Perception of farmers about different types of shrimp feeds.

PERCEPTION OF FARMERS ABOUT DIFFERENT TYPESOF SHRIMP FEEDS

v!-:, (-T---)

C o c h i n - 6 c 2 014,

DISSERTATION S UBM ITTED

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF FISHERIES SCIENCE (MARICULTURE)

OF THE

CENTRAL INSTITUTE O F FISHERIES E D U C A T IO N (DEEMED UNIVERSITY)

BY PAUL P A N D I

CENTRAL MARINE FISHERIES RESEARCH INSTITUTE

(INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH) COCHIN-682 014

INDIA.

JULY 2000

DEDICATED TO MYBELOVED PARENTS,

BROTHERS, SISTER AND SISTER IN LA W

C E R T I F I C A T E

C e r t i f i e d that the disserialion entitled P e r c e p t i o n o f f a r m e r s a b o u t d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f s h r i m p fee d s is a bona fide record o f work d o n e by M r . S . P a u l p a n d i u n d e r o u r g u id a n c e at the Central M a rin e Fisheries R e se a rc h Institute d u r in g the tenure o f h is M .F .S c (Mariculture) P r o g r a m m e o f 1 9 9 8 -2 0 0 0 and that it has not p r e v i o u s ly f o rm e d the basis for the a w a r d o f any other d eg re e , d i p lo m a o r other s im ila r title s o r f o r any publication.

M rs .S h e e la Im m anuel ²- ^ Sc ie n tist,S E E T T D

C M F R I,C o c h in .

C h a irp e rs o n & M a j o r A d v is o r A d v is o ry co m m ittee.

% o o •

D r . ( M r s ) .M anpal S ridhar S c i e n t i s t (SS) PN P D C M F R I , Cochin.

C o - C h a irp e r s o n A d v i s o r y committee.

_

D r . R . N a r a y a n a k u m a r ■ S cientist, S E E T T D

C M F R I . Cochin.

M em ber,A dvi.sory c o m m itte e

DECLARATION

I h e re b y d eclare lhai this thesis entitled P e r c e p tio n o f fa r m e r s a b o u t diffe r en t ty p e s o f s h r im p fe e d s is based on m y o w n research and has not previously f o rm e d the basis f o r the a w a rd o f any d e g re e , d ip lo m a , associateship, fello w s h ip o r o th e r sim ila r titles o r recognitions.

S. P A U L P A N D I Coch in

Ju ly - 2 0 0 0

A B S T R A C T

P erception o f farmers about different types o f shrimp feeds By

S. Paulpandi

C h a irp e r s o n : M rs . Sheela Im m a n u e l, Scientist,

S o c io E c o n o m ic E v a lu a tio n &

T e c h n o lo g y T r a n sf e r D i v i s i o n ,C M F R I, C o c h i n -1 4

T h i s rese a rc h study e n title d P e r c e p t i o n o f f a r m e r s a b o u t d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f s h r i m p f e e d s w a s c o n d u c te d in R a m a n a th a p u ra m a n d T h o o t h u k k u d i districts.

T h e o b j e c t iv e s o f the study w e r e f o c u s s e d on the p ro file c h a ra c te ristic s o f the target p o p u l a t i o n , kn o w le d g e level o f s h rim p farm ers a b o u t the different types o f feeds, f e e d i n g s c h ed u le and m a n a g e m e n t practices a d o p te d by s h r i m p farmers, p e rc e p t io n o f the farm ers t o w a r d s th e different ty p es o f s h rim p feeds and p r o b le m s f a c e d b y farm ers re g a r d in g th e feed.

M o s t o f the r e s p o n d e n ts b e lo n g e d to m id d le age g r o u p a n d had m e d i u m level o f e d u c a t i o n w ith s h rim p f a r m in g as th eir main o c c u p a t i o n and had low e x p e rie n c e . It is o b s e rv e d that m o r e th an thirty eight p e rc e n t o f the farm ers had low level o f in c o m e (below Rs. o n e lakh). M a jority o f th e f a rm e rs h a d high level o f e x te n s i o n a g e n cy contact a n d f o u n d to be m e m b e rs in o n e o rg an iz a tio n and h a d a tt e n d e d fisheries training p r o g ra m m e s .

M o s t o f the farm ers u s in g c o m m e rc ia l feed h a d k n o w le d g e on the p r a c tic e s o f d e c re a s in g feed d u r in g m o u ltin g time, effect o f low d isso lv e d oxygen and a b o u t th e need for reg u la r w a t e r e x c h a n g e in time o f o v e r feeding. T h e y also

p o s s e s s e d corrcci kn ow led g e aboul the different m e a s u r e s a d o p ted for checking the quality o f feed. M ajority d o e s not have know ledge a b o u t the feed m o n ito rin g a n d im p o r ta n t additives in the feed.

M a jo rity o f the farm m a d e feed using farmers posses.sed k n o w le d g e about the m e t h o d o f c h e ck in g ex c ess feeding, important a d d it i v e s in the feed, and e x c h a n g e o f w ater d uring o v e r feeding.

C o n im erc ia f feed using farmerN had adopted th e co rre c t m eth o d , type, fre q u e n c y a n d tim in g s o f feeding. T h e farm m ade feed u s in g farm ers a d o p te d the n u m b e r o f f ee d in g locations p e r unit area, quantity o f f e e d a n d p r o v id in g starter feed after stock ing . M ajority o f th e m is not adopting th e s u g g e ste d a llo c a tio n s o f fe e d p e r day.

F a r m e r s ’ preference to the com m ercial f ee d w a s due to its easy availa bility in the m arket, g o o d attractibility, water s ta b ility and sto ra g e life o f feed. In the case o f farm m a d e feed using farmers m ajo r ity felt that tex tu re o f the feed was g o o d w h e n c o m p a r e d to c o m m e rc ia l feed and th e feed was affordable.

T h e im porta n t p r o b le m s regarding c o m m e rc ia l fe e d are fungal infection and o v e r c o oking.

T h e m a jo r p r o b le m s o f th e farm m ade feed u s in g f a r m e r s w e re the lack o f availability o f raw m aterials, lo w s h e lf life, p o o r w a t e r stability, a n d the less im porta nt p r o b le m s faced b y these farm ers were h a r d n e s s o f the feed, fungal infection a n d o v e r cooking.

J V

i m r n

* w a r e 1 1 ^ 3 0 ^ q n arf^PRT

^ ^ T F i i 5 R T f ^ f t d d

arOTSTT: ^JWcff ?it?TT TRM 3TTfej sfR

^mm, ^ W 3T N 3TT5 - 14.

^ tR 3fR % TT^3TTff % ^ trt.

^ ^r f^R 3 tt^ 3tt^ afR ^f w f f % w i t n ^ f^rfcr ^

^TF 3 | ^ 2 m 2TT.

f^rrr^ ^ sif^mcT 5t^ a r t o m ttezt^^t^ afR ^te2pt ^ ^

f^5TT y r ^ ^ 3IR ^ ^ ^ ^ 3T>ft apft f^Fi^

^ q t ^ 3T^?T^ ^

^ W N ; T ^ m r ^ ^

q iP if ^ c f j ^ 7 ^ ^ ■^^rdhr 'jT^ ?frt

w ^ im ^ 3 T to Radi-^ iR 3#f^^F5R

nm

WTT 3TTf^ ^ uTH^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ % 3 T ^ ?R?

^iiPT^ 0 . ^ arflmim ^ w r ^ ^ 7T? 3fR ^ ^ uTPT^T^t ^

t l ^ :2PT ^T^3TT^ 'Hyech' ^3TPT^ 3 f t o ^ ^

f^cTT^ tfpft ^ ^ 3fR ^ ^TT^ ^ t ^

TRIT^

^?is7 grr _\9 ^ Pi^Pid ^ g ? r ^ afR f%^Pid

3 n ^ f^ ^ f%^n ajT. ■ST^ ^ w ftn ^ PraRid ^ernf ^

t o f ^ m HTsn % i h o \ m \. ^ ^ ^ fecfrar,

3Tf§mit?T ^ 3 T T ^ HT^n ^ ^ ^ 3 T ^ f .

TT^3TT% ^SfTSff cfi^

^

mU

A

3TRTm 3Tra>ifen, -gpft ^ f^4>|^j,MH , ^ 3 R ^ cT^ ^ Tf^RUi 5TT^^ 3TTf^

g jR W t. fJR ^ ^ira ^ We=T 3TRTH 3fR ^ t .

m W ^ T ^ ^iT?r ^

^

n ^

jsm ^ ^ ^

A C K NO W LE D G M E NT

I feel p r o u d in e x p re s s in g my deep sense o f g r a titu d e to m y guide M r s . S h e e l a I m m a n u e l , S c ientist (S E E T T D ) C M F R l for h e r in ex p ressib le guidance a n d p riceless sup p o rt t h ro u g h o u t the dissertation work.

