1
AEM - 205 B
Course 205 B
Sustainable Livestock Development
(3 credits)
Block I
Introduction to Sustainable Livestock Development
Unit 1 : Role of Livestock in Sustainable Rural Livelihood Security 3-15
Unit 2 : Livestock Biodiversity 17-30
Unit 3 : Mixed Farming Systems 31-40
Unit 4 : Crop-livestock Interactions 41-52
2
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
Published by
National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management (MANAGE),
Rajendranagar, Hyderabad – 500 030, Andhra Pradesh, India
First Published: 2008
© MANAGE, 2008
All rights reserved . No part of this work may be reproduced in any form, by mimeograph or any
other means without permission in writing from the MANAGE.
Shri K.V. Satyanarayana, IAS
Director General
National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management (MANAGE),
Rajendranagar, Hyderabad – 500 030
Andhra Pradesh, India
Program Coordinators
Dr. M.N. Reddy, Director (Agri. Extn. & Commn.) & Principal Coordinator (PGDAEM)
Ph. Off: (040) 24014527, email:

Dr. N. Balasubramani,

Assistant Director (Agri. Extn.)
Ph. Off: (040) 24016702-708 Extn. 275, email:

Course Coordinator
Dr. P. Chandrashekara, Deputy Director
National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management (MANAGE),
Rajendranagar, Hyderabad – 500 030, Andhra Pradesh, India
Ph. Off: (040) 24015399, email:

Contributors
Dr. K.H. Rao,
Senior Scientist
HRD Division, NAARM, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-30
Dr. B.S. Sontakki,
Senior Scientist
Training Cell, NAARM, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-30
3
AEM - 205 B
Unit 1
Role of Livestock in Sustainable
Rural Livelihood Security
Structure
1.0 Objectives
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Livestock ownership
1.3 Roles and functions of livestock in the sustainable rural livelihood security
1.4 Livestock production systems
1.5 Diversification
1.6 Factors influencing production systems

1.7 Impact of livestock development programmes
1.8 Recommended strategies
1.9 Let us sum up
1.10 Key words
1.11 Further readings
1.12 Check your progress
1.0 Objectives
After completing this unit, you will be able to understand
• The importance of livestock in sustainable rural development
• Inventory, assessment and approaches in Sustainable Livestock Development
• Various factors influencing livestock production systems
• Strategies for sustainable livestock development
Sustainable Livestock Development
4
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
1.1 Introduction
India has a large livestock population, regarded by some as an asset provided in plenty by
nature, and by others as a burden. Since 1971, when ‘poverty eradication’ became the main theme
of development planning, Indian Government recognized the livestock development program as an
important tool for poverty alleviation. The focus of the programme has been on improving production
of livestock commodities for income generation. In India, underprivileged families contribute 70 to
80% of the total livestock produce and livestock are central to their livelihoods and culture. Hence,
to improve the livelihoods of the underprivileged families we need to understand their way of life,
livestock production systems and their perceptions and about the role of livestock in their livelihood.
The livestock species considered for discussion here are cattle, buffaloes, goats, sheep, pigs and
poultry.
For sustainable rural livelihood, resource poor farmers have to overcome technical, economic
and social constraints to take benefit of increasing demand of livestock products and compete with
commercial producers. There are indications that this can be done in developing countries by complete
understanding of the different production systems evolved over a period of time and introduction of

improved and appropriate technologies eliminating the constrained faced by the farmers.
The underprivileged families: These are described and classified using different criteria. From
the economic perspective, they are classified using land holding, viz. landless, marginal farmers and
smallholder farmers (family income is not considered since most fall below the poverty line). From a
social perspective, there are three main categories of the underprivileged families described by the
Government, i.e. scheduled/backward castes, scheduled tribes and pastoralists and within each
category there are many social groups in the country. The population of underprivileged families
varies considerably between and within states.
1.2 Livestock Ownership
While the majority of livestock are owned by underprivileged families, reliable statistics are
not available on the number of livestock owned by a family (neither for rural nor urban populations);
an exception is a report from Rajasthan showing that >80% of rural families in arid and semi-arid
districts own one or more livestock species. The species and therefore the size of animals owned
seem to be positively related to the socio-economic status and land holding of the families, viz. most
of the underprivileged families own small ruminants, while large animals are commonly owned by
better-off families. Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh are exceptions, where the numbers of small ruminants
are greater with smallholder farmers. However, this picture changes when agricultural and
5
AEM - 205 BRole of Livestock in Sustainable Rural Livelihood Security
infrastructural development as well as institutional support is available to the underprivileged families.
In India, the majority of the underprivileged families keep livestock; however, it is only a few
social groups who are recognized as specialists in selection and breeding of livestock. Through
experience, these social groups have acquired the knowledge and skills of selecting animals (males
and females) for certain characters and for the production of bulls for sale and providing breeding
services. They have made major contributions in maintaining biodiversity amongst Indian livestock.
Majority of these professional livestock breeders are pastoralists. Other underprivileged groups are
generally not known to specialize in livestock breeding. However, there are exceptions like tribals
from Northern Himalayan ranges (Gaddis and Van Gujjars) and the Nes-rabaris of Gir forest in
Gujarat, who specialize in breeding of sheep, goats and buffaloes. Their way of life is like that of
nomadic pastoralists for whom livestock is the main source of livelihood. Amongst the underprivileged

