Cost of conservation of indigenous dairy cattle breed—A case of Sahiwal in India

GUNJAN BHANDARI; B S CHANDEL; MUKESH BHAKAT

doi:10.56093/ijans.v90i10.111414

Authors

GUNJAN BHANDARI ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana
B S CHANDEL ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana
MUKESH BHAKAT ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v90i10.111414

Keywords:

Conservation cost, Dichotomous choice CVM, Indigenous cattle, Sahiwal, WTA

Abstract

Conservation of indigenous cattle breeds is now getting much needed attention from the Government. Understanding the perception of dairy farmers and estimation of conservation cost is very important for designing effective conservation policies. Present study attempts to address the same with specific reference to Sahiwal breed. Primary data was collected from 168 dairy farmers spread over prominent breeding tract of Sahiwal in India. Relevant secondary information was collected from ABRC, NDRI and from companies dealing with reproduction technologies. Garrett’s ranking, dichotomous choice CVM and cost analysis were used for analyzing the collected data. Subsidy on purchase price, higher price for milk and ensured availability of pure breed figured out as the most essential requirement for rearing Sahiwal cattle. WTA estimates were lowest for Sri Ganganagar indicating that if in situ conservation is done in this area it will cost comparatively less to the Government. Cost per insemination and cost per conception in Sahiwal worked out to be ₹ 95.97 and ₹191.94, respectively.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Cameron T A and Quiggin J. 1994. Estimation using contingent valuation data from a dichotomous choice with follow-up questionnaire. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 27: 218–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1994.1035

Carson R T, Hanemann W M and Mitchell R C. 1986. Determining the demand for public goods by simulating referendums at different tax prices. Manuscript, University of California, Department of Economics, San Diego.

Cicia G, D’ Ercole and Marino D. 2003. Costs and benefits of preserving farm animal genetic resources from extinction: CVM and Bio-economic model for valuing a conservation program for the Italian Pentro horse. Ecological Economics 45: 445–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00096-X

Food and Agriculture Organization. 2000. World Watch List for Domestic Animal Diversity. 3rd edition, FAO, Rome.

Garrett E H and Woodworth R S. 1969. Statistics in psychology and education. Vakils, Feffer and Simons Pvt. Ltd., Bombay.

Government of India. 2013. Estimated livestock population breed wise based on breed survey-2013, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmer’s Welfare, New Delhi.

Haab T C and Mc Connell K E. 2002. Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources: The Econometrics of Non-market Valuation, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Hammond K. 1999. Management of farm animal genetic resources. Proceedings of an FAO/ILRI Workshop held at FAO Headquarters, Rome, Italy, 15–17 March.

Kumar P and Singh K. 2018. Role of different factors in economics of a bovine semen station. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 7: 4573–80.

Pandit A and Jain D K. 2003. Cost of artificial insemination using frozen semen. Journal of Dairying, Food and Home Sciences 22: 88–94.

Sharma A and Niranjan S K. 2016. National action plan for management of animal genetic resources. Compendium of 13th Convention and Symposium of Society for Conservation of Domestic Animal Biodiversity. Feb, 2016. Jammu, India 8– 23.

Thirunavukkarasu M. 2009. Cost of artificial breeding in bovines. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 79(12): 1245–51.

Tomar S S. 2004. Textbook of Animal Breeding. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi, India. pp 59–75.