I a m d e e p ly o b lig e d to A dvisory C o m m it te e m e m b e r D r . M a n p a l S r i d h a r , S c ien tist (S.S) ( P N P D ) C M F R I for h e r e x p e r t g u id an c e and her c o n tin u o u s e n c o u r a g e m e n t th ro u g h o u t the research p e rio d .

I e x te n d m y a rd e n t g ratitu d e to A dvisory c o m m i t t e e m e m b e r D r . R.

N a r a y a n a k u m a r , S cientist ( S E E T T D ) for his g u id an c e a n d en c o u ra g e m e n t.

I h a v e th e d e e p e s t g r atitu d e to D r . M . D e v a r a j , f o r m e r D irec to r, C M F R I a n d D r . V . N a r a y a n a P i ll a i, D irector, C M F R I for p e r m i tt in g m e to avail the facilities in the Institute d u r in g th e course this study.

I take this c h a n c e to th a n k D r . C. S u s e e la n , S e n i o r Scientist a n d fo rm e r O ffic e r-in -C h a rg e , P G P M a n d D r . R . P a u l r a j , H e a d , P N P D a n d Officer-in- C h a r g e , P G P M , C M F R I , C o c h i n f o r their support r e n d e r e d d u rin g the study period.

I also e x p re s s m y d e e p e s t thankfulness to D r . R . S a t h i a d h a s , Principal Sc ientist a n d H e a d ,S E E T T D iv isio n , C M F R I, Cochin.

I a m m u c h o b lig e d to M r s . S. A s h a l e t h a , S c ie n tist, S E E T T D , C M F R I , for h e r h e lp a n d advice.

I a m than k ful to S h r i . A m a l X a v i e r a n d M r s . R a c h a e l , Assistant D irectors, T a m il N a d u S ta te F ish eries D epartm ent, T a m il N a d u .

I a m thankful to th e D e a n , Tam il N a d u A g r ic u ltu ra l University, M r . J a w a h a r a n d M r . C h i d a m b a r a m , Associate p ro fe s s o rs . Fisheries C o lleg e and R e s e a rc h Institute, T h o o t h u k k u d i

I w is h to th ank all th e T ech n ical sta ff in S o c io E c o n o m i c E v a lu a tio n and T e c h n o l o g y T r a n s f e r D iv isio n , ( S E E T T D ) C M F R I, C o c h i n .

I also e x p re s s m y d e e p es t thankfulness to M r . J o h n , M s. Juliet, Ms.

M a y a an d M r. Y e s u d h a so n for their constructive s u g g e stio n s, s u p p o rt and e n c o u ra g e m e n t throu g h o ut the research work

1 fin d paucity o f w o rd s in e x p re ssin g m y o b lig a tio n to m y friends M r . S.

A n a n d , N . R u d h r a m u r t y , R aj, A n b u , J e e v a , K a b il a n , S a r o , V e n k i, V i ja y a b a s k e r , A n a n d h a n , E d w i n , M a r iy a p p a n , R e n j i t h , S u r e s h , A n a n d and D r. J a y a

M y sincere thanks are also d u e to the a u th o ritie s o f C M F R I a n d I C A R for the financial a ssistance in th e form o f J u n i o r R e s e a r c h F e l lo w s h ip (JR F )

I a m alw a y s grateful to all o th e r friends a n d o t h e r w ell w is h e rs w h o he lp e d m e directly o r indirectly in the a c c o m p lis h m e n t o f th is task.

L astly, 1 d edicate m y s u c ce s s to m y P arents, B r o t h e r s , S is te r a n d S ister In L a w a n d their c h ild ren f o r th eir e v erlasting love, s u p p o r t a n d e n th u s ia sm .

C o c h in -1 4 2 4 - 0 7 -2 0 0 0

^ a u r s )

(S. P A U L P A N D I )

S I.N o

C O N TEN TS Page No

Certificate 1

Declaration

II

A b stra c t in English

III

A b stra c t in Hindi

V

A ckn o w le d g m en ts

VI

L ist o f Tables

VIII

L is t o f Figures

IX

! Introduction 1

2 R e v i e w o f Literature

5

3 M e th o d o lo g y

21

3.1 S e lec tio n o f study area

21

3.2 D e sc rip tio n o f the s tu d y are a

22

3.3 S a m p li n g design and d a ta co llectio n

24

3 .4 S e lec tio n o f variables

25

3.5 D e sc rip tio n about c o m m e rc ia l and fanii m ad e feed

30

3.6 A na ly tic a l tools

31

4 R e s u lts and discussion

32

4.1 P r o file characteristics o f targ et p o p ulation

32

4 .2 K n o w l e d g e level o f s h r i m p farm ers about the different

t y p e s o f shrimp feeds

38

4.3 F e e d in g schedule and m a n a g e m e n t practices a d o p te d b y f a rm e rs

46

4 .4 P e rce p tio n o f the f a r m e r s to w a rd s the different types o f s h r i m p feeds.

51

4.5 P r o b le m s faced by f a rm e rs reg a rd in g feed

54

5 S u m m a r y

61

6 R e fe re nc e s

69

N o L IS T O F T A B L E S ^{P a g e}

I Profile characteristics o f s h rim p farmers 33

2 K now le d g e level o f s h rim p farm ers a b o u t the d iffe re n t types o f

feed. 39

3 K now ledge level o f s h rim p farm ers ab o u t the c o m m e r c i a l feed 43 4 K now le d ge level o f s h rim p farm ers a b o u t the f a r m m a d e feed 45 5 F e e d in g schedule and m a n a g e m e n t practices a d o p t e d by farm ers

u s in g com m e rc ia l feed 48

6 F e e d in g schedule and m a n a g e m e n t practices a d o p te d b y farm ers

u s in g farm m ade feed. 50

7 Perception o f s h rim p f a rm e rs to w ard s c o m m e rc ia l feed 52 8 Perception o f s h rim p farm ers to w a rd s farm m a d e feed 53 9 P r o b le m s faced by s h rim p f a n n e r s in u s in g c o m m e r c i a l feed 55 10 P ro b le m s faced by s h rim p farm ers in usin g f a r m m a d e feed 58

Sl.N o LIST O F F IG U R ES Page

1 M a p o f the study area 23

2 Profile characteristics o f the targ e t p o pulation 35

3 K n o w le d g e about c o m m e rc ia l feed 4 0

4 K n o w le d g e about farm m a d e feed 41

5 P r o b le m s faced by s h rim p f a r m e r s regarding c o m m e rc i a l fe e d 56 6 P r o b le m s faced by s h rim p f a r m e r s regarding faiiii m a d e feed 59

1 . ^ /^ n ^ ’K 0 1 > U C < Z D Q / ^

1. Introduction

I n d i a n coastal waters o f fe r a very good potential f o r th e culture o f variety o f a q u a tic o rg an ism s. T h e c o u n try possesses a long c o a s t l in e o f 8129 K m with a n u m b e r o f b rac k is h w a te r lakes and the estuarine sys{em f o rm e d by the m ajo r rivers. In d ia n fish production is fro m both sectors viz, th e ca p tu re a n d culture fisheries. C a p t u r e fisheries s e c to r c o n stitu te a highly p r o d u c t i v e sector, a source o f v a lu a b le p r o te in rich food, e m p l o y m e n t and a net c o n t r i b u t o r w ith th e balance o f p a y m e n t. T h e catch fro m c a p tu r e fisheries has b e c o m e m o r e o r less static in several a re a s o n acco u n t o f th e e x ploitation reaching th e m a x i m u m s u sta in ab le level a n d r e d u c e d in so m e o t h e r areas due to o v e re x p lo ita tio n , e n v ir o n m e n ta l d e g r a d a t io n a n d related factors. T h e r e f o r e m o re and m o r e atten tio n is n o w being g iven to aquacuJture, which offers i m m e n se scope f o r s u b s ta n tia lly r a is in g the p r o d u c tio n level. W ith an e s tim a te d 1.2 m illion h e c ta re s o f b ra c k is h w a te r area, coastal a q u a c u l t u r e is e m e r g in g as a m a jo r p r o d u c tio n activity. India's total e s tim a te d p r o d u c tio n potential is ab o u t 17,68,422 tons, t h r o u g h a quaculture.

T h o u g h traditional s h r i m p farm in g has been p r a c t ic e d f o r a lo n g tim e in States like K e r a la and W e s t B e n g a l, m odified ex ten siv e a n d sem i - e x te n siv e type o f f a r m in g started only d u rin g th e last decade in the sta te s like A n d h r a Pradesh, T a m il N a d u , K a m a ta k a and Kerala. A b o u t 5 0 per c e n t o f th e farm in g a re a is still u n d e r e x te n s i v e f a n n i n g prac tic e a n d the rest u n d e r m o d if ie d ex te n siv e a n d sem i - e x te n s i v e f a r m in g (M urthy, 1997).