families there is variation, probably due to social factors, in the choice of livestock species. For
example, while the majority of tribal families in India own backyard poultry (mainly chicken and
duck), pig keeping is common with tribals from Eastern and North-Eastern States but not with those
from Western states, where goat keeping is more common. Besides the tribals of the North-East, pig
keeping in the rest of India is mainly with scheduled and backward classes, while goat keeping is
common amongst Muslims and backward classes. There is variation between social groups amongst
pastoralists regarding main livestock species kept by them. For example, Bharwads in Rajasthan and
Gujarat Dhangars in parts of Maharashtra keep sheep and goats, while the Rabaris/Raikas, in
North-West India specialize in cattle and camel breeding. Social groups from backward classes, like
Nats in Uttar Pradesh and Waghris in Gujarat, specialize in breeding of buffaloes and farmers in
these areas wait for their visit to breed their own animals. There are very few studies on ways of the
animal selection and management practices (under unfavourable and extreme conditions) of these
social groups.
Preferred animals of the resource poor are buffaloes and goats. Over the last decade, the
populations of buffaloes and goats in most states are increasing more rapidly than other species and
they are considered the ‘animals of the future for the country’ (note that the increase in the chicken
population is mainly within the commercial sector in which the underprivileged families are not
involved). The preference of the underprivileged families for buffaloes and goats is intriguing since
both are said to have many negative techno-economic characters. Until recently, the buffalo was
described as an animal of irrigated and assured rainfall areas where good quality fodder is available,
while semi-arid and arid areas were considered cattle tracts (of breeds like Tharparkar, Rathi, Kankrej
and Haryana). Yet even in these areas buffaloes are preferred over cattle. In the technical literature,
6
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
many performance problems are reported for buffaloes, viz. high calf mortality, late maturity, long
dry periods and poor thermo-regulation, while the only favourable character reported is their
production of high fat milk (preferred by most Indians). Goats are reported to have high kids’ mortality,
susceptibility to diseases like PPR, enterotoxaemia and parasitic infestation. Moreover, goats have
had hardly any development support since they are branded as responsible for de-vegetation and
desertification (although a debatable issue). Goats seem to be preferred by the resource poor (also

by many resource-rich farmers), but still apparently not by research and development planners.
Participatory studies in a few districts in Western India show that buffaloes are preferred not only
because their milk can be sold easily and fetches a good price (even in areas where co-operatives
are not well established), but also because they are easy to maintain. Adult buffaloes have hardly any
health problems and they can thrive on coarse feed (unlike crossbred dairy cattle); they can also be
sold easily when unproductive or during droughts (unlike cattle for which sale is a taboo) and hence
they are not a burden. Underprivileged families due to low initial investment, low external inputs and
good market demand prefer goats. However, most families were reluctant to increase flock sizes due
to the limitation of time (labour) and other resources (e.g. grazing land). In-depth studies are needed
to better understand the reasons of the underprivileged families for preferring buffaloes and goats,
their practices for, and perceptions about, improving animal productivity and the contributions of the
livestock to their livelihood.
Three hypotheses are therefore suggested
a) The underprivileged can best be benefited through livestock production by focusing R&D
efforts on improving productivity of small animals and buffaloes in smallholder systems and
keeping in view the choice or preference for livestock of some communities;
b) In many areas, compared to other livestock, goat production is more beneficial for the
underprivileged and, given adequate support services including credit and marketing, can
significantly improve the livelihoods of the underprivileged; and
c) Understanding the breeding and management systems of traditional livestock breeders in
ecologically fragile arid/semi-arid and hill areas, would enable appropriate approaches to
be developed to improve livestock productivity and to maintain livestock biodiversity.
7
AEM - 205 B
Box 1. Roles, functions and contributions of livestock
• Output function: related to producing food and non-food products.
• Input function: related to providing inputs for crop production, transport etc.
• Risk coverage or asset function: related to raising money at times of need.
• Socio-cultural functions: related to social status, culture etc.
1.3 Roles and Functions of Livestock in the Sustainable Rural

Livelihood Security
The roles and functions of livestock can be classified broadly into four major categories as
shown in Box 1.
The output function
This is the most commonly studied and reported function of livestock. It relates to the production
of food and non-food products (milk, meat, wool, hair and eggs) used for home consumption as well
as for sale and generate employment and income for the family. While using food products like milk
from cattle and buffaloes is well studied, there is dearth of information on non-food products and
products from small animals. Home consumption of food products is affected by factors like food
habits, economic status of the family, market conditions, crop performance and drought. During
droughts, almost 90% of milk and all surplus/unproductive animals may be sold, being the only
commodities available for sale. Home consumption of eggs and poultry meat from backyard poultry
is very limited (mostly used for sick members or for entertaining guests). Tribal families are more
interested in sale of birds rather than eggs. Surplus goat milk for sale is available only with pastoralists
or big farmers while most underprivileged families consume all the milk produced. The availability of
good quality and fresh food products for the family, at low cost, makes even a low producing cow or
goat or fowl an important asset for the women from underprivileged families and there is need to
understand this function when assessing the productivity of livestock.
The income and employment generated from the production of food and non-food products
are well studied for large dairy animals and to some extent for small ruminants (in a few states);
however, there are very few reports on pigs and backyard poultry. In mixed crop–livestock systems,
dairy production contributes 20 to 50% of family income; the extent of the contribution is influenced
by factors like type of animal, market condition, economic status of the family and crop condition.
The share of income from milk in the total income of underprivileged family is as high as 75 to 80%
Role of Livestock in Sustainable Rural Livelihood Security
8
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
during drought. Dairy production is labour intensive and the employment generated is relatively high.
Family members with low opportunity cost invariably provide labour. Small ruminants are a major source
of income for the underprivileged families and their contribution ranges between 17 to 24% of family

