
Jabalpur (+ Katni ) 194.81
(3.05)
176.06
(2.72)
207.46
(2.55)
207.97
(2.12)
0.45
Balaghat 160.18
(2.51)
180.12
(2.78)
240.24
(2.95)
273.23
(2.79)
4.71
Chhindwara 244.59
(3.83)
250.65
(3.87)
306.73
(3.77)
355.93
(3.63)
3.03
Seoni 116.03
(1.82)
129.99
(2.01)
158.34
(1.94)
170.74
(1.74)
3.14
Mandla +Dindori 119.35
(1.87)
134.94
(2.08)
160.23
(1.97)
964.19
(9.83)
47.19
Narsinghpur 68.94
(1.08)
70.03
(1.08)
96.91
(1.19)
77.91
(0.79)
0.87
Sagor 107.84
(1.69)
111.92
(1.73)
106.79
(1.31)
139.51
(1.42)
1.96
Damoh 87.86
(1.38)
110.94
(1.71)
100.15
(1.23)
94.43
(0.96)
0.50
63
Panna 112.13
(1.76)
108.66
(1.68)
201.76
(2.48)
145.16
(1.48)
-
Tikamgarh 185.98
(2.91)
170.20
(2.63)
282.01
(3.46)
390.84
(3.98)
7.34
Chhatarpur 257.21
(4.03)
283.00
(4.37)
336.08
(4.13)
414.57
(4.23)
4.08
Rewa 178.95
(2.80)
166.34
(2.57)
164.48
(2.02)
191.06
(1.95)
0.45
Sidhi 317.89
(4.98)
336.75
(5.20)
475
(5.83)
453.34
(4.62)
2.84
Satna 180.42
(2.83)
179.88
(2.78)
186.83
(2.29)
227.27
(2.32)
1.73
Shahdol (+Anuppur+
Umaria)
183.78
(2.88)
200.31
(3.10)
212.78
(2.61)
236.17
(2.41)
1.90
Indore 94.83
(1.49)
85.38
(1.32)
101.21
(1.24)
90.76
(0.93)
-0.29
Dhar 312.97
(4.90)
321.48
(4.97)
373.64
(4.59)
405.56
(4.13)
1.97
Jhabua 301.41
(4.72)
354.54
(5.48)
488.29
(6.00)
516.74
(5.27)
4.76
Kargoan (+ Badwani ) 415.97
(6.52)
422.03
(6.52)
458.27
(5.63)
625.17
(6.37)
3.35
Khandwa (+ Burhanpur) 166.37
(2.61)
168.07
(2.60)
171.46
(2.11)
269.42
(2.75)
4.13
Ujjain 131.80
(2.06)
141.09
(2.18)
189.42
(2.33)
221.08
(2.25)
4.52
Mandsour (+ Neemuch ) 259.12
(4.06)
234.37
(3.62)
375.27
(4.61)
309.24
(3.15)
1.29
Ratlam 131.93
(2.07)
178.12
(2.75)
203.08
(2.49)
214.36
(2.18)
4.17
Dewas 122.08
(1.91)
133.74
(2.07)
149.43
(1.83)
138.24
(1.41)
0.88
Shajapur 145.94
(2.29)
142.17
(2.20)
193.08
(2.37)
178.87
(1.82)
1.50
Morena (+ Sheopur ) 288.83
(4.52)
270.08
(4.17)
301.62
(3.70)
337.53
(3.44)
1.12
Bhind 141.00
(2.21)
137.28
(2.12)
180.94
(2.22)
219.29
(2.24)
3.70
Gwalior 241.94 152.57 155.54 324.06 2.26
64
(3.79) (2.36) (1.91) (3.3)
Shivpuri 251.40
(3.94)
235.39
(3.64)
396.75
(4.87)
365.65
(3.73)
3.03
Gunna (+ Ashoknagar) 164.95
(2.58)
145.08
(2.24)
200.06
(2.46)
246.05
(2.51)
3.28
Datia 73.44
(1.15)
67.34
(1.04)
113.06
(1.39)
155.86
(1.59)
7.48
Bhopal 49.62
(0.78)
50.39
(0.78)
56.30
(0.69)
91.49
(0.93)
5.63
Sehore 77.60
(1.22)
76.59
(1.18)
87.62
(1.08)
80.51
(0.82)
0.25
Raisen 66.20
(1.04)
73.19
(1.13)
77.34
(0.95)
106.38
(1.08)
4.05
Vidisha 76.91
(1.20)
79.29
(1.23)
155.12
(1.90)
78.28
(0.8)
0.12
Betul 122.17
(1.91)
158.46
(2.45)
183.86
(2.26)
175.77
(1.79)
2.92
Rajgarh 124.68
(1.95)
118.03
(1.82)
164.58
(2.02)
189.91
(1.94)
3.49
Hosangabad (+ Harda) 107.59
(1.69)
117.63
(1.82)
132.30 128.18
(1.31)
1.28
Madhya Pradesh 6384.69
(100.00)
6472.05
(100.00)
8143.99
(100.00)
9810.70
(1000.00)
3.58
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
Table 3.1.6c: District-wise number of goat, Karnataka, 1992 to 2007 (Thousand)
District 1992 1997 2003 2007 CAGR (%)
Bagalkot** - 267
(5.48)
267
(5.95)
431
(7.00)
4.89
Bangalore Urban 76
(1.20)
41
(0.85)
31
(0.69)
41
(0.67)
-3.99
Bangalore Rural 260
(4.14)
345
(7.07)
169
(3.78)
262
(4.26)
0.05
Belgaum 619
(9.84)
442
(9.07)
509
(11.35)
610
(9.92)
-0.09
Bellary 376
(5.99)
370
(7.60)
222
(4.95)
272
(4.43)
-2.13
Bidar 154
(2.44)
127
(2.61)
131
(2.92)
189
(3.07)
1.39
Bijapur 852
(13.55)
358
(7.34)
322
(7.19)
452
(7.35)
-4.13
65
Chamarajanagar** - 120
(2.45)
106
(2.36)
115
(1.87)
-0.41
Chikmagalur 116
(1.85)
43
(0.89)
47
(1.05)
75
(1.21)
-2.91
Chitradurga 392
(6.24)
218
(4.47)
220
(4.91)
369
(5.99)
-0.41
Dhakshina Kannada 30
(0.48)
22
(0.46)
17
(0.37)
26
(0.42)
-1.10
Davanagere** - 121
(2.49)
113
(2.52)
154
(2.50)
2.41
Dharwad 506
(8.06)
72
(1.47)
61
(1.36)
72
(1.18)
-12.16
Gadag - 123
(2.52)
101
(2.25)
172
(2.80)
3.45
Gulbarga 511
(8.13)
573
(11.76)
562
(12.54)
756
(12.28)
2.64
Hassan 237
(3.78)
112
(2.30)
100
(2.22)
132
(2.15)
-3.83
Haveri** - 147
(3.02)
128
(2.85)
151
(2.45)
0.21
Kodagu 14
(0.22)
7
(0.15)
4
(0.10)
7
(0.12)
-4.21
Kolar 307
(4.88)
158
(3.24)
203
(4.54)
255
(4.14)
-1.23
Koppal** 296
(4.72)
137
(2.80)
135
(3.01)
199
(3.24)
-2.61
Mandya - 233
(4.79)
205
(4.57)
244
(3.97)
0.47
Mysore 435
(6.92)
138
(2.83)
161
(3.58)
197
(3.20)
-5.15
Raichur 432
(6.88)
237
(4.87)
274
(6.11)
377
(6.13)
-0.91
Shiomaga 169
(2.69)
101
(2.07)
59
(1.31)
62
(1.00)
-6.49
Tumkur 482
(7.66)
342
(7.03)
322
(7.18)
518
(8.42)
0.48
Udupi** - 2
(0.03)
2
(0.05)
3
(0.04)
5.86
Uttara Kannada 20
(0.32)
17
(0.35)
14
(0.30)
12
(0.20)
-3.43
Karnataka 6285 (100)
4875 (100)
4484 (100)
6153 (100)
-0.41
Note: Figures in parenthesis are percentage to total* CAGR is between 1992 and 2007 and ** between 1997 and 2007
66
Table 3.1.6d: District-wise number of goat, Punjab, 1990 to 2007 (Thousand)
District 1990 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
1990-2007
Gurdaspur 22
(4.08)
19
(4.87)
15
(5.95)
11
(4.20)
-2.84
Amritsar 32
(5.94)
37
(9.49)
20
(7.94)
23
(8.78)
-1.62
Kapurthala 6
(1.11)
6
(1.54)
7
(2.78)
4
(1.53)
-1.66
Jalandhar 49
(9.09)
52
(13.33)
22
(8.73)
17
(6.49)
-3.67
Hoshiarpur 54
(10.02)
28
(7.18)
19
(7.54)
17
(6.49)
-3.77
Ropar 25
(4.64)
19
(4.87)
10
(3.97)
11
(4.20)
-3.23
Ludhiana 77
(14.29)
34
(8.72)
16
(6.35)
16
(6.11)
-4.43
Ferozpur 35
(6.49)
21
95.38)
25
(9.92)
33
(12.60)
-0.35
Faridkot 57
(10.58)
41
(10.51)
26
(10.32)
22
(8.40)
-3.39
Bathinda 94
(17.44)
92
923.59)
47
(18.65)
58
(22.14)
-2.16
Sangrur 40
(7.42)
20
(5.13)
27
(10.71)
29
(11.070
-1.51
Patiala 48
(8.91)
21
(5.38)
18
(7.14)
21
(8.02)
-3.13
Punjab 539
(100.00)
390
(100.00)
252
(100.00)
262
(100.00)
-2.87
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
3.1.7 District-wise camel population
District wise population and average annual growth rate (AAGR) of camel population for
Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Punjab states of India are presented in Tables 3.1.7a, 3.1.7b, and
3.1.7c, respectively.
The camel population in Gujarat recorded alarming decrease and it decreased from 65
thousands in 1997 to only 38 thousand in 2007. The AAGR for camel population was highly
67
negative (-5.28 %). The AAGR of camel population in various districts of the state found either
highly negative or stagnant. Not a single district recorded positive AAGR during 1997-2007.
The population of camel was found to be decreased over the period of time in Madhya
Pradesh with an annual growth rate of (-4.20 %). In the district Chhatarpur (22.22 %), Ujjain
(4.00%), Dewas (3.33%), Panna (0.53%), Damoh (0.47%), Sagar (0.40%), Narsinghpur (0.33%),
Mandla (0.27%), Seoni (0.20%), Chhindwara(0.13%) and Balaghat (0.07%) the population of
camel was found to be increased over the period of time, while in Tikamgarh, Rewa, Dhar, Sidhi,
Satna , Jhabua, Khargone, Khandwa, Ratlam, Shajapur, Morena, Bhind, Shivpuri, Guna, Datia,
Bhopal, Raisen, Vidisha, Rajgarh and Hoshangabad districts it was found to be decreased
during the period under study.
The population of camel is decreasing sharply in Punjab and reached to the lowest ebb of
about 1.4 thousand in 2007, as compared to their population of about 43.4 thousand in 1990
(Table 3.1.7c). Camels were reared in surrounding districts of Rajasthan state, particularly
Bathinda district of the state that housed about 72 per cent of total population of camel in the
state. Overtime, all the districts in the state showed decrease in camel population.
To conclude, the camel population in Gujarat recorded alarming decrease from 65
thousands in 1997 to only 38 thousand in 2007 at AAGR (-5.28 %). The AAGR of camel
population in various districts of the state found either highly negative or stagnant. The
population of camel was also found to be decreased over the period of time in Madhya Pradesh
with an annual growth rate of (-4.20 %). The population of camel is decreasing sharply in Punjab
and reached to the lowest ebb of about 1.4 thousand in 2007, as compared to their population of
about 43.4 thousand in 1990. Bathinda district housed about 72 per cent of total population of
camel in the state. Overtime, all the districts in the state showed decrease in camel population.
68
Table: 3.1.7a: District-wise number of camels, Gujarat, 1997 to 2007
(Thousand)
District 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%) (2007 over
1997) Ahmedabad 2
(3.08)
2
(3.77)
1
(2.63)
-6.70
Anand 2
(3.08)
2
(3.77)
2
(5.26)
0.00
Bhavnagar 1
(1.54)
1
(1.89)
0
(0.00)
-100.00
Banaskantha 18
(27.69)
12
(22.64)
5
(13.16)
-12.02
Gandhinagar 3
(4.62)
3
(5.66)
2
(5.26)
-3.97
Jamnagar 2
(3.08)
2
(3.77)
2
(5.26)
0.00
Junagadh 1
(1.54)
1
(1.89)
1
(2.63)
0.00
Kutch 17
(26.15)
11
(20.75)
9
(23.68)
-6.16
Kheda 1
(1.54)
1
(1.89)
1
(2.63)
0.00
Mahesana 9
(13.85)
8
(15.09)
6
(15.79)
-3.97
Patan 5
(7.69)
4
(7.55)
3
(7.89)
-4.98
Porbandar 0
(0.00)
0
(0.00)
2
(5.26)
0.00
Panchmahal 1
(1.54)
1
(1.89)
0
(0.00)
-100.00
Sabarkantha 3
(4.62)
4
(7.55)
3
(7.89)
0.00
Gujarat 65
(100.00) 53
(100.00) 38
(100.00)
-5.23
Note: Figures in parenthesis shows percentage share in total
69
Table 3.1.7b: District-wise number of camels, Madhya Pradesh, 1992-2007
(Thousand)
District 1992 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
Balaghat 0.00
0.01
(0.10)
0.00
0.00
0.07
Mandla +Dindori 0.00
0.00
0.12
(1.46)
0.00
0.27
Sagor 0.00
0.00
0.10
(1.22)
0.00
0.40
Tikamgarh 0.15
(1.20)
0.03
(0.30)
0.01
(0.12)
0.00
-6.67
Chhatarpur 0.03
(0.24)
0.03
(0.30)
0.01
(0.12)
0.13
(2.93)
22.22
Rewa 0.19
(1.53)
0.20
(2.00)
0.08
(0.97)
0.05
(1.13)
-4.91
Sidhi 0.10
(0.80)
0.12
(1.20)
0.03
(0.37)
0.00
-6.67
Indore 0.01
(0.08)
0.03
(0.30)
0.19
(2.31)
0.01
(0.23)
0.00
Dhar 0.04
(0.32)
0.34
(3.39)
0.08
(0.97)
0.00
-6.67
Jhabua 0.01
(0.08)
0.00
0.03
(0.37)
0.00
-6.67
Kargoan (+
Badwani )
0.02
(0.16)
0.01
(0.10)
1.86
(22.66)
0.00
-6.67
Khandwa (+
Burhanpur)
0.00
(0.00)
0.03
(0.30)
0.01
(0.12)
0.00 0.00
Ujjain 0.05
(0.40)
0.09
(0.90)
0.24
(2.92)
0.08
(1.81)
4.00
Mandsour (+
Neemuch )
3.63
(29.16)
5.08
(50.70)
3.20
(38.98)
1.79
(40.41)
-3.38
Ratlam 0.03
(0.24)
0.04
(0.40)
0.29
(3.53)
0.01
(0.23)
-4.44
Dewas 0.02
(0.16)
0.00
0.05
(0.61)
0.03
(0.68)
3.33
Shajapur 0.34
(2.73)
0.46
(4.59)
0.22
(2.68)
0.02
(0.45)
-6.27
Morena (+ Sheopur) 2.14
(17.19)
1.21
(12.08)
0.42
(5.12)
0.53
(11.96)
-5.02
70
Bhind 1.83
(14.70)
1.34
(13.37)
0.55
(6.70)
0.29
(6.55)
-5.61
Gwalior 2.23
(17.91)
0.42
(4.19)
0.53
(6.46)
1.34
(30.25)
-2.66
Shivpuri 0.21
(1.69)
0.30
(2.99)
0.03
(0.37)
0.04
(0.90)
-5.40
Gunna (+
Ashoknagar)
0.09
(0.72)
0.06
(0.60)
0.03
(0.37)
0.00
-6.67
Datia 0.04
(0.32)
0.02
(0.20)
0.04
(0.49)
0.01
(0.23)
-5.00
Bhopal 0.01
(0.08)
0.01
(0.10)
0.03
(0.37)
0.00
-6.67
Sehore 0.00
0.01
(0.10)
0.00
0.02
(0.45)
0.00
Raisen 1.05
(8.43)
0.01
(0.10)
0.00
0.00
-6.67
Vidisha 0.01
(0.08)
0.00
0.00
0.00
-6.67
Betul 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.05
(1.13)
0.00
Rajgarh 0.19
(1.53)
0.16
(1.60)
0.05
(0.61)
0.03
(0.68)
-5.61
Hosangabad (+
Harda)
0.03
(0.24)
0.01
(0.10)
0.01
(0.12)
0.00
-6.67
Madhya Pradesh 18.33
(100.00)
16.44
(100.00)
13.83
(100.00)
6.79
(100.00)
-4.20
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
71
Table 3.1.7c: District-wise number of camel, Punjab, 1990 to 2007 (Number)
Districts 1990 1997 2003 2007 AAGR (%)
1990-2007
Gurdaspur 50
(0.12)
50
(0.19)
-
30
(2.16)
-5.56
Amritsar 1500
(3.46)
1700
(6.31)
-
30
(2.16)
-5.56
Kapurthala -
-
-
-
-
Jalandhar 100
(0.23)
130
(0.48)
-
-
-5.56
Hoshiarpur 100
(0.23)
70
(0.26)
-
-
-5.56
Ropar 100
(0.23)
100
(0.37)
200
(6.06)
20
(1.44)
-5.56
Ludhiana 200
(0.46)
50
(0.19)
-
10
(0.72)
-5.56
Ferozpur 1100
(2.54)
1300
(4.82)
900
(27.27)
80
(5.76)
-1.52
Faridkot 3700
(8.54)
500
(1.86)
100
(3.03)
100
(7.19)
-5.56
Bathinda 34400
(79.35)
22800
(84.60)
1900
(57.58)
1000
(71.94)
-5.39
Sangrur 1100
(2.54)
200
(0.74)
200
(6.06)
100
(7.19)
-5.05
Patiala 1000
(2.31)
50
(0.19)
-
20
(1.44)
-5.56
Punjab 43350
(100.00)
26950
(100.00)
3300
(100.00)
1390
(100.00)
-5.29
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column
72
3.2. Fodder crops cultivation
This section highlights the comparative status of fodder production in Madhya Pradesh
and Punjab states of India which was presented in Table 3.2.1. The data for other two selected
states i.e. Gujarat and Karnataka could not be included as the data for fodder crops were not
available in these states. The growth rates in area under fodder crops were calculated over three
period of time, viz. 1990-91 to 1999-00 (Period I); 2000-01 to 2008-09 (Period II) and overall
Period, 1990-91 to 2008-09 (Period III).
Fodder cultivation is still found to be in a nascent stage in Madhya Pradesh. Out of the
total fodder area (0.74 lakh ha), the cultivators of Madhya Pradesh devoted their maximum area
under the cultivation of bajra (20%) followed by Jowar (4%), Berseem (2%) and Maize (1%).
The 72% of the fodder area is found to be covered under unidentified other fodder crops. The
Bajra which was found to be highly cultivated by the cultivators, but it was found to be mainly
cultivated for grain purposes rather than fodder. The by product of this crops is used as a fodder
for the live stock. The area of fodder was found to be declined over the years from 974888 ha.
(1990-94) to 745285 (2006-09) in Madhya Pradesh during the last 20 years. The area of Jowar,
Berseem, Loosarn, Jai were found to be increased over the year 1990-94 (Table 3.2.1 (a), while
the area under guar and other fodder decreased in Madhya Pradesh. As regards to the growth of
these are concerned in Madhya Pradesh, the areas of all the fodder crops was found to be
decrease with the rate of 1.97 per cent per year during the last 20 years (Table 3.2.1 (b) The
growth of these fodders was found to be more in the period I ( 2.52%/year) as compared to
period II (-2.40%/year). Among the different fodder crops the highest growth of fodder was
observed in the area of loosarn (4.98%/year) followed by berseem (3.89%/year), jowar
(2.79%/year), jai (2.39%/year) and maize (1.99%/year) during the last 20 years in Madhya
Pradesh. The growth of maize, jowar and loosarn was found to be more in period II as compare
to period I, while the growth of bajra and guar was found to be more in period I as compared to
period II. The growth of berseem was found to be negative in period I (-4.88%/year) and period
II (-0.11%/year) but it was found to be positive in period III (3.89%/year). The growth of other
fodder was found to be positive in all the period of the study and it is found to be more in period
II (2.23%/year) as compared to period I (2.52% per annum).
73
In Punjab, on an average, about 5.83 lakh hectare areas is under fodder crops during the
period 2005-09, which comes out to be about 7 per cent of gross cropped area of the state. The
area under fodder crops was found to decrease continuously from the average area of 7.8 lakh
hectare during the period 1990-94. The decline in fodder acreage may be attributed to the
decreasing livestock population and increasing productivity of fodders during this period. The
fodder crops occupied about 2.64 lakh hectare area in the kharif season and about 2.97 lakh
hectare during the rabi season. Maize fodder is also cutivated during the summer season covering
about 0.22 lakh hectare area during the season. Sorghum, bajra and guara were the important
kharif fodders covering about 24, 14 and 3 per cent of the total area under fodder cultivation in
the state during the period 2005-09. Berseem and oats were the important rabi fodders covering
about 34 and 12 per cent of the total area under total fodder cultivation in the state. Maize fodder
is also cultivated during the summer season covering about 4 per cent of the total area under
fodder cultivation in the state during the period 2005-09 (Table 3.2.1). The area under total
fodder in the state was found to decrease over all the periods under study. During the period
1990-91 to 2008-09 (Period III), most of the fodder crops showed declining trends in area except
guara during kharif season and oats during rabi season. During kharif season, maize fodder
showed the highest reduction in area (-11.74 per cent per annum) during the Period III, while
during rabi season, berseem showed the highest reduction in area (-2 per cent per annum) during
the same period. Maize fodder recorded an increase in area during the recent years (2000-01 to
2008-09), but also showed the maximum inter year variation in fodder area during this period
(Table 3.2.1).
To conclude, fodder cultivation is still found to be in a nascent stage in Madhya Pradesh.
Out of the total fodder area (0.74 lakh ha), the cultivators of Madhya Pradesh devoted their
maximum area under the cultivation of bajra (20%) followed by Jowar (4%), Berseem (2%) and
Maize (1%). The area of fodder was found to be declined over the years from 974888 ha. (1990-
94) to 745285 (2006-09) in Madhya Pradesh during the last 20 years. The area of Jowar,
Berseem, Loosarn, Jai were found to be increased over the year 1990-94, while the area under
guar and other fodder decreased in Madhya Pradesh. Among the different fodder crops the
highest growth of fodder was observed in the area of loosarn (4.98%/year) followed by berseem
(3.89%/year), jowar (2.79%/year), jai (2.39%/year) and maize (1.99%/year) during the last 20
74
years in Madhya Pradesh. In Punjab, on an average, about 5.83 lakh hectare areas is under fodder
crops during the period 2005-09, which comes out to be about 7 per cent of gross cropped area of
the state. The area under fodder crops was found to decrease continuously from the average area
of 7.8 lakh hectare during the period 1990-94. The fodder crops occupied about 2.64 lakh hectare
area in the kharif season and about 2.97 lakh hectare during the rabi season. Maize fodder was
also cutivated during the summer season covering about 21 thousand hectare area during the
season. Sorghum, bajra and guara were the important kharif fodders covering about 24, 14 and 3
per cent of the total area under fodder cultivation in the state during the period 2005-09. Berseem
and oats were the important Rabi fodders covering about 34 and 12 per cent of the total area
under total fodder cultivation in the state. Maize fodder is also cutivated during the summer
season covering about 4 per cent of the total area under fodder cultivation in the state during the
period 2005-09. During the period 1990-91 to 2008-09, most of the fodder crops showed
decrease in area except guara during kharif season and oats during rabi season. During kharif
season, maize fodder showed the highest decrease in area (-11.74 per cent per annum) during the
period 1990-91 to 2008-09, while during rabi season, berseem showed the highest decrease in
area (-2 per cent per annum) during the same period. Maize fodder recorded increase in area
during the recent years (2000-01 to 2008-09).
Table 3.2.1: Average area under major fodder crops, selected states, India
(Hectare)
Particulars Gujarat Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra Punjab
Sorghum 1990-94 NR NR NR 234293
(30.24)
1995-99 NR NR NR 205281
(29.12)
2000-04 NR NR NR 182340
(27.88)
2005-09 NR NR NR 137894
(23.66)
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR NR NR -3.17
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR NR NR 11.05
CGR (2000-01 NR NR NR -5.44
75
to 2008-09) CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR NR NR 21.03
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR NR NR -4.03**
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR NR NR 22.36
Bajra 1990-94 NR 156294
(16.03)
NR 93849
(12.11)
1995-99 NR 140041
(16.29)
NR 96921
(13.75)
2000-04 NR 176951
(21.94)
NR 108518
(16.59)
2005-09 NR 184055
(24.70)
NR 83216
(14.28)
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR 3.53 NR 0.98
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR 11732 NR 9.91
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR -1.55 NR -4.02*
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR 2430 NR 15.29
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR -1.09 NR -0.36
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR 10418 NR 13.15
Guara 1990-94 NR 3573
(0.37)
NR 16315
(2.11)
1995-99 NR 4397
(0.51)
NR 9138
(1.30)
2000-04 NR 7761
(0.96)
NR 9881
(1.51)
2005-09 NR NR 18946
(3.25)
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR 2.89 NR -14.65**
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR 165771 NR 33.22
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR -4.17
NR 3.55
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR 88457 NR 21.64
76
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR -3.17 NR 1.55
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR
476908 NR
29.19
Maize 1990-94 NR 5532
(0.57) NR 26986
(3.48)
1995-99 NR 5245
(0.61) NR 16643
(2.36)
2000-04 NR 6415
(0.80)
NR 7906
(1.21)
2005-09 NR 6326
(0.85)
NR 4670
(3.23)
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR -2.01
NR -6.79
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR
893 NR
31.62
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR 1.71
NR -8.30
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR
438 NR
30.90
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR 1.99
NR -11.74
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR
2766 NR
65.94
Others 1990-94 NR 746615
(76.58)
NR 39658
(5.12)
1995-99 NR 646033
(75.15)
NR 22132
(3.140
2000-04 NR 547445
(67.89)
NR 14505
(2.22)
2005-09 NR 485468
(65.14)
NR 18799
(45.22)
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR 2.12 NR -16.62*
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR 25875 NR 47.33
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR 2.3 NR 5.56
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR 16482 NR 62.22
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR 1.42 NR -8.10
CV (1990-91 to NR 55004 NR 63.18
77
2008-09) Barseem (Rabi) 1990-94 NR 13930
(1.43)
NR 255010
(32.92)
1995-99 NR 19721
(2.29) NR 227037
(32.21)
2000-04 NR 19929
(2.47)
NR 220397
(33.70)
2005-09 NR 20305
(2.72)
NR 195226
(33.50)
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR -4.88
NR -1.90
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR 2191 NR 8.27
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR -0.11 NR -2.90**
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR 34 NR 8.72
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR 3.89 NR -2.0
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR 5953 NR 11.54
Oats 1990-94 NR NR NR 57010
(7.36)
1995-99 NR NR NR 65725
(9.32)
2000-04 NR NR NR 63984
(9.78) 2005-09 NR NR NR 68279
(11.72)
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR NR NR 3.11**
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR NR NR 7.62
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR NR NR -0.24
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR NR NR 9.35
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR NR NR 1.06
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR NR NR 9.73
Others 1990-94 NR NR NR 30675
78
(3.96)
1995-99 NR NR NR 42821
(6.07)
2000-04 NR NR NR 29768
(4.55)
2005-09 NR NR NR 34456
(5.91) CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR NR NR 0.92
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR NR NR 36.32
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR NR NR 6.60
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR NR NR 26.77
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR NR NR 0.38
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR NR NR 32.53
Summer maize 1990-94 NR NR NR 20940
(2.70)
1995-99 NR NR NR 19241
(2.73)
2000-04 NR NR NR 16674
(2.55)
2005-09 NR NR NR 21228
(3.64)
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR NR NR -1.14
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR NR NR 19.32
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR NR NR 4.19
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR NR NR 37.84
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR NR NR -0.80
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR NR NR 30.15
Jowar 1990-94 NR 43338
(4.45)
NR NR
1995-99 NR 37294
(4.34)
NR NR
79
2000-04 NR 39618
(4.91)
NR NR
2005-09 NR 37785
(5.07)
NR NR
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR -5.88
NR NR
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR 8161 NR NR
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR 2.24
NR NR
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR 1793 NR NR
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR 2.79
NR NR
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR 12150 NR NR
Loosarn 1990-94 NR 4769
(0.49)
NR NR
1995-99 NR 6116
(0.71)
NR NR
2000-04 NR 7523
(0.93)
NR NR
2005-09 NR 8192
(1.10)
NR NR
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR 0.89
NR NR
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR 48 NR NR
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR 22.68
NR NR
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR 858 NR NR
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR 4.98
NR NR
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR 925 NR NR
Javi 1990-94 NR 836
(0.09)
NR NR
1995-99 NR 472
(0.05)
NR NR
2000-04 NR 777
(0.10)
NR NR
2005-09 NR 1366 NR NR
80
(0.18)
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR -5.07
NR NR
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR
1668 NR NR
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR
-24.69
NR NR
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR
5980 NR NR
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR
2.39 NR NR
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR
2779 NR NR
Total Fodder
1990-94 NR 974887 (100.00)
NR 774736 (100.00)
1995-99 NR 859319 (100.00)
NR 704939 (100.00)
2000-04 NR 806419 (100.00)
NR 653973 (100.00)
2005-09 NR 745286 (100.00)
NR 582714 (100.00)
CGR (1990-91
to 1999-00) NR NR NR -2.25
CV (1990-91 to
1999-00) NR NR NR 8.77
CGR (2000-01
to 2008-09) NR NR NR -2.59**
CV (2000-01 to
2008-09) NR NR NR 7.40
CGR (1990-91
to 2008-09) NR NR NR -2.15**
CV (1990-91 to
2008-09) NR NR NR 12.08
Note: For Madhya Pradesh the data for the 4th period is for the year 2006-09 NR: Not reported, Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column
81
3.2.1 Kharif season fodder:
Maize fodder is the important fodder crop cultivated during the kharif season. The
cultivation of maize fodder is concentrated only in Khargone (33%), Dhar (22%), Ujjain (16%),
Dewas (12%), Hoshangabad (8%), Morena (6%), Mandsur (1%) and Khandwa (1%) districts of
Madhya Pradesh. The area of maize is found to be increased by 14.35 per cent (2006-09) as
compared to 1990-04 (55.32ha.). It is found that the area of fodder increased with an annual
growth of 1.99 per cent per year during the last 20 years (period III). The growth of maize was
found to be more in period II (1.71%/year) as compared to period I (-2.01 %/year). The growth
of maize was found to be negative in all the district of Madhya Pradesh during period I except in
Dhar, (2.44%/year),Ujjain 2.73%/year) and Ratlam (2.55%/year) districts whereas, it was found
to be positive in Dhar (2.70%/year), Jhabua (24.60%/year), Dewas (18.42%/year), Morena
(21.88%/year), Bhopal (25.00%/year) , Rajgarh (4.17%/year) and Hoshangabad (0.73%/year).