D u e to very high d e m a n d in fo re ig n market and s ta g n a tin g p r o d u ctio n o f s h rim p s f r o m the capture fisheries, a tte m p ts were m a d e to in cre a se shrim p p r o d u c t i o n t h ro u g h culture fisheries. T h e b rac k is h w a te r are a in th e c o u n try is e s ti m a t e d at I J 9 ,0 9,000 hectares ( S h a le e s h a , 1994 ). Prsen tly a b o u t 10 per c e nt o f t h e a r e a is under b rac k ish w a te r s h r i m p farm in g w ith an annua) pro d u ctio n o f a b o u t o f 80, 0 0 0 tonnes ( R o s e n b e rry , 1999). In 1 9 9 9 - 2 0 0 0 c u ltu r e d shrim p e x p o rt f e t c h e d foreign exchange e q u iv a l e n t to Rs. 808 c r o r e s ( A n o n , 1999).

A q u a c u l t u r e in T a m il Nadu:

In T a m i l N a d u about 5 6 ,0 0 0 h e c ta r e s o f b r a c k i s h w a te r are a h a d already been i d e n t i f i e d suitable for farm in g . A d o p t i o n o f scientific strateg ies a n d m o d ern t e c h n i q u e s o f s h rim p aquaculture in T a m il N a d u w o u l d y ie ld a b o u t 0.61 - 0 .62 m etric t o n s o f s h rim p /h a worth Rs. 4 - 5 lakh annually. S h r i m p a q u a c u ltu re offers a d e q u a te e m p l o y m e n t op p o rtun ities to th e rural fis h in g c o m m u n i ty . In Tam il N a d u c o a s t th e total area u n d e r c u ltu re is 984.21 ha. In R a m a n a t h a p u r a m and T h o o t h u k k u d i districts the total a re a u n d e r culture is 3 5 .3 3 h a a n d 177.51 ha.

re s p e c tiv e ly (S u k u m a r,1 9 9 8).

S h r i m p farm ing is m o stly d o n e b y th e farm ers in t h e ir o w n lan d o r leased in land. T r a d itio n a l filtration m e t h o d o f f arm in g is p r a c tic e d b y m o s t o f the m arg in al a n d small farm ers w h e r e a s scie n tific s h rim p f a r m in g is d o n e by the large f a r m e r s o n a com m ercial scale. In c a se o f scientific f a r m in g o f s h rim p s the p o n d is e r a d i c a t e d and then sto c k e d w ith seeds c o lle c te d fro m the hatcheries.

S to c k in g d e n s i t y is m aintained as p e r the rec o m m e n d a tio n s . F e e d in g is an im p o r ta n t a c tiv ity in the scientific f a r m in g as it c o n trib u te s a lot to th e g r o w th o f

the sh rim p s. In ad d ilio n lo natural feed in g farm ers a lso use com m c rc ia l feeds to h arvest a b e iie r yield. D ifferen t types o f c o m m e rc ia l f e e d s are available in the m arket.

E v e n th o u g h q uite a n u m b e r o f feed fo rm u la tio n s a re available, the use o f a p a rticu la r type o f feed d e p e n d s u p o n the farm ers p r e f e r e n c e w h ich in turn is b a s ed o n t h e ir e x p e rie n c e . T h e s u c ce s s o f the feed d e p e n d s upon the ex ten t o f its u sa g e by the f a r m in g c o m m u n ity . P e rce p tio n a n d a ttitu d e o f farm ers diffe r from individ ual to in d iv id u a l a n d v a rio u s factors m ay c o n tr i b u te to this d ifference. A f ew stu d ie s o n l y h a v e been u n d e r tak en on aspects like (he k n o w le d g e level o f f a rm e rs a b o u t d iffe re n t ty p es o f feed, feed in g sc hedule a n d m a n a g e m e n t practices a n d also o n the e x te n t o f a d o p tio n o f different feeds b y f arm ers . Hence the present s tu d y is u n d e rta k e n with the f o llo w in g objectives: -

• T o s tu d y the p ro file c hara c te ristic s o f the target p o p u la tio n .

• T o a s se s s the k n o w l e d g e level o f s h rim p farm ers a b o u t the different types o f feeds.

• T o fm d o u t th e f ee d in g s c h e d u le and m a n a g e m e n t practices a d o p te d by s hrim p farm ers.

• T o stu dy the p e rc e p tio n o f the farm ers to w ard s th e diffe re n t types o f s h rim p feeds.

• T o identify ih e p r o b le m s faced by farm ers regarding th e feed.

Scope o f th e study

T h e p r o p o s e d sludy is e x p c c le d lo generate d a ta on the profile c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the sh rim p farm ers, their kn o w led g e level, feed in g sc h e d u le and m a n a g e m e n t p r a c tic e s adopted by th em , perception o f the farm ers t o w a r d s the d iffe re n t t y p e s o f shrim p feeds, a n d the p ro b le m faced by farm ers re g a r d in g the feed. A n o v e r a l l field a s se s s m e n t and p erfo rm an ce o f the feed c o u ld be m ade w h ic h m a y in turn contribute to th e feed m ak ers for refin in g their fo rm u la tio n s. I(

is h o p e d t h a t th e results w o u ld be useful for analysing the factors in flu e n c in g the feed p r e f e r e n c e a n d ad o ptio n o f f ee d in g sc hedule by th e f a rm e rs w h ic h in turn will h e l p t o ta k e suitable steps f o r c reatin g better a w a re n e s s a b o u t scientific f e e d i n g p r a c t i c e a m o n g the farm ers. T h is will lead to th e overall i m p r o v e m e n t in the a r e a o f s h r i m p culture, there b y in creasin g the yield.

L im ita tio n s o f the study

S i n c e this study w a s u n d e rta k e n as a part o f th e p o s t- g r a d u a te p r o g r a m of the a u th o r , t h e lim itations o f tim e a n d resources could n o t be av o id ed . H e n c e this study w a s c o n d u c te d only in R a m a n a t h a p u r a m and T h o o t h u k k u d i d istricts. Even then, a s i n c e r e effort was taken to th e m a x im u m e x te n t po.ssible to o b ta in belter

results.

O rganization o f the thesis

T h i s thesis is presented in five chapters viz. In troduction g iv e n in ch a p te r ], R e v i e w o f literature u n d e r c h a p te r 2, M e th o d o lo g y u n d e r c h a p te r 3, R e sults a n d D i s c u s s i o n u n d e r c hapter 4, a n d S u m m a r y under c h a p te r 5.

0 9 :

2. Review o f literature

A r e v i e w o f th e past rese a rc h in this field has been d o n e to en a b le a b etter u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the .subject. T h e different a sp ects c o v e r e d u n d e r r e v ie w are p r e s e n te d a s f o ll o w s

2.1 P r o file c h a r a c te r is t ic s o f the target population.

2.2 K n o w l e d g e level o f s h r i m p f a rm e rs about the d iffe re n t types o f feed.

2.3 F e e d i n g s c h e d u l e a n d m a n a g e m e n t practices a d o p te d b y farmers.

2.4 P e r c e p t i o n o f th e fa r m e r s to w a r d s th e different ty p es o f s h rim p feed.

2.5 P r o b l e m s f a c e d by f a rm e rs r eg a rd in g feeds.

2.1 P rofile characteristics o f the target population:

2.1.1 A g e

P o u n r a j (1 9 9 2 ) w h ile a n a ly z in g the inland f is h e rm e n c o -o p e r a tiv e s o c ie tie s f o u n d th at m o st o f th e resp o n d en ts c o m e u n d e r m id d le a g e gro u p ( 7 5 .8 3 % ) , f o l l o w e d by o ld ( 1 5 % ) and y o u n g ( 9 . 1 %).

P e r u m a l e t a i ( 1 9 92 ) rep o rted that m o st o f th e b en eficiaries o f the Fish F a rm e rs D e v e l o p m e n t A g e n c y (F F D A ) were u n d e r y o u n g age ca te g o ry (6 3 % ), fo llo w e d b y m i d d l e ( 2 6 % ) a n d o ld age (11%).

K h a n e t a i (1 9 9 7 ) rep o rted that 55 p e r ce n t o f th e p a d d y farm ers w e re o f m iddle a g e , 2 2 p e r c e n t w e r e o f y o u n g age and 18 p e r c e n t w e r e o f old age.

A l a u d d i n e/ al. (1 9 9 8 ) f o u n d that nearly h a lf o f th e agriculture lab o u re rs b e lo n g e d t o o l d a g e and a little o v e r o n e third b elo n g e d to y o u n g age f o llo w e d by

m id d l e a g e (1 8 7 r) in their stud y on agriculture la b o u r e rs and e m p lo y m e n t o p p o r tu n i ti e s ,

M e e r a n ei a i (1999) in th e ir study on s o c io - e c o n o m i c a n d socio- p s y c h o lo g i c a l profile o f s h rim p fa r m e r s fo u n d that 5 0 a n d 4 2 p e r c e n t o f the s h r i m p f a r m e r s b e lo n g e d to y o u n g a n d m id d le age gro u p resp ectiv ely .

