Thumbnails Document Outline <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=1> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=2> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=3> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=4> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=5> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=6> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=7> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=8> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=9> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=10> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=11> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.

pdf#page=12> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=13> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=14> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=15> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=16> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=17> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=18> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=19> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=20> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=21> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=22> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=23> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=24> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=25> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=26> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=27> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=28> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=29> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=30> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=31> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=32> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=33> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=34> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=35> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=36> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=37> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=38> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=39> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=40> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=41> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=42> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=43> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=44> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=45> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=46> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=47> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=48> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=49> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=50> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=51> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=52> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=53> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=54> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=55> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=56> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=57> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=58> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=59>

<http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=60> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=61> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=62> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=63> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=64> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=65> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=66> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=67> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=68> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=69> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=70> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=71> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=72> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=73> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=74> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=75> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=76> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=77> <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=78> No Outline Available Find: Previous Next Highlight all Match case Toggle Slider Find Previous Next Page: of 78 Presentation Mode Open Print Download Current View <http://www.nird.org.in/nird_docs/ven_finrepo.pdf#page=25&zoom=auto,0,99> Zoom Out Zoom In 8 * 7 **-Provisional *Source : DAHD, GoI, 2006 9 3.2 Dairy Development in Andhra Pradesh and Study Districts 3.2.1 The state ranks seventh in milk production in the country and it is the home tract of Ongole, Punganur and Deoni breeds of cattle. Prakasam district is a home tract of world famous Ongole breed while Chittoor, for punganur breed of cattle . Dairy accounted for 11% of agricultural GDP in the state. According to 17th Quiquennial livestock census 2003, the total population of cattle and buffalos in the state was 106.3 lakhs and 93 lakhs respectively. Milk production in the state in 1980-81 was 2.01 million tons and increased to 7.257 million tons in 2004-05 (table.1) registering a growth rate of 3.74% per annum raising the per capita

availability of 263 gms. According to the sample survey report of Department of Animal Husbandry, AP 2006-07, the average milk yield per animal in milk was only 1.888 Kgs, 2.84 Kgs, 7.147 Kgs and 6.541 Kgs per day for non-descript cows, non-descript buffalos, crossbred cows and graded murrah buffalos, respectively. 3.2.2 The district-wise milk production data for last 6 years is furnished below in Table.3. Chittoor and Krishna districts top the list with 9% of total milk production of the State followed by Guntur and Prakasam districts with 8% and 7%, respectively. In the study districts, there was a decline in the milk production during 2001-02 and later increased gradually with a growth rate of 9.7% in Chittoor and 18% in Prakasam. In Prakasam district the milk production almost got doubled during 2004-05. According to the sample survey report (2004-05) of Department of Animal husbandry, 16.30% of milk produced by farmers was consumed by them, 11.31% was kept for conversion and 72.39% was sold either to organized dairy or to private vendors. Table . 3 District-wise Estimated Milk Production during the years 1996-97 to 2004-05 in Andhra Pradesh ( 000 tons ) 10 S.No. District 1999-20 00 % 2000-01 % 2001-02 % 2002-03 % 2003-04 % 2004-0 5 % 1 Krishna 375.375 7 357.981 6 426.900 7 485.995 7 533.786 8 658.93 7

9 2 Chittoor 397.944 8 533.031 10 465.910 8 508.000 8 539.906 8 646.24 9 3 Guntur 478.818 9 568.255 10 538.900 9 528.738 8 599.354 9 592.77 4 8 4 Prakasam 302.675 6 338.954 6 309.980 5 305.001 5 348.649 5 536.71 3 7 5 West Godavari 515.528 10 438.044 8 396.768 7 444.995 7 549.685 8 522.64 2 7

6 East Godavari 352.627 7 374.139 7 426.000 7 482.995 7 535.924 8 459.71 1 6 7 Visakhapatnam 217.969 4 240.045 4 227.001 4 314.000 5 320.983 5 365.50 8 5 8 Nellore 207.981 4 273.004 5 209.900 4 224.999 3 233.802 3 338.74 1 5 9 Kurnool 191.284 4 210.704 4 287.100 5 358.997 5 365.125 5 291.77 5 4

10 Ananthapur 152.399 3 202.682 4 181.972 3 194.520 3 185.004 3 276.79 7 4 11 Nalgonda 238.063 5 254.496 5 225.200 4 265.699 4 267.927 4 276.65 4 12 Srikakulam 122.716 2 185.204 3 168.924 3 187.996 3 187.131 3 276.29 9 4 13 Khammam 201.196 4 169.872 3 240.913 4 310.008 5 329.652 5 276.05 5 4 14

