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