income.
The Input Function
Livestock provide inputs for crop production, transport of produce and people and fuel needs of
the families. Large ruminants provide two major inputs for crop production, viz. draft power and organic
manure from their excreta. Estimates indicate that 40 to 60% of dung is used as manure and the rest as
fuel. The extent of use for different purposes depends on land holding, herd size, economic status of the
family and alternate material available as fuel and fertilizer. Valuing cattle and buffalo dung as manure is
done only on the basis of its NPK value and the beneficial effect on properties of soils is ignored. Using
dung as fuel is criticized by many, but has some positive aspects such as saving fuel wood and oil, low
cost, traditional preference for cooking, convenience and low dependency on fuel suppliers. Surplus
dung cakes are sold and are a good source of income for women from underprivileged families (income
is mostly used for purchase of jewellery). Biogas system is an efficient alternative for use of dung as
manure and fuel; however, its adoption is limited to a few pockets of the country. Very few resource poor
families have adopted biogas, despite the subsidies provided by the Government, due to some constraints
(initial investment, small herds, maintenance needs). The excreta from small ruminants are widely
recognized as good quality manure and are used through an innovative and well-knit system of penning
animals in harvested fields during migration by pastoralists. The system enables pastoralists to get fodder
and resting place for their animals as well as the opportunity to sell animals and the farmers’ fields get
fertilized. However, this system is breaking down with changes in farming systems (cropping intensification,
adoption of cash crops).
A few decades ago draft power for crop production and transport (of produce and people in
remote rural areas) was the major function of large ruminants and particularly cattle, as is evident
from the fact that majority of Indian cattle breeds are draft type. The share of animal power in
farming and hence the demand for bullocks and their population has now gone down substantially
except in states like Andhra, Orissa and Rajasthan, indicating their continuing use. Only a small
percentage of underprivileged families keep bullocks and mostly depend on others for meeting draft
needs. While there is preference for bullocks for transporting material in most parts of the country,
buffalo males are preferred in western Uttar Pradesh. The use of animals for draft purposes results in
saving of fossil fuel and thus saving of precious foreign exchange. Social benefit–cost analyses show
that the estimated value of contribution of livestock through use of crop by-products, draft power and

dung for manure and fuel far exceeds the value of livestock products.
9
AEM - 205 B
Risk coverage or asset function
Participatory studies on reasons for keeping livestock show that ‘asset building’, in the form of
animal/bird, is one of the top four objectives along with income generation, meeting family needs
and tradition. For resource poor families, any kind of animal is an asset since it can be easily
encashed in times of need. There are several examples of resource poor farmers using income, from
sale of animals, for improving their farms, irrigation facility, houses, as well as for meeting marriage
expenses or paying school fees of the children etc. During drought, sale of animals is a major source
of income for resource poor farmers to sustain the family.
Social function
This is an aspect usually ignored or undervalued even though it is now well known that
livestock have strong socio-cultural linkage. For most rural families and particularly for women,
livestock are a part of the family. Their importance in Indian rural society is evident from the fact that
livestock are still indicators of social status, many festivals and fairs are based on livestock, and many
songs related to livestock are sung by women while cleaning, feeding or grazing and milking the
animals.
Possessing an animal of their choice gives women considerable satisfaction. The choice of
an animal, kept by a family, and management practices are influenced by socio-cultural factors.
These factors have to be borne in mind while studying production systems and suggesting interventions
for increasing productivity and profitability with underprivileged families.
1.4 Livestock Production System
There are very few studies planned exclusively to understand livestock production systems
(even farming systems in general) of the underprivileged rural families. The livestock production
systems of the underprivileged families are different from those of resource-rich farmers since they
aim at optimizing use of the limited available resources (material and labour) and minimizing external
inputs and avert risks, as against maximizing profit by the resource rich. Thus ‘diversification and
internalization’ are the main features of their production systems. Based on the review of available
reports and extensive observations, some shared characteristics of the livestock production systems

of the rural underprivileged families are presented in Box 2.
Role of Livestock in Sustainable Rural Livelihood Security
10
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
Box 2. Features of livestock production systems
• Mixed farming system and diversified crop and livestock activities are common.
• Low external input–low output and highly internalized system making maximum use of
available resources like crop residues, feed, labour, animal waste etc.
• Extensive grazing with limited supplementary feeding in semi-arid/arid areas and limited
grazing/semi-stall feeding in other areas.
• Local breeds of livestock/poultry preferred over ‘improved’ stock as part of risk
management, except in areas where there is organizational support.
• Traditional systems of livestock management and feeding are preferred and adoption of
scientific recommendations or technologies is very low.
• Livestock output is low but represents major share of daily cash income to family.
• Women play a major role in livestock production and sale of produce.
1.5 Diversification
Crop–livestock production diversification is one way of optimizing outputs from limited land and
reducing risks. Reports from some rainfed, semi-arid districts of central Rajasthan indicate that some
farmers have as many as 27 crop and 7 livestock activities (milk, meat, wool/hair, eggs, animal sale,
transport, and farm work). Diversification is more common in areas with erratic rainfall and frequent
crop failures. Farmers from such areas, based on their innate wisdom, use a mix of crops (with different
moisture requirements) and livestock so that subsistence is assured even if rains fail or disease occurs.
Moreover, livestock production is less severely affected by drought than crop production and it becomes
the main source of income during years of poor rainfall.
1.6 Factors Influencing Production System
Production systems are a result of the interplay between agro-ecology, stage of overall development
of the area, farming situation, market demand, organizational support, resources of the farmers and
social factors and thus systems appropriate for specific situations are adopted by farmers in general.
An important characteristic of the underprivileged families is ‘preference for assured subsistence