Vizianagaram 149.837 3 183.021 3 156.786 3 181.502 3 178.401 3 240.18 3 3 15 Mahabubnagar 203.124 4 183.620 3 354.100 6 439.002 7 354.141 5 212.64 5 3 16 Karimnagar 191.169 4 213.070 4 287.100 5 329.004 5 333.690 5 208.01 7 3 17 Ranga Reddy 145.116 3 85.170 2 130.000 2 156.003 2 186.723 3 200.79 9 3 18

Adilabad 121.116 2 127.113 2 157.200 3 171.007 3 159.934 2 187.40 3 3 19 Medak 150.235 3 158.643 3 181.100 3 207.999 3 204.022 3 172.11 8 2 20 Warangal 137.822 3 156.610 3 124.990 2 158.698 2 161.914 2 165.96 8 2 21 Cuddapah 128.443 2 131.335 2 141.900 2 136.002 2 149.321 2 152.02 5 2 22

Nizamabad 108.630 2 122.532 2 129.100 2 137.006 2 141.087 2 146.41 6 2 23 Hyderabad 31.576 1 13.693 0 46.000 1 54.999 1 92.647 1 53.363 1 Total 5151.643 10 0 5521.476 10 0 5813.74 4 10 0 6583.16 5 10 0 6958.81 0 10 0 7256.8 3 10 0 Source: Sample Survey reports of Department of Animal Husbandry , AP 3.2.3 The Department of Animal Husbandry (DAH) is providing veterinary health cover through 4976 veterinary institutions (Table.4) in the State, 197 in Prakasam 11 and 302 in Chittoor district. The number of adult cattle units covered by each veterinary graduate institution is 9733 and by including rural livestock

units the coverage will be 4100. Similar pattern was observed in study districts also. The state has 3 veterinary colleges, one each at Hyderabad, Tirupati and Gannavaram. There is one Veterinary Biological Research Institute in the state which produces 11 different types of bacterial / viral livestock vaccines and supplies to veterinary institutions. Overall, in the State AI services are being provided through 4792 AI centres of DAH and also through 1791 Gopalmitras, 150 centres of JK Trust {100 in Chittoor and 50 in Anantapur), 49 BAIF centres {Mahabubnagar, Anantapur, Karimnagar, Hyderabad-Nalgonda and Warangal districts} and 224 Dairy Coop. Centres. During 2004-05, 11 lakh calves were born in the state, 1.5 lakh calves in Chittoor dominated by Crossbreds and 0.5 lakh in Prakasam district dominated by buffalos (Table.5). The success rate of AI is 37% in the state, and 34.5% in the study districts. Table.4. Coverage and no. of veterinary institutions in Andhra Pradesh and study districts (As on 31.3. 2004) Districts No. of Veterinary Institutions Catering to Veterinary Aid No. of Technical Persons Employed in Veterinary Institutions Veterinary Poly Clinics Veterinary Hospitals Veterinary Dispensaries Rural Livestock Units Total Deputy Directors Assistant Directors Veterinary Assistant Surgeons Prakasam 1 9 90 97 197 1 17 96 Chittoor 1 15 99

187 302 3 24 107 Andhra Pradesh 22 282 1793 2879 4976 30 390 1626 Source: Sample Survey reports of Department of Animal Husbandry , AP Table.5 Livestock Development Services Provided in Andhra Pradesh and study districts ( as on 31 st March, 2004) Districts No. of Castrations Done No. of Vaccinations Done Artificial Inseminations Done (No.) Calves Born (No.) Exotic IndigeNous Murrah Total Exotic Indige nous Murrah Total No. of Artificial Insemin ation Centres Area Brought Under Fodder Develop ment (In Acres) Prakasam 44148

2421443 987 2449 131554 134990 266 784 45264 46314 192 84982 Chittoor 79455 3922311 382046 2 29250 411298 133360 10320 143680 301 54501 Andhra Pradesh 135813 3 7024751 8 84625 7 16343 9 195184 6 296154 2 30471 5 52360 66185 4 111892 9 4792 131307 3 Source: Sample Survey reports of Department of Animal Husbandry , AP 12 3.2.4 Fodder shortage is a major impediment for dairy development in the state. Only 3% of the geographical area (7.79 lakh hectares) is under permanent pasture and grazing land against recommended 8%. The dry matter requirement, availability and gap has been estimated by the department of animal husbandry as 50.32 million