The growth of maize is found to be positive in all the maize growing districts of M.P. in the
period under study expect in Narsighpur (-10.64%/year), Indore (-1.19%/year, Khargoan (-
0.79%/year) and Mandsour (-2.54%/year). The maximum and positive growth of maize fodder
was found to be in Bhopal (25.00%/year) followed by Morena (24.48%/year) districts of Madhya
Pradesh.
Sorghum is the important fodder crop cultivated during the kharif season in Punjab. The
area under the crop was found to contract continuously and declined to 1.37 lakh hectares in the
period 2005-09 from about 2.34 lakh hectares during the 1990-94, which may be due to the
decreasing livestock population and increasing fodder productivity during this period (Table
3.2.4. Patiala and Sangrur are the leading districts in terms of area under sorghum cultivation in
the state as their share was about 16 and 13 per cent of the total area under sorghum cultivation
respectively in the period 2005-09. During the periods, 2000-01 to 2008-09 (Period II) and 1990-
91 to 2008-09 (Period III), all the districts showed the decrease in fodder area. In some of the
districts, bajra was preferred over sorghum crop during the season. During 1990-91 to 2008-09
(Period III), Amritsar district showed the highest significant decline in sorghum acreage (-8.99
per cent per annum) and also showed the highest inter year level of variation in area during this
period (Table 3.2.5).
82
To conclude, maize fodder is the important fodder crop cultivated during the kharif
season in Madhya Pradesh. The cultivation of maize fodder is concentrated only in Khargone
(33%), Dhar (22%), Ujjain (16%), Dewas (12%), Hoshangabad (8%), Morena (6%), Mandsur
(1%) and Khandwa (1%) districts of Madhya Pradesh. The area of maize is found to be increased
by 14.35 per cent (2006-09) as compared to 1990-04 (55.32ha.) with an annual growth of 1.99
per cent per year during the last 20 years (period III). The growth of maize was found to be
more in period II (1.71%/year) as compared to period I (-2.01 %/year). Sorghum is the
important fodder crop cultivated during the kharif season in Punjab. The area under the crop was
found to contract continuously and declined to 1.37 lakh hectares in the period 2005-09 from
about 2.34 lakh hectares during the 1990-94. Patiala and Sangrur are the leading districts in
terms of area under sorghum cultivation in the state as their share was about 16 and 13 per cent
of the total area under sorghum cultivation respectively in the period 2005-09. During the
periods, 2000-01 to 2008-09 (Period II) and 1990-91 to 2008-09 (Period III), all the districts
showed the decrease in fodder area.
Table 3.2.2: District-wise average area of Maize (kharif season) in different periods in
Madhya Pradesh
(Hectare)
District 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005-09
Narsinghpur 140
(2.53)
614
(11.71) - -
Indore 1343
(24.28)
917
(17.48)
61
(0.95)
14
(0.22)
Dhar 1029
(18.6)
711
(13.56)
1107
(17.26)
1402
(22.16)
Jhabua - 63
(1.2)
11
(0.17)
4
(0.06)
Khargone(+Badwani) 2687
(48.57)
2409
(45.93)
2477
(38.61)
2069
(32.71)
Khandwa(+Burhanpur) 14
(0.25)
23
(0.44)
129
(2.01)
67
(1.06)
Ujjain 136
(2.46) 89
(1.7) 532
(8.29) 1043
(16.49)
Mandsaur(+Neemuch) 72
(1.3)
95
(1.81)
118
(1.84)
37
(0.58)
Ratlam 23
(0.42)
2
(0.04)
151
(2.35)
1
(0.02)
Dewas 76 275 414 758
83
(1.37) (5.24) (6.45) (11.98)
Shajapur 7
(0.13)
27
(0.51)
78
(1.22)
25
(0.4)
Morena(+Sheopur) - - 98
(1.53)
374
(5.91)
Shivpuri - 1
(0.02)
9
(0.14) -
Guna(+Ashoknager) - - - -
Datia -
- 194
(3.02)
8
(0.13)
Bhopal -
- 1
(0.02) -
Rajgarh 3
(0.05)
16
(0.31)
13
(0.2)
16
(0.25)
Hoshangabad(+Harda) 2
(0.04)
3
(0.06)
1022
(15.93)
512
(8.09)
Madhya Pradesh 5532
(100.00) 5245
(100.00) 6415
(100.00) 6326
(100.00) Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
84
Table 3.2.3: District wise average annual compound growth rate of area and their coefficient of variance (CVs) of Maize (Kharif Season) in Madhya Pradesh
(Percent)
District 1990-1991 to 1999-
00 (Period I) 2000-01 to 2008-09
(Period II) 1990-1991 to 2008-
09 (Period III)
Narsinghpur -11.47
(356.55) 0.00
-10.64
(566.24)
Indore -1.77
(164.90)
-44.69
(85.29)
-13.19
(2165.53)
Dhar 2.44
(175.50)
2.70
(128.86)
2.54
(611.18)
Jhabua -29.62
(77.95)
24.60
(8.86)
0.44
(2.35)
Khargone(+Badwani) 0.01
(1.55)
-2.13
(201.43)
-0.79
(470.24)
Khandwa(+Burhanpur) -14.71
(22.45)
-14.07
(-62.71)
13.12
(178.71)
Ujjain 2.73
(25.30)
24.93
(675.71)
17.23
(1426.94)
Mandsaur(+Neemuch) -2.42
(16.70)
-55.32
(209.29)
-2.54
(53.76)
Ratlam 25.57
(25.95)
-49.64
(214.71)
7.54
(93.65)
Dewas -29.22
(423.05)
18.42
(377.29)
14.56
(1097.29)
Shajapur -23.81
(33.40)
-1.87
(4.71)
13.04
(112.71)
Morena(+Sheopur)
0.00
21.88
(154.43)
24.48
(426.82)
Shivpuri -8.48
(0.35)
-75.00
(18.43)
6.25
(4.24)
Datia -54.55
(0.45)
-24.62
(138.43)
16.72
(232.47)
Bhopal
0.00
25.00
(0.57)
25.00
(1.41)
Rajgarh -24.05
(18.85)
4.17
(2.29)
7.68
(20.71)
Hoshangabad(+Harda) -31.27
(6.45)
0.73
(25.43)
20.85
(1813.24)
Madhya Pradesh -2.01 (892.80)
1.71 (437.86)
1.99 (2766.29)
Note: Figures in the parentheses are coefficient of variation
85
Table 3.2.4: District-wise average area of sorghum fodder crop (kharif season) Punjab,
1990-91 to 2008-09 (Five year average)
(Hectares)
District 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005-09
Gurdaspur 11922
(5.09)
10979
(5.35)
10591
(5.81)
8849
(6.42)
Amritsar 29047
(12.40)
35356
(17.22)
21052
(11.55)
9893
(7.17)
Kapurthala 3671
(1.57)
3227
(1.57)
3726
(2.04)
2583
(1.87)
Jalandhar 11130
(4.75)
4586
(2.23)
5525
(3.03)
5368
(3.89)
Hoshiarpur 15066
(6.43)
8302
(4.04)
15423
(8.46)
12616
(9.15)
Ropar 21776
(9.29)
17000
(8.28)
15256
(8.37)
9627
(6.98)
Ludhiana 15006
(6.40)
11685
(5.69)
14450
(7.92)
13917
(10.09)
Ferozepur 25349
(10.82)
21514
(10.48)
15253
(8.37)
9053
(6.57)
Faridkot 29802
(12.72)
28743
(14.0)
30603
(16.78)
14283
(10.36)
Bathinda 26788
(11.43)
19425
(9.46)
15129
(8.30)
11236
(8.15)
Sangrur 19932
(8.51)
21194
(10.32)
11828
(6.49)
17849
(12.94)
Patiala 24804
(10.59)
23269
(11.34)
23506
(12.89)
22621
(16.40)
Punjab 234293
(100.00)
205280
(100.00)
182342
(100.00)
137895
(100.00) Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
86
Table 3.2.5: Average annual compound growth rates of area and their coefficient of
variation (CVs*) of sorghum fodder crop (kharif season), Punjab, 1990-91 to 2008-09
(Percent)
Note: Figures in the parentheses are coefficient of variation
**significant at I percent level, *significant at 5 per cent level
District
1990-91 to 1999-00
(Period- I)
2000-01 to 2008-09
(Period -II)
1990-91 to 2008-09
(Period -III)
Gurdaspur -9.56
(26.72)
-0.60
(23.08)
-2.53
(26.89)
Amritsar 0.66
(27.73)
-13.96
(62.39)
-8.99**
(52.13)
Kapurthala -0.39
(22.45)
-10.16*
(26.41)
-2.61
(24.85)
Jalandhar -14.82
(47.52)
-5.39
(48.61)
-14.82
(47.52)
Hoshiarpur -11.17*
(29.73)
-2.70
(14.59)
-0.11
(22.96)
Ropar -3.58
(14.74)
-13.42
(47.95)
-7.82**
(37.60)
Ludhiana -2.33
(17.54)
-2.08
(13.92)
-0.20
(15.76)
Ferozepur -1.27
(17.82)
-9.17
(41.12)
-7.72**
(41.50)
Faridkot -8.59
(34.47)
-14.13**
(45.42)
-5.44*
(41.29)
Bathinda 3.46
(38.45)
-6.38
(41.85)
-5.61*
(50.09)
Sangrur 1.31
(26.05)
10.24**
(28.65)
-1.54
(32.28)
Patiala -3.56
(28.42)
-0.40
(14.56)
-0.51
(22.63)
Punjab -3.17
(11.05)
-5.44
(21.03)
-4.03**
(22.36)
87
3.2.2 Rabi season
Berseem is the most important fodder crop cultivated during the rabi season in Madhya
Pradesh as well as Punjab. The area of Berseem was mainly concentrated in Shajapur,
Hoshangabad, Sehore, Ujjain, Ratlam, Bhopal, Shivpuri, Indore, Bhind, Mandsaur, Dhar
Morena, Narsinghpur, Betul and Jabalpur districts of Madhya Pradesh (Table 3.2.6). The area of
Berseem is increased by 45.76 per cent in the year 2005-09 (20305 hectares) as compared to the
year 1990-94 (13930 hectares). The area of berseem is increased with an annual growth rate of
2.82 per cent /year during the last 20 years. The growth of area of berseem was found to be more
in period II (2.24%/year) as compared to period I (-5.54%/year). The growth of area of berseem
was found to be negative in all the districts of Madhya Pradesh except Mandla (44.26%/year),
Gwalior (29.22%/year), Shivpuri (11.27%/year), Khargone (11.62%/year), Jhabua
(9.41%/year), Panna (7.07%/year), Khandwa (4.94%/year) and Guna (1.43 %/year) in period I
of the study, while it was found to be positive in Narsinghpur, Sagar, Chhatarpur, Rewa,
Shahdol, Dhar, Jhabua, Ratlam, Dewas, Shajapur, Bhopal, Sehore, Raisen, Vidisha, Betul and
Rajgarh districts of Madhya Pradesh in period II. The growth of Berseem was found to be
positive in all the district of Madhya Pradesh except Chhindwara, Mandla, Damoh, Panna, Sidhi,
Khargone, Khandwa, Ujjain, Ratlam, Dewas, Gwalior, Shivpuri and Guna districts of Madhya
Pradesh in period III of the study (Table 3.2.7)
In Punjab, the area under berseem was found to decrease continuously to average of
about 1.95 lakh hectares during the period 2005-09 as compared to the average of about 2.55
lakh hectares during the period 1990-94 (Table 3.2.8). The decreasing area of fodder during this
period was due to promotion of multi cut varieties and the overtime decreasing livestock
population in the state is responsible for this. Amritsar and Sangrur are the leading districts in
terms of area under berseem cultivation in the state as their share was about 15 and 13 per cent of
the total area under berseem cultivation respectively in the period 2005-09. During the period,
1990-91 to 2008-09 (Period III), all the districts showed the decrease in area, except Hoshiarpur
district. During this period, Bathinda district showed the highest significant decrease in area (-
6.97 per cent per annum) and also showed the highest inter year level of variation in area during
this period (Table 3.2.9). During 1990-91 to 1999-00 (Period I), Hoshiarpur district showed the
88
highest significant increase in area (3.89 per cent per annum), for all other districts the area was
either decreasing or increasing non-significantly.
To conclude, berseem is the most important fodder crop cultivated during the rabi season
in Madhya Pradesh as well as Punjab. The area of Berseem was mainly concentrated in
Shajapur, Hoshangabad, Sehore, Ujjain, Ratlam, Bhopal, Shivpuri, Indore, Bhind, Mandsaur,
Dhar Morena, Narsinghpur, Betul and Jabalpur districts of Madhya Pradesh. The area of
Berseem is increased by 45.76 per cent in the year 2005-09 (20305 hectares) as compared to the
year 1990-94 (13930 hectares). As regards to the growth of berseem is concerned in different
district of Madhya Pradesh it is found that the area of berseem is increased with an annual
growth rate of 2.82 per cent /year during the last 20 years. The growth of area of berseem was
found to be more in period II (2.24%/year) as compared to period I (-5.54%/year) in Madhya
Pradesh. In Punjab, the area under berseem was found to decrease continuously to average of
about 1.95 lakh hectares during the period 2005-09 as compared to the average of about 2.55
lakh hectares during the period 1990-94. Amritsar and Sangrur are the leading districts in terms
of area under berseem cultivation in the state as their share was about 15 and 13 per cent of the
total area under berseem cultivation respectively in the period 2005-09. During the period, 1990-
91 to 2008-09 (Period III), all the districts showed the decrease in area, except Hoshiarpur
district.
Table 3.2.6: District wise average area of Berseem (Rabi Season) in different periods in Madhya Pradesh
(Hectare)
District 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005-09
Jabalpur(+Katni) 335
(2.4)
471
(2.39)
477
(2.39)
358
(1.76)
Balaghat 79
(0.57)
88
(0.45)
54
(0.27)
59
(0.29)
Chhindwara 14
(0.1)
21
(0.11)
21
(0.11)
6
(0.03)
Seoni 20
(0.14)
61
(0.31)
45
(0.23)
55
(0.27)
Mandla(+Dindori) 7
(0.05) 0
1
(0.01) 0
Narsinghpur 347
(2.49)
493
(2.5)
570
(2.86)
502
(2.47)
89
Sagar 54
(0.39)
62
(0.31)
81
(0.41)
77
(0.38)
Damoh 10
(0.07)
16
(0.08)
15
(0.08)
9
(0.04)
Panna 50
(0.36)
51
(0.26)
20
(0.1) 0
Tikamgarh 743
(5.33)
879
(4.46)
1167
(5.86)
1133
(5.58)
Chhattarpur 58
(0.42)
79
(0.4)
211
(1.06)
236
(1.16)
Rewa 70
(0.5)
84
(0.43)
80
(0.4)
74
(0.36)
Sidhi 6
(0.04)
9
(0.05)
2
(0.01) 0
Satna 55
(0.39)
52
(0.26)
43
(0.22)
245
(1.21)
Shahdol(+Anuppur+Umaria) 2
(0.01)
8
(0.04)
11
(0.06)
1
(0)
Indore 1032
(7.41)
1544
(7.83)
1973
(9.9)
1175
(5.79)
Dhar 426
(3.06)
355
(1.8)
286
(1.44)
615
(3.03)
Jhabua 18
(0.13)
15
(0.08)
11
(0.06)
13
(0.06)
Khargone(+Badwani) 139
(1.00)
54
(0.27)
47
(0.24)
18
(0.09)
Khandwa(+Burhanpur) 9
(0.06)
4
(0.02)
5
(0.03)
1
(0)
Ujjain 1219
(8.75)
2061
(10.45)
1757
(8.82)
1613
(7.94)
Mandsaur(+Neemuch) 916
(6.58)
1404
(7.12)
865
(4.34)
817
(4.02)
Ratlam 944
(6.78)
1682
(8.53)
765
(3.84)
1277
(6.29)
Dewas 12
(0.09)
232
(1.18)
175
(0.88)
317
(1.56)
Shajapur 1150
(8.26)
2102
(10.66)
1699
(8.53)
2123
(10.46)
Morena(+Sheopur) 45 61 699 595
90
(0.32) (0.31) (3.51) (2.93)
Bhind 622
(4.47)
955
(4.84)
1129
(5.67)
905
(4.46)
Gwalior 658
(4.72)
131
(0.66) 0 0
Shivpuri 1615
(11.59
832
(4.22)
1261
(6.33)
1062
(5.23)
Guna(+Ashoknager) 48
(0.34)
51
(0.26)
18
(0.09)
29
(0.14)
Datia 296
(2.12)
370
(1.88)
758
(3.8)
771
(3.8)
Bhopal 712
(5.11)
1224
(6.21)
1272
(6.38)
1249
(6.15)
Sehore 1049
(7.53)
1568
(7.95)
1520
(7.63)
1991
(9.81)
Raisen 167
(1.2)
228
(1.16)
228
(1.14)
278
(1.37)
Vidisha 65
(0.47)
111
(0.56)
152
(0.76)
253
(1.25)
Betul 73
(0.52)
108
(0.55)
91
(0.46)
378
(1.86)
Rajgarh 1
(0.01)
1
(0.01)
1
(0.01)
16
(0.08)
Hoshangabad(+Harda) 866
(6.22)
2252
(11.42)
2418
(12.13)
2060
(10.15)
Madhya Pradesh 13930
(100.00)
19721
(100.00)
19929
(100.00)
20305
(100.00)
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
91
Table 3.2.7: District wise average annual compound growth rate of area and their
coefficient of variance (CVs) of Berseem (Rabi Season) in Madhya Pradesh
(Percent)
Districts 1990-1991 to 1999-
00 (Period I) 2000-01 to 2008-09
(Period II) 1990-1991 to 2008-09
(Period III)
Jabalpur(+Katni) -6.41
(212.80)
-7.55
(133.71)
1.52
(153.29)
Balaghat -4.11
(28.25)
-4.72
(10.43)
-2.63
(45.35)
Chhindwara -9.63
(13.75)
-17.46
(11.57)
0.45
(1.82)
Seoni -24.41
(81.95)
4.82
(9.29)
6.41
(67.35)
Mandla(+Dindori) 44.26
(12.05)
-12.50
(0.29)
-24.55
(12.82)
Narsinghpur -6.53
(226.35)
0.01
(0.14)
3.54
(402.12)
Sagar -2.49
(11.90)
7.57
(24.14)
3.84
(61.65)
Damoh -5.04
(5.45)
-17.93
(9.43)
-0.19
(0.59)
Panna 7.07
(29.40)
-60.78
(35.43)
-12.35
(105.65)
Tikamgarh -5.25
(351.45)
0.54
(25.14)
4.06
(930.00)
Chhattarpur -10.70
(60.20)
8.44
(73.71)
12.02
(375.06)
Rewa -3.41
(21.60)
-4.88
(15.29)
0.51
(9.47)
Sidhi -0.26
(0.15)
-46.88
(2.14)
-11.71
(13.06)
Satna -4.56
(22.10)
41.89
(169.00)
9.26
(169.18)
Shahdol
(+Anuppur+Umaria)
-12.12
(5.00)
-38.43
(11.86)
2.48
(3.65)
Indore -2.33
(211.10)
-4.73
(330.43)
4.04
(1321.59)
Dhar 3.30
(106.50)
29.01
(441.00)
1.04
(96.71)
Jhabua 9.41
(12.65)
0.60
(0.29)
-4.74
(16.47)
Khargone(+Badwani) 11.62
(92.15)
-27.03
(41.86)
(-10.90
(189.59)
Khandwa(+Burhanpur) 4.94 -22.32 -6.23
92
Note: Figures in the parentheses are coefficient of variation
(2.65) (3.57) (8.18)
Ujjain -8.72
(1180.60)
-2.67
(183.29)
1.93
(773.47)
Mandsaur(+Neemuch) -8.34
(797.95)
-7.09
(241.43)
-1.07
(266.12)
Ratlam -2.27
(245.45)
19.36
(705.43)
-1.43
(393.00)
Dewas -41.09
(412.90)
12.35
(106.57)
12.47
(480.12)
Shajapur -13.17
(1767.35)
11.59
(844.00)
4.36
(1785.65)
Morena(+Sheopur) -21.83
(95.65)
-1.16
(31.00)
17.82
(1311.82)
Bhind -9.75
(634.10)
-4.01
(170.86)
4.03
(872.82)
Gwalior 29.22
(951.30)
-24.63
(1372.00)
Shivpuri 11.27
(1137.80)
-2.89
(139.43)
-2.63
(767.18)
Guna(+Ashok nager) 1.43
(5.85)
-2.89
(2.43)
-6.99
(63.53)
Datia -3.73
(102.45)
-4.93
(150.29)
7.20
(880.24)
Bhopal -10.68
(853.35)
2.39
(120.86)
4.45
(1163.76)
Sehore -7.52
(811.55)
10.05
(665.57)
4.21
(1464.53)
Raisen -7.26
(118.40)
2.73
(26.43)
3.32
(172.24)
Vidisha -11.62
(84.45)
15.34
(110.86)
9.44
(286.00)
Betul -8.99
(67.15)
29.43
(203.29)
9.80
(292.47)
Rajgarh -4.85
(0.40)
62.84
(13.29)
21.90
(14.53)
Hoshangabad(+Harda) -11.86
(1525.30)
-2.39
(221.43)
5.27
(2363.82)
Madhya Pradesh -5.54
(7598.75) 2.24
(1792.86) 2.82
(12199.82)
93
Table 3.2.8: District-wise average area of berseem fodder crop (Rabi season), Punjab,
1990-91 to 2008-09 (Five years average)
(Hectare)
District 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005-09
Gurdaspur 15208
(7.16)
17717
(9.01)
16204
(8.58)
16779
(9.86)
Amritsar 27487
(12.94)
28698
(14.60)
30015
(15.89)
24746
(14.54)
Kapurthala 8123
(3.82)
7977
(4.06)
7875
(4.17)
7149
(4.20)
Jalandhar 17701
(8.33)
16050
(8.17)
15203
(8.05)
13821
(8.12)
Hoshiarpur 11557
(5.44)
14089
(7.17)
13610
(7.21)
12315
(7.24)
Ropar 4336
(2.04)
4636
(2.36)
5528
(2.93)
3784
(2.22)
Ludhiana 20545
(9.67)
19622
(9.98)
19797
(10.48)
18268
(10.73)
Ferozpur 24531
(11.55)
17651
(8.98)
13310
(7.05)
12574
(7.39)
Faridkot 19994
(9.41)
18554
(9.44)
13740
(7.27)
13174
(7.74)
Bathinda 16337
(7.69)
9528
(4.85)
7975
(4.22)
7162
(4.21)
Sangrur 25153
(11.84)
23789
(12.10)
23817
(12.61)
22170
(13.03)
Patiala 21424
(10.09)
18221
(9.27)
21812
(11.55)
18266
(10.73)
Punjab 212396
(100.0)
196532
(100.0)
188886
(100.0)
170208
(100.0)
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
94
Table 3.2.9 Average annual compound growth rates of area and their coefficient of
variation (CVs*) of Berseem fodder crop (Rabi season), Punjab, 1990-91 to 2008-09
(Percent)
District
1990-91 to 1999-00
(Period- I)
2000-01 to 2008-09
(Period -II)
1990-91 to 2008-09
(Period -III)
Gurdaspur -0.69
(7.22)
-0.91
(11.48)
-1.60*
(11.27)
Amritsar 1.82
(24.97)
-4.58**
(13.52)
-0.37
(19.81)
Kapurthala -1.28
(7.83)
-2.25**
(6.08)
-1.03**
(7.76)
Jalandhar -2.07
(12.20)
-3.62
(13.61)
-2.07
(12.20)
Hoshiarpur 3.89**
(10.43)
-2.21*
(7.97)
0.45
(9.39)
Ropar -1.02
(19.64)
-7.24
(28.10)
-0.74
(24.90)
Ludhiana 0.19
(5.28)
-1.73**
(5.25)
-0.72*
(5.94)
Ferozpur -3.89
(23.00)
-1.34
(6.45)
-4.92**
(33.09)
Faridkot 1.31
(44.68)
16.33
(70.52)
-3.54*
(29.16)
Bathinda -8.71
(29.62)
-5.94
(37.35)
-6.97**
(44.20)
Sangrur -1.72**
(4.90)
-1.45
(6.16)
-0.97**
(6.45)
Patiala -2.59
(9.17)
-3.92**
(14.51)
-0.89
(1.59)
Punjab -1.90
(8.27)
-2.90**
(8.72)
-2.0
(11.54)
Note: Figures in the parentheses are coefficient of variation
**significant at I percent level and * significant at 5 per cent level
95
3.2.5 Summer season:
Jowar is the most important green fodder crop in Madhya Pradesh during summer season.
The jowar cultivation as a fodder is concentrated in Indore, Khargone, Dhar, Mandsaur, Vidisha,
Ujjain, Shajapur, Morena, Gwalior, Sehore, Rajgarh, Ratlam, Dewas, Datia, Shivputi,
Hoshangabad, Jhabua and Jabalpur districts of Madhya Pradesh. The area of Jowar was found to
be decreased to 37785 hectares (2006-09) from 43338 hectares (1990-94) in Madhya Pradesh
(Table 3.2.10). As regards to the growth of area of Jowar fodder in M.P. is concerned, it is found
that the area of Jowar is decreased with a rate of -1.10 per cent per year during the last 20 years.
The growth of area of Jowar was found to be more in period I (3.50%/year) as compared to
period II (-1.55%/year). The growth of area of jowar was found to be negative in all the district
of Madhya Pradesh in period III except Jabalpur, Chhindwara, Khargone, Ratlam, Shajapur,
Morena, Bhind, Gwalior, Shivpuri, Bhopal, Sehore, Raisen Vidisha, Betul, Rajgarh and
Hoshangabad districts. The growth of Jowar was found to be positive in most of the district of
Madhya Pradesh in period I except Jabalpur Chhindwara, Damoh, Rewa, Sidhi, Indore, Dhar,
Jhabua, Khargone, Ujjain, Mandsaur, Dewas, Bhind, Morena, Gwalior, Shivpuri, Guna, Datia,
and Hoshangabad districts. The area of Jowar was found to be negative in all the districts of
Madhya Pradesh except in Jabalpur, Chhindwara, Chhattarpur, Khargone, Ratlam, Morena,
Bhind, Shajapur, Gwalior, Datia, Bhopal, Sehore, Raisen, Betul, Rajgarh and Hoshangabad
districts in period of the study.