over risky productivity’ and hence changes in production systems and adoption of technologies or
improved animals are slow (till farmers are convinced that change is not risky and is beneficial).
11
AEM - 205 B
Some of the factors influencing livestock production systems adopted by the underprivileged families are
discussed next to elucidate the points mentioned above.
• Agricultural and overall development of the area: In developed areas the livestock production
systems of the underprivileged families are more productive than in other areas. For example,
in tribal belt of Rajasthan, Gujarat and Maharashtra, the efforts of the district co-operative
milk union and Bharatiya Agro Industries Foundation (BAIF, a major livestock NGO) have
considerably improved dairy and crop production systems of thousands of tribal families,
while tribal families from other parts of the country continue subsistence farming. Landless
livestock owners have developed innovative systems to secure green fodder for their animals
from farmers’ fields as part of labour wages or in exchange for dung. Most animals (including
goats) are stall-fed or grazed in a limited area or in harvested fields. Animal owners get
organizational support and services, well established in these areas, (livestock services,
processing and marketing of produce, credit etc.). Access to reliable input and output markets
aided by the motivation from observing the results achieved by progressive farmers in these
productive areas are the key to success.
• Agro-ecology and farming systems: There is large variation amongst livestock production
systems between various regions of the country. For example in the Himalayan ranges, livestock
production can be said to be forest-based, it being the main source of fodder (through
grazing and cut and carry system). However, in the Indo-gangetic plains crop residues are
the major source of fodder for livestock and majority of animals are stall-fed or only partially
grazed and there is hardly any migration. Another example of influence of agro-ecology on
farming systems is the variation observed in livestock production systems, predominant animal
types, cropping pattern and dominant social groups by drawing a transect from North-west
to South-east Rajasthan. One can see a shift from livestock of defined breeds to non-descript
animals, from pastoralist dominated society to tribal dominated society and from dry farming
to assured rainfall system. A similar relationship can be seen between agro-ecology, social

structure and crop–livestock production in most other states. Studies from arid, semi-arid
and mountain areas, that are ecologically fragile, sparsely populated and inaccessible to
markets, show the need for an approach different from conventional approach. The holistic
and resource-based ‘niche approach’ that considers farmers’ needs is strongly recommended.
Considering the variability that exists in the country, such studies are essential for the planning
of development programmes suitable to the conditions prevailing in an area.
Role of Livestock in Sustainable Rural Livelihood Security
12
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
• Women in livestock production: The role of women in livestock production varies amongst
underprivileged groups and between regions. In tribal communities, women play a major
role in livestock production as well as in the sale of produce, while pastoral women are
generally involved in looking after the new born and sick animals. Amongst most of the other
backward communities, women have a greater role with small animals and backyard poultry,
while men manage large animals. There is poor awareness regarding ways of improving
livestock productivity to improve livelihoods—a consequence of weak public extension support
for livestock. There is need to strengthen extension and it is crucial that women’s involvement
in livestock research and development (R&D) is promoted.
Within this context of livestock production systems, three hypotheses are suggested
1. Under rainfed conditions diversified crop–livestock production systems in which livestock and
crops ‘niche well’ together, are the best way to improve the livelihoods of the underprivileged
on sustainable basis.
2. Improving the knowledge and skills of women about how improving the productivity of livestock
and the greater involvement of women in livestock research and development would bring in
a short time quantitative and qualitative improvements in the livestock production of the
underprivileged and
3. More productive livestock production systems can be adopted by the underprivileged working
in developed areas and wherever they have access to organizational support.
1.7 Impact of Livestock Development Programmes
Some economists clearly showed that agricultural and rural growth reduces poverty drastically

while industrial growth has very little effect on poverty. Smallholder livestock production has a special
role in this regard since the majority of the poor are involved in livestock production and it is labour
intensive. Other factors favoring smallholder livestock development are sustained growth in demand
for livestock products and low value of ‘Gini Coefficient’ (0.16 against 0.65 for crop production)
indicating that income distribution through livestock is more equitable than from crops.
The experiences from livestock development programmes suggest three hypotheses
1. Livestock development is most likely to be effective as ‘a pathway out of poverty for
underprivileged rural families’ and enable them to compete with commercial producers
provided:
13
AEM - 205 B
a. Organizations planning and implementing livestock development programmes are
sensitive towards the needs, resources, production systems and perceptions of the
families;
b. Livestock development is a part of ‘integrated development programme’ that incorpo-
rates natural resource management and development of producers organizations to
provide credit and services (backward and forward linkages) and help to improve
efficiency and quality of livestock produce;
c. Technologies, recommendations and services are developed on the basis of ‘needs
assessment’ and are pre-tested for being beneficial to the resource poor farmer;
d. Livestock extension is strengthened and targeted to the underprivileged families par-
ticularly the women.
2. Livestock production by resource-poor farmers can be more economic provided they have
access to adequate techno-economic support; and
3. Integrated livestock development can improve all five ‘capital assets’ within the sustainable
livelihoods framework.
1.8 Recommended Strategies
It is proposed that inter-disciplinary and action-oriented livestock development programmes
should be planned and carried out to improve the livelihoods of the underprivileged families in India
should target the following:

• Livestock production systems of underprivileged communities in contrasting agro-ecozones
in Central, Eastern and North-Eastern India with priority given to small-stock, specifically
pigs, goats and backyard poultry;
• Research should address the livestock-livelihood issues of the different social groups of the
underprivileged categories (as given by Government);
• Research should start by ensuring a shared understanding between the research-for-
development teams and their clients—the underprivileged communities—of the preferences
of the communities for specific types of livestock, their perceptions (particularly of the women)
about the roles and functions of the livestock in livelihood strategies, and what, from their
perspective, constitutes improvement;
• Subsequently action-oriented participatory research with individuals, households, communities
and villages will identify, characterize and prioritize constraints and interventions for improved
production and marketing; and
Role of Livestock in Sustainable Rural Livelihood Security
14
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
• Action plans should then be agreed and implemented based on the outcomes of the iterative
interactions amongst the social groups and the technical teams regarding the ways to increase
livestock productivity and profitability and to improve the non-market functions of livestock at
household, community and village levels.
Obviously this approach will require a change in paradigm from the conventional reductionist,
animal-level research to people-centred, participatory and holistic methods. It will be iterative research-
for-development programme that is inter-disciplinary, multi-institutional and, ideally, multi-locational
(for cross-site lesson learning). It is recommended that the core research for development teams
(with a minimum of two women members) will include animal production and health scientists, a
sociologist, an anthropologist and an agricultural economist and that the team will draw on water,
crop and soil scientists and human health specialists (as and when need arises). It is proposed that
either the National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research (NCAP) or the Indian
Veterinary Research Institute (IVRI) should act as the local coordinating agency and integrate into the
interactive research-for-development process state agricultural universities, specialist research centres

and NGOs (experienced in livestock development) from respective regions.
If these recommendations are accepted and acted upon, important outputs of the programme
will be the strengthening of the capacities of the collaborating organizations to undertake participatory,
inter-disciplinary research in support of sustainable livestock-based development, with the concurrent
strengthening of extension capacities and greater involvement of women.
1.9 Let us Sum Up
In India underprivileged families account for about one-fourth of the population and contribute
a major part of livestock production. Livestock are central to their livelihood and culture. The major
livestock species are cattle, buffalo, goat, sheep, pig and poultry and their output, input, risk, asset
and social functions are hall marks of India’s underprivileged families. There are several factors
affecting where and how the livestock were managed. To improve the livelihoods of the underprivileged
families through livestock, inter-disciplinary action-oriented research should target communities holding
small stock, specifically goats, pigs and backyard poultry. It is recommended that the research should
start by ensuring a shared understanding between research-for-development teams and the
underprivileged communities of the preferences of the communities for specific types of livestock,
their perceptions (particularly of the women) about the roles and functions of the livestock in livelihood
strategies, and what, from their perspective, constitutes improvement. Subsequently, action-oriented
participatory research would identify and address constraints to, and opportunities for, improving
15
AEM - 205 B
livestock-based productivity and profitability and the non-market functions of livestock. The
recommended approach will require a change in paradigm from the conventional reductionist,
animal-level research to people-centred, participatory and holistic methods in iterative research-for-
development programmes that are inter-disciplinary, multi-institutional and, ideally, multi-locational
to facilitate cross-site lesson learning. Given the increasing demand for livestock products, this is an
opportune time for animal scientists to make an impact on the livelihoods of the underprivileged by
adopting this change in the development paradigm.
1.10 Key Words
Sustainable Rural Livelihoods:



Livelihood options like farming, livestock rearing, forestry, etc. that
ensure a satisfactory living for the rural families on a sustainable basis.
Livestock farming: Keeping, rearing and managing livestock for economic purposes
Functions of livestock farming: The various functions like input, output, and asset and social for
which the livestock are used as livelihood option.
1.11 Further Readings
Rangnekar, D.V. 2006. Livestock and livelihoods of the underprivileged communities in India: A
review. International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya. 72 pp />webpub/fulldocs/LivestockInTheLivelihoods/LivestockUP_India_Final.pdf
Reddy, G. S, Reddy, B. M. K, Misra A. K, Prabhakar, M and Sambrajyam, A 2005. TAR-IVLP: On-farm
assessment and refinement of technologies in Southern Telangana Zone of Andhra Pradesh. NATP.
Central Research Institute for Dryalnd Agriculture, Hyderabd, India. 54pp
1.12 Check Your Progress
1 . What are the livestock resources of our country?
2. Discuss the various functions of livestock farming in the context of sustainable rural livelihoods.
3. Comment on the impact of livestock development program
Role of Livestock in Sustainable Rural Livelihood Security
16
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
17
AEM - 205 B
Unit 2
Livestock Biodiversity
Structure
2.0 Objectives
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Importance of biodiversity
2.3 Cattle biodiversity
2.4 Buffalo diversity
2.5 Let us sum up