tons, 40.31 million tons and 10.01 million tons respectively. Similar trend exists in the study districts also. 3.2.5 Andhra Pradesh Dairy Development Co-operative Federation ltd.(APDDCF) is providing milk marketing support to dairy farmers in the state through 9 milk unions and direct federation units. The federation and district unions procure 37.24 crore litres of milk per annum through a network of 456 milk routes, 9154 milk collection centres covering 10249 villages. Total milk processing capacity created in the state is 29 LLPD under co-operative sector and 14 LLPD under private sector (Table. 6). About 19% of the milk produced in the state is procured by the organized sector. Among the private dairies, majority of them are working in Chittoor and Prakasam districts collecting nearly 70% of procurement of organized sector. The major private dairies existing in Prakasam district are Jersey, creamline, Ravileela, Tirumala, Dodla, etc. and in Chittoor district are Heritage and Jersey. Table.6 Dairy Plants Registered under MMPO in Andhra Pradesh (Capacity 000 litres per Day) Registering Authority Cooperative Private Others Total No. Capacity No. Capacity No. Capacity No. Capacity Central Authority 13 2905 6 855 1 200 20 3960 State Authorities 0 0 9 588 0 0 9 588 Total 13 2905

15 1443 1 200 29 4548 Source: DAHD, GoI, 2006 13 IV General Profile of Study districts The demographic profile and land use pattern of the study districts is furnished in the table.7 (Census 2001). The population density is less in Prakasam district (173) than Chittoor. In many developmental fronts, i.e.in respect of litreacy, urbanization, net irrigated area, net sown area, rain fall, cropping intensity, etc., Performance of Chittoor district is better than Prakasam district. Both the districts are predominantly dependent on agriculture for livelihoods. Of the total households, 61% in Chittoor and 70% in Prakasam district are dependent on farming. About 44% of total area is under cultivation and 74 % of farmers in Prakasam are having less than 2 ha of land holding. Similar pattern (42% of area and 71 % of farmers) was observed in Chittoor also (PLPs, NABARD). How ever, the area under irrigation specifically under canal irrigation was more in Prakasam than in Chittoor (Table 7). The major crops grown in Chittoor district are Paddy, groundnut, sugarcane, mango, Banana, Citrus fruits and in Prakasam district are Tobacco, Paddy, Bajra, Maize, Ragi, Bengalgram, Redgram, Blackgram, Greengram, subabul, Cotton, Chillies, Mango, Guava, Sapota, Cashew and other forestry species. Table. 7 Profile of the study districts Item Units Chittoor Prakasam Area Sq.km. 15152 17626 14 Population In Thousands 3735.2 3054.94 Male In Thousands 1883.45 1549.89 Female In Thousands 1851.75 1505.05

Urban In Thousands 810.01 466.7 Rural In Thousands 2925.18 2588.23 Population Growth (decadal) % 14.54 10.72 Population Density (Persons/Sq.Km) 247 173 Litreacy % 67.46 57.86 Male % 78.29 69.78 Female % 56.48 45.6 Urbanisation % 19.8 16.45 Agro-climatic Region & Zone Zone XI - East Coast Plains and Hills Region , Southern Scarce Rainfall Zone . Rain fall Normal (mm) Actual (mm)during 2004-05 908 699 872 586 Geographical area Lakh ha. 15.15 17.14 Net Sown area and its % to total geographical area Lakh ha. 3.51(23%) 5.38 (31%) Forest area coverage Lakh ha. 4.51(29%)

4.43 (22%) Fallow land Lakh ha. 2.88 3.11 Land not available for cultivation Lakh ha. 4.24 4.49 Cropping Intensity % 113 106 Net Irrigated area and its % to Net sown area Lakh ha. 1.31(37%) 1.22(22%) By canals (in ha): Ha 677 44000 % to Net irrigated area % 1 33 By wells/Filter Points etc (in ha): Ha 115,146 68000 % to Net irrigated area % 88 52 By Tanks and lift irrigation (in ha): Ha 15570 20000 % to Net irrigated area % 12 15 Source: Aponline.gov.in 15 V. Socio-economic profile of sample respondents The data were collected from 200 farmers each from Prakasam and Chittoor from the villages and mandals as mentioned in Table 8. The selection was done using simple systematic random sampling technique. Table.8 Details of mandals and villages S.No. Name of the district Name of the Mandal Name of Village 1 Chittoor