Maize fodder is the most important green fodder available to the livestock in Punjab
during summer season along with berseem which is available up to the month of May. Although,
the area under the crop was found to decrease overtime from average of about 21 thousand
hectares during 1990-94 to about 17 thousand hectares during 2000-04, but again has shown an
increase during recent years (2005-09) when the area has reached to the average of about 21
thousand hectares (Table 3.2.12). Faridkot and Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of area
under its cultivation in the state as their share was about 26 and 22 per cent of the total area
under maize fodder cultivation respectively in the period 2005-09. During the period, 1990-91 to
2008-09 (Period III), Hoshiarpur district showed the highest significant increase in area (21.3 per
cent per annum), while Ferozepur district showed the highest significant decrease in area (-34.78
per cent per annum) during this period (Table 3.2.13).
96
To sum up, jowar is the most important green fodder crop in Madhya Pradesh during
summer season. The jowar cultivation as a fodder is concentrated in Indore, Khargone and Dhar
districts of Madhya Pradesh. The area of Jowar was found to be decreased to 37785 hectares
(2006-09) from 43338 hectares (1990-94) in Madhya Pradesh with a rate of -1.10 per cent per
year during the last 20 years. The growth of area of Jowar was found to be more in period I
(3.50%/year) as compared to period II (-1.55%/year). Maize fodder is the most important green
fodder available to the livestock in Punjab during summer season. Although, the area under the
crop was found to decrease overtime from average of about 21 thousand hectares during 1990-94
to about 17 thousand hectares during 2000-04, but again has shown an increase during recent
years (2005-09) when the area has reached to the average of about 21 thousand hectares.
Faridkot and Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of area under its cultivation in the state as
their share was about 26 and 22 per cent of the total area under maize fodder cultivation
respectively in the period 2005-09. During the period, 1990-91 to 2008-09 (Period III),
Hoshiarpur district showed the highest significant increase in area (21.3 per cent per annum),
while Ferozepur district showed the highest significant decrease in area (-34.78 per cent per
annum) during this period.
Table 3.2.10: District wise average area of Jowar Chari (Summer Season) in different periods in Madhya Pradesh
(Hectare)
Districts 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2006-09
Jabalpur (+Katni ) 68
(0.16)
38
(0.1)
38
(0.1)
132
(0.35)
Chhindwara 1
(0)
5
(0.01) 0
10
(0.03)
Narsinghpur 215
(0.5)
527
(1.41) - -
Sagar - 44
(0.12) - -
Damoh 1
(0) 0 - -
Rewa 5
(0.01)
2
(0.01) - -
Sidhi 1
(0) - - -
97
Satna 9
(0.02) - - -
Indore 4195
(9.68)
3419
(9.17)
3904
(9.85)
4358
(11.53)
Dhar 6698
(15.46)
7218
(19.35)
4773
(12.05)
3605
(9.54)
Jhabua 68
(0.16)
41
(0.11)
117
(0.3)
173
(0.46)
Khargone(+ Badwani) 6132
(14.15)
3540
(9.49)
4324
(10.91)
4371
(11.57)
Khandwa(+
Burhanpur)
28
(0.06)
65
(0.17)
4
(0.01)
24
(0.06)
Ujjain 3504
(8.09)
3138
(8.41)
3235
(8.17)
2250
(5.95)
Mandsaur(+
Neemuch)
3577
(8.25)
3381
(9.07)
3577
(9.03)
2866
(7.59)
Ratlam 468
(1.08)
789
(2.12)
1316
(3.32)
1172
(3.1)
Dewas 1870
(4.31)
1751
(4.7)
1999
(5.05)
1330
(3.52)
Shajapur 2179
(5.03)
2488
(6.67)
3193
(8.06)
2573
(6.81)
Morena ( + Sheopur) - - 1906
(4.81)
2397
(6.34)
Bhind 1092
(2.52)
747
(2.00)
933
(2.35)
1577
(4.17)
Gwalior 1313
(3.03)
179
(0.48)
1817
(4.59)
2152
(5.7)
Shivpuri 666
(1.54)
537
(1.44)
342
(0.86)
517
(1.37)
Guna( + Ashok nagar) 909
(2.1)
398
(1.07)
214
(0.54)
169
(0.45)
Datia 455
(1.05)
475
(1.27)
603
(1.52)
606
(1.6)
Bhopal 596
(1.38)
751
(2.01)
1143
(2.89)
1016
(2.69)
Sehore 1132
(2.61)
1696
(4.55)
1273
(3.21)
1659
(4.39)
Raisen 10 28 27 6
98
(0.02) (0.08) (0.07) (0.02)
Vidisha 4904
(11.32)
3076
(8.25)
2373
(5.99)
2567
(6.79)
Betul 1
(0)
13
(0.03)
4
(0.01)
5
(0.01)
Rajgarh 1049
(2.42)
1209
(3.24)
2491
(6.29)
1834
(4.85)
Hoshangabad ( +
Harda)
58
(0.13)
2
(0.01)
13
(0.03)
421
(1.11)
Madhya Pradesh 43338
(100.00)
37294.4
(100.00)
39618
(100.00)
37785
(100.00)
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
99
Table 3.2.11: District-wise average annual compound growth rate of area and their coefficient of variance (CVs) of Jowar (Summer season) in different periods in Madhya Pradesh
(Percent)
District 1990-1991 to 1999-
00 (Period I)
2000-01 to 2008-09 (Period II)
1990-1991 to 2008-09
(Period (III)
Jabalpur(+Katni)
5.1
(22.1)
39.44
(101.8)
3.8
(52.8)
Chhindwara
0.9
(0.2)
75.00
(8.57)
6.1
(3.9)
Narsinghpur
-12.6
(385.3) -
-10.3
(537.8)
Sagar
-30.3
(54.5) -
-4.2
(12.8)
Damoh
42.4
(1.8) -
-29.2
(2.1)
Chhattarpur
-
0.00
20.8
(1.5)
Rewa
23.8
(7.3) -
-22.7
(11.9)
Sidhi
32.7
(1.4) -
-25.8
(1.8)
Satna
32.0
(11.4) -
-25.6
(15.5)
Indore
4.9
(1532.1)
-2.13
(343.57)
-0.6
(576.5)
Dhar
1.7
(975.3)
-5.91
(1050.14)
-4.4
(6191.9)
Jhabua
7.2
(32.5)
0.13
(0.71)
6.8
(142.2)
Khargone(+Badwani)
8.3
(3309.4)
2.85
(494.86)
-2.5
(2769.5)
Khandwa(+Burhanpur)
-12.8
(49.1)
32.14
(12.86)
-5.4
(40.8)
Ujjain
2.0
(561.5)
-5.40
(638.14)
-1.8
(1348.4)
Mandsaur(+Neemuch) 3.0 0.47 -0.9
100
(868.9) (63.43) (702.4)
Ratlam
-7.7
(397.0)
-3.23
(164.57)
7.0
(1496.6)
Dewas
1.2
(172.3)
-5.05
(365.43)
-0.6
(258.1)
Shajapur
-2.7
(520.6)
-8.15
(983.00)
2.1
(1306.2)
Morena(+Sheopur)
3.5
(551.8)
7.47
(611.71)
0.3
(153.6)
Bhind
9.3
(704.2)
9.97
(445.57)
0.7
(176.2)
Gwalior
37.4
(2298.8)
8.59
(657.29)
4.5
(1320.5)
Shivpuri
3.2
(159.9)
-1.00
(15.71)
-4.3
(532.9)
Guna(+Ashok nager)
9.1
(491.5)
-7.31
(58.71)
-11.1
(1245.6)
Datia
2.0
(77.9)
-6.02
(145.57)
1.4
(179.9)
Bhopal
-5.7
(319.4)
4.70
(207.86)
5.7
(1164.9)
Sehore
-4.1
(476.2)
4.18
(231.43)
0.9
(311.6)
Raisen
-16.3
(26.0)
-3.06
(2.57)
3.7
(17.7)
Vidisha
7.4
(2430.1)
1.11
(108.00)
-5.7
(4600.6)
Betul
-27.2
(15.7)
-10.34
(1.71)
1.9
(2.6)
Rajgarh
-3.0
(275.3)
-19.74
(1818.57)
4.7
(1831.4)
Hoshangabad(+Harda)
16.7
(41.0)
41.17
(213.14)
15.8
(269.0)
Madhya Pradesh
3.5
(11732.1)
-1.55
(2430.43)
-1.1
(10417.9)
Note: Figures in the parentheses are coefficient of variation
101
Table 3.2.12: District-wise average area of maize fodder crop (summer season), Punjab,
1990-91 to 2008-09 (Five year average)
(Hectare)
Districts 1990-94 1995-99 2000-04 2005-09
Gurdaspur - - - -
Amritsar 4268
(20.38)
4079
(18.83)
5996
(31.84)
4612
(21.70)
Kapurthala 441
(2.11)
648
(3.00)
184
(0.98)
-
Jalandhar 2267
(10.83)
2881
(13.30)
2303
(12.23)
2332
(10.97)
Hoshiarpur 137
(0.65)
203
(0.93)
529
(2.81)
383
(1.80)
Ropar 96
(0.45)
53
(0.24)
504
(2.68)
627
(2.95)
Ludhiana 3412
(16.29)
4707
(21.73)
4418
(23.46)
4246
(19.98)
Ferozpur 1902
(9.08)
1642
(7.58)
278
(1.48)
6
(0.03)
Faridkot 3718
(17.76)
4011
(18.51)
1610
(8.55)
5426
(25.53)
Bathinda 1461
(6.98)
1182
(5.46)
811
(4.31)
447
(2.10)
Sangrur 2608
(12.46)
1856
(8.57)
1488
(7.90)
1822
(8.57)
Patiala 629
(3.0)
402
(1.86)
713
(3.79)
1349
(6.35)
Punjab 20940
(100.0)
19241
(100.0)
16674
(100.0)
21228
(100.0)
Note: Figures in parentheses show the percent to total in each column.
102
Table 3.2.13 Average annual compound growth rates of area and their coefficient of
variation (CVs*) of maize fodder crop (summer season), Punjab, 1990-91 to 2008-09
(Percent)
Districts
1990-91 to 1999-00
(Period- I)
2000-01 to 2008-09
(Period -II)
1990-91 to 2008-09
(Period -III)
Gurdaspur - - -
Amritsar -17.56
(62.99)
-10.18*
(34.26)
7.22
(49.28)
Kapurthala -1.59
(43.22)
- -1.59
(43.22)
Jalandhar 20.40
(70.34)
6.79**
(15.60)
20.40
(70.34)
Hoshiarpur -29.55
(123.76)
1.11
(19.64)
21.30*
(70.99)
Ropar 20.73
(168.34)
36.09
(156.07)
24.57
(173.88)
Ludhiana 6.23
(48.43)
0.75
(11.82)
2.91
(33.05)
Ferozpur 41.12
(83.40)
-32.28
(58.80)
-34.78**
(130.60)
Faridkot -5.95
(27.28)
-1.63
(6.90)
-0.22
(58.54)
Bathinda 1.33
(59.97)
-14.35
(63.40)
-8.71
(78.51)
Sangrur -8.00
(58.41)
1.57
(26.53)
-2.65
(55.17)
Patiala -19.94
(113.15)
55.16
(64.64)
12.40
(85.51)
Punjab -1.14
(19.32)
4.19
(37.84)
-0.80
(30.15)
Note: Figures in the parentheses are coefficient of variation
**significant at I percent level and * significant at 5 per cent level
103
Chapter 4
Socio Economic Characteristics of Sample Households
The socio-economic characteristics are the important parameters, which affect the
production and marketing decisions of the households. This chapter deals with the important
socio economic indicators of the sample households like family size, age of the head of the
household, literacy level, land utilization, asset composition, cropping pattern, status of fodder
and livestock and feeding practices adopted by sample households.
4.1 Demographic characteristics
Livestock rearing and dairy activities are the major source of income for small and
medium category farmers and women of farming community. For economizing the livestock
production, availability of timely work force and adequate availability of balance fodder is a pre-
requisite. In this context, the study of socio economic characteristics such as education, family
size and land holding size of the sample households is most important. This section highlights
the comparative socio-economic status of fodder growers in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh,
Karnataka and Punjab states of India which is presented in Table 4.1
4.1.1 Family size and age of head:
The Table 4.1 shows that majority of households in each selected state had family
members between 4 and 8. Only about 11 percent of the households in Gujarat had family size
above 8 whereas the proportion was about 40 percent in case of Madhya Pradesh. Overall, most
of the sample households had young head with age above 30 years except in Karnataka where
about 46 percent of sample households had head of age up to 30 years. In Madhya Pradesh, the
52 per cent of fodder growers were belonging to higher age group (above 50 years) while 39 per
cent and 9 per cent of fodder growers respectively fell in below to mid (30- 50 years) and low
(below 30 years) age groups.
4.1.2 Education status:
The data shows that heads of about 82 percent sample households were literate in Gujarat
and karnataka. Illiteracy was found to be significantly higher among the Madhya Pradesh
farmers farmers i.e. 52 percent.
104
4.1.3 Annual net income:
The data on annual net income per household for reference year 2008-09 was collected.
The sources of income comprised of agriculture, livestock and dairy, casual labour, self
employment and salary, profession and others. Majority of farmers of the selected states have net
annual income below Rs.1 lakh, except in Punjab, showing that their financial capacity to invest
more on agriculture and livestock/dairying is very low and nearly nil. Hence, they are facing lot
of problems in purchasing fodder from the open market for feeding their milch animals.
Subsequently they are under feeding their animals as they cannot afford to purchase required
quantity of fodder. In Punjab, most of the sample households (about 55%) were having annual
income of more than Rs. five lakh.
Table 4.1: General characteristics of sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09
(Percent)
Particulars Gujarat Madhya Pradesh
Karnataka Punjab
Average Family Size
Less than 4 7.3 3 13.43 6
4 to 8 81.3 57 64.68 75
Above 8 11.3 40 21.89 19
Education of head of the family Illiterate 17.6 52 18.41 19
Primary 24.9 21 14.93 37
Secondary 26.2 16 38.31 35
Higher Secondary 16.2 6 16.92 6
Degree/Diploma 15.2 5 11.40 3
Age of Head (Years)
Up to 30 6.7 9 45.77 5
31-50 42.0 39 34.83 76
Above 50 51.3 52 19.40 19
Annual Family Income (Rs)
Less than 50,000 15.3 5 39.30 1
50,000-1,00,000 17.3 47 30.35 2
1,00,000-2,50,000 39.3 30 22.39 18
2,50,000-5,00,000 18.0 14 5.47 24
More than 5,00,000 10.0 4 2.49 55
To conclude, majority of households in each selected state had family members between
4 and 8. Most of the sample households had young head with age above 30 years except in
Karnataka where about 46 percent of sample households had head of age up to 30 years. Heads
105
of about 82 percent sample households were literate in Gujarat and karnataka. Illiteracy was
found to be significantly higher among the Madhya Pradesh farmers i.e. 52 percent. Majority of
farmers of the selected states have net annual income below Rs.1 lakh, except in Punjab, where
most of the sample households (about 55%) were having annual income of more than Rs. five
lakh.
4.2 Land resources:
The data presented in Table 4.2 shows that average land holding was the highest for
Madhya Pradesh farmers (6.19 hect.) and the least for Karnataka farmers (3.14 hect.). In Gujarat,
the overall average land holding per sample household was 3.5 hect. There was not a single case
of leasing out of land among the sample households. The lease contract in the selected districts
is generally based on either share of produce or fixed rental. It is interesting to note that overall
82.23 percent of operational land was irrigated. In Madhya Pradesh, the average fodder grower
was found to be had 6.66 ha of land in his ownership, out of which he cultivated his 5.47 ha and
0.47 ha was found to be remained fallow. The cent per cent fodder growers had irrigation
facilities at their farms. The maximum numbers of fodder growers reported that there was not
found any contract for leased in and leased out land in the area under study. In Karnataka, the
average fodder grower was found to possess 2.93 ha of land in his ownership and less than 50
per cent fodder growers had irrigation facilities at their farms. In Punjab, the average operational
holding size of sample households was 5.88 hectares. The level of leased in land (1.51 hectares)
was much higher than the leased out land (0.11 hectares) among the sample respondents. Almost
all the area had the irrigation facilities highlighting well developed irrigation infrastructure in the
study region.
To conclude, average land holding was the highest for Madhya Pradesh farmers (6.19
hect.) and the least for Karnataka farmers (3.14 ha). In Gujarat, 82.23 percent of operational land
was irrigated. In Madhya Pradesh and Punjab, almost all fodder growers had irrigation facilities
at their farms.
106
Table 4.2: Average size of land holdings, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09
(Hectare)
Particulars Gujarat Madhya Pradesh
Karnataka Punjab
Owned land
Irrigated 2.72 5.47 1.44 4.46
Un-irrigated 0.56 1.18 1.48 0.02
Total 3.28 6.66 2.93 4.48
Leased-in
Irrigated 0.15 - 0.63 1.51
Un-irrigated 0.01 - 1.15 -
Total 0.16 - 1.79 1.51
Leased-out
Irrigated - - 0.72 0.11
Un-irrigated - - 1.07 -
Total - - 1.78 0.11
Fallow
Irrigated 0.01 - 0.44 -
Un-irrigated 0.05 0.47 0.39 -
Total 0.06 0.47 0.84 -
Total operational Land
Irrigated 2.87 5.47 1.53 5.86
Un-irrigated 0.62 0.71 1.62 0.02
Total 3.50 6.19 3.14 5.88
4.3 Farm implements and machinery:
Per household data relating to ownership of farm implements, machineries and farm
buildings have been presented in Table 4.3. Madhya Pradesh farmers own the highest i.e. Rs.3.97
lakh worth of farm building and machinery where as it was the least for Punjab farmers (3.08
lakh). Among the farm machinery, tractor holds a place of pride among the farmers. Due to
electrification in majority villages, there were more electric motors as compared to diesel
engines. In Madhya Pradesh, It is found to noticed that only 20 percent of the fodder growers of
the study area had their owned tractors at their farms, while 15 per cent ( 23), 29 per cent (44),
35 per cent ( 52), 9 per cent (13), 20 per cent ( 30) and 70 per cent (105) had trolley, diesel
engine, bullock carts, cultivators and spray pump respectively. The cent percent fodder growers
107
had small tolls and electric pumps at their farms. It is interesting to note that none of fodder
grower had chaff cutter for fodder cutting in their farm.
Table 4.3: Farm power machinery and buildings, sample households, selected states, India,
2008-09
Type of machine Gujarat Madhya Pradesh
Karnataka Punjab
No. PV No. PV No. PV No. PV
1. Tractor 0.32 107766.67 0.20 293000 NR NR 0.79 132300
2. Trolley 0.26 16983.33 0.16 43000 NR NR 0.64 19400
3. Harrow 0.12 2580.00 0 0.00 NR NR 0.63 3293.
4. Cultivator 0.29 3403.33 0.09 7000 NR NR 0.65 24533
5. Electric motor 0.85 22853.33 1.00 12000 NR NR 1.27 49013
6. Diesel Engine 0.16 3473.33 0.29 30000 NR NR 0.16 8900
7. Planker 0.44 412.87 0 0.00 NR NR 0.64 12360
8. Spray pump 0.83 1490.87 0.70 1000 NR NR 1.05 355
9. Generator 0.01 44.67 0 0.00 NR NR 0.29 9053
10. Cart 0.39 9213.33 0.35 9000 NR NR 0.49 1297
11. Drip System 0.20 22986.67 0 0.00 NR NR 11.81 14200
12. Small tools 19.65 2967.50 1.00 2000 NR NR 0.79 30020
13. Shed for fodder 0.96 66303.33 0 0.00 NR NR 0.85 4163
14. Chaff cutter 0.35 54526.67 0 0.00 NR NR 0.03 53
15. Farm house 0.35 54526.67 - - NR NR - -
16. Others 0.19 242.67 0 0.00 NR NR - -
Total PV - 315578.50 - 397000 NR NR - 308940
Note: PV is the Present value (Rs.), NR is Not reported
108
This denotes that fodder grower of the study area have not done milk production on
commercial line. They only grow fodder for fulfilling the daily requirement of their few cattle
and buffaloes. In Punjab, the average sample household was found to possess assets worth about
3 lakh. The average sample a household was found to possess more than one electric motors
(1.27) and own 0.79 sheds for fodder. In Punjab, the average sample household was found to
possess assets worth about 3 lakh. The average sample household was found to possess more
than one electric motors (1.27). The average sample household was found to own 0.79 sheds for
fodder.
To sum up, Madhya Pradesh farmers own the highest i.e. Rs.3.97 lakh worth of farm
building and machinery where as it was the least for Punjab farmers (3.08 lakh).
4.4 Livestock resources:
The comparative status of livestock population and their present value in the selected
states of India i.e. Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab was studied and presented in
Table 4.4. Gujarat has rich livestock resource of indigenous breeds. The famous cattle breeds of
Gujarat are Kankrej in north and Gir in Saurashtra and among the buffalo breeds, these are
Mehsani in north-central, Jaffarabadi in Saurashtra and Surti in south Gujarat. The data presented
in Table 4.4 shows that nearly 99 percent of the total livestock’s were bovines. The Table 4.4
shows that about 86 percent of the total adult cows in milk were crossbred. This eventually
proves the success of efforts of improving the quality of animals through crossbred animal
programmes. Among the total bovines, we find more female bovines than males; this is for the
obvious reason that draught power has been replaced by tractors and other machineries. Overall,
on an average value of total livestock per sample household was found to be Rs.1, 73,608. The
costliest livestock with the farmers were the adult female crossbred cow in milk (Rs.0.58 lakh)
and adult female buffalo in milk (Rs.0.56 lakh). We find negligible population of goats and
horses among the sample households. In Madhya Pradesh, the total respondents 150 fodder
growers had found to be reared 63 adult female in milk, 49 adult female in dry, 111 adult male,
26 and 37 respectively of male and female young stock of indigenous cattle at their farm. As
regards to buffaloes are concerned , they found to be reared 132 adult female in milk , 63 adult
female in dry , 65 young stock male and 68 young stock female. They also reared 78, 103 and
94 respectively of male, female and young stock of goat. They also found to be reared 5 cross
109
breed cattle and 6 adult male of buffalo at their farm. None of the fodder growers of the area
found to be reared sheep, pig, camel etc. animals at their farm. The present value of indigenous
cows cross breed cows and buffalo were found to be Rs. 0.10 lacs, Rs. 0.20 lacs and Rs. 0.23 lacs
respectively in the area under study. The average value will vary with quality of animals. In case
of female cattle and female buffalo, price will be determined based on certain important
indicators like milk yield, lactation stage and age. For sheep, goat, pig and poultry, price per
animal will be determined based on the meat yield. In Karnataka, among indigenous cattle, for
overall sample farmers the average price per female dry was the highest with Rs. 18,857
followed by female in milk (Rs. 16,576) and female not calved (Rs. 16,500). Similarly for
crossbred cattle the average price for female in milk was the highest (Rs. 21,835) followed by
female dry (Rs. 13,750) and male (Rs. 12,857). The average price of indigenous male cattle was
higher than that of crossbred male cattle. This was because the former is sturdy and suitable for
heavy work as compared to the latter. In Punjab, buffaloes were found to be the most preferred
livestock of the sample households as consumers of the Punjab state prefer buffalo milk due to
its high fat content. The average sample household was found to rear about 6 buffaloes on the
farm (Table 4.4). The crossbred cattle were the next preferred livestock category. The average
sample household was found to rear about 2 cattle on the farm. The indigenous cattle were the
least preferred livestock as the average sample household was found to rear only 0.18 indigenous
cattle on the farm. Overtime, indigenous cattle population has declined in the state and it has
been continuously replaced by crossbred
To conclude, in Gujarat nearly 99 percent of the total livestock’s were bovines and about
86 percent of the total adult cows in milk were crossbred. The value of total livestock per sample
household was found to be Rs.1,73,608. In Madhya Pradesh, the total respondents 150 fodder
growers had found to be reared 63 adult female in milk, 49 adult female in dry, 111 adult male,
26 and 37 respectively of male and female young stock of indigenous cattle at their farm. As
regards to buffaloes are concerned , they found to be reared 132 adult female in milk , 63 adult
female in dry , 65 young stock male and 68 young stock female. The present value of
indigenous cows cross breed cows and buffalo were found to be Rs. 0.10 lacs, Rs. 0.20 lacs and
Rs. 0.23 lacs respectively in the area under study. In Karnataka, among indigenous cattle, for
110
overall sample farmers the average price per female dry was the highest with Rs. 18,857
followed by female in milk (Rs. 16,576) and female not calved (Rs. 16,500). Similarly for
Table 4.4: Livestock population, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09
(Per household)
Particulars Gujarat Madhya Pradesh Karnataka Punjab
No. PV No. PV No. PV No. PV
Indigenous cattle
Adult female in milk 0.37 0.10 0.42 0.10 1.44 0.16 0.01 0.01
Adult female in dry 0.05 0.01 0.32 0.03 1.59 0.18 - -
Adult Male 0.87 0.13 0.74 0.13 1.98 0.13 0.17 0.01
Young stock (male) 0.05 0.01 0.17 0.01 1.50 0.08 - -
Young stock (female) 0.16 0.01 0.25 0.03 1.39 0.07 - -
Crossbred cattle
Adult female in milk 2.31 0.58 0.03 0.20 1.48 0.21 1.20 0.29
Adult female in dry 0.47 0.06 0.00 1.33 0.13 0.21 0.04
Adult Male 0.07 0.01 0.00 2.00 0.12 0.11 0.01
Young stock (male) 0.23 0.01 0.00 1.50 0.11 0.31 0.01
Young stock (female) 1.23 0.05 0.03 0.08 1.42 0.07 0.57 0.02
Buffalo
Adult female in milk 1.92 0.56 0.88 0.23 1.59 0.16 3.21 0.76
Adult female in dry 0.84 0.15 0.42 0.15 1.38 0.12 0.87 0.14
Adult male 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.08 1.64 0.08 0.04 0.01
Young stock (male) 0.32 0.01 0.43 0.02 1.17 0.01 0.83 0.02
Young stock (female) 1.58 0.05 0.45 0.04 1.79 0.03 1.35 0.05
Sheep
Male - 0.00 2.00 0.04 - -
Female - 0.00 1.78 0.04 - -
Young stock - 0.00 1.67 0.01 - -
Goat
Male 0.01 - 0.52 0.02 2.33 0.03 - -
Female 0.03 - 0.69 0.01 2.75 0.02 - -
Young stock - 0.63 0.01 1.00 0.01 - -
Pig
Male - - 0.00 2.00 0.07 - -
Female - - 0.00 1.00 0.02 - -
Young stock - - 0.00 0.08 - -
Camel
Male - - - - - 0.03 - -
Female - - - - - - -
Young stock - - - - - 0.04 - -
Note: PV is the Present value (Rs.in lacs)
111
crossbred cattle the average price for female in milk was the highest (Rs. 21,835) followed by
female dry (Rs. 13,750) and male (Rs. 12,857). In Punjab, the average sample household was
found to rear about 6 buffaloes and about 2 cattle on the farm.
4.5 Cropping pattern:
The comparative status of cropping pattern in the selected states of India i.e. Gujarat,
Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab was studied and presented in Table 4.5. In Gujarat, of
the total cropped area (GCA), sample farmers devoted 21.93 percent area to pure fodder crops
(green fodder) such as lucerne, maize, bajra, sorghum (jowar) and grass. In kharif, of the net
cropped area, 21.91 percent devoted to pure fodder crops. It was 17.83 percent in rabi and 36.34
percent in summer. The maize, bajra, paddy and wheat were important cereal crops whose by-
product / straw / crop residues are used as dry fodder for feeding livestock. Of the GCA, area
devoted to these crops was about 30 to 40 percent. Generally, pure fodder crops in rabi and
summer season are grown under irrigated condition. Hence, due to fluctuating rainfall and
limited irrigation, area under pure fodder crops remained at low. Therefore, green fodder supply
remained short in study areas.
