Annals of Arid Zone 43(2): 185-190, 2004

Livestock Rearing Practices in Arid Fringes of Rajasthan

P,p, RohiIla I, Khem Chand I and D.C Mathur2

I Central Arid Zone Research Institute, Regional Research Station, Pali Marwar 306 401, India2 Veterinary Polyclinic, Deptartment of Animal Husbandry, Pali Marwar 306 401, India

Abstract: A survey on livestock rearing practices in Pali district of Rajasthan wasconducted during January to December, 2002. The liv~stock maintained by farmersare local/non-descript types except a few. A significant increase in buffalo populationin last five years indicated of its vital role in improving dairy farmers' economyin arid region also. The nutritional status of the livestock was not satisfactorydue to scarcity of feed/fodder in the drought year. M~iority of the livestock ownerswere ignorant about balanced feeding. No elaborate housing was provided to animalsin rural areas, except a temporary protection during winter months. Livestock ownerswere not much concerned about animal health, especially cattle, which they consideruneconomical. Proper marketing facilities for animal products like goat and camel

milk, meat and wool lacking.

Key words: Livestock, breeding, feeding, housing, marketing, extension, rearing,

arid region.

Different workers have reported on costof rearing, wool, milk and other productiontraits in livestock (Gupta et al., 1992; Rathi,1992; Raut and Nadkarni, 1974; Rawat etal., 1993; Sankhyan et a/., 1997). Only7.36% of land is available for permanentgrazing in the district. Keeping above factsin mind the present study was conductedto investigate the existing livestock rearingpractices being followed in rural areas ofPali district of Rajasthan.

Materials and Methods

For present study one sample villagewas randomly selected from each tehsilof Pali district viz., Sadra (Bali),Gudaaskaran (Desuri), Morai (Jaitaran),Ranavas (Marwar In.), Kerla (Pal i), Lilamba(Raipur), Nimbli (Rohat), Bhesana (Sojat)and Balwana (Sumerpur). Farmers havingmaximum number of animals were selectedfor further studies. Data were collected from

ten such selected farmers by personalinterviews using a schedule (questionnaire),especially prepared for this study. Itcontained questions on different aspects ofanimal production and management, viz.,breeding, feeding, housing, health coverage,care of young calves, diseases andmarketing. Various types of housing andfeeding methods were viewed andphotographed in the selected villages ofdifferent tehsils ofPali district. The collecteddata were tabulated and analyzed as perSnedecor and Cochran (1975).

Results and Discussion

Breeds and livestock numbers

The distribution of sheep breeds 111

relation to available grazing land inRajasthan was studied by Sen el al. (1981).The breed characters of sheep/ goats foundin Rajasthan have been described in detai I

186 ROHILLA et at.

by Acharya (1982). Marwari breed in north-west region of the country is the mostpopular (Kaushish, 1992).

Although the recognized cattle breedof Pali district is Kankrej, the ownersmaintain local and non-descript type. About96% of sheep, goats and camel flocks/herdsare being maintained by DevasilRabari/Grassia tribes, who are known as professionalsheep breeders. Other communities rearingsheep and goats are Meghwal, Prajapati,Gujjar, Sirvi, Suthar, etc. Rajput, Sirvi,Chaudhary, Prajapati, Kumawat, Patel,Bishnoi and Gujjar are engaged in rearingcattle and buffaloes. The range of flocksize kept by livestock owners is shownin Table I.

Animal breeding

Natural service is being used for breedingthe livestock species. Artificial inseminationfacilities provided by State AnimalHusbandry Department and RCDF DairyCentres are also being utilized in a fewvillage herds, well linked to the cities bymetalled roads.

For natural service a common breedingbull is maintained by Panchayat, whosefeeding, health, other maintenance charges,

etc., are solely borne by Panchayat. Somemarginal livestock owners maintainbreeding bulls while others hire the breedingbulls on payment basis. Economic viabilityof various animal models (sheep, goat, pigand poultry) in different agro-climaticregions under specialized and mixed farm ingsituations, depending upon people'spreference and under different systems(extensive, semi-intensive and intensive),has been demonstrated (Bhat, 2002).

Animal Nutrition

Feeding alone accounts for about 75%of the total production cost. For feedingof cattle and buffalo the villagers use cropby-products, green and dry fodder,concentrates, open grazing, etc. The typeof green fodder, dry fodder, concentratesand crop by-products available in Palidistrict (Table 2) are given below:

• Green fodder: Lucern, berseem, barley,oats, cowpea, pearl millet, kashmira,cotton-seed-Ieaves, grasses, etc.