Penumuru Yadamari Atlavaripalli, Balijapalli, Pedarajulapalli, Jattigundlapalli, Maniyanampalli, Sanyasipalli Yadamuru, Bondaluru, V a r a d a r a j u l a p a l l i , Bandivandavallavuru 2 Prakasam Santhanuthanapadu Jarugumalli Mungamooru, Indluru, Pernimitta, Mynampadu and Challappalem Jarugumalli, Chintalaplaem, K.Bitragunta, Cherrikurapalem and Davagudur 16 5.1 Age-wise and category-wise classification of sample : Among the respondents, 34% belonged to the age group of 41-50 years in Prakasam followed by age group 51-60, 31-40, above 61 and 21-30 (Table.9). In Chittoor also the maximum number of farmers were in the age group of 41-50 years. Table.10 shows that 5% of sample farmers were women farmers in Prakasam district and only 2% of sample farmers were women farmers in Chittoor district. These female farmers are mostly heading the families when the male counterpart is not existing or not in a position to take care of family. Further, in very few families (1%) the women being SHG members, assets like land, house and livestock are on their name. Three and half & 6.0% of the sample dairy farmers belonged to Agricultural Labour (AL) category in Chittoor and Prakasam districts respectively: Similarly 28.0 & 17.5% to Marginal Farmer (MF), 35.5 & 26.0% to Small Farmer(SF), 28.0 & 31.5% to Medium Farmer (Med.F), and 5.0 & 19.0% to Big Farmer(BF) categories in Chittoor & Prakasam respectively. Thus chittoor district has higher concentration of Agricultural Labour (AL), Marginal Farmer (MF) and Small Farmer (SF) category accounting for 67.0% of the sample dairy farmers while the corresponding figure for prakasam district is only 50.0% Table.9 Age-wise and Category-wise classification of the sample respondents Category of farmers (no.) District Age Marginal Farmer Small farmer Medium Farmer Big farmer

Agriculture labourer Total Prakasam 21-30 0 4 4 3 2 13 31-40 3 10 18 9 3 43 41-50 17 20 19 10 2 68 51-60 14 13 13 6 5 51 Above 61 1 5 9 10 0 25 Total 35 52 63 38 12 200 % to total 18 26 32 19 7 100 Chittoor 21-30 2 7 1 1 1

12 31-40 18 19 15 0 0 52 41-50 25 15 21 3 2 66 51-60 7 18 9 3 4 41 Above 61 4 12 10 3 0 29 Total 56 71 56 10 7 200 % to total 28 36 28 5 4 100 Source: Data collected from Study districts 17 Table .10. Gender classification of sample N-400 Category of farmers (%) District Sex Marginal Farmer Small farmer Medium Farmer Big farmer Agriculture labourer

Total Prakasam Male 10 25 30 25 5 95 Female 1 1 2 1 5 Chittoor Male 28 33 28 5 4 98 Female 0 2 0 0 0 2 Source: Data collected from Study districts 5.2 Educational status of sample dairy farmers: The percentage of farmers who can read and write were 54% in Prakasam and 69% in Chittoor district and the trend was similar to educational status shown in census (Table.7). The big and medium farmers were more educated than the other category of dairy farmers in both the districts. Table. 11. Educational status of sample farmers N=200 each Category of farmers (%) District Litreacy level Marginal Farmer Small farmer Medium Farmer Big farmer Agriculture labourer Total Prakasam Illitreate 5 13 13

8 5 43 Read and W rite 4 13 18 17 2 54 Graduate & Above 1 3 3 Chittoor Illitreate 12 8 5 2 27 Read and W rite 15 26 21 4 2 69 Graduate & Above 1 1 1 1 4 Source : Data collected from Study districts 5.3 Occupational status of sample dairy farmers: The primary occupation of 91% and 83% of all categories of farmers in Prakasam and Chittoor respectively was agriculture and practicing dairying as secondary occupation. However, the primary occupation in respect of majority of marginal (23 and 34% of marginal farmers in Prakasam and Chittoor) and small farmers (around 8% in both the districts) was not agriculture and they were working as labourers in neighbours fields or in industries. The trend was on higher side in Chittoor than in the Prakasam district. Whenever they are working as field labour the landlord allowed them taking fodder grass for their cattle. Table.12 Occupational status of sample dairy farmers 18 Category of farmers (%) District Primary Occupation Marginal Farmer Small farmer

Medium Farmer Big farmer Agriculture labourer Total Prakasam Farming 7 23 32 27 1 91 Non-Farming 1 1 Labour 2 2 4 8 Chittoor Farming 19 33 27 5 83 Labour 10 3 1 4 17 Source: Data collected from Study districts 5.3 Land holding pattern The average landholding of individual farmer in the study area was 0.60 and 4.37 acres under irrigated and Rainfed areas in Prakasam district and corresponding figures for Chittoor were 1.27 and 0.86 acres, respectively. The average land holding per farmer under rainfed conditions was higher in Prakasam than in Chittoor district in respect of all categories of the farmers (Table.13). Table.13 Landholding pattern of sample dairy farmers Prakasam District Chittoor District Total category/land in acres Irrigated Rainfed Total Irrigated Rainfed Total Irrigated Rainfed

