• No results found

Economics of goat farming under traditional system of management in Uttarakhand

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Share "Economics of goat farming under traditional system of management in Uttarakhand"

Copied!
5
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Economics of goat farming under traditional system of management in Uttarakhand

BS Khadda*,Brijesh Singh, DV Singh, SK Singh & CB Singh

Department of Livestock Production Management, College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar-263 145, Uttarakhand, India

E-mail: khadda74@gmail.com Received 9 April 2018, revised 21 June 2018

A bench mark survey was conducted to collect the base line information from the goat rearers regarding goat production systems and economics of goat farming in field conditions. The data were collected through personal interview using a well-structured questionnaire. The study revealed that 87.59 % investment was made on cost of goats and the overall variable cost contributed 77.89 % to the gross cost. The net income over gross cost per household was observed to be ₹ 7267.89, 18133.40, 31243.90 and 56028.00 in small, medium, semi-large and large flocks, respectively. The overall benefit: cost ratio was observed as 2.24 which were highest in large (2.37) followed by semi-large (2.27), medium (2.24) and small (2.23) flocks.

Keywords: Economics, Goat, Management practices, Traditional system IPC Int. Cl.8: G09B 19/18, A01K 1/00, G06Q 10/00

India is an agriculture based country and small ruminants play an important role in the rural economy. Goat production from centuries has been an integral component of farming system and a primary source of livelihood for poor villagers. Resource poor people on zero input mostly rear goats in India.

Therefore the development of goat production is considered to be a pathway for comprehensive agricultural development as out of 138 million operational holdings, the small and marginal holdings (below 2.00 ha) jointly constituted 85 % and these holdings are the main custodian (> 75 % of total goat population)1. There is significant growth in population of goats across the agro-climatic regions in India.

Demographic change in livestock population in the country showed a shift in favor of small ruminant particularly for goat2. The goats and its products contribute ₹ 22,138.4 crore annually to the national economy. More than 20 million smallholder families are engaged in goat keeping. Goat husbandry generates employment to more than 4 million people, mostly (95 %) of them are small and marginal farmers and landless labourers3. The variable cost, expenditure on labour was the major component of cost and was 81 % under goat farming4. Keeping this in view the present study was undertaken to evaluate the

economics of goat rearing under traditional management system in Uttarakhand.

Methodology

The area of study is characterized with a humid sub-tropical climate. The winters are severe and summers are hot and humid with an average rainfall of more than 1200 mm. The maximum temperature may go up to 44ºC in summer and minimum up to 0ºC in winter with relative humidity ranging between 15 to 95 %. The region has a number of large rivers and rivulets. A variety of green herbage is plentifully available in the area for grazing. A bench mark survey was conducted to collect the base line information from the goat rearers regarding to goat production systems and economics of goat farming in field conditions in Udham Singh Nagar and Nainital districts of the Uttarakhand during a period of 2 yrs (April, 2015 to March, 2017). Multistage sampling method was adopted for the selection of respondents.

Four clusters, viz. Bhimtal, Tilpuri, Bara and Kunda were selected from two districts (Udham Singh Nagar and Nainital). Total one hundred thirteen villages were surveyed. A list of goat rearing families of the selected villages was prepared with the help of village Pradhan and Patvari and mostly all goat rearers were selected for survey from each village. Thus, 645 selected respondents were interviewed and the desired

—————

*Corresponding author

(2)

information was collected. The data were collected by personal interview techniques through an interview schedule by administering a developed questionnaire on managemental practices and economics of goat farming. The economics of goat farming was calculated on the basis of the information provided by the farmers on rough estimates/ approximations because due to social, cultural and educational limitations and due to lack of adequate record keeping (about expenditures and income from goat farming) the data could not be narrated by the farmers with greater degree of accuracy. The goat keepers were classified according to their flock size as small (1-5 goats), medium (6-10 goats), semi-large (11-20 goats) and large (> 20 goats) (Table 1). Therefore, appropriate tables were prepared, keeping in view the specific objectives of the study. The collected data were subjected to basic statistical analysis as per Snedecor & Cochran (1994)5.

Results and discussion

The distribution of goat keepers according to the flock size of sample households revealed that overall small, medium, semi-large and large categories of

goat keeper accounted for 63.10, 20.93, 11.16 and 4.81 % of the total goat keepers, respectively. The overall average flock size per household was 2.58, 7.42, 14.12 and 28 for small, medium, semi-large and large categories of respondents with an overall flock size of 6.11 adult goats6,7.