2.6 Key words
2.7 Further readings
2.8 Check your progress
2.0 Objectives
After completing this unit, you should be able to
• Understand the importance of livestock biodiversity in sustainable rural livelihood in India
• Biodiversity of cattle and buffaloes and the need for preserving the genetic resources
2.1 Introduction
Livestock like cattle (bulls and cows), buffaloes, sheep and goat are an integral part of India’s
socio-economic life. Animal husbandry is a part of agricultural economy. It directly supports about
five per cent (20 million) of our population. India has two per cent of the geographical area and
accounts for 15 per cent of livestock population (400 million). Cows and buffaloes comprise 56.5
per cent of world population. It has been estimated in official reports that capacity of land to support
grazing is 31 million, whereas the population, which grazes, is 90 to 100 million. It has also been
calculated that fodder required for total population is 1800 million tons (MT) per annum whereas
the total fodder available is 900 MT. Due to shortage of feed and fodder and poor management
Sustainable Livestock Development
18
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
practices the daily output of local breeds in India is around 2 litres per cow and 3 litres per buffalo. Cattle
population, like human population, needs water, fodder and other resources for a healthy and productive
life. At the same time, religious and social values prohibit cow slaughter in most of the states (except West
Bengal and Kerala). It is unfortunate that stray and unproductive cattle, mostly old bulls and cows, which
cannot lactate, are abandoned and hence they survive on garbage, which includes harmful plastic bags.
Due to mechanization like tractors and fragmentation of land holdings, many poor farmers cannot
afford to rear cattle for milk and draught. A cow is useful only if after a cost-benefit analysis the poor
farmer gets a profit. A bull, as a draught animal similarly needs to be reared. If ploughing a field by a
contract tractor is cheaper, then bulls are a drain on the family income. Also, since high yield variety of
cows are imported for greater yield and standardization, our livestock diversity is today under threat.
2.2 Importance of Biodiversity

Livestock products are valued at Rs 1000 billion or about eight per cent of GNP. India has the
largest population of livestock in the world and is the world’s number one producer of milk. Livestock
provide us animal draught power, nutrition like milk and meat, manure, and skin for the leather
industry. Leather export is India’s eighth largest foreign exchange earner. Table below gives the
approximate figures of population of some important livestock.
The draught power of animals is also phenomenal. Eighty million work animals (comprising 70
Indigenous milch breeds: Sahiwal, Sindhi, Gir and Deoni. There
are about 10 dominant general utility breeds like Nimari, Dangi,
Hariyana, Mewati, Rath, Ongole, Gaolao, Krishna valley,
Tharpakar and Kankrej.
India has more than 66 per cent of world population. Important
breeds are Murrah, Bahndawari, Jaffarabadi, Surti, Mehsana,
Nagpuri and Nili.
Five per cent of world population
20 per cent of world population and 20 per cent of biodivesity
in India. Twenty-one recognized breeds - largest, Jamunapari.
Provides for 37 per cent of meat consumption. Leather or hide
is in high demand. Called a “poor man’s cow”, goat milk was
Gandhi’s favourite. Animal is easy to rear and maintain as
versatile and adaptable.
Livestock Population Breed
Cattle
Buffaloes
Sheep
Goats
205 million
84 million
51 million
123 million
19

AEM - 205 B
per cent bullocks, 21 per cent cows and 9 per cent male buffaloes) plough 100 million hectares of land
and haul 14 million carts, thus saving six million tons of petroleum valued at Rs 120 billion. Eighty three
million draught animals (72 million bullocks) contribute an equivalent of 30,000 MW of electricity and
plough 100 million hectares, almost two-thirds of India’s cultivated area, doing work for about 15
million tractors, thus saving 6 million tons of oil. They also excrete 70 million tons of recoverable manure,
which is used as fuel and fertilizers saving a thermal equivalent of 27 MT of kerosene, 35 MT of coal or
68 MT of wood.
2.3 Cattle Biodiversity
The Indian cattle belong to kingdom Animalia, phylum Chordata, sub phylum Vertebrata, class
Mammalia, sub class Eutheria, order Ungulata, family Bovidae, genus Bos, species indicus. In 1992
India with 204.58 million cattle, constitutes 15.97% of the world cattle population. India stands first
with respect to the bovine population having 1/5th of the world’s bovine population. About 80% of the
total cattle population in India are non-descript. Further the large majority of descript cattle belongs to
draught and dual-purpose breeds. The distribution of different classes of cattle (millions) in 1992 has
been shown in Table 1.
Between 1987 and 1992 cattle population grows at an annual growth rate of 0.48%. Out of
the 204.58 million cattle, 15.21 million were crossbred cattle, which is 7.43% of the total cattle
population. Between 1987 and 1992, crossbred grows at the rate of 5.92%. The changes within the
cattle population over the last two decades indicate a radical shift in the priority of the farming
community from production of work animals to milk production. The proportion of the female in the
population increased steadily with 1972 as turning point. Between 1972 and 1982, the number of
working male in cattle population declined sharply (by 12 million) and among females the proportion
of adult females increased (63% in desi and 61% in crossbred) gradually. However, the proportion of
desi cows steadily declined and a marked phenomenal growth took place in the number of crossbreds.
Total crossbred number grew from 8.80 million in 1982 to 11.59 million in 87 (31.70%), and 15.21
million (31.32%) in 1992. In the northern region, desi cow population has declined substantially and
Livestock Biodiversity
Table 1. Distribution of different classes of cattle (millions) in 1992
ClassClass

ClassClass
Class
All cattle
Adult female
TT
TT
T
otalotal
otalotal
otal
204.58
64.36
CrossbredCrossbred
CrossbredCrossbred
Crossbred
15.21
6.49
Total
All cattle
Adult female
IndigenousIndigenous
IndigenousIndigenous
Indigenous
Descript
28.41
8.68
Non-Descript
160.96
49.19
20

Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
the region now accounts for 40% of all crossbreds in the country. The South has the second largest
population of crossbred cattle –34% followed by west, which has 15% of the crossbred. Eastern region
has the highest proportion of desi cows and lowest percent of cross breeds (11%). Among all the States,
Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Kerala and Punjab have the largest number of crossbred
cattle and together they account for nearly 65% (9.50 million) of all the crossbred cattle population in
the country in 1992 (Table 2).
2.3.1 Trends in cattle population
Table 2. Cattle population trend in India (Million No)
Species/categorySpecies/category
Species/categorySpecies/category
Species/category
19871987
19871987
1987
19921992
19921992
1992
Annual Growth rateAnnual Growth rate
Annual Growth rateAnnual Growth rate
Annual Growth rate
Total cattle 199.69 204.58 0.48%
Indigenous cattle 188.28 (94.29%) 189.37 (92.57%) 0.12%
Breedable female cattle 60.93 (30.51%) 62.68 (30.64%) 0.57%
Milch cattle 55.91 (27.99%) 57.79 (28.25%) 0.62%
Cross bred cattle 11.59 (5.80%) 15.21(7.43%) 6.2%
21
AEM - 205 B
2.3.2 Cattle breeds of India
Details of Important recognized breeds of cattle of India with their breeding tracts, are given below:

Table 3. Important recognized breeds of cattle of India with their breeding tracts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.

BreedBreed
BreedBreed
Breed
Gir
Sahiwal
Red Sindhi
Rathi
Tharparkar
Deoni
Hariana
Kankrej
Ongole
Red Kandhari
Nimari
Malvi
Gaolao
Dangi
Khillar
Amritmahal
Hallikar
Kangayam
Nagore
Bargur
Kenkatha
Siri
Bachaur
Kherigarh
Mewati
Umblachery
Krishna Valley

Ponwar
Vechoor
Pungannur
Breeding tractsBreeding tracts
Breeding tractsBreeding tracts
Breeding tracts
Saurashtra region of Gujarat.
Herds established in Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, and Haryana.
Number of Red Sindhi herds has been established in India.
Bikaner and Ganga-nagar Districts of Rajasthan, Sirsa Distt. Of Haryana and
part of Ferozepore district of Punjab.
Tharparkar District of Sind (Pakistan) and Kutch, Jodhpur and Jaisalmer desert
area of India.
Marathwada region of Maharashtra
Hariana home tract is in Haryana State but the breed is found in U.P., Bihar and
parts of Rajasthan.
Bani tract of Bhuj District, North Gujarat and part of Rajasthan adjoining to Gujarat.
Guntur and Ongole Districts of Andhra Pradesh.
Breeding tracts are in Marathwada region of Maharashtra
Khandwa District of Madhya Pradesh.
Parts of Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. A dual purpose breed.
Found in Vidarbha Region of Maharashtra.
Found in Western Maharashtra.
Found in southern part of Maharashtra
Found in Karnataka
Found in Hassan, Mysore and Tunkur districts of Karnataka.
It is found in Coimbatore District of Tamil Nadu.
Nagore District of Rajasthan.
Coimbatore District of Tamil Nadu
Found along the Ken river of Banda District of UP and MP.

Hill tracts around Darjeeling and in Sikkim. Bhutan is the real home of this
breed.
Sitamarhi District of Bihar.
Kheri District of UP.
West Alwar and Bharatpur districts of Rajasthan. The breed is mainly found in
Mewat region but is also known as Kosi.
Thanjavur District of Tamil Nadu.
Southern border of Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh.
Pilibhit and North West part of Lakhimpur Kheri District of UP.
Kerala Small animal.
Dwarf cattle, Andhra Pradesh.
Livestock Biodiversity
22
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
Species
Cattle
>10000
Normal
(Intermediate)
5000-10000
Insecure
1000-500
Vulnerable
100-1000
Endangered
<100
Critical (Rate)
The population statistics of different breeds of cattle revealed that Malvi had the maximum estimated
population (0.75 million) followed by Gir (0.54 million), Kankrej 90.46m), Ongole (0.38m) and Hariana
(0.33m) whereas Red Sindhi and Sahiwal had very low estimates of 2400 and 3400 respectively. This

may be due to the fact that a large part of the home tract of these two breeds are now in Pakistan. The
maximum decline in the population of different breeds from 1977 to 1982 was observed in Bargur (-
49%) followed by Kangayam (-18.2%). The population of Mewati (-14.10%), Hariana (-8.65%), Ponwar
(-8.0%), Siri (-5.60%) and Nagori (-2.4%) also exhibited during this period. This decline in the population
of these breeds has been attributed to the fast changing socio-economic condition of the farmers, change
in the nature of farming, shrinkage of grazing area, emphasis on crossbreeding as a tool to increase
milk production also preference of buffalo over cow for milk production.
The population size in thousands for consideration of endangered status of a breed under Indian
condition for cattle have been suggested by NBAGR which shown below:
The endangered Indian cattle breeds, which need attention for their conservation, are as
under-
Red sindhi , Sahiwal, Tharparkar, Vachur, Punganur, Mewati, Kenkatha, Kheriagarh,
Bargur,Panwar, Siri, and Krishna valley.
2.3.3 Proximate Causes affecting cattle biodiversity are
• Lack of awareness
• Economic benefits
• Overall policy of breed improvement
• Shrinkage of grazing land
• Over population of livestock-high density
• To improve yield and economic benefits
• Replacement of local non-descript breeds to productive cattle8. Over mechanization of agriculture
& transport
• Inadequate attention on identification of germplasm and performance recording
• Indiscriminate cross breeding with exotics for other purposes
23
AEM - 205 B
Consequences of loss of cattle genetic biodiversity are
• Stagnation and even deterioration of production performance of indigenous breeds
• Loss of indigenous genetic resources
• Disappearance of native varieties and breeds