• Dry Fodder: Wheat straw, guar straw,pearl millet stover, sorghum stover, etc.

• Concentrates: Maize, barley, oat,sorghum, guar, wheat, kapasia, pearlmillet, gram, dhaincha, etc.

Table 1. Herdlflock size maintained by farmers in different tehsils

Tehsil Cattle Buffalo Sheep Goat CamelBali 2-5 4-6 80-120 20-85 1-3Oessuri 2-4 3-5 15-80 10-70 2-4laitaran 2-5 2-5 40-85 10-85 1-5Marwar In. 5-50 3-15 5-200 15-100 1-4Pali 2-8 2-10 20-) 50 10-100 3-30Raipur 2-4 3-8 15-350 10-30 1-3Rohat 3-10 2-20 2-8 3-10 2-15Sojat 2-8 2-] 8 25-] 50 ]5-50 ]-3Sumerpur 3-70 5-50 5-200 5-75 1-5

LIVESTOCK REARING PRACTICES 187

Table 2.

Tehsil

BaliOessuri

KhariflRabi crops grown by farmers in different

Kharif cropsMaize, pearl millet, sorghum, mung beanMaize, pearl millet, til, sorghum, mung beanchola

tehsi/s

Rabi cropsWheat, barley, mustard, gramWheat, mustard, cumm, gram, taramera

J aitaran Lucero, maize, mung bean Wheat, mustard, cumin, gram

Marwar In. Sorghum, pearl millet, mung bean, sesame, Wheat. gram, mustard

moth bean

Pali Pearl millet, sorghum, sesame Wheat, gram, mustard

Raipur Pearl millet, sorghum, sesame Wheat, cumin, isbgol, methi, barley

Rohat Pearl millet, mung bean Wheat, mustard, gram

Sojat Pearl millet, sorghum, Sesame, mung bean, Wheat, mustard, cumin, lucero

moth bean

Sumerpur Maize, sorghum, sesame, guar Wheat, barley, mustard, gram

• Crop by-products: Wheat bran, rice bran,cotton seed cake, mustard cake,molasses, groundnut c~ke, etc.

The large animals were stall-fed duringmilking only. The heifers and- dry animalswere not fed properly resulting in delayin age at first calving and longer calvingintervals. Very few dairy farmers offeredsalt, mineral mixture, etc. to their livestockdaily. Such practices are lacking in villages,thus livestock species become vulnerableto infections, diseases, disorders and otherabnormalities.

Sheep, goats and camels were mainlyreared through open grazing on nearby forestareas, roadsides, railway tracks and riverembankments. Only pregnant and post-parturient animals were stall-fed for a fewdays, otherwise no extra concentrate feedswere offered to these animals. Number ofgrasses (Cenchrus, doob, dinanath, rhodes,para grass, sewan, kala dhaman, sudan grass,etc.), fodder trees (Khejri, babool, rohida,neem, kharijaal,bawali, kakraunda,jharberi,imli, nishora, subabul, vilayati babool,

jayanti), shrubs (Bordi, kher, desi-aak,palash, Acacia sp., Cajanus sp., Leucaena,Milletia sp., Parkinsonia sp., Sesbania sp.,Tamanridus sp., etc.) and crop by-products(Mahua cake, tamarind seed, maize glutenseed, maize cake and guar seed, neem cake,molasses, mango seed kernel, etc.) wereavailable for grazing in various tehsils ofPali district.

Tree lopping is used for kids/Iambs understall-feeding. The grazing area is shrinkingday by day as more area is brought undergrain crops. Sheep and goat rearers migrateto the adjoining states viz., Punjab, Haryana,Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, etc.

Animal housing

Performance of milking goats with andwithout shelter was studied by Patel (1999).Lowest milk yield (391 ml) and body weight(26.3 kg) was recorded in unshelteredanimals during winter months in comparisonto those kept under shelter (439.7 mI and31.1 kg, respectively). It shows thesignificance of providing suitable housingto the livestock.

188 ROHILLA el at.

No elaborate housing was provided tolivestock in the villages except atcommercial dairy farms. For cattle andbuffaloes simple/temporary arrangementswere made for night shelter using locallyavailable materials, viz., wooden structures,stone-strips, iron angles, tin-sheets, etc. Theanimal houses were made adjoining tohuman dwellings, so that the animals couldbe attended in case of emergency also.About 95% animal houses were kaccha(temporary) type in rural areas.