In Madhya Pradesh, the majority fodder growers of the study area adopted Soybean based
cropping pattern at their farm.(Table 4.5) Soybean was found to be main Kharif crop of the area,
in which an average farmer devoted his 92.54 per cent of the net cropped area. Wheat (51.90%)
and Gram (40.59%) were found to be the major crop of Rabi season, reveals that the Soybean-
Wheat and Soybean –Gram are found to be the main cropping pattern of the study area. Maize
(5.46%) was found to be major fodder crop of the Kharif season, while Berseem (5.25%) and
Jowar (5.25%) were found to be major Rabi and summer crop of the study area respectively. In
Karnataka, the overall cropping pattern is dominated by coarse cereals accounting for over one-
third of the gross cropped area. Among crops, area under maize constituted the highest share of
about 21 per cent. The next predominant crop was paddy (18 per cent) followed by sugarcane
(11 per cent). Interestingly, napier grass has accounted for about 4 per cent of the gross cropped
area of overall sample farmers. In Punjab, paddy and wheat were the major kharif and rabi crops
in the study area grown on about 70 and 83 per cent area respectively (Table 4.5). The area under
paddy was found to vary from about 43 to 78 per cent of the net cropped area, which decreased
with the increase in farm size. Maize was the other major kharif crop grown by the sample
112
households as it occupied about 8 per cent of the net cropped area. Sugarcane and vegetables
were the other important crops which occupied about 2 and 4 per cent area respectively. Cotton
was also grown on about one per cent of the net cropped area during the kharif season. Fodder is
grown in the kharif, rabi and summer seasons in the state. During kharif season, sorghum, bajra
and maize are the important fodder crops and the net cropped area under these crops was about 7,
3 and one per cent respectively. Wheat was the major rabi season crop in the study area.
Vegetables and sunflower were the other important crops of the season which occupied about 10
and one per cent area of the net cropped area, respectively. During rabi season, berseem and oat
are the important fodder crops and the net cropped area under these crops was about 8 and one
per cent respectively. Maize was the summer fodder crop grown on about 6 per cent of the net
cropped area. Kinnow, safeda, poplar and fisheries were also taken on about 3 per cent of the net
cropped area.
To sum up, in Gujarat, of the total cropped area (GCA), sample farmers devoted 21.93
percent area to pure fodder crops (green fodder) such as lucerne, maize, bajra, sorghum (jowar)
and grass. In kharif, of the net cropped area, 21.91 percent devoted to pure fodder crops. It was
17.83 percent in rabi and 36.34 percent in summer. In Madhya Pradesh, the majority fodder
growers of the study area adopted Soybean based cropping pattern at their farm. Maize (5.46%)
was found to be major fodder crop of the Kharif season, while Berseem (5.25%) and Jowar
(5.25%) were found to be major Rabi and summer crop of the study area respectively. In
Karnataka, the overall cropping pattern is dominated by coarse cereals accounting for over one-
third of the gross cropped area. Among crops, area under maize constituted the highest share of
about 21 per cent. The next predominant crop was paddy (18 per cent) followed by sugarcane
(11 per cent). Interestingly, Napier grass has accounted for about 4 per cent of the gross cropped
area of overall sample farmers. In Punjab, paddy and wheat were the major kharif and rabi crops
in the study area grown on about 70 and 83 per cent area respectively. Fodder is grown in the
kharif, rabi and summer seasons in the state. During kharif season, sorghum, bajra and maize are
the important fodder crops and the net cropped area under these crops was about 7, 3 and one per
cent respectively. During rabi season, berseem and oat are the important fodder crops and the net
cropped area under these crops was about 8 and one per cent respectively. Maize was the
summer fodder crop grown on about 6 per cent of the net cropped area.
113
Table 4.5: Cropping Pattern of an average fodder grower, sample households, selected
states, India, 2008-09
(Percent to net cropped area)
Season/Crop Gujarat Madhya Pradesh
Karnataka Punjab
A. Kharif Crops
1. Paddy 5.84 - 22.50 70.04
2. Maize 5.42 - 21.87 8.43
3. Cotton 13.18 - 1.21 1.29
4. Sugarcane 0.43 - 18.22 1.72
5. Vegetable 0.20 - 4.35 3.97
6.Pulses - - - 0.28
7. Soybean - 92.54 9.17 -
8. Bajra 2.49 - 0.53 -
9. Jowar 1.25 - - -
10.Any other 13.56 - - 0.31
Fodder
1. Maize 1.01 5.46 5.82 0.76
2. Sorghum 3.20 - - 6.52
3.Bajra 4.75 - - 3.35
4. Guar 0.18 - - -
5. Lucerne 0.56 - - -
6.Jowar - - 7.26 -
7. Others 2.19 - - -
B. Rabi Crops
1. Wheat 19.61 51.95 7.00 82.90
2. Sunflower - - - 1.30
3.Sarson - - - 0.02
4.Sugarcane - - - 1.72
5.Maize - - 30.71 0.60
6. Vegetable 0.79 - 6.47 10.32
7. Gram 1.37 40.59 6.61 -
8. Rapeseed and mustard 4.02 - -
9.Jowar - - 30.38 -
10.Any other 3.45 - - 0.46
Fodder
114
1. Berseem - 5.25 - 8.49
2. Oats - - - 1.30
3. Lucerne 4.75 0.21 - -
4. Maize 0.41 - - -
5. Sorghum 0.12 - - -
6. Cowpea 0.11 - - -
7. Others 0.96 - - -
C. Summer Crops
1. Maize - - - 0.32
2.Vegetables - 40.59 - -
3. Bajra 4.72 - - -
4. Cowpea 0.24 - - -
5.Paddy - - 97.45 -
6. Others 1.18 - - -
Fodder
1.Maize 0.20 - - 5.75
2.Jowar 0.82 5.25 - -
3. Lucerne 0.18 - - -
4. Others 2.50 - - -
Fruits/Perennial crops
1. Kinnow - 2.00 - 1.97
2.Safeda - - - 0.36
3.Fisheries - - - 0.46
4.Napier - - 32.47 -
5.Arecanut - - 29.98 -
Net cropped area (ha) 3.50 6.19 3.14 5.88
Note: For Gujarat, figures are the per cent to gross cropped area
115
4.6 Area, yield and production status of fodder crops:
In this section, the present status of fodder crop (2008-09) vis-à-vis the status that used to
be before 10 years (1998-99) is being examined here. The opinions of sample farmers on
changes in respect of area, production and yield across various seasons kharif, rabi and summer
have been collected. The collected responses have been analyzed in the form of percent of HHs
reporting increase, decrease or remained same. The comparative status of changes in respect of
area, production and yield across various seasons kharif, rabi and summer in the selected states
of India i.e. Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab was presented in Tables 4.6, 4.7
and 4.8.
In Gujarat, as compared to 10 years before i.e.1998-99, majority sample farmers reported
marginal increase in area under bajra, maize, paddy and wheat in year 2008-09. These crops have
better fodder value (dry fodder). However, as compared to base year 1998-99, area under guar
seed and cow-pea declined in 2008-09. During same period, area under lucerne showed
somewhat increase whereas due to crop diversification, area under summer bajra showed
marginal decline. Overall, the production of green fodder as well as of dry fodder increased in
the reference year 2008-09 as compared to base year 1998-99. The increase in fodder production
was a result of many factors such as increase in area under crops, yield improvement, better
agronomic practices, higher use of HYV seeds, efficient use of irrigation etc. The majority
sample farmers reported increase in production of fodder from lucerne, sorghum, maize, bajra,
paddy and wheat crops. However, they reported decline in production of fodder from cowpea
and guar crops. The majority sample households reported improvement in fodder yield for
lucerne, wheat, bajra, maize and sorghum in 2008-09 compared to it in 1998-99. However,
decline in yield was reported for cow-pea crop.
In Madhya Pradesh, the 70 per cent of fodder growers reported that their area under
fodder remained same as compared to last 10 years. They devoted same area of land under
different seasons of fodder as they were devoting 10 year back. More than 48 per cent of fodder
growers reported that the production under fodder increased as compared to last 10 years, while
about 40 percent of fodder growers reported that they harvested same produce as they harvested
10 year before. This was might be due to the lack of extension activities (technical know-how to
cultivation) of fodder crops at their field. There was found the less of coordination between the
116
department of agriculture and animal husbandry in the area under study during the course of
investigation. The majority of fodder growers ( above 80 %) reported that the productivity of
fodder was increased as compared to last 10 years, while only 10 percent of fodder growers
reported that they harvested same yield as they harvested 10 year before. This was might be due
to the introduction of new high yielding varieties of fodder in the study area.
A large percentage of sample farmers (60 per cent) in Karnataka have reported stagnation
of area under Napier and jowar. Majority of the farmers reported increase in trend in the
production of green fodder from Napier during the last 10 years. At the same time, over one-third
of them have reported decrease in the production of Napier, which is mainly due to decrease in
yield. Although Napier is cultivated in a separate plot preferably near the irrigation source,
application of fertilisers and manure is very much limited.
In Punjab, during the last 10 years, bajra was replaced by sorghum, whereas there was
only a marginal increase in area under maize only by a few farmers. Berseem and oat were the
important fodder crops during the Rabi season and more number of farmers increased the area
under berseem crop than oat crop during the last 10 years. A large number of farmers increased
the area under maize fodder during the summer season and the crop was found to become more
popular amongst the sample households during last 10 years. During kharif season, it was found
that during last 10 years, majority of the sample households reported increase in sorghum
production while the production of bajra was reported to be decreased, which is mostly due to
replacement of area under this crop. Most of the farmers revealed that during rabi season
production of fodder remained the same during last 10 years. A large number of farmers reported
increase in the production under maize fodder in the summer season during last 10 years. During
kharif season, it was found that during last 10 years, majority of the sample households reported
increase in bajra productivity followed by the productivity of sorghum and maize fodder. Most
of the farmers revealed that during rabi season, productivity of fodder remained the same during
last 10 years. A large number of farmers reported increase in the productivity under maize fodder
in the summer season during last 10 years.
To conclude, in Gujarat as compared to 10 years before i.e.1998-99, majority sample
farmers reported marginal increase in area under bajra, maize, paddy and wheat in year 2008-09.
However, as compared to base year 1998-99, area under guar seed and cow-pea declined in
117
2008-09. During same period, area under lucerne showed somewhat increase whereas due to
crop diversification, area under summer bajra showed marginal decline. The majority sample
farmers reported increase in production of fodder from lucerne, sorghum, maize, bajra, paddy
and wheat crops. However, they reported decline in production of fodder from cowpea and guar
crops. The majority sample households reported improvement in fodder yield for lucerne, wheat,
bajra, maize and sorghum in 2008-09 compared to it in 1998-99. In Madhya Pradesh, the 70 per
cent of fodder growers reported that their area under fodder was remained same as compared to
last 10 years. The above 48 per cent of fodder growers of different size of farms reported that the
production under fodder was increased as compared to last 10 years, while about 40 percent of
fodder growers reported that they harvested same produce as they harvested 10 year before. The
majority of fodder growers ( above 80 %) reported that the productivity of fodder was increased
as compared to last 10 years. In Karnataka, a large percentage of sample farmers (60 per cent)
have reported stagnation of area under Napier and jowar. Majority of the farmers reported
increase in trend in the production of green fodder from Napier during the last 10 years. At the
same time, over one-third of them have reported decrease in the production of Napier, which is
mainly due to decrease in yield. In Punjab, during the last 10 years, bajra was replaced by
sorghum, whereas there was only a marginal increase in area under maize only by a few farmers.
A large number of farmers increased the area under maize fodder during the summer season and
the crop was found to become more popular amongst the sample households during last 10 years.
118
Table 4.6: Status of area of fodder crops during last 10 years, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09
(Percent farmers reported)
Crops Gujarat Madhya Pradesh Karnataka Punjab
I D S I D S I D S I D S
Kharif crops
Jowar 3.14 2.52 94.34
Maize 56.76 8.11 35.14 8.67 16.00 75.33 3.00 - 3.00
Sorghum 55.36 14.29 30.36 16.00 21.00 45.00
Bajra 46.46 20.20 33.33 1.00 15.00 35.00
Guar 34.69 36.73 28.57
Paddy 59.26 3.70 37.04
Cowpea 55.17 10.34 34.48
Green
grass
65.63 15.63 18.75
Others 35.29 7.84 56.86
Rabi
crops
Berseem 12.00 18.00 70.00 9.00 11.00 45.00
Lucerne 36.13 15.13 48.74 - - 40.00
Wheat 51.04 15.63 33.33
Maize 72.73 - 27.27
Sorghum 56.00 4.00 40.00
Oats 3.00 1.00 11.00
Others 31.25 18.75 50.00
Summer crops
Jowar 24.40 10.67 65.33
Maize 67.57 16.22 16.22 19.00 - 9.00
Bajra 31.48 17.59 50.93
Cowpea 14.29 42.86 42.86
Others - - 100.00
Perennial crop
Napier 29.86 10.42 59.72
Note: I indicates Increased; D indicates decreased and S indicates Remained same
119
Table 4.7: Status of production of fodder crops during last 10 years, sample households,
selected states, India, 2008-09
(Per cent farmers reported)
Crops Gujarat Madhya Pradesh Karnataka Punjab
I D S I D S I D S I D S
Kharif
crops
Jowar 16.67 55.56 27.78
Maize 71.62 9.46 18.92 48.00 9.00 43.00 6.00 - 1.00
Sorghum 60.71 14.29 25.00 28.00 1.00 34.00
Bajra 48.48 20.20 31.31 9.00 15.00 28.00
Guar 36.73 36.73 26.53
Paddy 68.52 5.56 25.93
Cowpea 55.17 13.79 31.03
Green
grass
65.63 15.63 18.75
Others 41.18 11.76 47.06
Rabi
crops
Berseem 49.00 10.33 40.67 9.00 1.00 81.00
Lucerne 38.66 13.45 47.90 - - 40.00
Wheat 55.21 17.71 27.08
Maize 81.82 - 18.18
Sorghum 60.00 4.00 36.00
Oats 5.00 1.00 10.00
Others 37.50 21.88 40.63
Summer
crops
Jowar 54.53 7.00 38.47
Maize 67.57 16.22 16.22 19.00 - 9.00
Bajra 36.11 17.59 46.30
Cowpea 14.29 42.86 42.86
Others - 100.00 100.00
Perennial crop
Napier 51.79 37.50 10.71
Note: Indicates Increased; D indicates decreased and S indicates Remained same
120
Table 4.8: Status of yield of fodder crops during last 10 years, sample households, selected
states, India, 2008-09
(Per cent farmers reported)
Crops Gujarat Madhya Pradesh Karnataka Punjab
I D S I D S I D S I D S Kharif
crops
Jowar 16.67 55.56 27.78
Maize 71.62 9.46 18.92 87.33 2.00 10.67 6.00 - 1.00
Sorghum 60.00 14.55 25.45 29.00 - 34.00
Bajra 48.48 19.19 32.32 10.00 8.00 33.00
Guar 38.78 34.69 26.53
Paddy 70.37 5.56 24.07
Cowpea 55.17 17.24 27.59
Green
grass
65.63 18.75 15.63
Others 41.18 11.76 47.06
Rabi crops
Berseem 86.00 2.67 11.34 33.00 - 35.00
Lucerne 37.82 13.45 48.74 - - 40.00
Wheat 55.21 17.71 27.08
Maize 79.55 - 20.45
Sorghum 56.00 4.00 40.00
Oats 5.00 1.00 9.00
Others 37.50 21.88 40.63
Summer crops
Jowar 84.67 3.33 12.00
Maize 67.57 16.22 16.22 25.00 1.00 2.00
Bajra 35.19 18.52 46.30
Cowpea 14.29 50.00 35.71
Others - 100.00 -
Perennial
crop
Napier 51.79 37.50 10.71
Note: I indicates Increased; D indicates decreased and S indicates Remained same
121
4.7 Status of Livestock population and milk or meat production of sample households:
The present status of livestock numbers with sample households is analyzed here by
comparing it with numbers 10 years before (1998-99) for the selected states of India i.e. Gujarat,
Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab and presented in Table 4.9. In Gujarat, 50.70 per cent of
farmers reported that the population of bullock remained almost same in the reference year
(2008-09) as compared to the base year (1998-1999). On the contrary, 53.21 per cent sample
farmers reported an increase in the population of the cow. Further, increase in number of female
buffaloes, was reported by 34.03 percent sample households. About 50 percent reported that the
population of goat has either decreased or remained same. In Madhya Pradesh, the population of
cattles and male buffaloe were found to be decreased as compared to last 10 years while the
population of female buffalo increased and goat remained same in the area under study. In
Karnataka, over 80 per cent of the farmers reported either decrease or stagnation in the
population of cattle female and male in the last one decade. There was a marginal increase in
buffalo female population. But, about 47 percent of the sample farmers reported decrease in goat
population, while 43 per cent reported increase in sheep population. In Punjab, during the last 10
Table 4.9: Status of livestock population during last 10 years, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09
(Per cent farmers reported)
Crops Gujarat Madhya Pradesh Karnataka Punjab
I D S I D S I D S I D S
Cattle
female 54.13 16.51 29.36 2.00 93.33 4.67 16.2 36.2 47.6 7.00 11.00 33.00
Cattle
male 6.00 88.00 6.00 9.8 30.4 59.8 1.00 1.00 4.00
Buffalo
female 39.58 29.17 31.25 85.33 4.00 10.67 16.3 44.6 39.1 13.00 8.00 35.00
Buffalo
male 1.33 95.34 3.33 4.8 47.6 47.6 - 1.00 2.00
Goat 25.00 25.00 50.00 16.67 10.67 72.67 33.3 46.7 20.0 10.00 8.00 33.00
Sheep 42.9 35.7 21.4
Pig - - 40.00 - 100.0 -
Poultry 46.2 23.1 30.8
Note: I indicate increased; D indicates decreased and S indicates Remained same
122
years period, about 13 per cent of the dairy farmers observed the increase in buffalo population,
which was higher than about 7 per cent of the dairy farmers for cattle population. More number
of dairy farmers observed increase in buffalo population and decrease in cattle population during
the last 10 years period.
To sum up in Gujarat, 50.70 percent of farmers reported that the population of bullock
remained almost same in the reference year (2008-09) as compared to the base year (1998-1999).
On the contrary, 53.21 percent sample farmers reported an increase in the population of the cow.
Further, increase in number of female buffaloes, was reported by 34.03 percent sample
households. In Madhya Pradesh, the population of cattles and male buffaloe were found to be
decreased as compared to last 10 years while the population of female buffalo and goat was
respectively increased and remain same in the area under study. In Karnataka, over 80 per cent
of the farmers reporting either decrease or stagnation in the population of cattle female and male
in the last one decade. There is a marginal increase in buffalo female population. But, about 47
percent of the sample farmers reported decrease in goat population, while 43 per cent reported
increase in sheep population. In Punjab, during the last 10 years period, about 13 per cent of the
dairy farmers observed the increase in buffalo population, which was higher than about 7 per
cent of the dairy farmers for cattle population. More number of dairy farmers observed increase
in buffalo population and decrease in cattle population during the last 10 years period.
4.8 Status of livestock milk or meat production
The data presented in Table 4.10 shows that majority of sample households in Gujarat
reported improvement in the milk yield and production of both, cows and buffaloes in the
reference year (2008-09) as compared to the base year (1998-1999). About 54.13 percent of
cattle farmers and 39.58 percent of the buffalo farmers reported increase in the milk yield and
production. About 29.36 percent of cow farmers and 31.25 percent of buffalo farmers reported
more or less no change in the milk yield and production. In Madhya Pradesh, more than 90% of
fodder growers reported that that the milk yield of female cattle (cows) decreased as compared to
10 years before in the area under study, while the milk yield of buffaloes was found to be
increased. More than 70% of fodder growers reported that the goat meat yield remained same as
compared to 10 years before. In Karnataka, while a quarter of farmers reported increase in
buffalo milk yield, but about one-third reported stagnation and two-fifth reported decrease during
123
the last 10 years. Similarly, about 45 per cent and 33 per cent of farmers reported stagnation and
decrease in milk yield from cattle, respectively. As far as meat yield is concerned, large
percentage of sample farmers reported increase in meat production from goat, sheep, pig and
poultry. In Punjab, during the last 10 years period, about 45 per cent of the dairy farmers
observed the increase in buffalo milk productivity, which was higher than the productivity of
cattle milk which was revealed by about 29 per cent of the dairy farmers. More number of dairy
farmers observed increase in buffalo milk productivity as compared to in cattle milk productivity
during the last 10 years period. This is the main reason behind the more popularity of buffalo
population in the state.
To conclude, majority of sample households in Gujarat reported improvement in the milk
yield and production of both, cows and buffaloes in the in the reference year (2008-09) as
compared to the base year (1998-1999). About 54.13 percent of cattle farmers and 39.58 percent
of the buffalo farmers reported increase in the milk yield and production. About 29.36 percent of
cow farmers and 31.25 percent of buffalo farmers reported more or less no change in the milk
yield and production. In Madhya Pradesh, more than 90% of fodder growers reported that that
the milk yield of female cattle (cows) decreases as compared to 10 years before in the area under
study, while the milk yield of buffaloes was found to be increased. The more than the 70% of
fodder growers reported that the goat meat yield was remained same as compared to 10 years
before. In Karnataka, while a quarter of farmers reported increase in buffalo milk yield, but about
one-third have reported stagnation and two-fifth have reported decrease during the last 10 years.
Similarly, about 45 per cent and 33 per cent of farmer reported stagnation and decrease in milk
yield from cattle, respectively. As far as meat yield is concerned, large percentage of sample
farmers reported increase in meat production from goat, sheep, pig and poultry. In Punjab, during
the last 10 years period, about 45 per cent of the dairy farmers observed the increase in buffalo
milk productivity, which was higher than the productivity of cattle milk which was revealed by
about 29 per cent of the dairy farmers. More number of dairy farmers observed increase in
buffalo milk productivity as compared to in cattle milk productivity during the last 10 years
period.
124
Table 4.10: Status of milk and meat yield during last 10 years, sample households, selected
states, India, 2008-09
(Per cent farmers reported)
Crops Gujarat Madhya Pradesh Karnataka Punjab
I D S I D S I D S I D S Milk
Buffalo 39.58 29.17 31.25 85.33 4.00 10.67 25.93 40.74 33.33 45.00 5.00 45.00
Cattle 54.13 16.51 29.36 2.00 93.33 4.67 21.51 33.33 45.16 29.00 6.00 16.00
Goat 25.00 25.00 50.00
Meat
Goat 25.00 - 75.00 16.67 10.67 72.67 39.46 37.46 23.08
Sheep 38.46 30.77 30.77
Pig - - 40.00 100.0 - -
Note: I indicates Increased; D indicates decreased and S indicates Remained same
4.9 Feeding practices and feeding composition:
The comparative status of feeding practices in the selected states of India i.e. Gujarat,
Madhya Pradesh and Punjab was studied and presented in Table 4.11. The most popular practice
of feeding livestock in Gujarat is a combination of both, stall feeding and grazing. Among the
indigenous cow owners, 59.04 per cent opted for open grazing in the morning and stall feeding to
animals in the evening. About 39.76 per cent indigenous cow owners reported stall feeding to
animals during the entire year. A crossbreed cows are highly productive and valuable to farmers.
Hence, about 75.28 percent crossbreed cow owners adhere to only stall feeding whereas 24.72
per cent followed combination of both, stall feeding and open grazing. None of crossbreed young
stock owners send their animals for open grazing. In case of buffaloes, about 66.41 per cent
farmers followed only stall feeding and 33.59 per cent farmers followed combination of both,
stall feeding and grazing. In Madhya Pradesh, the grazing of the live stock in the pasture land
was not found in practice by the fodder growers as more than 60 per cent of fodder growers
reported that they adopted stall feeding for the cattles and buffaloes instead of grazing. This has
happened due to the fact that the M.P. government passed an act in the year 2003 in which the
125
pasture land was restricted to 2 per cent of total geographical area of the village under the section
237 and the pasture land above 2 per cent had been distributed among landless farmers related
schedule cast & schedule tribe and hence now the grazing land was found to be reduced year to
year. The fodder growers left their dry un-productive cattles from their farms and now they are
found be seen in the road sides of cities and towns of the study area. More than 80 per cent of
fodder growers reported that they left their goats for grazing in the near by forest area. In Punjab,
the practice of stall feeding as well as grazing was prevalent in the study area as the sample
respondents were rearing only cattle and buffaloes on their farms. As nobody was rearing sheep
and goat, the sole practice of grazing was absent and the fodder growers were following both the
practices (stall feeding as well as grazing). The practice of grazing was more prevalent among
the cattle as compared to buffalo growers. Amongst cattle, the practice of grazing was more
popular for indigenous cattle as compared to cross bred cattle. About 30 per cent of the cattle
growers were grazing their indigenous cattle as compared to less than 6 per cent for cross bred
cattle. The practice of grazing was still lesser prevalent among the young stock as compared to
the adults.
To conclude, the most popular practice of feeding livestock in Gujarat is a combination
of both, stall feeding and grazing. Among the indigenous cow owners, 59.04 percent opted for
open grazing in the morning and stall feeding to animals in the evening. About 39.76 percent
indigenous cow owners reported stall feeding to animals during the entire year. About 75.28
percent crossbreed cow owners adhere to only stall feeding whereas 24.72 percent followed
combination of both, stall feeding and open grazing. In case of buffaloes, about 66.41 percent
farmers followed only stall feeding and 33.59 percent farmers followed combination of both,
stall feeding and grazing. In Madhya Pradesh, more than 60 per cent of fodder growers reported
that they adopted stall feeding for the cattles and buffaloes instead of grazing. In Punjab, the
practice of stall feeding as well as grazing was prevalent in the study area as the sample
respondents were rearing only cattle and buffaloes on their farms. The practice of grazing was
more prevalent among the cattle as compared to buffalo growers. Amongst cattle, the practice of
grazing was more popular for indigenous cattle as compared to cross bred cattle
126
Table 4.11: Livestock feeding practices, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09
(Percent multiple response)
Season/Crop Gujarat Madhya Pradesh
Karnataka Punjab
1. Indigenous Cattle
Adults
Stall feeding 39.76 66.67 NR 100.00
Grazing 1.20 10.00 NR 30.00
Both 59.04 23.33 NR -
Young stock
Stall feeding 30.77 87.34 NR -
Grazing - 6.00 NR -
Both 69.23 6.67 NR -
2. Crossbreed Cattle
Adults
Stall feeding 75.28 90.67 NR 100.00
Grazing - 4.67 NR 6.00
Both 24.72 4.66 NR -
Young stock
Stall feeding 59.72 84.67 NR 100.00
Grazing - 8.00 NR 3.00
Both 40.28 7.33 NR -
3. Buffalo
Adults
Stall feeding 66.41 88.00 NR 100.00
Grazing - 6.67 NR 4.00
Both 33.59 5.33 NR -
Young stock
Stall feeding 51.92 82.67 NR 100.00
Grazing 2.88 10.00 NR 3.00
Both 45.19 7.33 NR -
4. Goat
Stall feeding - 5.33 NR -
Grazing - 84.67 NR -
Both 100.00 10.00 NR -
Note: NR is Not reported
127
4.10 Seasonal feeding composition
The data presented in Table 4.12a, 4.12b 4.12c and 4.12d shows average feeding
composition followed for different livestocks by the sample farmers during the rainy, winter and
summer season for Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab respectively.
In Gujarat, in all seasons, total quantity of feed and fodder fed to dry bovines was lower than
quantity given to in milk bovines. For example, in rainy season, in-milk cross-bred cow was
given daily 31.55 Kg. whereas dry cross-bred cow was given 21.50 Kg. /day. As compared to in
milk bovine animals, relatively decline use of green fodder and higher use of dry fodder was
observed for dry bovines. The major green fodder crops used to feed to animals were lucerne,
grasses, jowar, bajra and maize. Whereas, major dry fodders were bajra straw, jowar straw,
maize straw and wheat straw.Goats were mostly dependent on grazing. For example none of the
goat owners fed any feed and fodder to their goats during the rainy season. Across the seasons,
total quantity of feed and fodder fed to different categories of livestock was highest in winter
season and lowest in summer season. For example, crossbreed cow was given total 31.55
Kg./day in rainy, 32.52 Kg./day in winter and 26.36 Kg./day in summer. Bullocks were fed more
dry fodder and less green fodder in all the seasons. Grains and concentrates given to in milk
bovines were higher than its quantity fed to dry animals. As compared to crossbreed cows,
quantity of feed and fodder fed to indigenous cows was lower. The quantity of feed and fodder
fed to animals was found somewhat lower compared to that recommended by Department of
Animal Husbandry, Government of Gujrat.
In Madhya Pradesh, an average fodder grower fed an indigenous cow with 12.86 kg.