V e n k a t t a k u m a r (1999) w h ile d e s c rib in g the p r o file c h a ra c te ris tic s o f c o m m e r c i a l c o c o n u t grow ers f o u n d th at n e a rly h a lf o f th e farm ers w e re o f m id d le age a n d o n e th ird o f them were y o u n g a g e and the rest w e r e o ld age.

G a i k w a d et al. (2000) w h i l e s tu d y in g the in fo r m a tio n se e k in g b e h a v io u r o f K r i s h i V i g y a n K e n dra ( K V K ) b e n e fic ia rie s in M a h a r a s h tr a f o u n d that m o st o f the b e n e f i c ia r ie s (75% ) were fro m m id d le age and old a g e group.

2.1.2 E ducation

D e s a i a n d Kaul (1984) in th eir stu d y on a dult e d u c a tio n o f f is h e rm e n re p o r t e d chat m o st o f the fishe rm e n w e r e illiterate.

S e h a r a et al. (1986) stu died th e so cio -e co n o m ic c o n d itio n s o f f is h e rm e n in se le c te d v i ll a g e s o f M a h ara s h tra a n d G u ja ra t coasts a n d f o u n d th at m o s t o f the fis h e rm e n w e r e illiterate (60% ). A m o n g th e literate f is h e r m e n 31 p e r c e n t had e d u c atio n u p to p rim ary level, 4 p e r c e n t had middle level, 4 p e r c e n t h a d h ig h er se c o n d a ry level and rem ain in g 1 p e r ce n t h a d graduate level.

S u b h a s c h a n d r a (1986) w h ile stu d y in g the c o n s e q u e n c e s o f a d o p tio n o f fish c u lt u r e practices by fish farm ers fo u n d that a b o u t 88 p e r c e n t o f the re s p o n d e n ts had prim ary to s e con d a ry level o f education.

VenkairamanujaiTJ a a i ( 1 9 8 7 ) in iheir s tu d y on s o c io - e c o n o m ic c o n d i t i o n s o f the chunk fisherm en c o m m u n i ty reported that the p e rc e n ta g e o f s c h o o l a t t e n d i n g m ale and female c h ild re n w e re 57.4 p e r ce n t and 42 .3 p e r cent r e s p e c ti v e ly .

K h a n e t al. (1997) found that m o st ( 6 9 .6 9 7 r) o f th e pad d y fa rm e rs were f o u n d t o b e e d u c a t e d between p rim a ry a n d h ig h er s e c o n d a r y level and o n l y 3 0 .8 0 p e r c e n t h a d education up to co lle g e level, w h ile studying the farm ers c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a n d adoption of p a d d y te c h n o lo g y in e a ste rn M a d h y a P ra d es h .

I m m a n u e l (1997) while e v a lu a tin g th e train in g p r o g r a m m e f o r fish er w o m e n o n p re p a r a tio n o f food fro m s e a w e e d s rep o rted that about 33 p e r ce n t o f the r e s p o n d e n t s h a d primary level o f e d u c atio n fo llo w e d by high school e d u c a tio n ( 2 7 % ) , s e c o n d a r y education {20% ) and ( 2 0 % ) illiterate.

M e e r a n et a!. (1999) fou n d that all s h rim p f a r m e r s w h o were ta k e n as r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e literate and had a c q u ire d e d u c a tio n beyond p r im a r y leve).

A m o n g t h e r e s p o n d e n ts 42 p e r ce n t h a d u n d e rg o n e c o lle g ia te e d u c atio n a n d the r e m a i n i n g r e s p o n d e n ts had stu d ied u p to h ig h er s e c o n d a r y (2 2 % ) a n d m id d le s c h o o l ( 1 6 % ) .

V e n k a t t a k u m a r (1999) in his stu d y on p r o file c h a ra c te ristic s o f c o m m e r c i a l c o c o n u t growers, stated th at m o re than o n e third ( 3 8 .0 5 % ) o f the r e s p o n d e n t s possessed m edium level o f e d u c atio n f o llo w e d by low ( 3 4 . 5 2 % ) and h ig h ( 2 7 . 4 3 % ) level o f education.

2.1.3 O ccupational status

S u h a s h c h a n d r a (1986) in his slu d y on fisli c u ltu r e p rac tic e s by fish f a m i e r s r e p o r t e d that m ore than th ree fo u rth o f the r e s p o n d e n ts had fish c u ltu re as their s e c o n d a r y occupation.

M e e r a n et al. (1999) f o u n d that s h r i m p farm in g w a s c o n s id e r e d as p rim ary a n d s e c o n d a r y o ccu p atio n by 6 2 p e r c e n t a n d 28 p e r c e n t o f the r e s p o n d e n ts r es p e c tiv e ly .

2.1.4 E xperience

P o u n r a j (1 99 2 ) while a n a ly z in g th e Inland f is h e rm e n c o -o p e r a tiv e society r e p o r t e d that nearly three fourth o f th e m e m b e rs p o s s e s s e d m e d i u m level o f fish f a r m in g e x p e r i e n c e , less than o n e fifth o f the m e m b e rs h a d low level and one ten th o f th e m e m b e r s had high level o f ex p erien ce.

P e r u m a l et a i (1992) in his s tu d y on Fish F a r m e r s D e v e l o p m e n t A gency ( F F D A ) p r o g r a m m e reported that m o s t o f the farm ers ( 5 6 % ) had m e d i u m level o f fish f a r m i n g e xperience.

A i a u d d i n e t al. ( 19 9 8) re p o r te d that 4 0 p e r c e n t o f th e agricultural lab o u re rs h a d high level o f e x p e ri e n c e in farm in g activity w h ile ( 5 0 % ) h a d lo w to m e d i u m level o f experience.

M e e r a n et a i (1999) r e p o rte d th at m o st o f the s h r i m p f a rm e rs (7 2 % ) had e x p e rie n c e in shrimp farm ing up to th re e years while th e rest h a d m o re than three years o f ex p erien ce.

V e n k a tta k u m a r (1999) w h ile analysing the p ro file c h a ra c te ris tic s o f c o m m e r c i a l coconut growers fou n d th at a b o u t 5 0 p e r c e n t o f the re s p o n d e n ts had

low level o f f a r m in g ex p cricn cc. while 3 3 .6 ? p e r cent o f th e m had m e d i u m level o f f a r m in g c x p c r i e n c c .

2.1.5 A n n u al income

S a h a r a et al. ( 1 98 6 ) ca lc u late d that av erag e n et in c o m e per fis h e rm e n fam ily at Rs. 5 3 1 3 / - while stud y in g th e s o c io - e c o n o m i c c o n d itio n s o f f is h e rm e n at s e le c te d v i ll a g e s in M a h a ra s h tra and G u jarat

S u b a s h c h a n d r a (1986) while a n a ly s in g the c o n s e q u e n c e s o f a d o p tio n o f fish c u ltu r e p r a c tic e s reported that m o st o f th e m ( 9 5 % ) h a d m e d i u m level o f annua) in c o m e .

P o u n r a j (1 9 9 2 ) rep o rted that m o st o f the r e s p o n d e n t s o f the inland f is h e rm e n c o - o p e r a ti v e societies ( 6 8 .3 2 % ) fall u n d e r m e d i u m to high level o f in c o m e g r o u p a n d less than one third ( 3 1 .6 6 % ) w e re u n d e r low in c o m e category.

K i r a n (1 9 9 2 ) in his study o n e ffe c tiv e n es s o f th e fisheries train in g p r o g r a m m e s re p o rte d that m o st o f the trainees b e lo n g e d to low i n c o m e g r o u p (7 2 .5 % ) h a v i n g an annual in c o m e less than Rs. 10,0 00/-, fo llo w e d by 15.83 per cent b e lo n g e d to m e d i u m in c o m e group( Rs. 10,000/- R s . 15,000/-) and 11.67 per cent b e lo n g e d to h ig h in com e g r o u p (> Rs. 15,000/-).

A l a u d d in ef al. ( 19 9 8 ) reported that a b o u t 54 p e r ce n t o f th e ag ric u ltu re labourers w e r e in low in c o m e group( < 5 0 0 0 R s ) a n d 10 p e r cent hig h in co m e group ( > 15,000Rs), 3 6 p e r cent w ere in m e d iu m i n c o m e g ro u p (R s 5 0 0 0 *

15000).

V e n k a t ta k u m a r (1999) in his stu d y on p ro file chara c te ristic s o f c o m m e rc ia l c o c o n u t growers found that a lm o st e q u a l p erc e n tag e o f the

r e s p o n d e n l s ( 4 5 . ! 3 ‘7r) belonged to low a n d m e d iu m 4 2 .4 8 p e r cent in c o m e group and the rest 1 2 .3 9 p c r c e n l b e lo n g e d to h ig h - in co m e group.