Investments of goat rearing

The overall investment pattern of goat rearing in the study area revealed that out of the total investment 87.59 % was made on cost of goats followed by 10.68

% on construction of goat shed and 1.73 % on cost of equipment (Table 2). Since goat rearing was carried out by traditional extensive method of farming system in the study area, less attention was paid for the infrastructure and equipments and hence it was lesser when compared with investment made on other animals. The data related to total investment made in goat rearing revealed that the overall total investment was found highest in large flocks (₹ 82245.20) followed by semi-large (₹ 47016.89), medium (₹ 26609.60) and small (₹ 10315.34) flocks. The increase in the investment cost in case of large flocks was due to increased flock size of the sample

Table 1 — Classification of household according to flock size

Particulars Flock size No. of households Per cent Average adult goats

U.S. Nagar Small (1-5) 255 68.54 2.34

Medium (6-10) 62 16.67 7.41

Semi-large (11-20) 42 11.29 14.33

Large (> 20) 13 3.50 27.92

Total 372 100 5.44

         

Nainital Small (1-5) 152 55.68 2.97

Medium (6-10) 73 26.74 7.42

Semi-large (11-20) 30 10.99 13.83

Large (> 20) 18 6.59 28.05

Total 273 100 7.01

         

Overall Small (1-5) 407 63.10 2.58

Medium (6-10) 135 20.93 7.42

Semi-large (11-20) 72 11.16 14.12

Large (> 20) 31 4.81 28

Total 645 100 6.11

Table 2 — Average investment (₹) of goat rearing per household in different flock size

Flock size Goats Shed Equipments Total investment (in ₹) Investment/ goat (in ₹)

Small (1-5) 8989.56 (87.14) 1134.20 (10.99) 191.52 (1.85) 10315.34 4018.60

Medium (6-10) 23150.40 (87.00) 2974.81 (11.18) 484.44 (1.82) 26609.60 3601.94 Semi-large (11-20) 41300.02 (87.84) 4929.17 (10.48) 787.71 (1.68) 47016.89 3344.23 Large (>20) 73038.70 (88.80) 8007.10 (9.74) 1199.35 (1.46) 82245.20 2952.26

Overall 18665.62 (87.59) 2276.82 (10.68) 368.37 (1.73) 21310.78 3804.17

Note: Figures in parenthesis indicate percentage

(3)

household. The investment per goat was highest in small flocks (₹ 4018.60) followed by medium (₹ 3601.94), semi-large (₹ 3344.23) and large flocks (₹ 2952.26) with an overall investment of ₹ 3804.17 per goat6,7.

Cost of goat rearing

The variable costs included labour (family or hired), feed and fodder, medicines and miscellaneous expenditures including the repairs of goat sheds, equipments, etc., whereas, the fixed cost included the interest on fixed investment, depreciation on shed and equipments. The results of the study revealed that in case of variable cost group, cost of labour included grazing charges by hired labourers and imputed value

of family labour formed the major components in the cost of production and varied from 52.86 (semi-large flocks) to 58.68 % (medium flocks) with overall 56.28 % share of the total cost (Table 3). The contribution of feed and fodder, medicines and miscellaneous expenditures were 14.60, 4.50 and 2.51

% respectively of the total cost. Overall variable cost contributed 77.89 % to the gross cost. The total average variable cost per household worked out to be

₹ 5156.41, 12553.30, 18856.91 and 32121 on small, medium, semi-large and large flocks respectively with an overall average ₹ 9542.25. In the case of fixed cost, the interest on fixed investment formed the major share that ranged from 19.13 (small flock) to

Table 3 — Overall cost and income of goat rearing (₹) per household/ year in different flock size (N=645)

Particulars Small Medium Semi-large Large Overall

Variable cost

Labour 3743

(57.85)

9355.56 (58.68)

13122.20 (52.86) 22919.40 (53.91)

6894.94 (56.28)

Feed and fodder 954.17

(14.74)

2106.67 (13.21)

4040.97 (16.27)

6080.65 (14.30)

1789.05 (14.60)

Medicines 287.49

(4.44)

722.96 (4.53)

1080.56 (4.35)

2014.52 (4.74)

550.85 (4.50)

