Effect of Farmer FIRST Program on the Adoption of Animal Husbandry Practices in Haryana

The livestock sector is a significant component of India’s agriculture sector, where small and marginal farmers predominantly engage in farming to support their families. Agriculture and livestock production are intertwined, mutually dependentand essential to ensuring global food security.

India produces 23.67% of the world’s milkand its milch cattle population is the greatest in the world. In India, farm-fresh milk makes for about 50% of all milk consumed. Dairy is India’s most productive agricultural sector, contributing 5% of the country’s GDP and directly employing over 8 crore farmers (FAOSTAT, 2021; Economic Survey, 2022).

There is no doubt that overall livestock production increased manifold after independence due to the white revolution and other programmes for dairy sector i.e., Key Village Scheme, Intensive Cattle Development Project, Operation Flood (OF). The broad objective of all these programmes was to increase the milk production.

Even though the Indian dairy sector is the world’s largest producer of milk, individual animal milk production is far lower as compared to that in developed countries (Parihar et al., 2020). The dairy business in India is growing more swiftly, yet it is struggling because of inefficient management, marketing, breeding, feedingand healthcare practices. Farmers dealt with problems such as systematic breeding, a shortage of green fodder, inappropriate shelter management, inadequate feeding, insufficient animal health care practices, lack of refrigerated storageand delayed vaccination (Patil et al., 2009; Acharya et al., 2022).

For the socioeconomic development of dairy farmers, it is necessary to strengthen their connections through cooperatives or other similar organizations (Mandi et al., 2022). To satisfy their daily necessities, many farmers are leaving the livestock farming and turning to alternative forms of income since they are unable to keep up with evolving trends. Poor livestock producers who dedicate a lot of time to animal care and rearing are let down by the poor financialgains from their labour. An open and flexible design can be more attentive to stakeholders’ interests, experiencesand viewpoints as well as allow room for the negotiation of methodologies, experimentsand technology adaptation. (McDougall and Braun, 2003). In addition to increasing farmer awareness of subsidy schemes and climate change advice, respondents proposed new agricultural technologies such as laser field levelers, zero tillage, seed treatment, water conservation, micro irrigationand poly houses. (Manjeet et al., 2018).

To tackling the problems faced by the dairy farmers, a bottom-up strategy was used by ICAR by implementing Farmer FIRST Programme (FFP), a nationwide programme for the agricultural community since 2015. To prioritize smallholder agriculture and the complex, variedand risk-prone circumstances of the majority of farmers, ICAR’s new approach through this programme attempts to go beyond production and productivity by enhancing the farmer-scientist interaction through a participatory mode. So, keeping the importance of the Farmer FIRST programme in the livestock sector, present study was conducted to find its effectiveness.

The current study was undertaken in during year 2019-20 in two areas of Haryana, Hisar and Karnal, where the CCS Haryana Agricultural University and the ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, respectively, are implementing the Farmer FIRST initiative. In the Karnal district, Garhi-Gujran and Samora were seen as adopted and non-adopted villages, respectively. Gurana, in Hisar, was regarded as an adopted village, whereas Datta was regarded as a non-adopted village. A total of 240 farmers were chosen, 120 from each district and 60 from each adopted and non-adopted village. Personal interviews of the sampled farmers were conducted for the collection of data. The independent factors included age, education, socioeconomic status, irrigation source, extension contact, mass media exposure, scientific orientation, economic status, risk orientation and farming system. The data were analysed using standard statistical procedure and the paired t-test were employed as statistical methods for the data analysis. The Farmer FIRST program’s impact was assessed by contrasting the replies of respondents regarding livestock husbandry techniques from adopted and non-adopted villages.

Animal breeding and reproduction practices
 
The impact of FFP on adoption of animal breeding and reproduction practices is shown in Table 1. In the adopted village, maximum adoption was recorded with A. I. practices (2.97) which was followed by the practice of taking the animal for A. I. within 12 hours after detection of heat (2.96) and keeping watch on oestrous cycle heat symptoms (2.75). Contrastingly, in the non-adopted village, the level of adoption was found relatively low for the preferred practices by the farmers, viz., A. I. practices (2.88) followed by taking the animal for A. I. within 12 hours after detection of heat (2.78)and improved breed (2.60). Similar finding reported Sharma Ramavatar (2022) by Breeds and breeding practices in milk shed areas were greatly enhanced by the Operation Flood Program.



The artificial insemination become general breeding practice among dairy farmers, who are innovative as well as having more extension contact. Whereas, low adoption of A.I. and improved breed among the farmers in non-adopted villages might be due to their unfavourable attitude towards A.I. It could be seen that there is a clear difference regarding adoption of breeding practice in the adopted village as compared to the non-adopted village. The results of Madhavan et al., (2022) provided support for these conclusions, as they discovered a significant disparity in the degree of adoption of scientific pig production practices, such as breeding, between the two groups of small-scale pig farmers in Assamese adopted villages. About 88.33 percent of respondents in non-adopted villages fell into the low adoption category, compared to 50.56% of farmers in adopted villages who fell into this category. Dairy farmers in experimental villages were given access to the A.I. facility by NDRI project workers. This might be the cause of the experimental villages’ increased adoption of scientific breeding techniques compared to the control villages. Similar finding reported by (Mandi et al., 2022) that better management techniques, prompt veterinarian care, high-quality feedand instruction from JMF members all improved the performance of cooperative dairy animals, according to the study.
 