Total Marginal Farmer 0.00 0.95 0.95 0.29 0.48 0.77 0.21 0.61 0.82 Small farmer 0.10 2.30 2.40 1.20 0.58 1.78 0.74 1.30 2.04 Medium Farmer 0.20 3.81 4.02 2.03 1.42 3.45 1.06 2.69 3.75 Big farmer 1.93 9.25 11.1 8 3.86 2.36 6.21 2.24 8.13 10.3 7 Agri .labourer 0.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.33 1.33 Total 0.60 4.37 4.97 1.27 0.86 2.13

0.94 2.62 3.55 Source : Data collected from Study districts 5.4 Cropping pattern in the study area The farmers of Prakasam district mainly grow Bengal gram (25%), Tobacco (18%), Subabul (12%), Paddy (12%), Jowar (5%), social forestry species, vegetables and fruits (Table.14) and in Chittoor they grow Groundnut, (48%) Sugarcane (25%), Jowar (13%) and Paddy (3%). Further, 66% of the farmers in Prakasam and 45% of the farmers in Chittoor are following multiple cropping patterns i.e. growing more than one crop in a season. The average yield per acre and acreage per farmer for major crops grown (as primary crop) is furnished below in the table.14. Thus the cropping 19 pattern is more livestock friendly in Prakasam (paddy, jowar, pulses, Subabul) district as well as in Chittoor district (paddy, jowar, groundnut). The production system is highly dependent on home grown feeds, fodders and crop residues. Farmers in the study area are cultivating many green fodder varieties like fodder Jowar, NB21, pillipesara and Paragrass. However, the percentage of the farmers who are growing green fodder is 6.0% & 4.5% in Prakasam and Chittoor districts respectively. Table.14 Cropping pattern in the study districts District Name of the crop Kharif Rabi Average Acereage /farmer Yield per acre (quintals) Average Acereage/ farmer Yield per acre (quintals) % of total of farmers Prakasam Paddy/Rice 1.39 21.00 0.25 2.81 12.0 Jowar 0.76 12.13

0.60 10.43 5.0 Subabul ( Perrennial) 2.41 187.94 12.0 Tobacco 2.65 56.67 2.13 31.94 18.0 Bengal Gram 1.22 7.80 1.36 9.00 25.0 Jute 2.25 3.50 0.00 0.00 1.5 N.B.21 4.00 300.00 0.00 0.00 0.5 Paragrass 0.25 40.00 0.20 0.00 0.5 Fodder Jowar 0.28 42.00 0.15 0.00 12.00 Orange 2.00 50.00 0.00 0.00 1.5 Vegetables 1.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.5 Eucalyptus Trees 2.50 132.50 0.00 0.00

2.0 Sapota 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.5 Chittoor Paddy/Rice 1.25 46.25 0.13 3.75 3.0 Jowar 0.76 9.12 0.00 0.00 11.0 Red Gram 0.30 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.5 Ground Nut 1.25 3.96 0.00 0.00 48.0 N.B.21 0.50 150.00 0.00 0.00 0.5 F.Jowar 0.35 45.00 0.25 39 2.0 APBN 1.33 117.33 0.00 0.00 2.0 Sugar Cane 1.54 215.07 0.00 0.00 25.0 Malbari 0.00 0.00 2.00

1500.00 0.5 Source : Data collected from Study districts 20 VI. Management Practices and Profitability of Dairy Farming in Study Districts 6.1 Livestock holding pattern and Yield: In general, the Prakasam district has buffalo based dairy farming system and Chittoor has crossbred (CB) cow based dairy system. Table.15 shows that about 39% of farmers in Chittoor were rearing 2 CB cows on an average followed by 3-5 CB cows (36%). Only 8% of the farmers were rearing more 5 animals. The majority of farmers (57%) holding of CB cows yielding in the range of 5-6 litres per day and only 10% of the farmers were holding the CB cows yielding more than 10lit. In Prakasam also 44% of the farmers were holding 2 graded buffalos, 12% farmers have more than 3 buffalos and 19% were having single graded buffalos. The majority of the farmers (63%) were getting a yield of 5-6 lit / day/animal. Only 6% of the farmers possessed the graded buffalos yielding 10-12 lit / day. The average productivity of milk for AL, MF, SF, Med.F, and BF is 3 & 4, 5 & 4, 5 & 6, 7 & 8, and 5 & 10 litres per day for buffalo in prakasam and CB cows in chittoor district respectively. Thus in both the districts the germ plasm was of good quality resulting from either cross breeding or up-gradation. Culling is a precondition for milk productivity enhancement and it is practiced in Chittoor. Dairy farmers are ingenious, progressive and enterprising in the district that no sooner the animal productivity decreased, than they would replace with other quality animal. Usually farmers were retaining young female animals (70% of farmers) and only 33% of the farmers were rearing young male animals. The male young ones were usually disposed off within a year age. Field study reveals that none of the farmers were maintaining bullocks or bulls in both the districts and hiring tractors for ploughing. Though the Prakasam district is a home tract of world famous Ongole breed, very few of the sample farmers were holding these Ongole cattle, either cows or bulls or bullocks. Apart from dairy animals, 7% of farmers in Chittoor and 3% of farmers in Prakasam were rearing other livestock like sheep, goat and poultry. The details of livestock holding pattern is furnished below in the table.15. The category wise livestock holding was provided in table 16, where the frequency of holding a pair of 21 milch animals is more in prakasam with 62% of the farmers and 32% of the