For sheep, goats and camel also verysimple and low-cost animal houses wereconstructed. Simple enclosures wereprovided at night, because during daytimettle flocks were sent for grazing. A fewmarginal farmers provided pucca houseswith well-designed semi-open type systemfor sheep and goats. Some shade trees werealso planted in the centre that providedboth top feed and shade during summerdays.

All the livestock owners regularlycleaned the animal houses when the flockwas out for grazing. These livestock ownersdo not disinfect the animal houses. Foravoiding flies and mosquitoes they use thelocal old traditional practices (mudplastering on animal body, burning of mixeddried and green grass in the evening) thatare very effective and economical. Hence,housing needs a greater attention, care andimprovement for enhancing animal'scomfort and the productivity at village level.

Animal health coverage

The livestock owners in villages arenot much concerned about the health oftheir animals. About 90% of the farmersdo not vaccinate and deworm their animals

regularly. About 80% farmers first triedto treat their animals at home using theirtraditional knowledge and methods. About15% animal owners rushed to the nearbyveterinary hospital, while rest of the animalsdied due to lack of timely treatment. Onlya few livestock owners visited theveterinary hospital for the vaccination oftheir livestock, though these vaccines aremade available by the State AnimalHusbandry Departments regularly.

Occasionally animal health camps werealso organized in the villages by NGOs,Panchayat Samities and Governmentagencies to treat the animals at farmers'doorstep. There is an urgent need to educatethe livestock owners to take advantage ofsuch programs.

Livestock marketing

Generally, the milk of cattle, buffaloand goats is sold. Sheep milk is not usedas its yield is low and is adequate to nourishthe lambs only. Range of milk yield ofthe different livestock is presented in Table3. Some mix the milk of cattle. buffaloand goat, and earn a good price in themarket. A range in price of milk, meat,wool and animals is presented in Table4. About 40% farmers sold theiranimals/products through the brokers, 50%farmers sold directly, and the rest 10%availed the marketing facilities.

About 40% farmers sold the milk while60% owners used a pali of milk for preparingcurd, ghee, cheese, etc., for domesticpurpose. Several sheep rearers clipped theirsheep flock thrice a year, where the averagewool yield from sheep varied from 375to 500 g in single cl ipping.

LIVESTOCK REARING PRACTICES 189

Table 3. Daily milk yield (L) of various milch animals

Tchsil Cattle Buffalo Sheep Goat CamelBali 2.50-4.00 3.50-5.00 0.750-1.00 20-85 1.25-2.50Desuri 2.50-3.50 3.50-4.00 0.500-0.750 10-70 1.75-2.50.Iaitaran 3.50-4.50 5.00-6.50 1.00-1.500 10-85 1.25-2.00Marwar .In. 3.50-8.00 4.50-10.00 0.600-0.800 15-100 1.50-2.00Pali 4.50-6.00 5.00-6.50 1.00-1.600 10-100 1.25-2.25Raipur 3.50-5.00 7.00-9.00 10..-1.5000 ]0-30 1.50-3.00Rohat 6.50-8.00 7.00-10.00 0.700-1.00 3-10 2.00-4.00Sojat 5.00-7.00 7.00-9.50 0.650-1.00 15-50 1.00-2.50Sumerpur 4.50-6.00 7.00-8.50 0.700-1.25 5-75 3.00-5.00

The average market price of wool (Table4) varied from Rs 10 to 30 kg-I. About60% wool was sold to the brokers, hencethe livestock owners could not receive goodprice of their harvest. Nearly 30% sheepowners sold wool to the weavers, whilerest of the sheep breeders used the woolfor their own domestic weaving purposes.Mehta et al. (2002) concluded that Merinosheep could be used as import ·substituteto exotic sheep and in farmers' flock toimprove breed.

Kumar and Deoghare (2002) reportedaverage investrnent per household to beRs 3806 in small category for flock size01'2.20 breedable goats; Rs 8954 in mediumflock size of 5.25 and Rs 22608 in largeflock size of 16 breedable goats. The shareof income from goats/total income wasestimated to be 12.45, 40.95 and 52.25%on small, medium and large category ofgoat keepers, respectively.

Mostly male sheep/goat and buffaloeswere sold to the brokers or to the butchersdirectly. Their prices were fixed based onage and weight. The average price of meatwas Rs 80 to 90 kg-I in different villages.

The milch animals were sold/purchased 111

local market or cattle fairs.