Maize fodder, 2.66 kg. of wheat straw and 1.58 kg. Oilcake/ day in the rainy season while they
fed 12.30 kg berseem, 1.19 kg. soybean straw and 1.88 kg. oil cake/ day in the winter season. In
the summer season, they fed their indigenous cow with 7.36 kg. of jowar 1.49 kg. of wheat straw
and 1.99 kg. of oil cake/ day. The difference of 2 kg + was observed in case of cross bred and
buffaloes’ in milk, while absence of oil cake and chuni was observed in case of dry animals
In Karnataka, the average consumption rate of green fodder was higher during kharif than
the rates observed in rabi and summer seasons. The consumption of dry fodder was observed
relatively high during rabi and summer. Among livestock types, the average consumption rate of
128
green fodder per animal was worked out to be higher for crossbred cattle in milk across the
seasons. In fact, the consumption of green fodder by crossbred cattle in milk was 17.5 Kg/day,
16.4 Kg/day and 13.9 Kg/day in kharif, rabi and summer, respectively. Buffaloes are also good
converter of dry fodder. The average consumption rate of dry fodder for buffalo was 11.4 Kg,
12.7 Kg and 12.4 Kg in kharif, rabi and summer, respectively. The corresponding rates for green
fodder were 13.0 Kg, 10.9 Kg and 10.9 Kg, respectively. The consumption of all types of fodder
was lower for cattle female dry and buffalo female dry. By fodder types, crossbred cattle was fed
with relatively high quantity of napier (22.4 Kg), jowar straw (22.15 Kg), maize straw (18.3 Kg)
and paddy straw (14.9 Kg).
In Punjab, during all the seasons, the in milk animals were found to feed more green
fodder as compared to dry/male animals. Amongst in milk animals, the cross bred animals were
found to fed higher doses of green fodder as compared to buffaloes, which may be due to higher
fodder requirements for cross bred animals because of their higher productivity of milk.
Amongst all the seasons, the animals were fed the least doses of green fodder on per day basis in
the summer season. The young stock was found to feed green fodder. The animals were also
fed the dry fodder in form of wheat and paddy straw during rainy season, which was fed more to
male buffaloes as compared to other animals. The grains and concentrates were found to be fed
mostly to the in milk animals and young stock.
To sum up, in Gujarat, in all seasons, total quantity of feed and fodder fed to dry bovines was
lower than quantity given to in milk bovines of same category. Across the seasons, total quantity
of feed and fodder fed to different categories of livestock was highest in winter season and
lowest in summer season. Bullocks were fed more dry fodder and less green fodder in all the
seasons. Grains and concentrates given to in milk bovines was higher than its quantity fed to dry
animals. As compared to crossbreed cows, quantity of feed and fodder fed to indigenous cows
was lower. In Madhya Pradesh, an average fodder grower feed an indigenous cow with 12.86 kg.
maize fodder, 2.66 kg. of wheat straw and 1.58 kg. oilcake/ day in the rainy season while they
fed 12.30 kg berseem, 1.19 kg. soybean straw and 1.88 kg. oil cake/ day in the winter season. In
the summer season they feed their indigenous cow with 7.36 kg. of jowar 1.49 kg. of wheat straw
and 1.99 kg. of oil/ day cake. The difference of 2 kg + was observed in case of cross breed and
buffaloes’ in milk, while absence of oil cake and chuni was observed in case of dry animals. In
129
Karnataka, the average consumption rate of green fodder was higher during kharif than the rates
observed in rabi and summer seasons. The consumption of dry fodder was observed relatively
high during rabi and summer. Among livestock types, the average consumption rate of green
fodder per animal was worked out to be higher for crossbred cattle in milk across the seasons. In
fact, the consumption of green fodder by crossbred cattle in milk was 17.5 Kg/day, 16.4 Kg/day
and 13.9 Kg/day in kharif, rabi and summer, respectively. In Punjab, during all the seasons, the
in milk animals were found to feed more green fodder as compared to dry/male animals.
Amongst in milk animals, the cross bred animals were found to fed higher doses of green fodder
as compared to buffaloes. Amongst all the seasons, the animals were fed the least doses of green
fodder on per day basis in the summer season. The grains and concentrates were found to be fed
mostly to the in milk animals and young stock.
Table 4.12a: Season wise feeding practices for livestock population, Gujarat, sample
households, 2008-09
(kg/animal/day)
Season/Crop
In Milk Animals Dry animals Male Young Stock
Horse Goat
Ind. cows
X-bred
Buffalo Ind. cows
X-bred
Buffalo Bullock Buffalo
Rainy season 1. Green Fodder
i. Maize 0.85 2.30 2.55 0.00 1.83 4.17 1.09 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00
ii. Bajra 4.36 4.68 4.85 3.25 3.48 3.22 0.91 0.00 0.78 8.67 0.00
iii. Sorghum 2.18 3.47 1.55 0.25 1.38 1.32 0.44 0.00 0.61 0.00 0.00
iv. Guar 0.00 2.12 0.13 0.00 2.55 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00
v. Lucerne 0.09 0.27 0.49 0.00 0.30 0.34 0.16 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00
vi. Green Grass 2.56 3.21 4.59 2.88 1.66 3.41 1.09 5.00 0.69 6.67 0.00
vii. Any other 0.00 1.21 1.18 0.00 1.58 0.42 0.69 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00
Total Green Fodder
10.05 17.27 15.34 6.38 12.77 12.89 4.39 5.00 3.25 15.33 0.00
Green Fodder Ratio
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
2. Dry fodder
i. Wheat straw 0.31 3.58 0.91 2.63 2.10 0.88 4.57 0.00 0.74 0.00 0.00
ii. Paddy straw 0.73 1.56 1.23 1.25 1.66 1.56 6.02 0.00 1.02 0.00 0.00
iii. Jowar 3.31 2.92 0.78 0.50 1.52 0.55 3.24 10.00 0.83 3.33 0.00
iv. Bajra 0.42 1.40 1.03 1.00 0.92 0.79 3.71 0.00 0.53 3.33 0.00
v. Maize 0.31 0.59 0.44 1.13 0.55 0.44 1.89 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00
vi. Any other 0.00 0.34 0.13 0.00 0.08 0.13 1.30 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00
Total Dry Fodder
5.07 10.39 4.51 6.50 6.83 4.35 20.73 10.00 3.76 6.67 0.00
130
Dry Fodder Ratio
0.50 0.57 0.29 1.02 0.53 0.34 4.73 2.00 1.16 0.43 0.00
3. Grains
i. Wheat 0.25 0.28 0.57 0.13 0.20 0.14 0.49 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00
ii. Bajra 0.12 0.66 0.62 0.25 0.46 0.35 0.51 0.00 0.19 3.33 0.00
iii. Mixed Bhusa 1.40 0.60 0.34 0.00 0.18 0.31 0.36 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00
iv. Any other 0.18 0.62 0.30 0.25 0.17 0.13 0.14 0.00 0.10 3.33 0.00
Total Grains 1.95 2.16 1.83 0.63 1.01 0.93 1.51 0.00 0.51 6.67 0.00
Grains Ratio 0.19 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.34 0.00 0.16 0.43 0.00
4. Concentrates
i. Mixed feed 0.04 0.44 0.50 0.00 0.27 0.22 0.46 0.00 0.21 2.00 0.00
ii. Oil cakes 0.15 0.39 0.55 0.00 0.23 0.22 0.36 0.00 0.12 2.67 0.00
iii. Dairy cattle
feed 0.44 0.77 0.75 0.25 0.18 0.49 0.45 0.00 0.52 0.00 0.00
iv. Any other 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.01 1.00 0.02 0.00 0.00
Total Concentrates
0.62 1.73 1.91 0.25 0.89 0.94 1.29 1.00 0.87 4.67 0.00
Concentrates Ratio
0.06 0.09 0.12 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.29 0.20 0.27 0.30 0.00
Season Total 17.70 31.55 23.59 13.75 21.50 19.10 27.91 16.00 8.40 33.33 0.00
Winter season 1. Green Fodder i. Maize 0.58 1.63 2.05 0.63 1.82 3.00 0.84 0.00 0.66 2.00 0.00
ii. Jowar 0.40 1.04 0.95 0.13 1.25 1.55 0.53 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.00
iii. Lucerne 5.47 9.90 8.39 3.00 7.17 5.17 2.41 0.00 1.67 8.67 0.60
iv. Green grass 0.95 1.87 2.00 0.63 0.48 0.97 0.66 0.00 0.47 3.33 1.20
v. Any other 0.44 1.48 1.60 1.88 0.90 0.63 0.19 5.00 0.27 3.33 0.00
Total Green Fodder
7.84 15.93 14.98 6.25 11.62 11.32 4.62 5.00 3.41 17.33 1.80
Green Fodder Ratio
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
2. Dry fodder
i. Wheat straw 0.56 4.49 1.19 3.38 3.32 0.94 4.92 0.00 0.78 2.00 0.00
ii. Paddy straw 1.31 2.15 1.65 1.25 2.30 1.57 5.23 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.00
iii. Bajra Straw 0.71 2.57 1.44 1.38 3.62 1.02 3.01 10.00 1.22 4.67 0.00
iv. Maize Straw 0.47 1.14 0.72 1.63 0.87 0.57 2.56 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.00
v. Jowar Straw 3.45 1.69 0.88 0.63 0.41 0.33 1.71 0.00 0.37 2.00 0.00
vi. Any other 0.00 0.51 0.26 0.00 0.18 0.20 1.19 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.30
Total Dry Fodder
6.51 12.54 6.14 8.25 10.70 4.62 18.62 10.00 3.82 8.67 0.30
Dry Fodder Ratio
0.83 0.79 0.41 1.32 0.92 0.41 4.03 2.00 1.12 0.50 0.17
3. Grains
i. Wheat 0.24 0.35 0.62 0.25 0.21 0.31 0.34 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00
ii. Bajra 1.06 0.67 0.81 0.25 0.17 0.24 0.31 0.00 0.16 5.33 0.00
iii. Maize 0.11 0.30 0.29 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00
iv. Any other 0.13 0.69 0.34 0.00 0.03 0.30 0.20 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00
Total Grains 1.54 2.01 2.06 0.50 0.62 1.07 1.07 0.00 0.52 5.33 0.00
131
Grains Ratio 0.20 0.13 0.14 0.08 0.05 0.09 0.23 0.00 0.15 0.31 0.00
4. Concentrates
i. Mixed feed 1.35 0.77 0.72 0.00 0.25 0.14 0.49 0.00 0.34 2.00 0.00
ii. Oil cakes 0.25 0.43 0.65 0.25 0.25 0.27 0.48 0.00 0.13 1.33 0.00
iii. Dairy cattle
feed 0.42 0.80 0.77 0.25 0.27 0.48 0.27 2.00 0.41 0.00 0.00
iv. Any other 0.00 0.05 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00
Total Concentrates
2.02 2.04 2.23 0.50 0.76 0.90 1.24 2.00 0.90 3.33 0.00
Concentrates Ratio
0.26 0.13 0.15 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.27 0.40 0.27 0.19 0.00
Season Total 17.90 32.52 25.40 15.50 23.70 17.90 25.55 17.00 8.65 34.67 2.10
Summer season
1. Green Fodder
i. Maize 0.18 0.63 0.82 0.00 0.63 0.71 0.86 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
ii. Bajra 4.44 4.44 4.49 2.25 1.24 1.21 1.77 4.00 1.09 3.33 0.00
iii. Cowpea 0.00 1.28 0.19 0.00 1.08 0.10 0.11 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00
iv. Jowar 0.13 0.86 0.97 0.00 0.99 0.57 0.42 0.00 0.19 2.00 0.00
v. Lucerne 0.25 1.00 1.85 0.25 0.03 0.38 0.88 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.00
vi. Any other 0.76 0.81 1.02 1.25 0.06 1.00 0.38 0.00 0.23 8.33 1.20
Total Green Fodder
5.76 9.01 9.33 3.75 4.03 3.98 4.43 4.00 2.65 13.67 1.20
Green Fodder Ratio
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
2. Dry fodder
i. Wheat straw 1.40 5.15 2.32 4.13 4.77 2.86 4.00 0.00 1.06 0.00 0.00
ii. Paddy straw 1.05 1.93 1.56 1.75 1.96 3.05 2.99 0.00 1.02 6.67 0.00
iii. Bajra Straw 3.05 4.56 2.23 2.63 3.96 2.51 2.67 10.00 1.35 2.00 0.00
iv. Maize Straw 0.36 1.01 0.83 0.75 1.00 1.27 1.45 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.00
v. Jowar Straw 3.24 1.21 0.89 0.50 0.85 0.86 1.21 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00
vi. Any other 0.00 0.41 0.13 0.00 0.28 0.72 0.57 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00
Total Dry Fodder
9.11 14.28 7.97 9.75 12.82 11.27 12.89 10.00 4.13 8.67 0.00
Dry Fodder Ratio
1.58 1.59 0.85 2.60 3.18 2.83 2.91 2.50 1.56 0.63 0.00
3. Grains
i. Wheat 0.80 0.38 0.61 0.25 0.32 0.17 0.36 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00
ii. Bajra 0.05 0.41 0.66 0.25 0.23 0.28 0.33 0.00 0.14 4.00 0.00
iii. Maize 0.05 0.34 0.26 0.13 0.35 0.20 0.12 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00
iv. Any other 0.09 0.40 0.31 0.00 0.23 0.07 0.10 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00
Total Grains 1.00 1.52 1.84 0.63 1.13 0.73 0.91 0.00 0.48 4.00 0.00
Grains Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.20 0.17 0.28 0.18 0.20 0.00 0.18 0.29 0.00
4. Concentrates
i. Mixed feed 0.67 0.63 0.54 0.00 0.25 0.16 0.33 0.00 0.25 2.00 0.00
ii. Oil cakes 0.14 0.28 0.52 0.25 0.25 0.28 0.36 0.00 0.08 1.33 0.00
132
iii. Dairy cattle
feed 0.31 0.50 0.80 0.00 0.47 0.37 0.35 2.00 0.45 0.00 0.00
iv. Any other 0.02 0.15 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00
Total Concentrates
1.14 1.56 2.04 0.25 0.98 0.81 1.08 2.00 0.78 3.33 0.00
Concentrates Ratio
0.20 0.17 0.22 0.07 0.24 0.20 0.24 0.50 0.30 0.24 0.00
Season Total 17.01 26.36 21.18 14.38 18.96 16.79 19.30 16.00 8.04 29.67 1.20
Table 4.12b: Season-wise feeding practices for livestock population adopted by sample households, Madhya Pradesh, 2008-09
(Kg/animal/day)
Season/Crop In Milk Animals Dry animals Male Young
Stock
Sheep Goat
Ind.
cows
X-
breed
Buffalo Ind.
cows
X-
breed
Buffalo Cattle Buffalo
Rainy Season
1. Green Fodder
i. Maize 12.86 14.76 17.61 10.14 13.73 14.88 12.61 14.38 9.65 0.00 1.14
2. Dry fodder
i. Wheat
straw 2.66 3.22 2.86 1.94 2.01 1.37 1.53 1.62 1.26 0.00 0.62
3. Grains
i. Wheat 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Concentrates
i. Mixed feed 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ii. Oil cakes 1.58 1.66 2.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Winter season
1. Green Fodder
i. Berseem 12.30 11.40 12.54 9.49 9.88 11.39 12.53 13.87 7.92 0.00 1.35
2. Dry fodder
i. Wheat
straw 1.19 1.60 1.79 1.43 1.55 1.77 2.12 1.37 1.72 0.00 0.70
iii. Any other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3. Grains
i. Wheat 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Concentrates
i. Mixed feed 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ii. Oil cakes 1.88 2.07 2.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
iii. Any other 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Summer season
1. Green Fodder
i. Juar 7.36 7.75 8.32 6.79 7.14 7.67 8.37 5.64 5.89 0.00 0.66
2. Dry fodder
i.Wheat
straw 1.49 1.90 1.83 1.19 1.36 1.69 1.73 1.47 1.25 0.00 0.61
3. Grains
133
i. Wheat 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Concentrates
i. Mixed feed 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ii. Oil cakes 1.99 1.93 2.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Table 4.12c: Season-wise Feeding Practices adopted by sample households, selected states, Karnataka, 2008-09 (Kg/animal/day)
Season/Crop In Milk Animals Dry animals Male Young
Stock
Sheep Goat
Ind.
cows
X-
breed
Buffalo Ind.
cows
X-
breed
Buffalo Cattle Buffalo
Kharif season
1. Green fodder
Bajra 8.3 20.0 8.8 - - 5.0 12.8 10.0 4.0 - 2.0
Collected
Grass 7.3 15.0 12.6 . 10.0 11.7 14.3 1.1 2.5 12.0 -
Jowar 13.9 12.5 10.9 14.3 - 12.1 12.3 11.0 5.8 8.0 -
Leaves - - - - - - - - - 1.0 1.0
Maize 10.6 14.2 12.0 13.3 10.0 10.3 11.3 10.0 4.3 8.0 -
Napier 14.1 21.5 14.6 10.5 11.4 12.1 15.4 10.6 7.5 1.7 8.8
Sugarcane
leaves 27.0 10.0 - - - - 10.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 -
Areca nut
Spathe - 20.0 20.0 - - - 1.0 - 4.0 - -
2. Dry Fodder
Bhoosa 4.1 2.0 2.4 - 10.0 1.0 1.0 - - - -
Groundnut
Haulms 1.6 2.4 . - - - 5.4 - 0.7 - -
Jowar Straw 8.0 14.0 30.0 - - - 40.0 2.0 3.0 - -
Maize straw 6.2 11.1 8.8 - 10.0 10.0 8.7 . 3.5 - -
Paddy straw 11.4 14.5 12.3 13.3 11.3 15.1 16.1 7.8 5.3 1.5 1.0
Ragi straw 7.8 11.4 11.8 18.8 20.0 15.8 12.1 1.3 2.9 3.0 .
3. Grains
Broken
Maize 1.0 0.5 1.0 - - 0.5 1.8 - 0.5 - 0.5
Broken rice 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.0 - 1.5 4.3 1.3 1.5 3.0 -
Horse gram 1.3 1.0 2.5 1.3 - 1.0 4.0 1.0 0.9 1.5 -
4. Concentrates
Husk (hottu) 1.0 2.0 - - - - 1.0 - - - -
Mixed feed 2.6 3.7 2.5 1.7 3.3 2.0 4.0 1.7 1.3 0.8 -
Oil cake 2.0 1.9 1.2 1.0 - 2.0 1.3 2.5 1.8 - -
Waste food/
gruel - 5.0 6.0 - - 4.5 8.0 9.0 - - -
Rabi sesaon
1. Green fodder
Collected
Grass 4.5 10.2 8.3 - 5.0 8.5 11.0 - 2.0 2.0 .
Jowar 8.3 12.1 10.4 - 15.0 8.8 10.9 - 6.3 2.0 .
134
Leaves - - - - - - - - - 1.0 1.0
Maize straw 12.2 15.0 11.6 11.3 10.0 9.6 11.6 9.0 4.6 7.0 -
Napier 13.9 21.1 11.0 7.7 7.3 10.4 13.2 8.5 6.0 2.2 6.5
2. Dry Fodder
Bhoosa 2.4 2.0 2.3 - - 0.8 - - - - -
Jowar Straw - 20.0 32.0 - - - 38.0 2.0 5.0 - -
Maize straw 5.1 9.3 10.3 8.0 12.5 9.3 12.0 7.0 3.0 - -
Paddy straw 12.7 17.1 14.7 16.9 13.3 16.6 14.9 8.7 5.3 1.7 1.0
Ragi straw 7.8 10.6 11.3 15.0 10.0 10.8 11.0 2.9 2.8 3.0 .
3. Grains
Broken jowar - 1.0 1.0 - 0.5 0.5 - - - - -
Broken maize 1.0 0.5 1.0 - - 0.5 2.0 . 0.5 - -
Broken rice 4.1 1.4 2.3 - - 1.9 1.7 2.0 2.5 3.0 -
Horse gram 1.0 1.0 3.4 1.3 - 1.0 3.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 -
4. C oncentrates
Husk (hottu) 1.0 6.0 - - - - 1.0 1.0 . . .
Mixed feed 2.2 4.5 2.7 1.9 3.3 2.1 4.9 3.2 1.4 1.3 2.0
Oil cake 4.8 1.6 2.9 2.0 - 2.0 4.3 2.8 2.0 - -
Waste food/
gruel - 3.0 9.5 - - 5.5 2.0 9.0 4.5 - -
Summer season
1. Green Fodder Collected
Grass 8.5 8.0 6.0 - - 6.0 2.0 1.3 1.0 2.0 .
Jowar 12.4 14.6 14.1 22.5 - 16.0 13.4 3.0 6.3 . 2.0
Leaves - - - - - - - - - 1.0 1.0
Maize straw 11.7 12.6 10.0 6.0 10.0 8.5 10.8 4.0 2.9 2.0 8.0
Napier 9.5 15.7 9.8 9.3 7.3 7.0 9.6 12.6 5.5 3.3 4.7
2. Dry Fodder
Bhoosa 3.6 - 1.9 - - 0.8 - - - - -
Groundnut
Haulms 1.9 7.2 . - - - 5.5 - 5.3 - -
Jowar straw 5.0 20.0 32.3 2.0 - - 40.0 2.0 2.0 - -
Maize straw 5.1 9.4 12.8 . 12.5 10.5 11.7 20.0 3.2 - -
Paddy straw 14.2 15.5 14.1 15.0 15.0 16.6 15.1 7.8 5.7 1.3 1.0
Ragi straw 9.1 9.8 10.3 15.5 20.0 17.0 10.4 1.3 3.7 1.0 2.0
3. Grains
Broken Bajra 5.0 - 2.0 2.0 - 2.0 . - 0.5 - -
Broken
Maize 1.5 0.5 1.0 - - 0.5 2.3 - 1.0 - -
Broken Rice 1.8 1.7 1.6 - - 1.8 2.2 2.0 1.0 3.0 0.5
Horse gram 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.3 - 1.3 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.3 1.0
4. Concentrates
Husk (hottu) 1.0 4.0 1.0 - - - 1.0 - - - -
Mixed feed 4.7 3.8 2.6 1.5 4.3 1.9 4.2 2.0 1.3 0.8 -
Oil cake 2.3 3.4 1.3 1.0 - 2.0 1.5 2.8 1.0 - -
Waste food/
gruel 3.0 - 8.8 - - 8.0 8.5 2.0 8.3 - -
135
Table 4.12d: Season-wise feeding practices for livestock population, sample households, Punjab, 2008-09 (Kg/animal/day) Season/Crop In Milk Animals Dry animals Male Young
Stock Ind.
cows
X-
bred
Buffalo Ind.
cows
X-
bred
Buffalo Cattle Buffalo
Rainy Season
1. Green Fodder
i. Maize - 4.7 2.4 - 3.9 4.2 2.9 0.7 1.2
ii. Sorghum 15.5 18.4 17.1 - 19.6 13.7 8.7 17.2 5.8
iii. Bajra - 6.4 5.0 - 1.8 5.0 3.2 6.7 3.2
2. Dry fodder
i. Wheat straw - 4.0 5.5 - 2.5 3.9 2.9 6.5 0.3
ii. Paddy straw - 0.03 0.02 - - - - - -
3. Grains
i. Wheat - 0.7 0.7 - - - - - 0.03
ii. Maize - 0.1 0.1 - - - - - -
4. Concentrates
i. Mixed feed 0.3 1.9 2.2 - - - - - 0.1
ii. Oil cakes - 0.5 0.5 - - - - 0.1 0.01
Winter season
1. Green Fodder
i. Berseem 19.5 29.0 27.1 - 23.1 21.2 14.8 15.8 6.2
ii Oats - 1.4 0.8 - 0.1 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.2
2. Dry fodder
i. Wheat straw 2.5 6.5 7.4 - 7.1 7.3 6.3 7.2 0.9
ii. Paddy straw - 0.1 - - 0.1 0.1 - 0.7 -
iii. Maize straw 5.0 0.2 0.2 - 0.1 - 0.3 1.3 -
3. Grains
i. Wheat - 0.4 0.4 - - - - - -
4. Concentrates
i. Mixed feed 0.3 1.7 2.1 - - - - - 0.1
ii. Oil cakes - 0.4 0.5 - - - - - -
Summer season
1. Green Fodder
i. Maize - 11.7 11.0 - 4.8 4.9 2.8 5.3 4.0
ii. Berseem 10.9 8.5 8.6 - 12.9 15.2 8.0 6.0 3.1
2. Dry fodder
i. Wheat straw 3.5 5.4 5.7 - 4.5 4.7 7.6 6.7 0.8
ii. Paddy straw - 0.2 0.2 - 1.5 2.4 0.7 0.2 -
iii. Maize 2.5 0.2 0.3 - 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.2 0.1
3. Grains
i. Wheat 0.8 0.6 0.5 - 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.2
ii. Maize 0.8 0.2 0.1 - 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.2 0.1
iii. Paddy - 0.1 0.1 - 0.3 0.3 0.1 - -
4. Concentrates
i. Mixed feed 1.0 1.4 1.6 - - - - -
ii. Oil cakes - 0.3 0.4 - 0.6 - -- 0.5 -
136
Chapter-5
Economics of Production of Fodder Crops
Generally, economists suggest that acreage under forage crops should be increased to
meet the increasing demand of fodder from fast growing livestock sector. But, the scale of
change in acreage depends highly on economics for growing fodder crops as a substitute for
other competing higher value crops. Keeping this in view, we analysed here the economics of
different fodder crops and its competing crops on the basis of cost of cultivation and production
data. The main objective of this chapter is to find out economics of cultivation of selected fodder
crops and net returns associated with these fodder crops.
5.1 Cost of cultivation for fodder crops
The comparative cost of cultivation for major fodder crops grown during kharif, rabi and
summer seasons in selected states of India i.e. Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab
were studied and presented in Tables 5.1.1, 5.1.2 and 5.1.3.
5.1.1 Kharif crops:
Maize is one of the most important fodder crops in Gujarat state. It is mainly grown for
both, grain as well as green fodder purpose. When it is grown for grain purpose, its by-product
(residues) is used as dry-fodder. The average cost of cultivation per hectare for kharif maize
(cereal) comes to Rs. 15107. From the data, it emerged that human labour (32.70 %), machine
labour (20.20%); FYM (14.80 %) and chemical fertiliser (14.80 %) were the major contributors
in the total cost of cultivation. As kharif maize is almost dependent on rainfall, irrigation was
given to crop only under very moisture stress condition. Hence, the share of irrigation in total
cost of cultivation was only 3.30 percent. The share of expenses incurred on insecticides /
pesticides was also found very low (1.90%) which suggests that generally farmers not prefer to
use insecticides / pesticides for kharif maize.
In Madhya Pradesh, maize is found to be a major fodder crop cultivated by the majority
of fodder growers in the rainy season. The total cost of cultivation of maize fodder was Rs.
9264.64 /ha in the cultivation of maize. The farm yard manure (37%), machine labor (16%), seed
(13%), chemical fertilizer (12%), hired human Labour (10%) and family Labour (7%) were
found to be major components of cost of cultivation of maize in the area under study.
137
Jowar is also an important food crop in Karnataka. The overall estimated variable cost
was only Rs. 223/ha. Family labour accounted for the highest proportion of total cost. The use of
family labour was intensive among the farmers for the operations related to field management
and harvesting of green fodder. So, relatively high family labour cost has resulted in higher
variable cost.
Table 5.1.1: Cost of cultivation of important fodder crops during kharif season, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09
(Rs/ha)
Particulars Gujarat (Maize grain crop)
Madhya Pradesh (Maize chari)
Karnataka (Jowar)
Punjab (Sorghum)
Human Labour
Family labour 3769
(24.9)
959.05
(10.35)
102.7
(46.15)
4673
(39.1)
Hired labour 1178
(7.8)
659.54
(7.12)
9.8
(4.40)
3890
(32.6)
Animal Labour - - 9.7
(4.36)
-
Machine Labour 3045
(20.2)
1427.83
(15.41)
22.4
(10.07)
1352
(11.3)
Seed 1612
(10.7)
1240.82
(13.39)
6.9
(3.10)
270
(2.3)
Manures 2241
(14.8)
3355.67
(36.22)
38.3
(17.21)
788
(6.6)
Fertilisers 2233
(14.8)
1119.39
(12.08)
23.7
(10.65)
573
(4.8)
Plant protection 287
(1.9)
- 2.4
(1.08)
6
(0.05)
Irrigation 494
(3.3)
319.98
(3.45)
- 142
(1.2)
Interest on working
capital
248
(1.6)
69.63
(0.75)
6.5
(2.92)
253
(2.1)
Misc. expenses 112.73
(1.22)
- -
Total variable cost 15107
(100.0)
9264.64
(100.00)
222.5
(100.00)
11947
(100.0) Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
In Punjab, the total variable cost on per hectare basis for the most important fodder crop
during kharif season (sorghum crop) was found to be Rs 11946. Amongst variable cost
138
components, the share of human labour was more than 71 per cent. It shows that sorghum
cultivation is highly labour intensive and the farmers have to incur highest expenses on it, which
is particularly required during the harvesting of the fodder. Expenses on machine labor, FYM,
fertilisers and seed were the other important components of the variable cost. The average farm
was found to incur Rs. 573 per hectare basis for fertiliser. No plant protection measures were
adopted for the production of sorghum crop. This shows that the attack of insect, pest and
diseases is minimal in this crop.
