Herd composition
Selected crossbred cattle farms of NG were keeping average 78 adult crossbred cows with few heads of buffaloes. Similarly, buffalo farms of SG were also keeping average 114 adult female buffaloes with few crossbred cows. It shows that all farms are keeping cows along with buffaloes.
Economics of dairy farms
The investment pattern is presented in Table 1. Total annually fixed cost, variable cost and return from the dairy farms described in below (Table 2). Proportion of various cost and return parameters has been calculated and depicted in said table along with significance level between two regions and two species.
Labour management practices
Number of labours hired, number of family labours worked, working hours of labours, expenditure toward labours etc. is important to determine efficient labor management on a dairy farm. Mean of number of labours hired in crossbred cattle and buffalo farms is presented in (Table 1). Table revealed that significantly less numbers of labours were hired in crossbred cattle farms. The important aspects of dairy farm management were working of family members for routine activities of farms seen in both type of farms. Working of family labours in dairy farm is generally makes farm profitability in many parts of India
(Bardhan et al., 2005). Working hours of labours in both regions were similar. However, working hours found in studied farms was higher than previous findings
(Kumar 2009). It is general guideline of state agricultural university farms in Gujarat to employ, 14 labours/AU. However, Labour requirement per adult unit (AU) was less in studied specialized farms particularly crossbred cattle farms were more labour efficient. Expenditure toward labours per adult unit including family labours in crossbred cattle farms was around ₹ 1705.02 and in buffalo farms was ₹ 1364.88. It was higher in crossbred cattle farms; however, statistically it was at par. The labour cost incurred in present study was lower than reported by
Sahu (2010). The farms were mostly employed couples as labour on monthly salary. It was practice to provide free accommodation, electricity, milk to their labours in both regions. The monthly payments when calculated per day basis revealed nonsignificantly higher in buffalo farms (Rs. 269.60/day v/s 210.52). The costlier labours in buffalo farm in SG region was accordance to
Sorathiya et al., (2016).
Economics of dairy farms
Fixed cost
Mean cost and returns from studied specialized dairy farms is depicted in (Table 2). It is showing that total fixed cost was nonsignificant higher in buffalo farms. The share of interest in fixed capital, depreciation was 8.88 and 10.18 percents, respectively was almost double that
Patil et al., (2019). Kaware and Yadav (2014) reported 13.64% share of fixed cost, however, they have included herd replacement cost (7.37%) in fixed cost. Herd replacement is not included as cost in present study as all the selected farms were running for more than 10 years, hence, they are having their farm born replacement stock which is advantage of older farms. More fixed cost in present study was attributed with more costlier equipments and expensive shelter in selected farms being specialized type whereas, previous farms were mostly traditional types.
Variable cost
Total variable cost was significantly higher (37.68 lakh) in specialized buffalo farms. It was about 11 lakh less in crossbred cattle farms. It might be associated with more need of concentrate in buffalo farms. The proportion of variable cost was major (80.94%) among total cost. Among variable cost total feed and fodder cost was accounts for 63.69% percent of total cost followed by labour cost (15.72%). Feed cost was nonsignificant between studied farms, whereas, labour cost was significantly higher in buffalo farms.
Patil et al., (2019) revealed 76.46% feed cost and 13.26% labour cost in crossbred cattle farms in Karnataka. Relative expenditure of green fodder, dry fodder and concentrate is depicted in (Fig 1). It revealed that concentrate was major source of expenditure particularly in buffalo farms. It was having 36% share among total cost. The expenditure incurred for dry fodder was about 11%, it was significantly higher in buffalo farms. Similarly,
Ghule et al., (2012) revealed 33, 21 and 46 percent expenditure towards green, dry fodder and concentrate, respectively in crossbred cattle farm.
Patil et al., (2019) also revealed 76.46% share of feed-fodder cost among total cost, further, they reported that cost of concentrate was highest (54%) and cost of dry fodder was lowest (19%) in rearing of crossbred cattle at Karnataka state. The veterinary expenses included treatment cost, AI cost and other veterinary service cost. The miscellaneous costs included light bill, petrol-oil-lubricants, repairs of equipments etc. Both types of cost was meager in total cost was agreement with
Ghule et al., (2012) and
Patil et al., (2019).
Returns
The income generated from studied dairy farms includes sale of milk, sale of animal and sale of dung. Ghee a traditional milk product was also sold by 4 farms. The return and profit parameters shown in Table 2 depicts that all of them were statistically nonsignificant between cattle and buffalo farms. The results of Table 2 indicated that average total income from selling of milk were Rs.48.44 lakh (86.59%) which is major source of income.
Kumawat et al., (2016) also revealed that income from milk was chief among all income of dairy farm.
Kaware and Yadav (2014) reported more proportion of income than present study from sale of milk in dairy farms in Karnataka. The buffalo farms have earned about 15 lakh more from milk than cattle farms. It was associated with more selling price of buffalo milk particularly in SG. Buffalo farms have more return from milk than cattle farms might be due to fetching more price of milk for buffalo milk. Average buffalo milk selling price was Rs 52.56/liter in SG farms whereas, selling of cow milk was observed Rs. 36.75/liter. The return from sale of ghee was second after return from milk. One farms in NG and three farms of SG was selling organic ghee at premium rate about Rs 800-1000/Kg. The income received from dung was similar to previous findings
(Kumawat et al., 2016). Kaware and Yadav (2014) reported about 8% return from dung due to less production of milk in animals they have studied. The return from sale of animals was meager (<1%) which is about half than return observed in buffalo farms and similar to cattle farms in Maharashtra
(Kaware and Yadav, 2014). Male calves has little or no value as draft animal now a days, further, slaughter is strictly prohibited in Gujarat rendered male offspring useless and difficult to even disposed off. Gross total income was found higher in buffalo farms of SG was attributed with more numbers of buffaloes in herd
(Ghule et al., 2012). The results presented in Table 2 observed that average net profit in cattle farms of NG was ₹11.52 lakh, in buffalo farms of SG it was ₹ 20.60 lakh. It was higher than result of
Ghule et al., (2012) who found that in similar sized farms annual net profit from large commercial dairy farms was ₹ 3.12 lakh. However,
Mawase et al., (2018) revealed higher net profit in small size dairy farms. Further, overall average net returns / AU was ₹16 thousand. Buffalo farms having higher return per AU than cattle farms, which is, however, nonsignificant. It is less than earlier report of
Jadav et al., (2016). Overall yearly net returns /labour was ₹ 2.35 lakh. It means the earning in farms were equal to monthly salary about 20000 per person worked in farm. It is positive finding for inspiration among entrepreneurs who want to start dairy farms. The overall net return per litre of milk produced was Rs 13.10 which was similar to findings of
Ghule et al., (2012). It was higher in SG farms, but nonsignificant. The benefit cost ratio was 1:1.35 considerably higher than previous findings
(Patil et al., 2019). However,
Kaware and Yadav (2014) revealed higher benefit cost ratio from in-housed dairy farms in western Maharashtra. Fetching of more milk selling price in buffalo farms of SG was reflected in more net return, return/AU, Benefit Cost ratio and return/liter milk.