2 . 1 . 6 T y p e o f family

M e d h a n i e ct al. (1991) w h ile s tu d y in g the p r o file o f u n d e r graduate siudent.s o f a g ric u ltu re in T a m il N a d u A g ricu ltu ral U n iv e rsity ( T N A U ) reported that a b o u t 7 8 p e r cent o f the s tu d e n t s b e lo n g e d to n u c l e a r fam ily a n d the rest b e lo n g e d to j o i n t fam ily system .

A l a u d d i n et fl/.(1998) r e p o r t e d th at m o st o f th e ag ricu ltu ral labourers ( 6 8 % ) h a d n u c le a r family a n d the rest ( 3 2 S f ) h a d j o in t f a m ily system .

2.1.7 Size o f family

I m m a n u e l (1997) in h e r s tu d y o n training p r o g r a m m e f o r f is h e r w o m e n on p r e p a r a t i o n o f food from s e a w e e d re p o r te d that 70 p e r c e n t o f the r e s p o n d e n ts b e lo n g e d lo the n uclear fam ily w ith an a v e ra g e o f five m e m b e r s in the fa m ily and r e m a in i n g 3 0 p e r cent o f the re s p o n d e n ts b e lo n g e d to j o i n t family.

A l a u d d i n et al. (1998) re p o r te d that most ( 7 8 % ) o f th e agricultural la b o u re rs b e lo n g e d to small fa m ily (<5 m e m b e rs ) a n d th e rest b e lo n g e d to big fa m ily (> 5 m em b e rs).

G a i k w a r d et al. ( 20 0 0 ) w h ile s tu d y in g the in fo rm a tio n s e e k in g b e h a v io u r o f K V K b eneficiaries reported th at 4 8 p e r ce n t had small fam ilies.

2.1.8 T ype of house

V e n k a ta ra m a n u ja m et al.^ (1 9 8 7 ) in their s tu d y on s o c io - e c o n o m ic c o n d itio n s o f the chank fisherm en c o m m u n i ty reported that 85 p e r ce n t live in k u tc h a h o u s e a n d 15 p e r cent in se m i-p itc c a bouse.

/O

P o u n r a j (1 9 9 2 ) in his siu d y on critical a n a ly sis o f inland fish e rm e n c o ­ o p e ra tiv e s o c ie t ie s has recorded that about 55 p e r ce n t o f the resp o n d e n ts were liv ing in the tile d h o u s e , fo llo w e d by terraced h o u se ( 2 5 % ) and th atch ed ho u se

(2 0% ) .

I m m a n u e l ( 1 99 7 ) in h e r study on training p r o g r a m m e for fisher w o m e n on p r e p a r a t i o n o f food from s e a w e e d s r e p o n e d (hat a m a j o r proportion o f (hem o w n e d k u tc lu i h o u s e (7 3 % ) and 2 0 p e r cent h a d s e m i - p u c c a house, while on ly 7 p e r c e n t h a d p u c c a house.

2.1.9 M ed ia participation

S u j a t h K u m a r et al. (1 9 9 2 ) reported that r a d i o (1 0 % ) and n e w s p a p e r (10%j) w e r e the m a j o r s o u rc e s o f inform ation on i m p r o v e d tech n o lo g ies u tilized by th e tra w l o w n e r s o f the coastal regions o f R a m a n a t h a p u r a m district in T a m il N a d u .

K i r a n ( 1 9 9 2 ) in his stu d y on e ffe c tiv e n ess o f the fisheries train in g p r o g r a m m e o b s e rv e d that f o r 85 percent o f the re s p o n d e n ts , d aily m e d ia p a rticip a tio n is m a in ly by w a y o f read in g n e w s p a p e r, listening to th e radio p r o g ra m m e s ( 7 1 .5 % ) a n d by s e e in g television (7.5%).

M e e r a n e t al. (1 9 9 9) in his study on s h rim p f a r m e r s reported that m o st (72% ) o f th e r e s p o n d e n ts w e r e f o u n d to have m e d iu m t o h ig h degree o f e x p o s u re to m e d i a c h a n n e ls like n e w s p a p e r, television, radio a n d m a g a z in e s .

B a b y K u m a r e t al. ( 1 9 9 9) o b se rv e d that aJI the o p i n i o n leaders used ra d io as the m a j o r s ou rce o f information, television (8 0 % ) , n e w s p a p e r ( 6 0 % ) and m a g a z in e (50 % ).

2.1.10 C ontact with extension personnel

S u h a .s h c h an d ra (1 98 6 ) reported that m ost o f the fish farm ers had m e d iu m to high level o f c o n ta c t wiih e x te n s io n agencies.

P o u n r a j (1 9 9 2 ) rep o rted that m ost {83.337r) o f th e m e m b e r s in the inland f is h e r m e n 's c o - o p e r a ti v e w e re h a v in g m e d iu m level o f e x t e n s i o n ag e n cie s contact f o ll o w e d b y h ig h level o f c o n ta c t ( 1 2 % ) and only very f e w (4 .6 6 % ) r e s p o n d e n ts w e r e h a v in g lo w level o f e x te n s io n ag e n cie s contact.

S h i v a li n g h a ia n et al. (1 9 9 6 ) rep o rted that m o s t o f the small fa rm rural y o u th h a d l o w to m e d i u m e x te n s io n co n ta c t w h e re as ( 8 4 % ) o f big fa rm rural y o u t h h a d m e d i u m to high level o f e x te n s io n contact.

M e e r a n e t al. (1 99 9 ) r e p o rte d that m o st (8 6 % ) o f th e sh rim p fa rm e rs were f o u n d to e x h ib i t lo w degree o f c o n tact with extension a g e n c ie s , r e m a in in g (1 4 % ) o f the s h r i m p f a r m e r s h a d n o c o n ta c t with ex ten sio n a g e n c ie s .

2.1.11 Social participation

S u b a s h c h a n d r a (1 98 6 ) in his stu d y on fish c u lt u r e practices b y fish farm ers s ta t e d th at m o st o f th e m ( 8 4 .1 4 % ) h a d m e d i u m to low level o f social participation.

S h iv a lin g a ia n e t al. (1 9 9 6 ) reported on their s t u d y o n f arm in g p r o b le m o f rural y outh that sm all farm rural youth (8 0 % ) had l o w to m ed iu m e x te n s io n pa rticipation a n d a high pro p o rtio n o f big farm rural y o u t h ( 7 0 % ) h a d m e d i u m to h ig h level o f pa rticip a tio n with ex ten sio n agent.

K h a n et a!. (1997) while studying the p a d d y f a r m e r s reported that m ajo rity o f the r e s p o n d e n t s (8 1.819r) was fo u n d to have s o m e extent o f social p a rtic ip a tio n a n d th e rest h a d m u c h extent.

M e e r a n e f al. ( 19 9 9 ) reported that m ost o f (he s h r i m p farmers ( 7 8 % ) were f o u n d to h a v e lo w level o f social p a rticipation and r e m a i n i n g (22^r) h a d high level o f soc ia l pa rticipation.

2.1.12 T ra in in g attended

M e e r a n e / al. ( 1 9 99 ) in th eir stu d y on s o c io - p e rs o n a l p s y c h o lo g ic al p ro file o f s h rim p f a r m e r s rep o rted that m o re than h a lf o f th e r e s p o n d e n ts {5 4 % ) had u n d e rg o n e t ra i n in g p r o g r a m m e on s h rim p farm in g a n d th e rest (4 6 % ) had a lready u n d e r g o n e s o m e trainin g in s h r i m p farm ing.

2.2 K n o w led g e level

P o u n ra j (1 9 9 2 ) studied the inland fish erm en c o -o p e r a tiv e so c ie tie s in T h a n j a v u r d istr ic t a n d fo u n d that m o re than th ree fo u rth ( 7 6 .6 6 % ) o f the m e m b e r s had m e d i u m level o f a w a ren e ss, fo llo w ed by 15 p e r c e n t l o w and the rest 8.33 per cent had h i g h level o f aw areness.

Raj et al. ( 1 9 9 2 ) w h ile an aly sin g the k n o w l e d g e level o f f a r m e r s on Irrigation m a n a g e m e n t prac tic e s o f T h a n j a v u r d i s t r i c t - i n Tam il N a d u zo n e, reported that ab o u t 53 p e r c e n t o f the trained farm ers o f o l d D elta region h a d high k n o w le d g e level, fo llo w e d b y m e d iu m (2 5 % ) a n d lo w ( 2 1 . 6 7 % ) k n o w le d g e level.

In n ew D e l ta region nearly tw o third o f the trained f a r m e r s (6 5 % ) had hig h level o f k n o w l e d g e fo llow ed by m e d iu m (2 0 % ) a nd low ( 1 5 % ).