• Threat to native draught breeds
• Loss of indigenous biodiversity
• Shrinkage and even disappearance of grass-lands lead to loss of biodiversity
• Grassland ecosystem is disturbed
2.3.4 Utility of Indian cattle
Dairying is closely interwoven with the socio-economic fabric of rural people in India.
Traditionally, dairy animals have performed multiple functions of producing milk for household
consumption, males as a source of draught power in agricultural operations, and dung as manure
and fuel. Besides, dairy animals have often performed important functions of banking and insurance
during the times of crop failure and drought situations.
Dairy production system in India mainly consists of smallholders. Around 100 million milch
animals are spread over 5 lakh villages among 70 million farmers. There are about 100,000 village
milk cooperatives with 11 million farmers as members. Landless, small and marginal farmers own
68% of milch animals and contribute nearly 62% of total milk produced. Around 63% of the available
animal protein in Indian diet (10 g per capita per day against a world average of 25 g) comes from
milk. Apparently milk would continue to be a major source of animal protein in India. Livestock
account for about one forth of the GDP in agricultural sector output in India, in which dairy accounts
for the Lion’s share. In1998/2000 milk accounted for 69.3 % of the livestock sector output. In fact,
milk with a share of 18 % in gross value of agricultural sector has emerged as the largest agricultural
commodity produced in the country. This shows rising importance of dairying in India. The per capita
availability of milk, which has been growing over the years, is projected to reach 232 gm/day in
2004-05. An extensive nation wide study carried out by the NCAER in 1990 found that revenue from
milk sale alone amounted for 33% of the family income (National average). Details of important
characteristics and other features of some of the important recognized breeds of cattle are given
below:
Livestock Biodiversity
24
Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management (PGDAEM)
A. Milch Breeds
Gir: Gir cows are high milk yielder, milk yield ranging from 2000 kg to 6000 kg per lactation with fat

percentage ranging from 4.5% to 5%. Bullocks are heavy and powerful draught animals. Heat and
drought tolerant.
Sahiwal: Best India dairy breed and most economic milk producer. Sahiwal cows are well-known for
their milking capacity. Milk yield varies from 2000 to 4000 kg per lactation, with fat content varying
from 4% to 4.5%. Heat and drought tolerant.
Red Sindhi: The milk yield varies from 2000 kg to 4000 kg per lactation, with fat content varying from
4% to 4.5%. Heat and drought tolerant. Resistance to any diseases. Exported to Malaysia,Brazil and
Cuba etc.
Tharparkar: Bullocks are slow workers. Cows are good milkers, with average milk yields varying from
1800 to 3500 kg per lactation. Heat and drought tolerant.
B. Dual Purpose Breeds
Rathi: Good potential for milk production. Resistance to adverse climatic conditions of the desert area.
Milk yield ranges from 1800 kg to 3500 kg per lactation.
Deoni: Dual purpose breed.
Hariana: Bullocks are useful for ploughing and transport. Cows are good milkers. Milk yield is 1000 to
2000 kg per lactation.
Kankrej: Milk yield is 1500-4000 kg per lactation. Bullocks are strong and hard working. It is the
heaviest cattle breed of India. Imported by central/south USA for beef production.
Ongole: Bullocks are useful for ploughing and cart-work / transport. Cows are fair milkers.
Gaolao: Bullocks are useful for ploughing. Cows are average milkers.
Krishna Valley: Bullocks are powerful and good for heavy ploughing and slower draught purpose.
Cows are fair milkers.
Dangi: Especially good for heavy rainfall areas for draught purpose.
Mewati: Mewati cattle are in general sturdy, powerful and docile and are useful for heavy ploughing,
carting and drawing water from deep wells. Cows are said to be good milkers.
25
AEM - 205 BLivestock Biodiversity
C. Draught Breeds
Red Kandhari: Draught purpose and hardy in nature. Bullocks are good draught animals. Cows are
good milkers.

Nimari: Draught breed.
Malvi: A Draught purpose breed.
Khillari: Bullocks are hardy and well known for being fast in work. It is the most popular draft breed of
N-Western India.
Amritmahal: Bullocks are well known for draught power and endurance. Average milk yield is 1000 to
1200 kg per lactation. Best draft breed of India.
Hallikar: Draught breed both used for road and field agricultural operations.
Kangayam: Bullocks are strong draught animals. Their skin is very strong and tight.
Nagore: It is an excellent draught breed for hot climate.
Bargur: Bullocks are good work animals.
Kenkatha: Bullocks are small but fairly sturdy animals and good for cultivation in rocky areas.
Siri: This breed can stand the rugged conditions of the mountains (high altitude breed) very well. Bullocks
are eagerly sought after for draught purposes (ploughing and transport) due to their reputed great
strength.
Bachaur: Bullocks are used for draught purpose. Cows are poor milkers. Best draft breed of Bihar.
Kharigarh: The cattle of this breed are very active and thrive on grazing only. Bullocks are good for light
draught and quick light transport. The cows are poor milkers.
Umblachery: It is a draught breed of the Zebu type, similar to Kangayam but smaller. Excellent for wet
ploughing.
Ponwar: Draught purpose. Cows are poor milkers.
Vechoor: Bullocks are mainly used for draught purpose. Cows are poor milkers. Miniature cattle. The
most important genetic quality of the Vechoor breed is the high fat content in milk- from 6.02% to
7.86%.
Pungannur: Dwarf cattle.