Animal feeding practices
 
Data from Table 2 show how FFP has impacted the adoption of animal feeding practises. Maximum adoption was observed in the adopted village with continuous colostrum feeding to new-born calves up to five days after its birth and giving animals the necessary amount of green feed (2.98), followed by adopting an animal to stall feed (2.85). In case of non-adopted village, maximum adoption was with feeding colostrum continuously to new-born calves up to five days of its birth (2.90) followed by providing recommended dose of green fodder to animals (2.88), adopting animal to stall feeding (2.83); while minimum adoption was observed with feeding concentrate mixture to animal on milk production (1.70), feeding advance pregnant animal with extra 1-2 kg concentrate over and above maintenance (1.65) and feeding without chaffing of green fodder to animal (1.25).  Table 2 shows higher adoption of all the feeding practices in the adopted village, which might be due to more exposure of dairy farmer. According to a similar study, beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries had mean adoption scores for dairy animal feeding practices of 5.27±0.19 and 4.20±0.12, respectively, according to (Garai et al., 2017). Finding explains dairy farmers in experimental villages adopted scientific dairy animal feeding procedures significantly earlier than non-beneficiaries in control villages.


 
Animal management practices
 
Data regarding the impact of FFP on adoption of the animal management practices are presented in Table 3. It is evident that maximum adoption was observed in the adopted village with preventing their animal from severe cold and hot waves (3.00) and clean milking methods (3.00), followed by suitable dung disposal (2.97). Whereas in non-adopted village, the same level of adoption was found in case of protecting their animal from severe cold and hot waves with (3.00) whereas clean milking practices (2.94), provide timely supply of water and feed to animal (2.91), proper disposal of dung (2.88) found lower than that in adopted village. Findings could be a result of the regular animal health camps held in the adopted village under FFP. Additionally, greater extension interactions and a focus on science among the farmers in the adopted village would be another good justification. The above study is supported by the finding of (Garai et al., 2017) studied that Beneficiary farmers had considerably higher knowledge (p<0.01) than non-beneficiary farmers regarding dairy animal management practices.


 
Animal health care practices
 
The impact of FFP on adoption of animal health care practices is provided in Table 4, which demonstrated that in the adopted village, the largest impact was observed with improved adoption of treatment for infertility, repeat breeding and anoestrus cases by veterinarian (2.91) followed by practicing timely vaccination against contagious disease like, Foot and Mouth Disease (F. M. D.) (2.86), identification of mastitis and udder infection symptoms and timely treatment (2.82). In the non-adopted village, maximum adoption was with practicing timely vaccination against contagious diseases like Foot and Mouth Disease (F. M. D.) (2.84) followed by treatment for infertility, repeat breeding and anoestrus cases by veterinarian (2.76), identification of mastitis and udder infection symptoms and timely treatment (2.74)and timely treatment of sick and weak animals by Veterinary Doctors (2.53). The frequent animal health camps held under FFP may be the reason why more health practises are being accepted in the adopted village. Similar type of result is reported by (Garai et al., 2017). According to this finding, farmers in experimental villages had considerably higher knowledge of dairy animal health (p<0.01) compared to non-benefiting farmers in control villages.


 
Marketing of dairy product
 
Table 5 depicts the impact of FFP on adoption in marketing of the dairy product. In the adopted village, highest impact was found with marketing of milk (2.70) followed by purchasing of freshly calved animals (2.40), getting market information (2.34), preparing of value-added products of milk (2.32), selling products to the wholesale market (2.30) and lowest adoption was with selling dung cake and manure (2.05).


 
Overall impact of FFP on adoption of animal husbandry
practices
 
Table 6 indicates the overall impact of FFP on adoption of animal husbandry practices in the adopted and non-adopted villages. The adoption of animal husbandry practices, including breeding, feeding, management, animal health careand marketing, was assessed. The data show that animal husbandry interventions in the study area had a significant impact on the adoption of animal breeding and reproduction practices with ‘t-value’ (12.627) followed by animal feeding (11.806), animal health care (15.381) and overall animal husbandry practices (20.038). The overall impact of FFP in the study area showed more adoption of innovative dairy practices in adopted villages. A study by Chadda et al., (2024). that Knowledge Index of beneficiaries was greater (61.46) than that of non-beneficiaries (56.68), suggesting that self-help groups had a major positive impact on rural women’s socioeconomic circumstances.

The study’s findings showed how the Farmer FIRST Program affects the adoption of Animal Husbandry Practices in Haryana.  It is clear that there was a considerable difference between adopted and non-adopted communities in all facets of scientific dairy farming practice. It can be observed that there was a clear difference regarding breeding practices, feeding practices, animal management practices, animal health care practices with higher adoption in the adopted village when compare to non-adopted village shows positive effects of Farmer First Programme due to farmers possessed better knowledge for breeding, feeding, animal health care practices.

The present study was not supported by any agency.
 
Disclaimers
 
The views and conclusions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of their affiliated institutions. The authors are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the information provided, but do not accept any liability for any direct or indirect losses resulting from the use of this content.
 
Informed consent
 
All animal procedures for experiments were approved by the Committee of Experimental Animal care and handling techniques were approved by the University of Animal Care Committee.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article. No funding or sponsorship influenced the design of the study, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.