V e n k a i a p i r a b u et al. (1992) in th eir stu d y on k n o w l e d g e level o f pad d y f a rm e rs o n w a t e r m a n a g e m e n t practiccs at M o d a k u rc h i b lo ck o f Periyar district in T a m il N a d u , re p o r te d that 52 p e r c e n t o f the r e s p o n d e n ts p o s s e s s e d m e d i u m level o f k n o w 'le d g e on w a t e r m a n a g e m e n t practices a n d 4 8 p e r ce n t o f the fa rm e rs had high level o f k n o w le d g e .

L ak.shm an e f al. ( J 9 9 4 ) in iheir stu d y on tra in in g ex ten sio n p e rs o n n e l re p o r te d t h a t m o r e than tw o third o f th e r e s p o n d e n ts g a in e d m e d iu m level o f k n o w l e d g e f o l l o w e d by nearly one fifth o f the r e s p o n d e n t s with high level o f k n o w l e d g e a n d o n l y 12.5 p e r c e n t o f th em g a in e d low level o f know-ledge.

S u d e e p k u m a r e f aJ. (1994), w h ile s tu d y in g the e f f e c tiv e n e s s o f tra in in g on d a ir y t r a i n e e s , rep o rted that m o st ( 6 4 .5 8 % ) o f the tra in e e s had m e d i u m level o f k n o w l e d g e , 2 2 .9 2 p e r cent trainees had high k n o w le d g e level and the rest 12.5 p e r c e nt h a d l o w k n o w l e d g e level.

Y o g a n a n d a e t al. (1994), while s tu d y in g the k n o w l e d g e level o f c o c o n u t g r o w e rs r e p o r t e d th at 5 3 .3 4 p e r ce n t o f sm all c o c o n u t g r o w e rs had lo w level o f k n o w l e d g e o n p a c k a g e o f practices o f c o c o n u t c u ltiv a tio n as c o m p a r e d to big c o c o n u t g r o w e r s , w h o h a d high level ( 5 3 .3 4 % ) and m e d i u m level ( 4 1 . 6 6 % ) o f k now le d g e .

N a g a b h u s h a n a m (1 99 4 ), while stu d y in g the k n o w l e d g e and a d o p tio n o f c o c o n u t c ultivation practices, reported that a b o u t 5 0 p e r c e n t o f the re s p o n d e n ts h a d m e d i u m level o f k n o w le d g e , 28 p e r cent lo w and 2 2 .3 3 p e r cent hig h level o f k n o w le d g e .

N a r m a t h a cl al. (1996), in th eir s tu d y on the k n o w le d g e level o f farm \K o m en in s c ie n t if ic p o u ltr y farm ing, f o u n d th at 74 per cent o f th e p o u ltry fa rm w o m e n p o s s e s s e d m e d i u m level o f k n o w l e d g e and the rest h a d a lm o s t lo w ( 1 4 ^ 0 and h ig h ( 129r) level o f kn ow led g e.

R a m a m u r t h i et al. ( 19 9 7) fo u n d that m ost (56.67*^^ ) o f the r e s p o n d e n ts had m e d i u m leve l o f kn ow led g e, 3 0 .8 3 p e r cent had low level o f k n o w l e d g e and 12.50 p e r c e n t had high level o f k n o w l e d g e on tu r m e r i c p r o d u c tio n and p r o c e s s in g .

I m m a n u e l (1997), w h ile s tu d y i n g th e f is h e rw o m e n o n p re p a r a tio n o f food f r o m s e a w e e d , reported that m o st ( 9 7 % ) o f the trainees c a m e u n d e r th e low level k n o w l e d g e g r o u p and only 3 p e r c e n t o f th e m fell u n d e r th e m e d i u m k n o w le d g e g ro u p .

M u r u g e s a n et al. (1998) r e p o rte d that about 75 p e r cent o f th e trainees g a i n e d m e d i u m level o f k n o w le d g e , 16 p e r cent o f the tra in e e s g a in e d a h ig h level o f k n o w l e d g e a n d the rest 9.68 p e r ce n t g a in e d low level o f k n o w le d g e .

R a n g a n a t h a n and S o m a s u n d a r a m . (1998) in their s tu d y on k n o w l e d g e o f f a r m e r s o n m u s h r o o m c ultiv atio n rep o rted that m o re th a n t w o th ird o f the

r e s p o n d e n t s h a d m e d iu m to high level o f k n o w le d g e on m u s h r o o m tec h n o lo g ie s.

T h a r a n e a th a r a n et al. (1 9 9 8 ) w h ile studying the in fo r m a tio n u tiliz in g pattern, k n o w l e d g e a n d adoption level o f a g ro fore.stry beneficiaries rep o rted that more than o n e th ird o f respondents ( 3 6 .1 5 % ) were found to be in hig h k n o w le d g e c a te g o r y , fo llo w e d by low (3 3 .8 0 % ) a n d m ed iu m ( 3 0 .3 0 % ) categories.

V i j a y a l a k s h m i ct a i ( 19 9 8 ) in (heir stu d y o n f a r m u o r n e n in {umieric c u ltiv a tio n r e p o r t e d that m ost o f the resp o n d e n ts ( 7 1 . 6 7 % ) had m e d iu m level o f k n o w l e d g e f o il o w e d by low ( 15.8 37r) a n d high ( 12.59r) k n o w l e d g e c ateg o ries.

S u b r a m a i n a n (1999), while stu d y in g the k n o w l e d g e level o f dairy f arm ers , fo u n d th at m a j o r it y farm ers o f less successful m ilk s o c ie t ie s p o ssesse d m e d i u m to high level o f k n o w l e d g e respectively.

S h e e la a n d Su ndarasw 'am y ( 1 9 9 9 ) in their study o n th e k n o w le d g e level o f da iry f a r m e r s r e p o rte d that 62 p e r ce n t h a d m e d iu m k n o w l e d g e level a n d 19 per c e nt o f th e r e s p o n d e n t s each w e re fo u n d to have low' a n d h ig h k n o w le d g e level.

G o s w a m i et al. (2000) in their stu d y on c o m p o s i te fish culture re p o rte d that m o r e t h a n t h re e fourth o f the r e s p o n d e n ts were f o u n d in th e m e d iu m know'ledge c a te g o r y f o l l o w e d by h ig h (1 4 % ) and low k n o w le d g e ( 1 0 % ) category

2.3 F eed in g schedule

S h r i m p s feed usually 3 - 6 tim es p e r day (S u n d a ra s e k e r , (1991)); A k i y a m a ( 1993); R o b e r t s o n et al., (1993); P u ru sh an , (1995); K i n k a r c h a n d ( 1999); Paulraj, (1999).

A c c o r d in g to P r a sa d ( 19 9 5 ) feed in g was d o n e t w i c e daily fro m the third day o f s to c k in g till the e n d o f the culture period.

2.3.1 F eed in g method

V i l jj a lo n { ) 9 9 ) ) while siuclying Ihe practice for s e m i-in te n s iv e culture r e p o r t e d t h a t b r o a d casting and c h e c k iray feeding are m o s t l y a d o p te d in sh rim p f a r m s.

S u r e n d r a n et al. (1991) in ih e ir study on s e m i-in te n s iv e s h r i m p f a rm in g r e p o r t e d t h a t c h e c k trays were p r o v id e d in the p o n d s ( a b o u t 2-4 n u m b e r s ) for strict o b s e r v a t i o n o n feeding.

G o d d a r d (1996) in his s tu d y on f ee d in g m eth o d re p o r te d th at m o s t o f the f a r m e r s u s e d 1-6 feeding trays p e r h e c ta r e s , while P r a sa d ( 1 9 9 7 ) in his stu d y on the b i o - e c o n o m i c evaluation o f s e m i-in te n s iv e shrim p f a r m in g re p o rte d that six c h e c k tra y s w e r e usually used in o n e h e c ta re area o f pond.

S u k u m a r (1998) in his s tu d y o n the evaluation a n d c o m p a r is o n o f s hrim p f a r m m a n a g e m e n t practices a n d p r o s p e c t s for su sta in ab ility rep o rted th at m o st ot the f a r m e r s a d o p te d a c o m b in a tio n o f feed in g m e th o d s in v o lv in g b ro ad c a s tin g a n d c h e c k trays.

2.3.2 W a te r stability

D e s i l v a (1985) while s tu d y in g th e w ater stability o f feed r e p o rte d that s h rim p f e e d need to be w a te r stable f o r 3 - 4 hours.

A k i y a m a et al. ( 19 9 5) w h ile s tu d y in g the s h r i m p f ee d r e q u ir e m e n ts and f ee d m a n a g e m e n t reported that s h r i m p feed need to b e w a te r stable f o r a m i n i m u m o f tw o and h a lf hours. B u t Sita.sit H 9 9 5 ) while s tu d y i n g feed in g re d ie n ts a n d quality control reported that the water s ta b ility up to three h o u rs is c o n s id e r e d satisfactory.

C r u z ( 1 9 9 6 ) in his siucly o n feed quali{\ p r o b le m and m an a ^ e n ie n ! stra te g ie s r e p o r t e d that shrimps have slo w f e e d in g b e h a v io u r and hence it req u ires h ig h ly w a t e r sta b le feed and it sh ould be sta b le for m o re th an four hours.