Miscellaneous 171.74

(2.64)

368.15 (2.31)

613.19 (2.47)

1106.45 (2.60)

307.41 (2.51)

Total Variable cost (A) 5156.41

(79.69) 12553.30

(78.74) 18856.91

(75.96) 32121

(75.56) 9542.25

(77.89) Fixed cost

Interest on fixed investment @12%/ year 1237.83 (19.13)

3193.16 (20.03)

5642.03 (22.73)

9869.42 (23.22)

2557.29 (20.87) Depreciation on shed @ 5%/ year 56.71

(0.88)

148.74 (0.93)

246.46 (0.99)

400.35 (0.94)

113.84 (0.93) Depreciation on equipment @ 10%/ year 19.15

(0.29)

48.44 (0.30)

78.77 (0.31)

119.94 (0.28)

36.84 (0.29)

Total fixed cost (B) 1313.70

(20.31)

3390.34 (21.26)

5967.25 (24.04)

10389.70 (24.44)

2707.97 (22.11)

Gross cost (A+B) 6470.11 15943.7 24824.2 42510.7 12250.22

Gross cost/ goat 2677.74 2165.94 1783.89 1519.95 2414.24

Gross income

Sale of kids and culled animals 13088.25 (95.27)

32464.46 (95.27)

52729.10 (94.04)

92261.30 (93.63)

25408.16 (94.69)

Sale/ use of manure 649.75

(4.73)

1612.59 (4.73)

3338.89 (5.96)

6277.42 (6.37)

1423.99 (5.31)

Total gross income 13738.00 34077.05 56068.01 98538.72 26832.15

Net income

Net income over gross cost 7267.89 18133.40 31243.90 56028.00 14581.93

Net income/ goat over gross cost 3138.28 2423.24 2168.71 2054.07 2827.11

Net income over variable cost 8581.59 21523.70 37211.11 66417.72 17289.91

Net income/ goat over variable cost 3650.76 2882.01 2593.69 2426.45 3311.76

Benefit : Cost ratio 2.23 2.24 2.27 2.37 2.24

Note: Figures in parenthesis indicate percentage

(4)

23.22 % (large flock) of the total cost and the overall share was 20.87 %. In goat rearing the cost of goats was the major expenditure when compared with cost of shed and equipments, and hence it was found to be the major item. Cost of depreciation on shed and equipments ranged from 0.88 to 0.94 % and 0.28 to 0.31 % with the overall share of 0.93 and 0.29 % respectively of the total cost. The share of the total fixed cost to gross cost was 22.11 %. The total gross cost per household worked out to be ₹ 6470.11, 15943.7, 24824.2 and 42510.7 on small, medium, semi-large and large flocks respectively with an overall average of ₹ 12250.22. The gross cost per goat per household recorded was ₹ 2677.74, 2165.94, 1783.89 and 1519.95 on small, medium, semi-large and large flocks respectively with an overall average of ₹ 2414.24. The present study indicated that the total gross cost per goat decreased with increase in flock size6-10.

Income from goat rearing

The information on the total returns per house hold per year from goat rearing is presented in Table 3.

The results of the study revealed that maximum income from goat farming was obtained through sale of kids and culled animals (94.69 %) followed by use/

sale of manure (5.31 %). Income obtained through sale of kids and culled animals was the highest in small and medium flocks followed by semi-large and large flock which contributed to about 95.27, 95.27, 94.04, and 93.63 % respectively to the total returns.

The total gross income per household worked out to be ₹ 13738.00, 34077.05, 56068.01 and 98538.72 on small, medium, semi-large and large flocks respectively with an overall average ₹ 26832.15. The results of the study indicated that return from goat rearing increased proportionately with increase in flock size. The net income over gross cost per household was observed to be ₹ 7267.89, 18133.40, 31243.90 and 56028.00 on small, medium, semi-large and large flocks respectively with an overall average of ₹ 14581.93. The overall net income over gross cost per goat was ₹ 2827.11 which was highest in small (₹ 3138.28), followed by medium (₹ 2423.24), semi- large (₹ 2168.71) and large (₹ 2054.07) flocks. The overall net income over variable cost was observed as

₹ 17289.91 per household and ₹ 3311.76 per goat.

The overall benefit: cost ratio was observed as 2.24 which were highest in large (2.37) followed by semi- large (2.27), medium (2.24) and small (2.23) flocks6,7,10.