Technical know-how and extension

Only 25% livestock owners were awareabout the latest knowledge of animalhusbandry and veterinary developmentsthrough media, i.e., radio, television,newspaper, magazines, etc. Only 20% ofthe dairy farmers followed prophylaxismeasures and ethano-veterinary practicesto keep their animals healthy and productive.Nearly 15% of the cattle, buffalo, sheep/goats were fed Urea Molasses MineralBlocks (UMMB) or Multi Nutrient FeedBlocks (MNFB) prepared and provided byRCDF, Pali.

Conclusions

Based on the present findings it isinferred that local/non-descript typelivestock maintained by farmers can beupgraded by implementing systematicbreeding program. Increasing buffalopopulation (38.57%) might playa vital rolein improving dairy farmers' economy inarid region. Malnutrition prevalent in rurallivestock can be reduced by economicaland balanced feeding using locally available

I,)() ROHILLA et a/.

Table 4. Price of milk, meat and wool in different tehsils

Tehsil Milk price (Rs. L'I) Meat Sheep wool

Cattle Buffalo Goat Camel (Rs. kg-I) Price Yield(Rs. kg'l) (kg/head)

Bali 10.00 12.00 5.00 5.00 90.00 25-30 1.00-1.50

Desuri 9.00 11.00 4.00 4.00 90.00 18-20 0.60-0.70

Jaitaran 7.50 9.00 5.00 4.50 80.00 10-15 0.50-0.75

Marwar .In. 9.00 12.00 5.00 5.00 90.00 20-25 0.70-0.85

Pali 10.00 12.00 5.00 4.50 80.00 25-30 0.85-1.00

Raipur 8.50 11.00 6.50 5.00 80.00 20-25 0.60-0.75

Rohat 10.00 12.00 5.00 5.00 80.00 15-20 0.50-0.70

Sojat 7.00 10.00 5.50 6.00 80.00 20-25 0.65-0.85

Sumerpur 8.00 12.00 5.50 7.00 80.00 20-25 0.60-0.80

feed ingredients and crop by-products. Thereis much scope for improvement in animalhousing systems.

ReferencesAcharya. R.M. 1982. Sheep and Goat Breeds of

India. FAa, Rome, pp. 19-50.

Anonymous 1999. Effect of shelter management onmilk yield of Marwari goats. Annual Report,CAZRJ, Jodhpur.

Bhat. P.N. 2002. Income and employment generationfrom livestock enterprises: An Indianperspective. Xth International Congress onAnimal Production for Food andEnvironment Security. September 23-27, heldat New Delhi, pp. 292.

CAZRl 1997. Livestock production in Rajasthan.In Souvenir on Research and Development forArid Zone Beyond 2000 A.D. CAZRI. Jodhpur.

Gupta. L.R .. Yadav. V.K., Singh, S.N., Singh. K.P.and Singh, N. 1992. Economics of a smallunit of goat. Indian Journal ()(Animal Productionand ManaRement 8(1&2): 141-143.

Kaushish, S.K. 1992. Carpet wool production andutilization in India. Carpet-e-WorldInternational 24: 70-74.

Kumar, S. and Deoghare, P.R. 2002. Goat rearingand rural poor: A case study in south-western

semi-arid zone of Uttar Pradesh. Annals of AridZone 41: 79-84.

Mehta, B.S., Kushwaha, B.P. and Arora, A.L. 2002.Studies on body weight. wool yield and woolquality traits of Bharat Merino sheep. XthInternational Congress on "Animal Productionfor Food and Environment Security" September23-27; held at New Delhi. pp. 191.

Rathi, N. 1992. Economics of sheep and goat inMaharashtra. Indian Journal oj' AgriculturalEconomics 47( I): 62-78.

Raut. K.C. and Nadkarni. U.G. 1974. Cost of rearingsheep and goats under migratory and stationaryconditions. Indian Journal oj'llnil1lal Sciences44: 459-461.

Rawat. I'.S .. Riyazuddin and Patnayak. B.C.1993.Cost and returns from mixed farming in semi-arid region. Annual Report. CSWRI. Avikanagar.

Sankhyan. S.K., Shinde. A.K .. Karim. S.A. andI'atnayak, B.C. 1997. Production performanceof native and crossbred shecp on silvipasture.Indian Journal of Animal Production andManaRement 13(2): 117-118.

Scn. A.K .. Ghosh. P.K .. Gupta. P.K. and Bohra.II.C. 1981. Shccp in Rajasthan. (·.l/.I?!Monof.raph No 14. pp. 38. CAZRI. Jodhpur.

Sncdccor. G.W. and Cochran, W.G. 1975. ,'itatisticalMethods. Oxford and 181·1 PublishilH:! Co ..London. ~