A n o n ( 1 9 9 6 ) in his study on s h r i m p farm ing re p o rte d that s h r i m p feeds n e e d to be w a t e r sta b le for 2 - 3 h o u rs b e c a u s e s h rim p s a re slo w and c o n tin u o s feeders.

Ja in ( 1 9 9 8 ) in his study on s e le c tio n o f ideal b i n d e r f o r m a k in g stab le a q u a feed r e p o r t e d that, a q u a feed sh o u ld h a v e g o o d w a te r stability for a m i n i m u m p e rio d o f t w o hours.

2.4

Perception

A l a g e s a n a n d Sum athi (1998) w h ile s tu d y in g the a w a r e n e s s o f b io -fe rtilize r a n d b io -c o n tro l agenl.s by farm ers re p o r te d that a m o n g the b io-fertlizers.

A z o s p ir iU u m w a s k n o w n to majority ie,( 7 5 % ) o f the r e s p o n d e n ts and R h iz o h iu m

w'as k n o w n to a lm o s t half ( 5 4 .1 7 % ) o f t h e m , follow-ed by blue g r e e n algae (2 4 .1 7 % ) , a n d P h o s p h o b a c te ria (1 9 .1 7 % ).

M u r t h y et a l (1998) while s tu d y in g th e aw a ren e s s on use o f w e e d i c i d e s in pa ddy, re p o r te d th at all the farm ers w h o w e r e using w e e d i c i d e s w e re a w a r e o f its use in pa d d y . A b o u t 9 2 p e r cent o f f a r m e r s w h o were n o t usin g w e e d ic id e s w e re also aw a re o f its use.

G o s w a m i e t al. (2000), in hi.s s tu d y o n c o m p o s ite fish culture rep o rted that 6 4 pe r ce n t have fav o rab le attitude to w a rd s c o m p o site fish culture fo llo w e d by 22 p e r cent a n d 14 p e r cent having u n fa v o ra b le and h ig h ly fav o rab le attitu d e respe c tiv e ly

2.5 P r o b le m s faced by farm ers

S h i v a m u r t h y (1994) r e p o rte d lhal the most i m p o r ta n l c o n s tr a in ts in the a d o p ti o n o f d a iry innovation as e x p re s s e d by d a ir y m e n w e re high cost o f c o n c e n t r a t e s (70 .0 7 r). fo ilo w ed by lack o f finance ( 4 6 . 6 7 % ) a n d n o n -av a ila b ility o f fo d d e r

S h i v a li n g a ia n and V e e r a b h a d r a ia n (1996) rep o rted that m ajo r ity o f small a n d b i g f a r m m a le youth e x p r e s s e d hig h cost o f f e n i l iz e r s a n d c h e m i c a l s , lack o f s u b s id i e s , h i g h cost o f p r o d u c tio n a n d lack o f credit facilities as th eir m ajo r p r o b l e m s b o t h in agriculture a n d ho rticu ltu re. M ost o f th e sm all a n d big farm y o u th p e r c e i v e d high cost o f fee d s, lack o f credit and lac k o f tra in in g as m ajo r c o n s t r a i n t s in dairy.

M o s t o f the small a n d big farm y outh ex p re sse d h ig h c o s t o f in p u ts and price f l u c t u a t i o n for coco o ns as m a j o r co n strain ts in se ric u ltu re .

S u r e s h a et al ( 1 9 96 ) w h ile studying the p e rc e i v e d p r o b le m s o f be n e fic ia r ie s in dairy enterp rises r e p o rte d that m ost ( 9 4 . 7 3 % ) o f th e b en eficiaries h a d sta te d th a t inability o f local c o w s to b ear calve th ro u g h artificial in se m in a tio n and s u p p ly o f inferior cow's as the m a j o r p ro b lem s a n d s'ome o f th em e x p re s s e d lack o f g r a z in g facilities (8 9 .4 7 % ) , lack o f ex ten sio n facilities ( 8 9 .7 % ) and n e g le c t o f a n im a ls (84.12% ) as th e constraints.

R a v i s h a n k e r et al (1998) w h ile analyzing the c o n s tr a in ts faced by p o tato fa r m e r s r e v e a le d that lack o f technical guidance w a s the m a jo r c o n s tra in t

(94.16‘> ) followed by pests (W.O'/r). diseases (,88.33%) and high cosi of fertilizers ( 8 5 ,0 7 ().

T he m ajo r constraints faced by the farmers in marketing of potato were high cost o f transportation (I rank, 93.33%), delayed cash payment (II rank 91.66%), distance o f markets (III ranks, 90.0% ), high commission agent charges (IV rank, 89.16% ), fluctuation in market price (V rank. 88.33%) and high labour charges (VI rank, 86.66%).

Sundaram bal et al (1999) while studying the p roblem s o f transfer of dry land technology found that most o f the respondents (53.33%) faced the problem o f lack o f farmers panicipalion, about 5 0 per cent o f the respondents stated that they were not able to effectively disseminate the technologies due to vast jurisdiction and 37 per cent due to lack o f time.

3 . / H 6 < Z ’ H 0 T > Q A

3. M ethodology

In this chapter, the criteria a d o p te d for selection o f s tu d y area, a b rief descriptio n o f the study area, s a m p l in g procedure ap p lie d a n d the analytical tools e m p lo y e d have been presented u n d e r the following heads.

3.1 Selection o f study area 3.2 D e sc rip tion o f the study area

3.3 S a m p lin g design and da ta collectio n 3 .4 Selection o f variables

3.5 D e s c rip tio n about c o m m e rc ia l a n d farm m ade feed 3.6 Analytical tools

3.1 S e lec tio n o f s tu d y area:

In Tam il N adu 5 6 ,0 0 0 ha area is a v a ila b le f o r b r a c k is h w a te r a quaculture. Out o f this 3,0 0 0 h a is c u rre n tly ( 1 9 9 9 -2 0 0 0 ) u n d e r cu ltu re. O u t o f the 1 Icoastal districts, the R a m a n a t h a p u r a m and T h o o t h u k k u d i d istric ts were p u rp o siv e ly selected for the stud y b e c au s e o f the f o ll o w i n g r e a s o n s

• T he se tw o districts have the m a x i m u m area under s h r i m p farm in g .

• M a jo rity o f the farm ers in th ese districts is involved in s h r i m p farm in g .

• Very lim ited studies have been ca rrie d o u t on s h r i m p f a r m in g in th e s e two districts.

• T h e s tu d y area is very fa m ilia r to th e student r e s e a r c h e r a n d h e is well versed in the local dialect o f the farm ers.

T a m il N a d u is tlie southern m ost m aritim e slate o f India and it is b o u n d by A ndhra P r a d e s h in the north, B ay o f B engal and Palk bay in the east. G u l f o f M a nnar in the so uth east and the A ra b ia n sea in the S o u t h west. K e ra la state in the west a n d K arn atak a in the north west. T h e R a m a n a t h a p u r a m district lies between 8‘’5' a n d 13‘’35' North latitude a n d 7 6 " 1 5 ’ and 8 0 " 20' East longitude. It is bound by P u d u k o tla i district in the north, M a d u ra i, S iv a g a n g a i. and V ir u d h u n a g a r dictricts o n th e west, and T h o o th u k k u d i district on the so u th . T h e T h o o th u k k u d i district lies b e tw e e n 8” I0' - 9 "1 0 ’ north latitude a n d 7 7 '’5 0 ’ - 7 8 ‘’20' eastern longitude. Its b o u n d by T iru n elv eli district on th e south, V ir u d h u n a g a r, R a m a n a t h a p u r a m o n the north and G u l f o f M a n n ar.in th e so u th east (Fig 1 ) .

3.2.1 Climate and rainfall

T h e c l i m a t e p revailing in the state is tropical in n a tu re . The m a x i m u m and m in im u m te m p e r a t u r e in the stu d y are a ran g es b e tw e e n 18"c a n d 4 3 ”c. T h e average a n n ua l rainfall in R a m a n a t h a p u r a m district is 9 0 0 m m and T h o o t h u k k u d i is 660 m m . T h e entire state receiv ed m o re rainfall d u r i n g north-east m o n s o o n (49.2% ) c o m p a r e d to s o u th -w e s t m o n s o o n (4 2 .6 % ) in the- last year. D u r i n g 1996- 97, the R a m a n a t h a p u r a m a n d T h o o t h u k k u d i districts r e c e i v e d a rainfall o f about 1143 m m a n d 913.1 m m respectiv ely . D u r in g 1998- 9 9 , the district receiv ed about 60 p e r c e n t o f rainfall th ro u g h N o rth ea s t m o n s o o n a n d 4 0 p e r ce n t th ro u g h Southwest m o n s o o n .