To conclude, in Gujarat, average cost of cultivation per hectare for kharif maize (cereal)
comes to Rs. 15107. Human labour (32.70 %), machine labour (20.20%), FYM (14.80 %) and
chemical fertiliser (14.80 %) were the major contributors in the total cost of cultivation. In
Madhya Pradesh, the total cost of cultivation of maize fodder was Rs. 9264.64 /ha in the
cultivation of maize. The Farm Yard Manure (37%), Machine labor (16%), Seed (13%),
Chemical fertilizer (12%), Hired human Labour (10%) and Family Labour (7%) were found to
be major components of cost of cultivation of maize in the area under study. Jowar is an
important food/fodder crop in Karnataka. The overall estimated variable cost was Rs. 223/ha.
Family labour has accounted for the highest proportion of total cost. In Punjab, the total variable
cost on per hectare basis for the most important fodder crop during kharif season (sorghum crop)
was found to be Rs 11946. Amongst variable cost components, the share of human labour was
more than 71 per cent.
5.1.2 Rabi season
Lucerne is most important forage crop of Gujarat during rabi season. The total cost of
cultivation per hectare for lucerne was Rs.31372. The item-wise examination of cost shows that
in total cost of cultivation, share of seed cost was highest at 33.80 per cent. Of the total cost of
cultivation, human labour constitutes 18.40 per cent, irrigation constitutes 17.30 per cent and
machine labour constitutes 11.80 per cent. In total cost, FYM contributed 8.40 percent whereas
fertiliser contributed 7.50 percent.
In Madhya Pradesh, berseem is found to be a major fodder crop cultivated by the
majority of fodder growers in the winter season. An average fodder grower invested Rs.
13835.66 /ha in the cultivation of berseem. The farm yard manure (33%), seed (26%), machine
labor (11%), irrigation (9%), chemical fertilizer (8%), hired human labour (7%) and family
139
labour (4%) were found to be main component of cost of cultivation of berseem in the area under
study.
Table 5.1.2: Cost of cultivation of important fodder crops during Rabi season, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09
(Rs/ha) Particulars Gujarat
(Lucerne) Madhya Pradesh
(Berseem)
Karnataka
Punjab (Berseem)
Human Labour
Family labour 1850
(5.9)
956.53
(6.91) NR
6609
(36.2)
Hired labour 3913
(12.5)
604.15
(4.37) NR
5363
(29.4)
Machine Labour 5763
(18.4)
1463.83
(10.58) NR
1922
(10.5)
Seed 3714
(11.8)
3661.90
(26.47) NR
1275
(7.0)
Manures 10619
(33.8)
4521.81
(32.68) NR
216
(1.2)
Fertilisers 2640
(8.4)
1142.98
(8.26) NR
1869
(10.3)
Plant protection 2340
(7.5) - NR
2
(0.01)
Irrigation 338
(1.1)
1256.28
(9.08) NR
400
(2.2)
Interest on working
capital
5443
(17.3)
103.49
(0.75) NR
574
(3.1)
Misc. expenses - 124.69
(0.90) NR
Total variable cost 31372
(100.0)
13835.66
(100.00) NR
18230
(100.0)
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column.
NR is not reported.
In Punjab, the total variable cost on per hectare basis for the most important fodder crop
during rabi season (berseem) was found to be Rs 18231. Human labour was found to take larger
proportion of the cost as its share was about 66 per cent. Most of the labour is required during
the harvesting of the crop, which is done in 6-7 cuttings in about two months period. Expenses
140
on machine labor, fertilisers and seed were the other important components of the variable cost
and the expenses on these were about 11, 10 and 7 per cent of the total variable cost respectively.
To conclude, total cost of cultivation per hectare for lucerne, being the most important
forage crop of Gujarat during rabi season was Rs.31372. The item-wise examination of cost
shows that in total cost of cultivation, share of seed cost was highest at 33.80 percent. In Madhya
Pradesh, berseem is found to be a major fodder crop cultivated by the majority of fodder
growers in the winter season and an average fodder grower invested Rs. 13835.66 /ha in the
cultivation of berseem. The Farm Yard Manure (33%), Seed (26%), Machine labor (11%),
Irrigation (9%), Chemical fertilizer (8%), Hired human Labour (7%) and Family Labour (4%)
were found to be main component of cost of cultivation of berseem the area under study. In
Punjab, the total variable cost on per hectare basis for the most important fodder crop during rabi
season (berseem) was found to be Rs 18231. Human labour was found to take larger proportion
of the cost as its share was about 66 per cent.
5.1.3 Summer fodder crops:
In Gujarat, lucerne is cultivated in majority districts of the state during summer season.
The total cost of cultivation per hectare for lucerne was Rs. 25075. The item-wise examination of
cost data shows that in total cost of cultivation, share of seed cost was highest at 34.6 percent. Of
the total cost of cultivation, human labour constitutes 19.8 per cent, irrigation constitutes 19.5
percent, fertiliser constitutes 9.0 percent and FYM constitutes 7.7 per cent. The total cost of
cultivation per hectare of summer lucerne was lower than it for rabi lucerne. This is so, because
cost of cultivation of summer lucerne includes operational cost of four months whereas rabi
lucerne includes such costs of eight months.
In Madhya Pradesh, jowar is found to be a major fodder crop cultivated by the majority
of fodder growers in the summer season. An average fodder grower invested Rs. 9264.64 /ha in
the cultivation of jowar. The farm yard manure (32%), machine labor (16%), seed (11%), hired
human labour (11%), chemical fertilizer (10%), irrigation (9%), and family labour (8%) were
found to be main components of cost of cultivation of maize in the area under study.
In Punjab, the total variable cost on per hectare basis for most important fodder crop
during summer season (maize fodder) was found to be Rs 8948. About 60 per cent of the
operational cost was incurred on human labour, most of which is required during the harvesting
141
of the crop. Expenses on fertilisers, machine labor and seed were the other important components
of the variable cost and the expenses on these were about 13, 12 and 12 per cent of the total
variable cost respectively.
Table 5.1.3: Cost of Cultivation of Important fodder crops during summer season, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09
(Rs/ha)
Particulars Gujarat (Lucerne)
Madhya Pradesh
(Jowar chari)
Karnataka
Punjab (Maize)
Human Labour
Family labour 669
(2.7)
1023.05
(10.76)
NR 3842
(43.6)
Hired labour 4291
(17.1)
739.54
(7.78)
NR 1470
(16.7)
Machine Labour 4961
(19.8)
1497.83
(15.76)
NR 1095
(12.4)
Seed 1466
(5.8)
1076.37
(11.32)
NR 1036
(11.8)
Manures 8667
(34.6)
3129.67
(32.92)
NR 74
(0.8)
Fertilisers 1933
(7.7)
979.39
(10.30)
NR 1133
(12.9)
Plant protection 2249
(9.0)
- NR 10
(0.01)
Irrigation 494
(2.0)
819.98
(8.63)
NR -
Interest on working
capital
4895
(19.5)
71.29
(0.75)
NR 144
(1.60
Misc. expenses - 168.73
(1.78)
NR -
Total variable cost 25075
(100.0)
9505.85
(100.00)
NR 8804
(100.0)
Note: Figures in parentheses show the per cent to total in each column. NR: Not reported.
To summarise, In Gujarat, the total cost of cultivation per hectare for lucerne (summer)
was Rs. 25075. The item-wise examination of cost data shows that in total cost of cultivation,
share of seed cost was highest at 34.6 percent. In Madhya Pradesh, jowar is found to be a major
142
fodder crop cultivated by the majority of fodder growers in the summer season and an average
fodder grower invested Rs. 9264.64 /ha in the cultivation of jowar. The Farm Yard Manure
(32%), Machine labor (16%), Seed (11%), Hired human Labour (11%), Chemical fertilizer
(10%), Irrigation (9%), and Family Labour (8%) were found to be main components of cost of
cultivation of maize the area under study. In Punjab, the total variable cost on per hectare basis
for most important fodder crop during summer season (maize fodder) was found to be Rs 8948.
About 60 per cent of the operational cost was incurred on human labour, most of which is
required during the harvesting of the crop.
5.2 Economics of fodder crops vis-à-vis competing crops
Magnitude of change in area under fodder crops depends on net return from grown crops
as a substitute for other competing crops. Comparisons of net return from selected fodder crops
vis-à-vis its competing crops will be useful to understand about the alternative use of cultivated
land. The economics of selected fodder crops vis-à-vis its competing crops is analysed here for
each study crop selected in kharif, rabi and summer seasons and presented in Tables 5.2.1, 5.2.2
and 5.2.3.
In Gujarat, in kharif season, net return per hectare for maize cereal crop comes to Rs.
32775 which was higher as compared to net return of Rs. 18291 for maize paddy, which is
competing crop of maize. Overall, gross value of production (MP+BP) and total variable cost of
paddy were Rs. 34375 and Rs. 16444 respectively. Overall, net return per hectare for paddy was
Rs. 18291. From the above analysis, it is very obvious that the net returns were higher for
cultivation of maize as cereal crop compared to those for competing crop (paddy). In rabi season,
net return per hectare was Rs. 13828 for lucerne whereas it was Rs. 33922 for competing crop
wheat (Table 5.2.1). In summer season, net return for study crop lucerne was only Rs. 6569
whereas it was Rs. 9085 for competing crop bajra. The above data established that cultivation of
maize, bajra and lucerne is less profitable when they are grown as green fodder crops. The
cultivation of bajra, maize and wheat are more profitable when they are grown as cereal crops as
by-product (straw) of these crops are fetching good market price. Owing to less favourable
economics of net returns, farmers have less preference for growing green fodder crops. They are
growing green fodder on very limited areas to meet their own requirement. They are not
interested in growing green fodder for marketing purpose. Due to relatively higher returns, they
143
have high preference for cash crops and cereal crops such as bajra, maize, wheat and paddy
whose by-product is used as dry-fodder. This attitude of farmers of Gujarat is largely responsible
for chronic shortage of green fodder.
In Madhya Pradesh, there was no competition of fodder crops with other crops in the area
under study. An average fodder grower of the Madhya Pradesh devoted their 1 – 2 Bigha area of
cultivated land in the production of fodders in all the season of the year. The comparative picture
of fodder crops showed that the cultivation of beseem was found be more profitable in the area
under study in which an average fodder grower invested Rs.13835.66/ha and received Rs.
52521.47/ha revealed that on the investment of Rs. 1.00, he got Rs. 3.80 as benefit over the
variable cost, while he received only Rs. 1.80 and 1.69 on investment of Rs. 1.00 respectively
from the cultivation of maize and jowar. He also got maximum net return from the cultivation of
berseem (Rs. 52521.47/ha) as compared to cultivation of maize (Rs.16664.92/ha) and jowar (Rs.
16092/ha).
In Karnataka, farmers do not allocate higher area under fodder crops due to low
profitability in relation to their competing crops. The fodder markets are not well developed in
the study area, hence farmers grow fodders to meet their domestic requirement only. It can be
observed that the return over the variable cost is relatively high for paddy when compared to
jowar fodder.
During the kharif season, paddy is the most important crop of the Punjab state. The
results showed that the returns over variable cost fetched from paddy on per hectare basis were
more than double. As revealed through Table 5.2.2, berseem was found to be more remunerative
as compared to sorghum but still the returns over variable cost were only 65 per cent as
compared to the most important competing crop during the Rabi season (wheat). Likewise,
during the summer season, maize fodder was found to be less remunerative as compared to most
important competing crop during the season i.e. maize grain. The returns over variable cost for
maize fodder were only 70 per cent as compared to maize fodder during the season (Table 5.2.3).
Only a few farmers were growing fodder on commercial scale as these crops were found to be
less remunerative than the competing paddy, wheat and maize (grain) crops. Those farmers who
were either rearing the livestock or want to put the area under less time and input consuming
crops were growing fodder on the commercial scale.
144
To conclude, in Gujarat, during kharif season, net return per hectare for maize cereal crop
comes to Rs. 32775 which was higher by Rs.10821 compared to net return of Rs. 21954 for
maize grown as pure green fodder. Paddy is competing crop of maize. Overall, gross value of
production (MP+BP) and total variable cost of paddy were Rs. 34375 and Rs. 16444
respectively. Overall, net return per hectare for paddy was Rs. 18291. In rabi season, net return
per hectare was Rs. 13828 for lucerne whereas it was Rs. 33922 for competing crop wheat. In
summer season, net return for study crop lucerne was only Rs. 6569 whereas it was Rs. 16246
for competing crop jowar / sorghum grown as green fodder crop. In Madhya Pradesh, there was
found no competition of fodder crops with other crops in the area under study. The comparative
picture of fodder crops showed that the cultivation of beseem was found be more profitable in
the area under study in which an average fodder grower invested Rs.13835.66/ha and received
Rs. 52521.47/ha revealed that on the investment of Rs. 1.00, he got Rs. 3.80 as benefit over the
variable cost, while he received only Rs. 1.80 and 1.69 on investment of Rs. 1.00 respectively
from the cultivation of maize and jowar. He also got maximum net return from the cultivation of
berseem ( Rs. 52521.47/ha) as compared to cultivation of maize (Rs.16664.92/ha ) and jowar (
Rs. 16092/ha). The returns over variable cost fetched from paddy on per hectare basis were Rs.
10300 as compared to Rs. 552 for the jowar fodder in Karnataka. Farmers do not allocate higher
area under fodder crops due to low profitability in relation to their competing crops. In Punjab,
the returns over variable cost fetched from paddy on per hectare basis were more than double as
compared to sorghum. Berseem was found to be more remunerative as compared to sorghum but
still the returns over variable cost were only 65 per cent as compared to the most important
competing crop during the Rabi season (wheat). Likewise, during the summer season, maize
fodder was found to be less remunerative as compared to most important competing crop during
the season i.e. maize grain. The returns over variable cost for maize fodder were only 70 per
cent as compared to maize fodder during the season.
145
Table 5.2.1: Economics of kharif fodder crop vis-à-vis competing crop, sample households,
selected states, India, 2008-09
(Rs/ha)
Particulars Yield (Qtls/ha)
Price (Rs/qtl)
Gross Returns
Total variable
costs
Return Over
variable costs
Gujarat
Maize
(MP+BP)
NR NR 48905 16130 32775
Paddy
(MP+BP)
NR NR 34735 16444 18291
Madhya Pradesh
Maize chari 269.37 96.26 25929 9264 16665
Competing
crop
NR NR NR NR NR
Karnataka
Jowar 3.9 200 775.1 222.5 552.6
Paddy 15.8 890.0 15774 5474 10300
Punjab
Sorghum 448 56 25082 11946 13136
Paddy 59 775 45725 15635 30090
NR is not reported.
146
Table 5.2.2: Economics of Rabi fodder crop vis-à-vis competing crop, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09 (Rs/ha)
Particulars Yield (Qtls/ha)
Price (Rs/qtl)
Gross Returns
Total variable
costs
Return Over
variable costs
Gujarat
Lucerne
397.82 126 50221 36393 13828
Wheat
NR NR 50079 16158 33922
Madhya Pradesh
Berseem
649.73 102.13 66357.13 13835.66 52521.47
Competing
crop
NR NR NR NR NR
Karnataka
NR NR NR NR NR
Punjab
Berseem
855 49 41895 18231 23664
Wheat
47 1080 56635 17129 39506
NR: Not reported.
147
Table 5.2.3: Economics of summer fodder crop vis-à-vis competing crop, sample
households, selected states, India, 2008-09
(Rs/ha)
Particulars Yield
(Qtls/ha) Price
(Rs/qtl)
Gross Returns
Total variable
costs
Return Over
variable costs
Gujarat
Lucerne
260.24 125 32418 25850 6569
Bajra
190.03 146 27731 18646 9085
Madhya Pradesh
Jowar chari
253.37 101.03 25597.97 9505.85 16092.12
Competing
crop NR NR NR NR NR
Karnataka
NR NR NR NR NR
Punjab
Maize fodder
361 56 20220 8948 11272
Maize grain
37 725 26825 11285 15540
NR is not reported.
148
Chapter 6
Processing and Marketing System for Fodder Crops
Farmers are growing fodder mainly for home consumption. A small area is set aside for
fodder crops by farmers where irrigation is available. In normal rainfall years, generally farmers
are not facing problems of fodder shortage. Fodder is being bulky, less remunerative and costly
to transport, most of the producers having surplus fodder sell it soon after the harvest, mostly
within the village or nearby villages. In normal years, fodder/grass is marketed locally. Since not
all areas are self sufficient in fodder/grasses, there is a selling of fodder/grasses from surplus
areas to deficit area on a very small scale. Due to costly transportation, movement take place in
nearby villages. Even within the village, few farmers having surplus fodder sell some quantity of
fodder to needy dairy farmers. Generally demand for green and dry fodders in a village is met
from within the village. Thus, intra area and inter area marketing of fodder takes place, of course
on very small scale. The marketing of fodder gets impetus during scarcity/famine period.
Through processing, the fodder can be fed to animals as green feed; as hay, i.e. crops harvested
dry or left to dry if harvested green; or as silage products. Silage or ensilage is a method of
preservation of green fodder through fermentation to retard spoiling. The marketing/processing
of fodders (green and dry), is not so common among farmer households in Madhya Pradesh and
Karnataka. Therefore, the present chapter deals with the alternative marketing/processing
systems for the disposal of fodder in the Gujarat and Punjab states of India, showing their size
and efficiency.
6.1 Marketing of fodder crops:
In Gujarat, fodder is generally sold by producers through one marketing channel, namely
producer-Local Trader-Consumer. Table 6.1.1 shows the average purchase price, marketing cost
and profit margins of local trader. The price spread between the producer, local trader and
consumer is also illustrated. In this channel local trader incurred marketing expenses mainly on
transportation and loading/unloading of fodder. No spending on chaffing and packing of fodder.
Total marketing cost was born by local trader (purchase). The data clearly reveals that
transportation and marketing costs per Qtl. remained around Rs.23 in all the three season. These
149
costs were borne by local traders. However, purchase price and sell price of fodder was lowest in
kharif season and highest in summer season. The consumer’s price was Rs. 300/Qtl. in kharif and
it touched to Rs. 400/Qtl. in summer. The net profit margin of local trader on consumer’s price
was highest at Rs. 52.31(9.17%) in Rabi season and lowest at Rs. 26.67 (8.9 %) in kharif season.
Table 6.1.1: Marketing costs, margins and price spread analysis of various fodder crops during peak seasons through channel (Producer- local trader-consumer), sample households, Gujarat, 2008-09
(Rs/qtl)
Note: Figures in parentheses show percentage of consumer s‘ price
In Punjab, the following three major marketing channels were observed among sample
fodder growers in the study area for disposal of their produce.
Channel-I: Producer-Forwarding agent/Commission agent-Dairy owner (Consumer)
Channel-II: Producer-Forwarding agent/Commission agent-Chaff cutter-Consumer
Channel-III: Producer –Consumer
In channel I, the produce was directly taken by the producer to the
forwarding/commission agent, who were forwarding the produce to the big dairy owners keeping
in view the fodder demanded, through the chaff cutters. The forwarding/commission agent,
charges their commission from the producer as well as from the dairy owner/buyer. The chaff
cutters charges for the various services like, chaffing, weighing, packing, loading unloading,
Particulars Kharif Rabi Summer
Net price received by the producer/ Purchase price of local trader
250
(83.3)
275
(78.6)
340
(85.0)
Costs incurred by local trader
(i) Loading/unloading 15.00
(5.0)
15.00
(4.3)
15.00
(3.8)
(ii) Transportation 8.33
(2.8)
7.69
(2.2)
8.33
(2.1)
Sub-total 23.33
(7.8)
22.69
(6.5)
23.33
(5.8)
Net margins of local trader 26.67
(8.9)
52.31
(14.9)
36.67
(9.2)
Consumer’s price 300
(100.0)
350
(100.0)
300
(100.0)
150
Table 6.1.2: Marketing costs, margins and price spread analysis of various fodder crops during peak seasons in different Channels, sample households, Punjab, 2008-09
(Rs/qtl)
*Includes Chaffing, Weighing, Packing, Loading/unloading, Transportation etc charges Figures in parentheses show percentage of consumers ‘price Channel-1: Producer- Forwarding/commission agent-Dairy Owner (consumer) Channel-2: Producer- Forwarding/commission agent –Chaff cutter- Consumer Channel-3: Producer-Consumer
Particulars/channels Sorghum Berseem Maize
Ch-1 Ch-2 Ch-3 Ch-1 Ch-2 Ch-3 Ch-1 Ch-2 Ch-3
1. Net price received by the producer
47.4
(73.8)
47.4
(70.5)
44.0
(100.0)
41.9
(73.5)
41.9
(65.00
40.5
(100.0)
50..9
(76.7)
50.9
(70.7)
48.5
(100.0)
2. Marketing costs of producer
(i)Weighing charges 0.4
(0.6)
0.4
(0.6)
- 0.5
(0.9)
0.5
(0.8)
- 0.3
(0.5)
0.3
(0.4)
-
(ii) Loading/unloading 2.3
(3.6)
2.3
(3.4)
- 2.0
(3.5)
2.0
(3.1)
- 2.1
(3.2)
2.1
(2.9)
-
(iii) Transportation 4.8
(7.5)
4.8
(7.1)
- 3.6
(6.3)
3.6
(5.6)
- 3.5
(5.3)
3.5
(4.9)
-
(iv)Commission
charges
1.1
(1.7)
1.1
(1.6)
- 1.0
(1.8)
1.0
(1.6)
- 1.2
(1.8)
1.2
(1.7)
-
Sub-total 8.6
(13.4)
8.6
(12.8)
- 7.1
(12.5)
7.1
(11.00
- 7.1
(10.7)
7.1
(10.0)
-
3. Selling price of Producer
56.0
(87.2)
56.0
(83.3)
- 49.0
(86.0)
49.0
(76.0)
- 58.0
(87.3)
58.0
(80.6)
-
4.Purchase price of chaff cutter
- 56.0
(83.3)
- 49.0
- - 56.0
(83.3)
-
5. Costs incurred by Chaff cutter
(i) Chaffing, Weighing
etc.
- 4.0
(5.9)
- - 4.0
(6.2)
- - 4.7
(6.5)
-
Sub-total - 4.0
(5.9)
- - 4.0
(6.2)
- - 4.7
(6.5)
-
Net margins of chaff
cutter - 7.2
(10.7)
- - 11.5
(17.8)
- - 10.1
(14.0)
-
6. Costs incurred by Dairy owner(Consumer)
(i)Chaff cutter
charges*
6.0
(9.3)
- - 6.0
(10.5)
- - 6.0
(9.0)
- -
(ii)Commission
charges
2.2
(3.4)
- - 2.0
(3.5)
- - 2.4
(3.6)
- -
Sub-total 8.2
(12.8)
- - 8.0
(14.0)
- - 8.4
(12.7)
- -
7. Consumer’s price 64.2
(100.0)
67.2
(100.0)
44.0
(100.0)
57.0
(100.0)
64.5
(100.0)
40.5
(100.0)
66.4
(100.0)
72.0
(100.0)
48.5
(100.0)
151
transportation etc. from the dairy owner, to whom the produce is ultimately supplied. In channel
II, the chaff cutter purchases the produce from forwarding/commission agent, who charges their
commission from the producer as well as buyer. The chaff cutters provide the various services
like, chaffing, weighing, packing, loading unloading, transportation etc. from the consumer to
whom the produce is ultimately supplied. In channel III, the produce is directly disposed of to the
consumers in the village itself. In channel-I for the sale of sorghum, the producer’s share in
consumer’s rupee was found to vary from 74 to 77 per cent for the different fodder crops. In
channel-II the producer’s share in consumer’s rupee was about 65 to 70 per cent for different
crops.
To summarise, in Gujarat fodder is generally sold by producers through one marketing
channel, namely producer-Local Trader-Consumer. In this channel local trader incurred
marketing expenses mainly on transportation and loading/unloading of fodder and marketing
costs per Qtl. remained around Rs.23 in all the three season. The consumer’s price was Rs.
300/Qtl. in kharif and it touched to Rs. 400/Qtl. in summer. The net profit margin of local trader
on consumer’s price was highest at Rs. 52.31(9.17%) in Rabi season and lowest at Rs. 26.67 (8.9
%) in kharif season. In Punjab, in channel I (Producer-Forwarding agent/Commission agent-
Dairy owner/Consumer), the produce was directly taken by the producer to the
forwarding/commission agent, who were forwarding the produce to the big dairy owners keeping
in view the fodder demanded, through the chaff cutters. In channel II (Producer-Forwarding
agent/Commission agent-Chaff cutter-Consumer), the chaff cutter purchases the produce from
forwarding/commission agent, who charges their commission from the producer as well as
buyer. In channel III, the produce is directly disposed of to the consumers in the village itself. In
channel-I for the sale of sorghum, the producer’s share in consumer’s rupee was found to vary
from 74 to 77 per cent for the different fodder crops. In channel-II the producer’s share in
consumer’s rupee was about 65 to 70 per cent for different crops.
6.2 Fodder processing and cost involved:
In Gujarat, large dairy farmers are following practice of hay making. Silage making and
processing of fodder is on negligible scale and not common. In kharif 65 sample households, in
rabi 8 sample households and in summer 35 households prepared hay of fodder (Table 6.2). They
make hay either in godown/farmhouses or in open ground. Not a single sample household opted
152
for silage making during reference year. All farmers were found using plastic/tarpaulin sheet to
cover hay. This practice saves the hay from development of moulds. Chemical like,
BHC/Gamxene/Phorate were used by one fourth of hay making households to prevent the
damage caused by insects and pests. Many farmers said that they avoided use of chemical as it
changes the smell and taste of fodder and the bovines do not prefer this kind of smell of fodder.
The fodder was stored maximum for 140 days and minimum for 46 days. The storage cost per
Qtl. per month range from Rs. 2.30 to Rs. 3.30 in kharif, Rs. 3.00 to 3.10 in rabi and Rs. 2.90 to
Rs. 3.40 in summer. Average quantity stored per household was 57.91 Qtl. in kharif, 100.93 Qtl.
in rabi and only 28.50 Qtl. in summer. Loss of produce during the storage period ranged from
14.14 percent in kharif to 17.90 percent in summer. The four fodder processors were selected for
study. From these, three processors prepared silage of 75 Qtl. in summer season and stored
fodder for 90 days. The storage area was of 40.00 M3 and cost of storage was around
Rs.3/Qtl./month. About 5 per cent was lost in terms of weight during processing. All processors,
used chemical to keep fodder free from insects and pests. They also used plastic sheet to cover
the fodder. The cost of harvesting, packing, loading, unloading etc. are operational costs for hay
making. Overall, post harvesting operational costs of processing one quintal fodder was found to
be the highest for summer season. It was Rs. 27.34 for lucerne and Rs. 27.24 for bajra fodder.
Whereas, processing cost was lowest at Rs. 21.42 for wheat in rabi season. It was Rs. 24.32 and
Rs. 24.57 for kharif maize fodder and kharif bajra fodder respectively. Among various
operational costs, share of harvesting in total cost was more than 50 per cent. The other major
cost items were transportation, loading/unloading and storage.
The practice of fodder processing is not popular in Punjab. Only less than 5 per cent of
the fodder growers were found to practice it. The green fodder in the state are available
throughout the year as multi cut varieties of fodder have prolonged the harvesting time of the
fodder crops in the state. Besides, the dry fodder (mostly wheat straw) is easily and cheaply
available in the state due to the predominance of wheat crop during the rabi season. Therefore,
when the green fodder is in short supply, the dry fodder is available in the state. Even the farmers
who are processing the fodder were of the view that the processed fodder is not preferably fed to
the milch animals as it induces smell in the milk. Silage method of processing is more popular in
Punjab as compared to hay making. This is practised during the kharif season when sorghum,
153
bajra and chary are mixed, chaffed and put in the underground pit. The average storage capacity
of the pit was found to be 2100 quintals. The average farms were found to utilise about 92 per
cent of the capacity. The storage period was up to one year from the time of storage (July to
August). Less than one per cent of the produce was found to be spoiled as the rain water enters
from the corners through the sheets used. Regarding the post harvest operational cost involved in
for silage making, it was about Rs. 11/q. About 74 per cent of the operational cost has to be
incurred during chaffing followed by transportation (18 per cent) and pit making (about 6 per
cent).