farmers in chittoor obtaining two animal dairy unit. Table.15 Livestock holding pattern Particulars Prakasam Chittoor No. of animals Yield in lit/ animal/day No. of animals Yield in lit/ animal/day Indigenous cows 1 (3%) 3 4 (3%) Crossbred cows 1 (10%) 2 (39%) 3-5 (36%) >5 (8%) 5-6 lit (57%) 7-8 lit (26%) >10 lit (10%) Buffalos local 1 (14%) 2 (4 %) 3 (3%) 1-2 lit (12%) 3-4 lit (8%) Graded buffalos 1 (19%) 2 (44%) 3-5 (12%) 5-6 lit (63%) 7-8 lit (9%) 9-12lit (6%) 2 (2%) 8 (2%) Young stock Local buffalos male 1(14%) 2 (6%) Local buffalos female 1 (26%) 2 (11%) -

Graded buffalos male 1 (13) 2 (1%) Graded buffalos female 1 (28%) 2 (13%) 2 (1%) Sheep > 20 (0.7%) <10 (4%) 10-20 (2%) >20 (0.7%) Goat >10 (2%) >10 (2%) Poultry B a c k y a r d (2%) Figures in parenthesis indicate the percentage farmers responded under that category Source : Data collected from Study districts 22 Table.16 Category-wise large animal holding pattern Percentage of farmers responded No. of animals Marginal farmers Small farmers Medium farmers Big farmers AL Total Chittoor 1 14 6 1 21 2 10 11 8 1 2 32 3

1 9 6 16 4 2 4 6 1 1 14 5 & more 1 6 6 3 1 17 Prakasam 1 4 6 2 4 1 17 2 10 15 24 9 4 62 3 4 3 4 3 1 15 4 & more 2 2 3 1 8 6.2 Management practices followed by dairy farmers in study districts 6.2.1 Breeding efficiency The age at first calving (AFC) and intercalving period is considered to be a good indicator/ parameter among the management practices adopted by farmers. Majority of the farmers (53%) responded that the dairy animals calved first time at the age of 3 years (53%) followed by 2 years (41%) and 4 years (2%) in Chittoor (Table.17), While in Prakasam, majority of the farmers reported that the age of first calving was 4 years in respect of local buffalos (13%) as well as graded buffalos (43%).

Further, 10% of the farmers faced reproductive problems and AFC increased to 5 years. In respect of intercalving period 69% of farmers in Chittoor reported that the calving interval was up to 1.5 years (table.17). Similar trend was observed in Prakasam also (60%). AFC as well as calving interval indicated that medium and big farmers were taking care of the animals well in Prakasam, while in Chittoor it was by small and marginal farmers. Table.17 Age at First Calving (AFC) of dairy animals Response of farmers District Category Response of farmers (%) in Chittoor Response of farmers (%) in Prakasam Crossbred cows Indigenous Local buffalos Graded buffalos 23 cows Age at first calving in years 2 years 3 years 4 years 3 years 3 years 4 years 5 years 3 years 4 years 5 years Prakasam Marginal Farmer 2 4 1 4 6 3 Small farmer 3 4 1 6 11 2