<

UJ q:

<

>- Q3 h*(0

©

Z - 4 - •W

<

UJ

a:

<

> - Q ZD H c o LU X H

O O -

<

qD:

3.2.2 Fisherm en population

In R a m a n a lh a p u ra m district, the total fisherm en p o p u latio n is 77510 ( 1 9 9 1 ) o u t o f which the active fish e rm e n p o p u la tio n is only 4 5 6 3 7 (58.87% ) w h e r e a s in T h o o th u k k u d i the total fish erm en p o p u latio n is 4 7 2 8 9 out o f which the a c ti v e fis h e rm e n po p ulation is 3 0 9 9 0 (6 5 .5 3 % ).

3.2.3 Shrim p aquaculture

In R a m a n a t h a p u r a m di.strict, a b o u t 35.33 h e c ta res o f b r a c k is h w a te r area is a v a il a b le f o r culture, out o f w h ic h p resen tly 3 5 p e r cent is utili.sed for shrim p a q u a c u ltu re . In T h o o th u k k u d i district, about 177.51 ha o f b ra c k is h w a te r area is a v a ila b le f o r a quaculture. O ut o f w h ich on ly 2 5 p e r cent is u n d e r s h rim p farming. G e n e r a l l y s h rim p farm ing is ca rrie d o u t in t w o se aso n s n a m e ly M a r c h - June a n d A u g u s t - D e c e m b e r

3.3 Sam pling design and data collection 3.3.1 Selection o f blocks

T h e R a m a n a t h a p u r a m and O tta p id a ra m blocks w e r e selected p u r p o s iv e ly because, .shrimp f a r m in g is carried out in larger scale in th e s e blocks.

3.3.2 Selection o f villages

T h r e e v illa g es n a m e ly D e v ip a ttin a m a n d Athankarai fro m R a m a n a t h a p u r a m b lo c k a n d T h a r u v a i k u l la m fro m O tta p id a ra m b lo ck w e re selected f o r th e s tu d y b ased on the p ro p o rtio n o f s h r i m p farm ers in these villages.

T /jc rc.spondcn{s w e r e c la s s i/ic d initially into tw o g ro u p s namely ihosc u s i n g c o m m e r c i a l feed a n d th o s e usin g farm m a d e feed. B a s e d on this c riteria a s a m p l e o f 6 0 s h r i m p f a r m e r s were selected at ra n d o m - 4 0 shrimp fa r m e r s u s i n g c o m m e r c i a l fe e d a n d 2 0 u s in g farm m ade feed.

3.3.4 D ata collection

A w e ll- s tr u c tu r e d a n d p re tested in terv iew sc h e d u le w a s fo u n d to be an a p p r o p r i a t e d e v ic e to c o ll e c t d a t a fro m the re s p o n d e n ts . A s c h e d u le was p r e p a r e d b a s e d o n th e o b j e c t i v e s to c ollect data. N e c e s s a r y p rec a u tio n s were taken to e n s u r e that the q u e s t i o n s in the schedule w e r e u n a m b ig u o u s , clear, c o m p l e t e a n d c o m p r e h e n s i v e .

T h e in te rv ie w s c h e d u l e w a s pre tested t h ro u g h a pilot survey and -suitable m o d i f i c j l i o n s w ere c a r r i e d o u t befo re it was f in a liz e d . Each respondent w a s m e t i n d i v i d u a l l y and a g o o d r a p p o r t was e s ta b lis h e d initially and the data w ere c o l l e c t e d .

3.4 V a r ia b le s and their m easu rem en t

T h e v a ria b le s i n c l u d e d a re based on th e r e v ie w o f literature and d i s c u s s io n w i t h e x p e r t s . T h e v a r i a b l e s a n d their m e a s u r e m e n ts are listed beiow.

a ) A jie

A ^ c u a s opcraiiDtializL'd a s the n u m b e r o f c o m p le te d years o f the rCNponJenis at Hio tim e o f e n q u ir y . T h e r e s p o n d e n ts w e r e classified into three g ro u p s n a m e l y .

Y o u n g upto35year.s

M id d l e 3 5 -4 5 y ea rs O l d > 4 5 y e ars b) K ch jc;ition a l s t a t u s

T h e e d u c a t i o n a l statu s o f th e re s p o n d e n ts w a s o p e ra tio n a liz e d as the n u m b e r o f y e a r s o f s c h o o l i n g c o m p l e t e d a n d the c la ssifica tio n o f the resp o n d en ts were m a d e a s f u r n i s h e d b e lo w .

Illiie ra te -N o fo rm a l/in f o r m a l e d u c atio n

L o w level o f e d u c a t i o n - up to p r im a ry (1 to 5"^ sid) M e d i u m )evel o f e d u c atio n - 6 t h to 10'^ standard.

H ig h lev e l o f e d u c a t i o n - i Ith to 12 ‘^ standard- C o lle g e

c) O c c u p a t i o n a l s t a t u s

O c c u p a t i o n a l s ta t u s w a s o p e ra tio n a lis e d as th e ex ten t to w h ic h the r e s p o n d e n t s a r e i n v o l v e d in s h r i m p farm in g .

S h r i m p f a r m in g O t h e r s

d) S o c ia l p a r t i c i p a t i o n

II is the d e g re e to w h i c h a respondent i n v o lv e s in organization as a m e m b e r .

• M e m b e r in one O rg a n iz a tio n

• M e m b e r in more than o n e O r g a n iz a tio n

• N o m e m b e r s h i p

c) A n n u a l i n c o m e

A n n u a l i n c o m e w a s o p e r a t i o n a h s e d in the s t u d y as the total income o b t a i n e d f r o m b o th s h r i m p c u l t u r e a n d o t h e r activities f o r o n e year.

L o w - U p t o R s 1 Lakh M e d i u m - R s 1-5 Lakh H ig h - M o r e than Rs 5 Lakh

f) E x p e r i e n c e

E x p e r i e n c e o f th e r e s p o n d e n t s in the s h r i m p c u ltu re activities was in d ic a te d in y e a rs.

L o w 1 -5 y e a rs

M e d i u m 6 - 1 0 y e a rs

H i g h > 1 0 y e a rs

j;) T y p e o f h o u s e

T h e ty p e ot h o u s e w a s c a t e g o r i z e d as f o ll o w e d by S u ja th K u m a r,

( I 9 S S ) .

T h a l c h c d T i l e d T e r r a c e d h) M e d i a p a r t i c i p a t i o n

M e d i a p a r t i c i p a ti o n in th e s tu d y refers t o th e regularity o f r ea d in g n e w s p a p e r s , m a g a z i n e s , l is te n in g to r a d i o a n d v i e w in g tele v isio n ,

i) P 'xte n sion a g e n c y c o n t a c t

T h i s re fe rs to th e d e g r e e to w h i c h an i n d iv id u a l c o n ta c te d c h a n g e a g e n ts f o r g e t t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n o n s c i e n t i f i c i n n o v a tio n s,

j ) K n o w l e d g e le v e l

K n o w l e d g e level o f th e f a n n e r s w a s a s se s s e d b y g i v in g fifteen s ta te m e n ts a bout the v a r i o u s a s p e c t s o f feed. A s c o r e o f o n e w a s g i v e n to the co rre c t a n s w e r a n d z e r o t o t h e i n c o r r e c t a n s w e r . B a s e d o n th e s c o re s o b ta in e d , th e in d iv id u a ls w e re c l a s s i f i e d a s f o l l o w s

K n o w l e d g e lev e l S c o re

H i c h *

M e d i u m L o w

5-10 1-5

k) A d o p t i o n

A d o p t i o n le v e ls ot th e f a r m e r s w a s found out b y g i v i n g e ight staiem en ts a n d ih e f a r n i e r s w e r e c la s s if i e d u n d e r a d o p te d and n o n - a d o p t e d category,

h) I’c r c c p t i o n

P e r c e p t i o n w a s m e a s u r e d b y g i v in g tw elve s ta t e m e n t s a n d the resp o n d en ts w e r e r a te d o n a t h re e -p o i n t c o n t i n u u m as low', average a n d high.

i) P r o b l e m s

T h e d i f f e r e n t p r o b l e m s r e g a r d i n g s h rim p feed b y f a r m e r s w ere co llected t h r o u g h d i s c u s s i o n w ith f a r m e r s a n d r e v ie w o f literature. T h e lists o f p r o b le m s w e r e r a te d in a t h r e e - p o i n t c o n t i n u u m a n d the scoring w a s d o n e as s h o w n below.

R e s p o n s e S c o r in g

M o s t i m p o r t a n t 3

I m p o r t a n t 2

L e s s i m p o r t a n t 1

T h e c o n s t r a i n t s w e r e r a n k e d b a s e d o n a C u m u l a t i v e P e r c e p tio n Index ( C P I), w h i c h w a s w o r k e d o u t b y f i n d i n g o u t the ratio o f c u m u l a t i v e score o f each ite m s t o th e to ta l n u m b e r o f r e s p o n s e s .