To summarise, in Gujarat, the cost of harvesting, packing, loading, unloading etc. are
operational costs for hay making. Overall, post harvesting operational costs of processing one
quintal fodder was found highest for summer season. It was Rs. 27.34 for Lucerne and Rs. 27.24
for bajra fodder. Whereas, processing cost was lowest at Rs. 21.42 for wheat in rabi season. It
was Rs. 24.32 and Rs. 24.57 for kharif maize fodder and kharif bajra fodder respectively. Among
various operational costs, share of harvesting in total cost was more than 50.00 percent. In
Punjab, silage or ensilage is a method of preservation of green fodder through fermentation to
retard spoiling and this method of processing is more popular as compared to hay making. This
is practised during the kharif season when sorghum, bajra and chary are mixed, chaffed and put
in the underground pit. The average storage capacity of the pit was found to vary between 1500
quintals for medium size farms to 3000 quintals for large size farms. The storage period was up
to one year from the time of storage (July to August). Less than one per cent of the produce was
found to be spoiled as the rain water enters from the corners through the sheets used. Regarding
the post harvest operational cost involved in for silage making, it was about Rs. 11/q. About 74
per cent of the operational cost has to be incurred during chaffing followed by transportation (18
per cent) and pit making (about 6 per cent).
154
Table 6.2: Details regarding processing of fodder crops, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09 Particulars Gujarat Punjab
Kharif fodder Rabi fodder Summer fodder Kharif fodder
1. Processing method adopted (% Households) Hay making 43.33 5.33 23.33 -
Silage making - - - 3.0
2. Average Storage capacity (qtls)
NR NR NR 2100
3. Average quantity of produce stored (qtls)
57.91 100.63 28.50 1935
4. Percent capacity utilized NR NR NR 92.0
5. Material used for storage (%)
Sheet 100 100 54.29 3.0
Chemical 24.62 37.50 20.00 1.0
6. Produce lost during storage (%)
14.14 14.18 NR 0.7
7. Post Harvest operational costs (Rs./q)
Harvesting 9.28
(36.4)
5.65
(24.1)
6.25
(22.9)
-
Packing 3.21
(12.6)
2.61
(11.1)
4.69
(17.1)
-
Loading/unloading 2.79
(11.0)
4.78
(20.4)
5.47
(20.0)
-
Transportation 3.98
(15.6)
5.22
(22.2)
4.38
(16.0)
2.0
(17.7)
Chaffing 1.18
(4.6)
- - 8.3
(73.5)
Pit making - - - 0.7
(6.2)
Storage 2.65
(10.4)
2.61
(11.1)
3.13
(11.4)
-
Chemical used 0.74
(2.9)
0.87
(3.7)
1.56
(5.7)
0.1
(0.9)
Sheet used - - - 0.2
(1.8)
Any other 1.67
(6.5)
1.74
(7.4)
1.88
(6.9)
-
Total 25.50
(100.00)
23.48
(100.00)
27.34
(100.00)
11.3
(100.0)
Note: Figures in parentheses show percentage to total cost, NR is Not reported.
155
Chapter 7
Problems Faced by Fodder Growers
Fodder production does not require the intensive use of inputs. On the marketing front, the
price in the market fluctuates vigorously with the supply in market. This chapter is devoted to
assess the production and marketing problems faced by the fodder growers in the selected states
of India. The various problems which were faced by the fodder growers during the different
seasons in the selected states of India during production and marketed are summarized in this
chapter and presented in Tables 7.1 and 7.2.
7.1 Production problems
In Gujarat, nearly 77 per cent of sample households reported problem of inferior quality
of seeds of fodder crops. Few farmers reported higher payment for lucerne seed owing to
shortage. Nearly 18 per cent households faced the problem of non-availability of adequate
quantity of required brand HYV seeds of fodder at time when it was needed. In selected districts,
water resources are scare and irrigation is very costly. Hence, cost of production of fodder crops
goes high in rabi and summer season. This subsequently, lowered the net return from fodder
crops. Non-availability of adequate irrigation restricts farmers from allocating more areas to
fodder crops. The rate of human labour and machine labour are very high. Shortage of human
labour was felt at critical stage of crops. As a result, cost of labour went up and ultimately it
enhanced the cost of production. This, in turn, reduced net return from fodder crops. In kharif
season, more than 72 per cent sample farmers faced problems related to insects / pests and plant
diseases. The farmer lacks technical knowledge of tackling problem of pests and plant diseases.
Further they reported problem of spurious and adulterated insecticides / pesticides. This
enhanced the cost of production. Farmers have high preference to invest their own financial
resources on cash crops and cereal crops. Hence, for growing fodder crops for marketing
purpose, financial resources available with them are less. Therefore, some farmers require credit
support from institutional sources. Due to low credit worthiness, they find it difficult to avail
credit from institutional sources. The net return per hectare for growing pure fodder crops is very
less compared to other competing crops. Further, no regulated / organised market for fodder
156
crops. The fodder being high volume low value crop, it is costly to transport. Owing to these all
reasons, majority farmers are growing fodder crops for home consumption only.
Table 7.1 Problems related to the production of fodder crops, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09 (% multiple response)
Particulars Gujarat Madhya Pradesh
Karnataka Punjab
Kharif fodder 1. Seed Quality 16.67 74.00 NR 33
2. Input delivery 15.33 74.00 NR -
3. Expenditure on production 48.00 76.66 NR -
4. Insect-pests and diseases 30.00 13.33 NR -
5. Technical knowledge 24.67 74.00 NR 26
6. Access to credit 32.67 27.33 NR 27
7. Availability and cost of
labour
40.67 68.00 NR 13
8.Government Policies - 52.00 NR -
9. Any other 9.33 - NR -
Rabi fodder NR
1. Seed Quality 16.00 88.67 NR 38
2. Input delivery 16.00 65.33 NR -
3. Expenditure on production 47.33 53.33 NR -
4. Insect-pests and diseases 31.33 10.00 NR -
5. Technical knowledge 25.33 72.67 NR 27
6. Access to credit 32.00 11.33 NR 29
7. Availability and cost of
labour
40.67 36.66 NR 17
8. Government Polices - 46.00 NR -
9. Any other 8.67 NR -
Summer fodder
1. Seed Quality 18.00 66.67 NR 31
2. Input delivery 18.00 65.33 NR -
3. Expenditure on production 48.67 53.33 NR -
4. Insect-pests and diseases 23.33 11.33 NR -
5. Technical knowledge 25.33 72.67 NR 30
6. Access to credit 31.33 10.66 NR 27
7. Availability and cost of
labour
38.67 39.33 NR 20
8. Government Polices - 46.00 NR -
9. Any other 9.33 - NR 18 NR is not reported.
157
In Madhya Pradesh, lack of technical know how (76.66%) was found to be the biggest
problem observed during the course of investigation and reported by the maximum numbers of
respondents in the area under study. The inferior quality of seed (74%), faulty input delivery
system (74.00%), high expenditure in production due power cuts (74%), non availability of
skilled labour in time and high cost of labour ( 68%), faulty government policy as distribution of
mini kits of fodder seeds from veterinary department instead of agriculture department ( 52%)
were the other major problems found in the study area reported by the majority of the
respondents in production of fodder crops in the state.
In Punjab, more than 31 per cent of the farmers complained about supply of poor quality
and un-recommended varieties of seed for fodder crops. Majority of the fodder growers were
reported to be facing the shortage of labour for performing various cultivation operations
especially during harvesting of the crop, which is highly labour intensive. As the multi cut
varieties of the fodder are being grown in the state, which requires the human labour frequently
and for prolonged duration during the harvesting season. Being less important crops, the
extension camps for these crops are seldom organised and the farmers lack the technical
knowledge about the fodder crops. As these are the subsistence crops, the acquisition of credit
for these less commercial crops is also difficult and discouraged by the financing agencies. The
growers of maize fodder were facing the problem of shortage of irrigation water as the farmers
are not supplied adequate power supply to run the tube wells during the summer season.
To summarise, in Gujarat, inferior quality of seeds of fodder crops, non-availability of
adequate quantity of required brand HYV seeds, problems related to insects / pests and plant
diseases and the lack of technical knowledge were the major problems in production of fodder
crops. In Madhya Pradesh, lack of technical know how (76.66%) was found to be the biggest
problem observed during the course of investigation and reported by the maximum numbers of
respondents in the area under study. The inferior quality of seed (74.00%), faulty input delivery
system (74.00%), high expenditure in production due power cuts (74.00%), non availability of
skilled labour in time and high cost of labour (68.00%), faulty government policy as distribution
of mini kits of fodder seeds from veterinary department instead of agriculture department ( 52%)
were the other major problems found in the study area reported by the majority of the
respondents in production of fodder crops. In Karnataka, the highest percentage of farmers
158
reported problems with respect to access to credit, labour availability, high expenditure on
production, seed quality and access to technical knowledge. In Punjab, Supply of poor quality
and un-recommended varieties of seed, shortage of labour especially during harvesting of the
crop, lack the technical knowledge, acquisition of credit were the major problems faced by the
fodder growers during production of these crops in the study area.
7.2 Marketing problems
The opinions received from sample farmers on problems of marketing of fodder crops are
presented in Table 7.2. In Gujarat, more than 86 per cent of sample households were not
involved with marketing of fodder crops, they are not in position to inform about the problems
they faced while marketing of fodder production. Therefore, they reported no problem. The data
exhibit that by and large they do not faced problems related to output price, payment, packing,
marketing costs, storage and role of intermediaries. Few households reported problems in respect
of non-availability of market information in time and transport facility at reasonable rate. As
fodder being high volume low value crop, transporting of fodder has become very costly. Hence,
demand of fodder not coming from the distant places. Across different seasons, problems
relating to marketing of fodder were not varying much.
In Punjab, low price in the market was reported as the major marketing problem
confronted by fodder growers of the study area (Table 7.2). The price in the market abruptly
changes with the arrivals in the market. Whenever there is glut in the market, the prices comes
down and farmers find it very difficult to dispose of the produce at the remunerative prices in the
market. Lack of market information was reported as the other bottleneck faced in the marketing
of fodder crops by their growers in the study area as there are no regulated markets for disposal
of fodder in the state. The sharp fluctuations in prices in wake of even small changes in
production/supply are another serious concern impacting the cultivation of these crop choices as
prices are dependent upon the demand of fodder by dairy owners on the particular day.
159
Table 7.2: Problems related to the marketing of fodder crops, sample households, selected states, India, 2008-09 (% multiple response)
Particulars Gujarat Madhya Pradesh
Karnataka Punjab
Kharif fodder 1. Market information 1.33 NR NR 29
2. Output price related
problems
0.67 NR NR 43
3. Packing material - NR NR -
4. Packaging - NR NR -
5. Transportation 2.00 NR NR -
6. Delay in the payments - NR NR -
7. Marketing costs - NR NR -
8. Other storage facilities - NR NR -
9. Role of intermediaries - NR NR 33
10. Any other_______ - -
Rabi fodder
1. Market information 1.33 NR NR 38
2. Output price related
problems
0.67 NR NR 25
3. Packing material - NR NR -
4. Packaging - NR NR -
5. Transportation 2.67 NR NR 13
6. Delay in the payments - NR NR -
7. Marketing costs - NR NR -
8. Other storage facilities - NR NR -
9. Role of intermediaries - NR NR -
10. Any other_______ - - - -
Summer fodder
1. Market information 5.33 NR NR 50
2. Output price related
problems
2.00 NR NR 50
3. Packing material - NR NR -
4. Packaging - NR NR -
5. Transportation 3.33 NR NR 50
6. Delay in the payments - NR NR -
7. Marketing costs - NR NR -
8. Other storage facilities - NR NR 10
9. Role of intermediaries - NR NR -
10. Any other - NR NR -
NR is not reported.
160
Chapter 8
Summary, Conclusions and Policy Implications
The livestock sector in India contributes in the range of 30 to 35 percent in total
agricultural output. The desired annual growth of agriculture sector can be accomplished only
through enhancing overall productivity of the livestock sector. This would require a steady and
adequate supply of quality fodder for supporting the livestock population. Having only 4 to 5
percent of total cropping area under fodder cultivation and low productivity of fodder crops has
resulted in a severe deficit of green fodder, dry fodder and concentrates. For development of
livestock sector, the need of the hour is, therefore, to meet this shortfall of fodder (which is over
55%) by adopting suitable measures for increasing the production of crop residues, green fodder
and agricultural by-products. Fodder deficit can mainly be attributed to our limitations in
increasing the area under fodder crops, limited availability of good high yielding fodder
varieties, lack of quality seeds of improved hybrids/ varieties, poor quality of dry fodder like
paddy/wheat straw, changing crop pattern in favour of cash crops etc. Besides, low priority
accorded to investment in fodder production, lack of post-harvest management for surplus
fodder, poor management of grazing/pasture lands and inadequate research, extension and
manpower support also aggravated the shortfall situation of fodders. The importance of feeds and
fodders in dairy farming needs no emphasis. With increase in the pressure on land due to
urbanisation and industrialisation and decrease in the area under fodder and food crops coupled
with increasing demand for milk and milk products, the dependency of livestock / dairy farmers
on external or purchased inputs has also increased and it is putting pressure especially on the
resource poor dairy farmers. Efforts are being made and underway for reducing the gap between
the requirement and availability of feeds and fodders through technological interventions to
increase the yields, bringing more area under fodder crops, conservation of feeds and fodders,
improving the nutritive value of the poor quality roughages, formulation of balanced rations,
feeding of unconventional feeds etc. But “fodder scarcity” continued and it has becomes a
challenging issue in most of the developing countries including India, where dairying is largely
the avocation of the poor, especially women.
161
Objectives of the study
The study will be carried out to accomplish the following objectives:
1. To study the status of fodder crops cultivated in the selected states;
2. To estimate the costs of production and returns associated with the cultivation of important
fodder crops;
3. To identify the processing and marketing system and to estimate the costs and returns at
each link for these fodder crops;
4. To study the problems faced by the producers in production, marketing and processing of
these fodder crops.
Methodology
The study was conducted in the Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab states of India.
Important fodder crops in the India include berseem, sorghum, guar, maize, cowpea, oats, chari,
bajra, moth, lucerne, jowar etc. In the present study, one most important fodder crop each in the
kharif, rabi and summer seasons of the selected states were selected for the in depth analysis.
Amongst different districts of each state, three districts with the highest area of fodder in the
state were selected purposively. Amongst the selected districts, two blocks from each district,
one block near and one distant to the periphery of district headquarter were selected randomly to
realise the effect of distance factor in the findings. From each block, a cluster of 3 to 5 villages
were randomly chosen. Finally, a sample of 25 farmers was selected randomly from each
selected cluster, making a total sample of 150 households. The primary data pertaining to the
year 2008-09 was collected by the personal interview method. Though, fodders processing
practices were not commonly found in India, yet hay/silage method of fodder processing was
used by a few farmers. A sample of processors associated with the processing were randomly
chosen from the selected blocks to know the different stages of the fodder processing and to
assess the costs involved at each stage.
Status of livestock population
The size of livestock herd in Gujarat increased from 196.7 lakh in 1992 to 237.9 lakh in
2007 indicating spectacular average annual growth rate (AAGR) of 1.28 percent during period
1992-2007. Similarly, the livestock population in Madhya Pradesh showed increasing trend over
the years and the total livestock population was found to be increased with the annual growth of
162
1.90 per cent in the year 2007 as compare to the year 1992 (32400.06 thousand). Likewise, the
total livestock population in the state of Karnataka has increased from 29.57 million in 1992 to
30.86 million in 2007 with compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 0.29 per cent. On the
contrary, the livestock population in Punjab has been decreasing continuously since 1990
showed tremendous decline from about 97 lakh in 1990 to only 71 lakh during 2007, at the rate
of 1.5 per cent per annum. In Gujarat, the district-wise data on livestock population for period
1997-2007 increased remarkably for Anand, Gandhinagar, Banaskantha, Sabarkantha,
Panchmahals, Surendranagar, Kheda, Anand and Valsad districts. In most of the districts of M.P.
the growth of total livestock was also found to be increased over the period of time but these
annual growth was found to be less than the Madhya Pradesh. In Karnataka, Belgaum, Gulbarga,
Tumkur Bagalkot, Davanagere and Koppal were the important livestock rearing districts of state
which accounted for 9.72 per cent, 8.21 per cent, 7.89 per cent, 5.47 per cent, 3.61 per cent and
3.38 per cent, of the total livestock population, respectively. The CAGR was high in Koppal and
Bagalko and the other districts that showed positive growth in livestock population were
Belgaum, Bellary, Chitradurga, Davanagere, Gadag, Gulbarga and Tumkur. Sangrur and
Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of total livestock population in Punjab as their share in
total livestock population was about 12 per cent each in 2007. All the districts in the state
showed declining trends in total livestock population except in Faridkot.
The cattle population of Gujarat, which stood at 67.50 lakh in 1997 increased to 79.77
lakh in 2007 with an average annual growth rate of 1.68 percent. In terms of cattle population
(2007), selected Banaskantha, Sabarkantha and Panchmahals districts occupied first three ranks.
AAGR for cattle during period 1997-2007 found positive for all districts except for three districts
namely Bharuch, Dahod and Patan. The number of cattle found to be increased over the period of
time with an annual growth rate of 0.56 per cent in Madhya Pradesh. Amongst the different
districts of Madhya Pradesh, the highest population of cattle found to be annually increased in
Shahdol (2.50 %) district followed by Mandla (2.30%), Damoh (2.13%), and Rajgarh (2.01%). in
Karnataka. among districts, Gulbarga has the largest cattle population followed by Hassan,
Mysore and Belgaum. All the districts except Bagalkot (1.17 per cent) and Davanagere (0.39 per
cent) have showed decline in cattle population. The cattle population in Punjab has declined
from about 28 lakh in 1990 to about 17 lakh during 2007, decreasing at the rate of 2.29 per cent
163
per annum. Ferozpur and Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of cattle population in the
state as their share in total cattle population was about 11 per cent each in 2007. All the districts
in the state showed declining trends in cattle population. The growth of buffaloes was sharp and
positive in all the districts (except Navsari) of Gujarat during 1997-2007. Overall, the buffalo
population in the state increased at the average annual growth rate of 3.39 percent during 1997-
2007. The population of buffalo showed increasing trend over the years in Madhya Pradesh. All
the districts of Madhya Pradesh showed positive average annual growth rates during the period
under study. Seven districts of Karnataka have recorded positive growth in its population
between 1992 and 2007. In terms of per cent distribution of buffaloes, Belgaum accounted for
the highest share of 20 per cent followed by Bagalkot and Tumkur in 2007. The buffalo
population in Punjab has declined from about 56 lakh in 1990 to 49 lakh during 2007, falling at
the rate of 0.69 per cent per annum. Sangrur and Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of
buffalo population in the state as their share in total population was about 14 and 13 per cent
respectively in 2007. Most of the districts in the state showed decrease in buffalo population,
except the districts of Ropar, Bathinda and Sangrur.
In Gujarat, growth of Horses and Ponies during 1997-2007 had been found negative (-
0.69 %) and only Banaskantha district showed positive growth rates. Likewise, the population of
horse and pony were found to be decreased with an average annual growth of (- 4.09 %/year)
over the time in Madhya Pradesh. Drastic reduction in the population over the period of time was
observed in all the district of Madhya Pradesh except in Sehore district. In Punjab also their
population has declined from about 33 thousand in 1990 to about 27 thousand during 2007,
decreasing at the rate of 0.99 per cent per annum. Gurdaspur and Amritsar are the leading
districts in terms of population of horses, ponies and donkeys in the state as their share in total
population was about 14 per cent each in 2007. The growth of sheep population in Gujarat is
negative (-0.75 percent) during period 1997 to 2007 and only Ahmedabad, Anand, Patan,
Sabarkantha and Panchmahals districts recorded the positive AAGR whereas in remaining
districts growth in sheep population found either negative or stagnant. The population of sheep
also shows decreasing trend over the period of time in all the districts of Madhya Pradesh
except Jhabua, Betul, Rajgarh. In Karnataka, among the districts, Tumkur accounted for the
highest share of sheep population with 11.2 per cent followed by Belgaum and Kolar. Although
164
Tumkur and Kolar accounted for relatively a high concentration of sheep in 1992, their share per
cent share has almost declined in the subsequent census periods. In Punjab, the population of
sheep has been reduced almost to one third in 2007, as compared to their population of about 5
lakh in 1990). More than 54 per cent of total population of sheep in the state belongs to Ferozpur
and Bathinda districts. All the districts in the state showed decrease with regard to sheep
population except Ropar district. In Gujarat, the goat population increased from 43.85 lakh in
1997 to 46.40 lakh in 2007 increasing at an average annual growth rate of 0.57 per cent during
period. Out of 25 districts, goat population declined in 11 districts. The number of goats was
found to be increased in all the districts of Madhya Pradesh except Indore. The highest and
maximum average annual growth of goat population was found to be in Mandla district (47.19
%) followed by Datia (7.48 %) and Tikamgarh (7.34%). In Karnataka, large number of goats is
present in Gulbarga, which recorded the CAGR of 2.64 per cent between 1992 and 2007.
Although goat population in Belgaum declined marginally, it constituted the second largest
populated district followed by Tumkur and Bijapur. In Punjab, the population of goat got
reduced almost to half in 2007, as compared to their large population of about 5.38 lakh in 1990.
More than 24 per cent of total population of goats in the state belongs to Ferozpur and Bathinda
districts. All the districts in the state showed decrease in goat population. the camel population in
Gujarat recorded alarming decrease from 65 thousands in 1997 to only 38 thousand in 2007 at
AAGR (-5.28 %). The AAGR of camel population in various districts of the state found either
highly negative or stagnant. The population of camel was also found to be decreased over the
period of time in Madhya Pradesh with an annual growth rate of (-4.20 %). The population of
camel is decreasing sharply in Punjab and reached to the lowest ebb of about 1.4 thousand in
2007, as compared to their population of about 43.4 thousand in 1990. Bathinda district housed
about 72 per cent of total population of camel in the state. Overtime, all the districts in the state
showed decrease in camel population.
Status of fodder crops cultivation
Fodder cultivation is still found to be in a nascent stage in Madhya Pradesh. Out of the
total fodder area (0.74 lakh ha), the cultivators of Madhya Pradesh devoted their maximum area
under the cultivation of bajra (20%) followed by Jowar (4%), Berseem (2%) and Maize (1%).
The area of fodder was found to be declined over the years from 974888 ha. (1990-94) to 745285
165
(2006-09) in Madhya Pradesh during the last 20 years. The area of Jowar, Berseem, Loosarn, Jai
were found to be increased over the year 1990-94, while the area under guar and other fodder
decreased in Madhya Pradesh. Among the different fodder crops the highest growth of fodder
was observed in the area of loosarn (4.98%/year) followed by berseem (3.89%/year), jowar
(2.79%/year), jai (2.39%/year) and maize (1.99%/year) during the last 20 years in Madhya
Pradesh. In Punjab, on an average, about 5.83 lakh hectare area is under fodder crops during the
period 2005-09, which comes out to be about 7 per cent of gross cropped area of the state. The
area under fodder crops was found to decrease continuously from the average area of 7.8 lakh
hectare during the period 1990-94. The fodder crops occupied about 2.64 lakh hectare area in the
kharif season and about 2.97 lakh hectare during the rabi season. Maize fodder was also
cutivated during the summer season covering about 21 thousand hectare area during the season.
Sorghum, bajra and guara were the important kharif fodders covering about 24, 14 and 3 per cent
of the total area under fodder cultivation in the state during the period 2005-09. Berseem and
oats were the important rabi fodders covering about 34 and 12 per cent of the total area under
total fodder cultivation in the state. Maize fodder is also cutivated during the summer season
covering about 4 per cent of the total area under fodder cultivation in the state during the period
2005-09. During the period 1990-91 to 2008-09, most of the fodder crops showed decrease in
area except guara during kharif season and oats during rabi season. During kharif season, maize
fodder showed the highest decrease in area (-11.74 per cent per annum) during the period 1990-
91 to 2008-09, while during rabi season, berseem showed the highest decrease in area (-2 per
cent per annum) during the same period. Maize fodder recorded increase in area during the
recent years (2000-01 to 2008-09).
Maize fodder is the important fodder crop cultivated during the kharif season in Madhya
Pradesh. The cultivation of maize fodder is concentrated only in Khargone (33%), Dhar (22%),
Ujjain (16%), Dewas (12%), Hoshangabad (8%), Morena (6%), Mandsur (1%) and Khandwa
(1%) districts of Madhya Pradesh. The area of maize is found to be increased by 14.35 per cent
(2006-09) as compared to 1990-04 (55.32ha.) with an annual growth of 1.99 per cent per year
during the last 20 years (period III). The growth of maize was found to be more in period II
(1.71%/year) as compared to period I (-2.01 %/year). Sorghum is the important fodder crop
cultivated during the kharif season in Punjab. The area under the crop was found to contract
166
continuously and declined to 1.37 lakh hectares in the period 2005-09 from about 2.34 lakh
hectares during the 1990-94. Patiala and Sangrur are the leading districts in terms of area under
sorghum cultivation in the state as their share was about 16 and 13 per cent of the total area
under sorghum cultivation respectively in the period 2005-09. During the periods, 2000-01 to
2008-09 (Period II) and 1990-91 to 2008-09 (Period III), all the districts showed the decrease in
fodder area. Berseem is the most important fodder crop cultivated during the rabi season in
Madhya Pradesh as well as Punjab. The area of Berseem was mainly concentrated in Shajapur,
Hoshangabad, Sehore, Ujjain, Ratlam, Bhopal, Shivpuri, Indore, Bhind, Mandsaur, Dhar
Morena, Narsinghpur, Betul and Jabalpur districts of Madhya Pradesh. The area of Berseem is
increased by 45.76 per cent in the year 2005-09 (20305 hectares) as compared to the year 1990-
94 (13930 hectares). As regards to the growth of berseem is concerned in different district of
Madhya Pradesh it is found that the area of berseem is increased with an annual growth rate of
2.82 per cent /year during the last 20 years. The growth of area of berseem was found to be more
in period II (2.24%/year) as compared to period I (-5.54%/year) in Madhya Pradesh. In Punjab,
the area under berseem was found to decrease continuously to average of about 1.95 lakh
hectares during the period 2005-09 as compared to the average of about 2.55 lakh hectares
during the period 1990-94. Amritsar and Sangrur are the leading districts in terms of area under
berseem cultivation in the state as their share was about 15 and 13 per cent of the total area under
berseem cultivation respectively in the period 2005-09. During the period, 1990-91 to 2008-09
(Period III), all the districts showed the decrease in area, except Hoshiarpur district. Jowar is the
most important green fodder crop in Madhya Pradesh during summer season. The jowar
cultivation as a fodder is concentrated in Indore, Khargone and Dhar districts of Madhya
Pradesh. The area of Jowar was found to be decreased to 37785 hectares (2006-09) from 43338
hectares (1990-94) in Madhya Pradesh with a rate of -1.10 per cent per year during the last 20
years. The growth of area of Jowar was found to be more in period I (3.50%/year) as compared
to period II (-1.55%/year). Maize fodder is the most important green fodder available to the
livestock in Punjab during summer season. Although, the area under the crop was found to
decrease overtime from average of about 21 thousand hectares during 1990-94 to about 17
thousand hectares during 2000-04, but again has shown an increase during recent years (2005-
09) when the area has reached to the average of about 21 thousand hectares. Faridkot and
167
Amritsar are the leading districts in terms of area under its cultivation in the state as their share
was about 26 and 22 per cent of the total area under maize fodder cultivation respectively in the
period 2005-09. During the period, 1990-91 to 2008-09 (Period III), Hoshiarpur district showed
the highest significant increase in area (21.3 per cent per annum), while Ferozepur district
showed the highest significant decrease in area (-34.78 per cent per annum) during this period.
Socio economic characteristics of fodder growers
Majority of households in each selected state had family members between 4 and 8. Most
of the sample households had young head with age above 30 years except in Karnataka where
about 46 percent of sample households had head of age up to 30 years. Heads of about 82
percent sample households were literate in Gujarat and karnataka. Illiteracy was found to be
significantly higher among the Madhya Pradesh farmers i.e. 52 percent. Majority of farmers of
the selected states have net annual income below Rs.1 lakh, except in Punjab, where most of the
sample households (about 55%) were having annual income of more than Rs. five lakh. Average
land holding was the highest for Madhya Pradesh farmers (6.19 hect.) and the least for Karnataka
farmers (3.14 hect.). In Gujarat, 82.23 percent of operational land was irrigated. In Madhya
Pradesh and Punjab, almost all fodder growers had irrigation facilities at their farms. Madhya
Pradesh farmers own the highest i.e. Rs.3.97 lakh worth of farm building and machinery where
as it was the least for Punjab farmers (3.08 lakh). In Gujarat nearly 99 percent of the total
livestock’s were bovines and about 86 percent of the total adult cows in milk were crossbred.