The traditional practices of goat rearing has been evolved over a long period of time and standardized, thus, time tested. Through the present study authors have gathered sufficient data on the economics of goat farming under prevalent traditional practices and analyzed them in a systematic manner in order to arrive at meaningful interpretation. The study will help the policy makers to know the actual situation of the farmers and accordingly prepared the development schemes. The general perception that the major portion of the production cost of animal husbandry is as the feeding of animal has been proved wrong in case of goat rearing under traditional system and the animal cost has came up as the main component of the expenditure. So the efforts may be done to provide cheap and good quality germplasm to the goat rearers, which will be more helpful for them.

However, the combination of modern and local traditional practices and remedies are the best solution for goat production with respect to low cost of production and higher income in rural areas. Hence, present study sported with scientific background and is very useful for other farmers and scientists of the country.

Conclusion

The results of the study indicated that goat rearing provides opportunities of regular income and employment to the poor goat keepers. The socio- economic conditions of goat rearers can be improved through combination of modern and indigenous knowledge of goat rearing, which will not only generate income for their livelihood but also contribute much to the nutritional and health security.

Acknowledgement

Authors are thankful to the Vice-chancellor, G. B.

Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand and project coordinator, AICRP on Goat, ICAR- CIRG, Mathura for encouragement and providing facilities and are also sincerely acknowledge to the goat keepers in region for sharing their valuable information and their kind participation in the study.

References

1 Government of India, Agriculture Census 2010-11. All India Report on Number and Area of Operational Holdings.

Agriculture Census Division, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, 2014.

2 Dikshit AK, Reddy BS & Manohar NS, Demographic changes in small ruminant population in India: Some inferences from

(5)

different livestock regions, Indian J Animal Sci, 82 (2) (2012) 187–193.

3 Government of India, Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, 2012, (www.dahd.nic.in).

4 Oberoi RC, Morti TV & Sharma AK, Comparative economics of sheep and goat rearing (A study of tribal farms in Western Himalaya), Livestock Adviser, 17(1) (1992) 25-30.

5 Snedecor GW & Cochran WG, Statistical Method, 7th edn, (Oxford and IBH Publishing Co., Calcutta, India), 1994.

6 Dixit AK & Mohan B, Economics of goat production in Mathura district of Uttar Pradesh, Indian J Small Ruminants, 20(2) (2014) 96-98.

7 Dixit AK & Singh MK, Economic analysis of goat rearing under field conditions of Bundelkhand region, Indian J Small Ruminants, 20 (2) (2014) 165-168.

8 Shinde AK, Bhatta R, Sankhyan SK, Singh NP & Verma DL, Economics of goat rearing in an organized farm, Indian J Small Ruminants, 9 (1) (2003) 32-34.

9 Singh KP, Dixit SP, Singh PK, Tajane KR, Singh G &

Ahlawat SPS, Economics of goat farming under traditional low input production system in north Gujarat region of India, Indian J Animal Sci, 79 (9) (2009) 948-951.

10 Singh SP, Singh AK & Prasad R, Economics of goat farming in Agra district of Uttar Pradesh, Indian Res J Extension Education, 11 (3) (2011) 37- 40.

References

Related documents

Although a refined source apportionment study is needed to quantify the contribution of each source to the pollution level, road transport stands out as a key source of PM 2.5

The goat fishes though form an important consti- tuent of the mechanised trawler catches in most of the bases elsewhere along the Indian coast, the sudden appearance of this group

The net operating income (income after deducting operating cost from gross revenue) ranged from Rs. 21 per day during January-April to Rs. The number of average annual fijhing

The net operating income (income after deducting operating cost from gross revenue) ranged from Rs. 21 per day during January-April to Rs. The number of average annual fijhing

INDEPENDENT MONITORING BOARD | RECOMMENDED ACTION.. Rationale: Repeatedly, in field surveys, from front-line polio workers, and in meeting after meeting, it has become clear that

Of those who have used the internet to access information and advice about health, the most trustworthy sources are considered to be the NHS website (81 per cent), charity

venosa possess good cytolytic activity as evidenced by the haemolytic activity in goat and chicken erythrocytes and cytotoxic effect as evidenced by the MTT and

ro le in the modificat ion of functional properties such as emul sifi cati on, water- and fat-binding capacity and textural properties. Bawa et a l.I.~ studi ed the