Medium Farmer 2 4 1 8 14 3 Big farmer 7 11 2 Agrilabourer 1 3 3 1 6 13 2 27 43 10 Chittoor Marginal Farmer 11 16 1 1 Small farmer 15 19 2 Medium Farmer 12 13 2 2 Big farmer 2 3 Agrilabourer 1 2 41 53 2 2 2 Source : Data collected from Study districts Table.18 Calving Interval of dairy animals Response of farmers Chittoor district Prakasam district CB cows Local buff. Graded buff Up to 1.5 year 1.5 to 2.5

years Above 2.5 and up to 3.5 Up to 1.5 year 1.5 to 2.5 years above 2.5 Up to 1.5 year 1.5 to 2.5 years above 2.5 % of farmers gave response 69 25 6 15 3 2 46 30 4 Category wise response Marginal Farmer 21 7 2 2 1 6 5 2 Small farmer 26 5 2 3 1 12 8 Medium Farmer 16 9 4 6 1 16 8 1 Big farmer 4

1 2 1 10 6 Agrilabourer 2 3 1 2 3 1 69 25 6 14 4 2 46 30 4 Source : Data collected from Study districts Further, 52% of sample respondents in Chittoor indicated that CB cows were conceived with 1 service. Around 21% farmers reported to have faced reproductive problems with CB cows i.e. the number of services per conception were more than 3. The corresponding figures for Prakasam district were 44 and 7% in respect of graded buffalos and 11 & 9% in respect of local buffalos. The reason for higher number of services per conception in Prakasam district are : i) buffalos are seasonal breeders compared to cows ii) Silent heat in buffalos -detection of heat is difficult resulting in delayed AI leading to failure iii) Moreover, in the district, farmers are feeding their 24 animals entirely on Subabul which also causes reproductive problems iv) feeding mainly with Paddy straw with out vitamin and mineral supplements also cause reproductive failure. 6.2.2 Feeding practices Usually dairy animals whether crossbred cow or graded buffaloe, they are fed with 20 kg of green fodder, 5 kg. of dry fodder and 1 2 kgs of concentrate feed for sustaining the milk yield of 7 10 litres of milk. There can be variations and adjustments in the quantity of feed among the types namely dry, green and grain residues / concentrate feed ingredients. However, a thumb rule in dairy farming with regard to feeding is that feeding green fodder at lib can sustain an average milk yield of 6-7 litres per day without inclusion of either dry fodder or concentrate feed. Such a feeding has greater benefits including the health of the animal, in addition to easy conception. The metabolism of the animal is such that it adjusts the nutrients from the

feed and fodder resources accessed to the animal depending upon the availability and the conveniences of the dairy farmers. Thus, in place of concentrates the farmers in Prakasam and Chittoor fed with farm grown Bengal gram / rice bran and deoiled groundnut cake and kuduthi which is a semi-liquid stored in either a big pot or a stony structure. The kitchen waste, the food waste, vegetable cut waste, washings of the food plates, the left over foods including the buttermilk, form a semi-liquid, nutritious, delicious food cherished by the buffaloes inserting their jaws deep inside sucking and enjoing the kudithi. Usually, rice bran of 200 400 grms. and little of salts is added just before it is offered to the buffaloes. In lean season, the stalks and the dried stems of these crops are fed to the animals duly adopting hay making practices. 6.2.2.1 Grazing practice: Grazing is a common practice i.e. 79% of farmers in Prakasam and 70% of farmers in Chittoor send their animals for grazing. However it is restricted to dry animals in Chittoor district. Generally animals in milk are not sent for grazing in the first 4-5 months. The grazing hours varied from 4 to 10 hours i.e. 62 % of farmers in Chittoor sent the animals for grazing for 4-6 hours and 27% for 8-10 hours. While in Prakasam the reverse trend was observed. Further, grazing is a common practice on individual basis. The grazing opportunity is more in Chittoor than 25 in Prakasam due to the presence of green cover round the year on arable, uncultivated lands and orchards due to the activity of both the south west and north east monsoons, although the total quantity of rain fall is less. Thus even less time on grazing in Chittoor gives enough grass to the animal. Seventy percent of the farmers of Chittoor indicated that the fodder banks run by Department of Animal Husbandry during drought period were very much useful (supply feed and fodder & checkup for diseases) and 11% expressed that fodder banks were not useful because of long distance. In Prakasam the fodder banks were not established and farmers purchased paddy straw @ Rs. 50 per bundle (apx. 25 kg) from neighbouring Nellore district during drought period. 6.2.2.2 Fodder: The common green fodder fed to dairy animals were Jowar, wild green grass in Chittoor and Jowar (10%) and Subabul (22% of farmers) in Prakasam district. Only 4 - 6% of the farmers were growing fodder species like NB21, Pillipesara, etc. in the study area. About 40% of Chittoor farmers were feeding green fodder @ 10 kg per day per animal. Where as in Prakasam, majority of