The value of total livestock per sample household was found to be Rs.1, 73,608. In Madhya
Pradesh, the total respondents 150 fodder growers had found to be reared 63 adult female in
milk, 49 adult female in dry, 111 adult male, 26 and 37 respectively of male and female young
stock of indigenous cattle at their farm. As regards to buffaloes are concerned , they found to be
reared 132 adult female in milk , 63 adult female in dry , 65 young stock male and 68 young
stock female. The present value of indigenous cows cross breed cows and buffalo were found to
be Rs. 0.10 lacs, Rs. 0.20 lacs and Rs. 0.23 lacs respectively in the area under study. In
Karnataka, among indigenous cattle, for overall sample farmers the average price per female dry
was the highest with Rs. 18,857 followed by female in milk (Rs. 16,576) and female not calved
(Rs. 16,500). Similarly for crossbred cattle the average price for female in milk was the highest
168
(Rs. 21,835) followed by female dry (Rs. 13,750) and male (Rs. 12,857). In Punjab, the average
sample household was found to rear about 6 buffaloes and about 2 cattle on the farm.
In Gujarat, of the total cropped area (GCA), sample farmers devoted 21.93 percent area
to pure fodder crops (green fodder) such as lucerne, maize, bajra, sorghum (jowar) and grass. In
kharif, of the net cropped area, 21.91 percent devoted to pure fodder crops. It was 17.83 percent
in rabi and 36.34 percent in summer. In Madhya Pradesh, the majority fodder growers of the
study area adopted Soybean based cropping pattern at their farm. Maize (5.46%) was found to be
major fodder crop of the Kharif season, while Berseem (5.25%) and Jowar (5.25%) were found
to be major Rabi and summer crop of the study area respectively. In Karnataka, the overall
cropping pattern is dominated by coarse cereals accounting for over one-third of the gross
cropped area. Among crops, area under maize constituted the highest share of about 21 per cent.
The next predominant crop was paddy (18 per cent) followed by sugarcane (11 per cent).
Interestingly, napier grass has accounted for about 4 per cent of the gross cropped area of overall
sample farmers. In Punjab, paddy and wheat were the major kharif and rabi crops in the study
area grown on about 70 and 83 per cent area respectively. Fodder is grown in the kharif, rabi and
summer seasons in the state. During kharif season, sorghum, bajra and maize are the important
fodder crops and the net cropped area under these crops was about 7, 3 and one per cent
respectively. During rabi season, berseem and oat are the important fodder crops and the net
cropped area under these crops was about 8 and one per cent respectively. Maize was the
summer fodder crop grown on about 6 per cent of the net cropped area. In Gujarat as compared
to 10 years before i.e.1998-99, majority sample farmers reported marginal increase in area under
bajra, maize, paddy and wheat in year 2008-09. However, as compared to base year 1998-99,
area under guar seed and cow-pea declined in 2008-09. During same period, area under lucerne
showed somewhat increase whereas due to crop diversification, area under summer bajra showed
marginal decline. The majority sample farmers reported increase in production of fodder from
lucerne, sorghum, maize, bajra, paddy and wheat crops. However, they reported decline in
production of fodder from cowpea and guar crops. The majority sample households reported
improvement in fodder yield for lucerne, wheat, bajra, maize and sorghum in 2008-09 compared
to it in 1998-99. In Madhya Pradesh, the 70 per cent of fodder growers reported that their area
under fodder was remained same as compared to last 10 years. The above 48 per cent of fodder
169
growers of different size of farms reported that the production under fodder was increased as
compared to last 10 years, while about 40 percent of fodder growers reported that they harvested
same produce as they harvested 10 year before. The majority of fodder growers (above 80 %)
reported that the productivity of fodder was increased as compared to last 10 years. In Karnataka,
a large percentage of sample farmers (60 per cent) have reported stagnation of area under napier
and jowar. Majority of the farmers reported increase in trend in the production of green fodder
from napier during the last 10 years. At the same time, over one-third of them have reported
decrease in the production of Napier, which is mainly due to decrease in yield. In Punjab, during
the last 10 years, bajra was replaced by sorghum, whereas there was only a marginal increase in
area under maize only by a few farmers. A large number of farmers increased the area under
maize fodder during the summer season and the crop was found to become more popular
amongst the sample households during last 10 years.
In Gujarat, 50.70 percent of farmers reported that the population of bullock remained
almost same in the reference year (2008-09) as compared to the base year (1998-1999). On the
contrary, 53.21 percent sample farmers reported an increase in the population of the cow.
Further, increase in number of female buffaloes, was reported by 34.03 percent sample
households. In Madhya Pradesh, the population of cattles and male buffaloe were found to be
decreased as compared to last 10 years while the population of female buffalo and goat was
respectively increased and remain same in the area under study. In Karnataka, over 80 per cent
of the farmers reporting either decrease or stagnation in the population of cattle female and male
in the last one decade. There is a marginal increase in buffalo female population. But, about 47
percent of the sample farmers reported decrease in goat population, while 43 per cent reported
increase in sheep population. In Punjab, during the last 10 years period, about 13 per cent of the
dairy farmers observed the increase in buffalo population, which was higher than about 7 per
cent of the dairy farmers for cattle population. More number of dairy farmers observed increase
in buffalo population and decrease in cattle population during the last 10 years period. Majority
of sample households in Gujarat reported improvement in the milk yield and production of both,
cows and buffaloes in the in the reference year (2008-09) as compared to the base year (1998-
1999). About 54.13 percent of cattle farmers and 39.58 percent of the buffalo farmers reported
increase in the milk yield and production. About 29.36 percent of cow farmers and 31.25 percent
170
of buffalo farmers reported more or less no change in the milk yield and production. In Madhya
Pradesh, more than 90% of fodder growers reported that that the milk yield of female cattle
(cows) decreases as compared to 10 years before in the area under study, while the milk yield of
buffaloes was found to be increased. The more than the 70% of fodder growers reported that the
goat meat yield was remained same as compared to 10 years before. In Karnataka, while a
quarter of farmers reported increase in buffalo milk yield, but about one-third have reported
stagnation and two-fifth have reported decrease during the last 10 years. Similarly, about 45 per
cent and 33 per cent of farmer reported stagnation and decrease in milk yield from cattle,
respectively. As far as meat yield is concerned, large percentage of sample farmers reported
increase in meat production from goat, sheep, pig and poultry. In Punjab, during the last 10 years
period, about 45 per cent of the dairy farmers observed the increase in buffalo milk productivity,
which was higher than the productivity of cattle milk which was revealed by about 29 per cent of
the dairy farmers. More number of dairy farmers observed increase in buffalo milk productivity
as compared to in cattle milk productivity during the last 10 years period.
The most popular practice of feeding livestock in Gujarat is a combination of both, stall
feeding and grazing. Among the indigenous cow owners, 59.04 percent opted for open grazing in
the morning and stall feeding to animals in the evening. About 39.76 percent indigenous cow
owners reported stall feeding to animals during the entire year. About 75.28 percent crossbreed
cow owners adhere to only stall feeding whereas 24.72 percent followed combination of both,
stall feeding and open grazing. In case of buffaloes, about 66.41 percent farmers followed only
stall feeding and 33.59 percent farmers followed combination of both, stall feeding and grazing.
In Madhya Pradesh, more than 60 per cent of fodder growers reported that they adopted stall
feeding for the cattles and buffaloes instead of grazing. In Punjab, the practice of stall feeding as
well as grazing was prevalent in the study area as the sample respondents were rearing only
cattle and buffaloes on their farms. The practice of grazing was more prevalent among the cattle
as compared to buffalo growers. Amongst cattle, the practice of grazing was more popular for
indigenous cattle as compared to cross bred cattle. In Gujarat, in all seasons, total quantity of
feed and fodder fed to dry bovines was lower than quantity given to in milk bovines of same
category. Across the seasons, total quantity of feed and fodder fed to different categories of
livestock was highest in winter season and lowest in summer season. Bullocks were fed more dry
171
fodder and less green fodder in all the seasons. Grains and concentrates given to in milk bovines
was higher than its quantity fed to dry animals. As compared to crossbreed cows, quantity of
feed and fodder fed to indigenous cows was lower. In Madhya Pradesh, an average fodder
growers feed an indigenous cow with 12.86 kg. maize fodder, 2.66 kg. of wheat straw and 1.58
kg. oilcake/ day in the rainy season while they fed 12.30 kg berseem, 1.19 kg. soybean straw and
1.88 kg. oil cake/ day in the winter season. In the summer season they feed their indigenous cow
with 7.36 kg. of jowar 1.49 kg. of wheat straw and 1.99 kg. of oil/ day cake. The difference of 2
kg + was observed in case of cross breed and buffaloes’ in milk, while absence of oil cake and
chuni was observed in case of dry animals. In Karnataka, the average consumption rate of green
fodder was higher during kharif than the rates observed in rabi and summer seasons. The
consumption of dry fodder was observed relatively high during rabi and summer. Among
livestock types, the average consumption rate of green fodder per animal was worked out to be
higher for crossbred cattle in milk across the seasons. In fact, the consumption of green fodder by
crossbred cattle in milk was 17.5 Kg/day, 16.4 Kg/day and 13.9 Kg/day in kharif, rabi and
summer, respectively. In Punjab, during all the seasons, the in milk animals were found to feed
more green fodder as compared to dry/male animals. Amongst in milk animals, the cross bred
animals were found to fed higher doses of green fodder as compared to buffaloes. Amongst all
the seasons, the animals were fed the least doses of green fodder on per day basis in the summer
season. The grains and concentrates were found to be fed mostly to the in milk animals and
young stock.
Economics of production of fodder crops
In Gujarat, average cost of cultivation per hectare for kharif maize (cereal) comes to Rs.
15107. Human labour (32.70 %), machine labour (20.20%), FYM (14.80 %) and chemical
fertiliser (14.80 %) were the major contributors in the total cost of cultivation. In Madhya
Pradesh, the total cost of cultivation of maize fodder was Rs. 9264.64 /ha in the cultivation of
maize. The Farm Yard Manure (37%), Machine labor (16%), Seed (13%), Chemical fertilizer
(12%), Hired human Labour (10%) and Family Labour (7%) were found to be major components
of cost of cultivation of maize in the area under study. Jowar is an important food/fodder crop in
Karnataka. The overall estimated variable cost was Rs. 223/ha. Family labour has accounted for
the highest proportion of total cost. In Punjab, the total variable cost on per hectare basis for the
172
most important fodder crop during kharif season (sorghum crop) was found to be Rs 11946.
Amongst variable cost components, the share of human labour was more than 71 per cent. The
total cost of cultivation per hectare for lucerne, being the most important forage crop of Gujarat
during rabi season was Rs.31372. The item-wise examination of cost shows that in total cost of
cultivation, share of seed cost was highest at 33.80 percent. In Madhya Pradesh, berseem is
found to be a major fodder crop cultivated by the majority of fodder growers in the winter
season and an average fodder grower invested Rs. 13835.66 /ha in the cultivation of berseem.
The Farm Yard Manure (33%), Seed (26%), Machine labor (11%), Irrigation (9%), Chemical
fertilizer (8%), Hired human Labour (7%) and Family Labour (4%) were found to be main
component of cost of cultivation of berseem the area under study. In Punjab, the total variable
cost on per hectare basis for the most important fodder crop during rabi season (berseem) was
found to be Rs 18231. Human labour was found to take larger proportion of the cost as its share
was about 66 per cent. In Gujarat, the total cost of cultivation per hectare for lucerne (summer)
was Rs. 25075. The item-wise examination of cost data shows that in total cost of cultivation,
share of seed cost was highest at 34.6 percent. In Madhya Pradesh, jowar is found to be a major
fodder crop cultivated by the majority of fodder growers in the summer season and an average
fodder grower invested Rs. 9264.64 /ha in the cultivation of jowar. The Farm Yard Manure
(32%), Machine labor (16%), Seed (11%), Hired human Labour (11%), Chemical fertilizer
(10%), Irrigation (9%), and Family Labour (8%) were found to be main components of cost of
cultivation of maize the area under study. In Punjab, the total variable cost on per hectare basis
for most important fodder crop during summer season (maize fodder) was found to be Rs 8948.
About 60 per cent of the operational cost was incurred on human labour, most of which is
required during the harvesting of the crop.
In Gujarat, during kharif season, net return per hectare for maize cereal crop comes to Rs.
32775 which was higher by Rs.10821 compared to net return of Rs. 21954 for maize grown as
pure green fodder. Paddy is competing crop of maize. Overall, gross value of production
(MP+BP) and total variable cost of paddy were Rs. 34375 and Rs. 16444 respectively. Overall,
net return per hectare for paddy was Rs. 18291. In rabi season, net return per hectare was Rs.
13828 for lucerne whereas it was Rs. 33922 for competing crop wheat. In summer season, net
return for study crop lucerne was only Rs. 6569 whereas it was Rs. 16246 for competing crop
173
jowar / sorghum grown as green fodder crop. In Madhya Pradesh, there was found no
competition of fodder crops with other crops in the area under study. The comparative picture of
fodder crops showed that the cultivation of beseem was found be more profitable in the area
under study in which an average fodder grower invested Rs.13835.66/ha and received Rs.
52521.47/ha revealed that on the investment of Rs. 1.00, he got Rs. 3.80 as benefit over the
variable cost, while he received only Rs. 1.80 and 1.69 on investment of Rs. 1.00 respectively
from the cultivation of maize and jowar. He also got maximum net return from the cultivation of
berseem ( Rs. 52521.47/ha) as compared to cultivation of maize (Rs.16664.92/ha ) and jowar (
Rs. 16092/ha). The returns over variable cost fetched from paddy on per hectare basis were Rs.
10300 as compared to Rs. 552 for the jowar fodder in Karnataka. Farmers do not allocate higher
area under fodder crops due to low profitability in relation to their competing crops. In Punjab,
the returns over variable cost fetched from paddy on per hectare basis were more than double as
compared to sorghum. Berseem was found to be more remunerative as compared to sorghum but
still the returns over variable cost were only 65 per cent as compared to the most important
competing crop during the rabi season (wheat). Likewise, during the summer season, maize
fodder was found to be less remunerative as compared to most important competing crop during
the season i.e. maize grain. The returns over variable cost for maize fodder were only 70 per
cent as compared to maize fodder during the season.
Processing and Marketing System for Fodder Crops
In Gujarat fodder is generally sold by producers through one marketing channel, namely
producer-Local Trader-Consumer. In this channel local trader incurred marketing expenses
mainly on transportation and loading/unloading of fodder and marketing costs per Qtl. remained
around Rs.23 in all the three season. The consumer’s price was Rs. 300/Qtl. in kharif and it
touched to Rs. 400/Qtl. in summer. The net profit margin of local trader on consumer’s price was
highest at Rs. 52.31(9.17%) in rabi season and lowest at Rs. 26.67 (8.9 %) in kharif season. In
Punjab, in channel I (Producer-Forwarding agent/Commission agent-Dairy owner/Consumer),
the produce was directly taken by the producer to the forwarding/commission agent, who were
forwarding the produce to the big dairy owners keeping in view the fodder demanded, through
the chaff cutters. In channel II (Producer-Forwarding agent/Commission agent-Chaff cutter-
Consumer), the chaff cutter purchases the produce from forwarding/commission agent, who
174
charges their commission from the producer as well as buyer. In channel III, the produce is
directly disposed of to the consumers in the village itself. In channel-I for the sale of sorghum,
the producer’s share in consumer’s rupee was found to vary from 74 to 77 per cent for the
different fodder crops. In channel-II the producer’s share in consumer’s rupee was about 65 to 70
per cent for different crops.
In Gujarat, the cost of harvesting, packing, loading, unloading etc. is operational costs for
hay making. Overall, post harvesting operational costs of processing one quintal fodder was
found highest for summer season. It was Rs. 27.34 for Lucerne and Rs. 27.24 for bajra fodder.
Whereas, processing cost was lowest at Rs. 21.42 for wheat in rabi season. It was Rs. 24.32 and
Rs. 24.57 for kharif maize fodder and kharif bajra fodder respectively. Among various
operational costs, share of harvesting in total cost was more than 50.00 percent. In Punjab, silage
or ensilage is a method of preservation of green fodder through fermentation to retard spoiling
and this method of processing is more popular as compared to hay making. This is practised
during the kharif season when sorghum, bajra and chary are mixed, chaffed and put in the
underground pit. The average storage capacity of the pit was found to vary between 1500
quintals for medium size farms to 3000 quintals for large size farms. The storage period was up
to one year from the time of storage (July to August). Less than one per cent of the produce was
found to be spoiled as the rain water enters from the corners through the sheets used. Regarding
the post harvest operational cost involved in for silage making, it was about Rs. 11/q. About 74
per cent of the operational cost has to be incurred during chaffing followed by transportation (18
per cent) and pit making (about 6 per cent).
Problems faced by fodder growers
In Gujarat, inferior quality of seeds of fodder crops, non-availability of adequate quantity
of required brand HYV seeds, problems related to insects / pests and plant diseases and the lack
of technical knowledge were the major problems in production of fodder crops. In Madhya
Pradesh, lack of technical know how (76.66%) was found to be the biggest problem observed
during the course of investigation and reported by the maximum numbers of respondents in the
area under study. The inferior quality of seed (74.00%), faulty input delivery system (74.00%),
high expenditure in production due power cuts (74.00%), non availability of skilled labour in
time and high cost of labour (68.00%), faulty government policy as distribution of mini kits of
175
fodder seeds from veterinary department instead of agriculture department (52%) were the other
major problems found in the study area reported by the majority of the respondents in production
of fodder crops. In Karnataka, the highest percentage of farmers reported problems with
respect to access to credit, labour availability, high expenditure on production, seed quality and
access to technical knowledge. In Punjab, Supply of poor quality and un-recommended varieties
of seed, shortage of labour especially during harvesting of the crop, lack the technical
knowledge, acquisition of credit were the major problems faced by the fodder growers during
production of these crops in the study area.
In Gujarat, as more than 86.00 percent of sample households were not involved with
marketing of fodder crops, they are not in position to inform about the problems they faced while
marketing of fodder production. Therefore, they reported no problem. Few households reported
problems in respect of non-availability of market information in time and transport facility at
reasonable rate. In Punjab, Low price in the market, lack of market information and delayed
payment for the produce by the commission agents in the market were reported as the major
marketing problem confronted by fodder growers of the study area.
Policy implications
In Gujarat, fodder markets being unorganized and unregulated, fodder production become
low priority enterprise in potential fodder production areas. Also, dry fodder being mainly by-
products from cereal crops, their economics linked with demand and price realisation of main
products. In normal year, there were surplus productions of fodder / grass. Hence, organizing
fodder banks in these areas is suggested. Fodder / grass from surplus production areas may be
stored in these fodder banks in normal years. It is suggested that government must evolve an
arrangement to produce HYV seeds for fodder crops in adequate quantity and these should be
made available at reasonable rate in adequate quantity to the farmers. There is a need to adopt
price mechanism which ensure higher net return from cereal crops and prevent shift in crop
pattern from cereal crops to cash crops. Create organised marketing structure in surplus fodder /
grass production areas. Also arrange to provide market information uninterruptly to farmers. The
production of grass / fodder can be increase by regeneration of wastelands through controlled
exploitation and growing grass in a systematic manner. The problematic lands may be treated to
make them fit for growing grass. Cultivation of fodder trees on marginal land and degraded
176
forest areas will be helpful in increasing forage production. Also encourage silvi-pasture in waste
lands. Government may provide organizational and financial support to individuals for making
investment in such treatments. Large producers of fodder / grass should be encouraged to create
godown by providing institutional credit at reasonable rate. They should also be provided bank
credit for growing fodder. A separate feed and fodder development authority should be
established within the Directorate of Animal Husbandry with necessary technical manpower to
undertake inter-agency co-ordination in fodder production, fodder seed production, conservation
and transportation of fodder. The forest grass should be harvested during monsoon season and
converted into hay and packed, compressed and transported to other destinations. This would be
helpful in reducing fodder deficit. The state should develop and maintain pasture and fodder
patches along water reservoir, canals and rivers. Gram panchayat should be encouraged for
development of pasture lands.
In Madhya Pradesh, the fodder cultivation was not shown too much progress in the state
since 1990. The cultivator still growing fodder in the line of crop cultivation and the majority of
them were not known the recommended package of practices of fodder cultivation. The fodder
growers were also found to be not doing fodder preservation techniques viz. hay and silage
making for the lean period. They were not cultivating fodder in commercial line as none of them
involved in marketing of fodder in the state. Hence, it is the right time that state government re-
intensified their efforts in progress of fodder in the state because without introducing dairy based
faming system approach on the farmers’ farm, their income should not became double, which is
the ultimate target of the state government. It is only activity which was done by the farmers
since long time. It not only generated income but also enhanced employment at their owned
farm. The mini kit of fodder crops were found to be distributed by the animal husbandry
department and they were not taking interest in the extension activities concern to the fodder, due
to lack of training in it and it lacks the aura of being doctor and the fodder is more inclined
towards agriculture. The animal husbandry department in the state is only concerned with the
treatment aspect and improvement of breeds because here lays the money. Investing interest in
fodder sector will benefit the live stock owners but who cares? Hence, there is urgent need to
create the a separate department for fodder development separate from animal husbandry
department or merge the fodder development sector in agriculture department for better
177
extension activities and distribution of fodder min kits with technical know-how because the
cultivation of fodder is more or less similar to the cultivation of crops.
In Karnataka, concerted efforts should be made to encourage the farmers to cultivate
green fodder crops for enhancing the quality of livestock rearing across districts in the state. This
may be attempted initially by providing subsidised seed material and fertiliser to group of
potential farmers at hobli level and then can be replicated to others through these successful
farmer groups. It is thus, necessary to conduct farmers’ training periodically by the officials of
the Department of Agriculture to impart skill and technical knowledge to the farmers. In this
regard, a co-ordination between Department of Agriculture and Department of Animal
Husbandry and Veterinary Services is necessary for better sharing of technical knowledge
including on feeding practices with the farmers. There is huge scope for increasing the yield of
napier and jowar through adoption of better technology and field management. For this, good
quality seed material and other inputs should be made available. Local institutions should be
encouraged to play an active role in protecting the common property resources, which not only
will help in the development of livestock enterprises but also in the maintenance of ecological
balance. Efforts should be made to popularise the improved breeds of different livestock which
are adaptable to different agro-climatic conditions. Karnataka has relatively a large area under
dry land. The livestock species suitable to dry land areas should be promoted so that they
perform better in those areas. Efforts should also be made to promote rearing of high quality
buffaloes for improving the dairy development. This assumes importance in the context of
decline or stagnant cattle population in the state. Availability of reliable data on fodder
cultivation will be useful for better planning of livestock development in the state. Concerted
efforts should be made by the government departments to systematically collect and publish data
on fodder cultivation.
In Punjab, due to heavy pressure of growing wheat and paddy, the area under fodder has
been decreasing, and so as the composition of the live-stock population. As a viable means of
diversification, cultivation of fodder should be increased along with increase in livestock
population, in order to make it more productive. Farmers suggested improving the quality of
seedlings and frequent checks by the Department officials can help in this direction. More
emphasis is needed to evolve the high yielding varieties for various fodder crops as presently
178
these are regarded as lesser important crops. The centre government grant of Rs. 6 crores to the
State Government during 2009-10 and 2010-11 for providing subsidies to purchase quality
berseem seed to cattle farmers, need to be increased keeping in view the serious problem of non-
availability of quality seed for various fodder crops in the state. Further, the state government
needs to use such subsidies more effectively for right cause and concern. The primary
agricultural credit cooperative societies and other funding agencies should be persuaded to
provide adequate short-term credit facilities to cover the operational cost. There is need to make
more efforts for effective extension for these hitherto neglected crops so that the farmers may be
able to know the latest know how regarding these crops. On the marketing front, most of the
fodder growers were in favour of establishment of regulated markets in the region. To stabilize
the prices, the farmers were in favour of establishment of better market infrastructure by the
government so that the prices may not go down by the certain minimum level and they may
come out of the clutches of the commission agents. The state has abundant roughage (wheat and
rice crop), which can be used in making silage through processes developed and recommended
by Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. The centre provides a subsidy of 80 per cent for
making silo pits with automatic loader. To promote the processing of fodder, these facilities are
needed to be spread to more number of farmers.
179
REFERENCES
Acharya S.S. and Agarwal N.L. (2005), “Agricultural Marketing in India”, Oxford & IBH
Publishing Company, New Delhi.
Bhende, M.J., R.S. Deshpande and P. Thippaiah (2004). Evaluation of Feed and Fodder
Development under the Centrally Sponsored Schemes in Karnataka, Agricultural
Development and Rural Transformation Centre, Bangalore.
Biradar, N., C. R. Ramesh and P.S. Pathak (2007). “Traditional Livestock Feeding Practices in
Northern Karnataka”, Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 6(3): 459-462.
Birthal, P.S. and P.P. Rao (2004). “Intensification of Livestock Production in India: Patterns,
Trends and Determinants”, Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59(3): 555-565.
Dikshit, A.K and P.S. Birthal (2010). “India’s Livestock Feed Demand: Estimates and
Projections”, Agricultural Economics Research Review, 23: 15-28, January-June.
Erenstein, O., W. Thorpe, J. Singh and A. Verma (2007). Crop-Livestock Interactions and
Livelihoods in the Indo-Gangetic Plains, India: A Regional Synthesis, International
Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT), Mexico.
Government of India (2002), Report of the Working group on Animal Husbandry and Dairying
for the 10th
Five Year Plan (2002-2007), Government of India, Planning Commission,
January-2002.
Government of India (2007), Report of the Working group on Animal Husbandry and Dairying
for the 11th
Five Year Plan (2007-2012), Government of India, Planning Commission.
ICAR (2011). Handbook of Agriculture, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New
Delhi.
Kumar, S. and S.A. Faruqui (2009),"Production Potential and Economic Viability of Food
Forage Based Cropping System Under Irrigated conditions", Indian Journal of
Agronomy, 54 (1): 46-51.
Mishra, A.K., D.B.V.Raman, M.S.Prasad, Y.S.Ramakrishna “Strategies for forage production
and utilisation, KVK Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Hydrabad-
500059.
Sharma, R.P.; K.R. Raman and A.K. Singh. (2009),"Fodder Productivity and Economics of
180
Pearlmillet with Legumes Intercropping under Various Row Proportions", Indian Journal
of Agronomy, 54 (3): 301-305.
Wylie P. (2007), "Economics of Pastures versus Grain or Forage Crops," Tropical Grasslands,
Vol. 41: 229-233.
181
Appendix-I: Area and productivity of fodder crops grown in India
Crop Area
(thousand hectares)
Green fodder productivity
(tonnes/hectare)
Berseem 1900 60-110
Lucerne 1000 60-130
Senji 5 20-30
Shaftal 5 50-75
Mentha 5 20-35
Cowpea 300 25-45
Guar 200 15-30
Rice bean 20 15-30
Oat 100 35-50
Barley 10 25-40
Jowar/chari (Sorghum) 2600 35-70
Bajra 900 20-35
Maize 900 30-55
Makchari (Teosinte) 10 30-50
Chinese cabbage 10 15-35
Source: Handbook of Agriculture, 2011, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi
182
Appendix-II
Comments on the draft report
This study was conducted in four states i.e. Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab.
The report is well written and also presents policy perspective. It has fulfilled all the set
objectives. However, following comments are offered to enrich the analysis:
1. The report has documented demand, supply and deficit of green and dry fodder, in India.
Authors are advised to elaborate the fodder scenario at the national level.
2. The time period for district wise analysis of livestock has varied for different states
covered under the study [Gujarat (1997-2007), Madhya Pradesh (1992-2007), Karnataka
(1992-2007) and Punjab (1990-2007)]. The reasons for this variation may be explained.
3. The note given below Table 4.9 need not to be repeated in Table 4.10.
4. Processing is one part of the objectives (iii) and (iv). The analysis of this part needs to be
elaborated.
The report should be finalized after incorporating the above suggestions.
Usha Tuteja
Acting Director
Agricultural Economics Research Centre
University of Delhi
Delhi-110 007
183
Appendix III
Action Taken Report on the Comments
All the comments were taken into consideration while finalizing the report. These comments
have been incorporated, wherever necessary, in the relevant chapters.
1. The fodder scenario at the national level has been elaborated as desired.
2. The time period for district wise analysis of livestock was originally proposed as 1992-
2007. In Gujarat, due to reformation process of districts in 1997, relevant data for 1992
were not available. Similarly, in Punjab, the livestock data for 1990 were available
instead of 1992. Therefore, the analysis was carried out for the period (1990-2007) for
Punjab and 1997- 2007 for Gujarat.
3. Comment incorporated.
4. In most of the study districts, the processing practices of fodders were not commonly
prevalent among the farmers. A very small number of fodder growers were involved in
the processing of fodder. In Madhya Pradesh, none of the fodder grower was found to
practice processing of fodder i.e hay and silage making. Still the available information on
the subject has been reported in the text.
Authors
top related