farmers (53%) were feeding only 10 kg green fodder per day. In both the districts the common dry fodder is paddy straw, which was stored out of paddy crop after harvesting and used through out the year. As mentioned in previous para Prakasam district was reeling under drought for last 3 years and farmers were purchasing paddy straw to feed the animals. The majority of farmers were feeding their dairy animals with 5 kg of dry fodder per day in addition to the green grass either collected or grazed along with concentrate ingredients. 6.2.2.3 Concentrates : The common concentrate ingredients used were ground nut cake and rice bran and usage of ingredients was mostly coinciding with cropping pattern. As could be seen from table 14, majority of the farmers in chittoor district were growing groundnut, the de-oiled cake of which is used as rich source of protein for sustaining high productivity levels. Similarly Bengal gram, Rice bran and subabul are used in prakasam district. The quantity of primary concentrate (Table 18) ingredient fed was on lower side (37% of farmers in Chittoor and 30% of farmers in Prakasam fed less than 1 kg of concentrate). Apart from this, 25% of the farmers in Prakasam 26 and 35% of farmers in Chittoor are feeding more than one concentrate item which include rice bran (around 200 grams), seed coat (300-400 gms). About 7% of farmers in Chittoor and 43% of farmers in Prakasam district were not feeding any concentrate (Table 19). The reason for feeding of no or lower amount of concentrates in Prakasam by majority of the farmers could be i). Prakasam district dominated by buffalos based dairy farming, which are efficient converters of crop residues ii). The milk yield was lower than 4 lit per day in respect of 30% of the farmers iii) Green and dry fodder without concentrate can support easily an animal yielding up to 4-5 lit of milk per day. Over all Buffalo dominant farming systems are found to be efficient converters of crop waste of inferior quality of these straws (crop residues) in supporting the livelihoods of the dairy farmers compared to the cow dominant farming system. The feeding practice followed in a household was a combination of ingredients in ration, in general, feeding pattern per animal in milk is as follows:. Chittoor Prakasam Quantity Quantity Groundnut(deoiled) Cake

2-3 kgs/day 1 3Kgs Bran 1-3 kgs/day 100 gms 200 gms. Black/Bengal/Greengram seed coat 0.5 1.5 kg/day 200 gms 300 gms Green Fodder 10-20 kgs/day 10-25 kgs/day Paddy/Jowar straw 5 kgs/day 5-10 kgs/day In both the dairy dominant farming systems, the value addition of the crop wastes (crop residue, grain residue, stalks and hovers), kitchen wastes, and labour wastes (infirm, aged, and women members etc) are adding to the income and food security in normal years. Majority of the farmers are growing bengal gram and ground nut in the study area. The stalks, seed coat of bengal gram and stalks, kernels of ground nut and deoiled cake are excellent sources of Total Digestible Nutrients (TDN) and Digestible Crude Protein (DCP). 6.2.2.4 : Feeding vitamin and mineral mixture : About 8% of Prakasam and 11% of Chittoor farmers were always feeding vitamin and mineral mixture while 43% and 65% of farmers respectively were not yet all feeding vitamin and mineral mixture. The 27 main sources of purchase of vitamin and mineral mixture was Shop (for 33% of respondents in both the districts) followed by dairy cooperative society (DCS) (for 12% of Prakasam farmers and 1% of Chittoor farmers) and private dairy (for 2 % of Prakasam farmers and 12% of Chittoor farmers). Occasionally when the animals was sick, farmers get the vitamin and mineral mixture from veterinary dispensary at free of cost. The cost of 500 gm pack was Rs. 25 at DCS and Rs. 42 at veterinary medical shop. Overall Quantitative and qualitative insufficiency of feeds and green fodder at small/marginal farmer level had been the biggest impediment in exploiting genetic potential of the dairy animals in existing farming system in both the districts. Farmers are not aware of benefit of growing and feeding of Azolla rather feeding beer extract / residue. The production cost of Azolla is only half rupee per kg. which is cost effective and brings down the production costs drastically. It is rich in the critical amino acids that are absent in normal feeds. Table.19 Feeding pattern by dairy farmers in study districts

% of farmers responded Chittoor Prakasam Concentrate feeding (kg/day/animal) 0 0. 5 1 2 3 4 & above Total 0 0. 5 1 2 3 4 & above Total None 7 7 1 3 13 Rice Bran 1 1 1 3 6 6 8 1 0 2 4 30 Groundnut Cake 7 2 2 1 3 2 2 15 60 6 7 8 2 1 10 52 Bengal Gram 3

1 1 5 Sead Coat 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 D.Oil Cake 3 1 0 4 1 18 Maize Powder 1 1 1 More Information Less Information Close