Socio-economic profile of commercial poultry farmers in temperate and sub-tropical areas of Jammu and Kashmir

Introduction

Poultry refers to domesticated birds raised for their meat, eggs, or feathers, and can be kept either commercially or in smaller, backyard settings. Poultry constitutes approximately 40.6% of global meat production, amounting to 0.33 billion tons. Between 2011-12 and 2021-22, India's poultry sector experienced an annual growth rate of 12.52%, surpassing all other animal husbandry sub-sectors in production increase. Poultry meat alone contributes over 50% (51.44%) to India's total meat production, with the remainder provided by buffalo, goat, sheep, pig, and cattle (BAHS-2022). Farmers primarily adopt improved agricultural practices to enhance their economic outcomes. The extent of this adoption is influenced by various socio-economic factors, including age, education, landholding size, socio-economic status, and progressiveness. A progressive mindset encourages farmers to embrace innovative ideas and agricultural technologies, thereby increasing their economic gains.

Methodology

The study was conducted in two purposively selected districts of Jammu and Kashmir-Jammu from the sub-tropical region and Budgam from the temperate region-both known for their significant poultry farming activities. Within these districts, the blocks with the highest poultry populations were chosen. Subsequently, four blocks exhibiting the highest number of poultry farms were selected from each district, totalling eight blocks. From each block, 15 poultry farmers were randomly selected, resulting in a total sample size of 120 respondents. The collected data were analysed using statistical tools such as percentage, frequency, mean, and standard deviation. Bhanja's scale was used to analyse education status of the farmers.

Results

Age

The data shown in the table 1 reveals that 38.4 percent of the broiler poultry farmers in temperate area belonged to young age group (32-38 years), followed by very young age (33.33%, 25-31 years) and middle (28.33, > 38years) age. While in case of sub-tropical area, 54.67 percent broiler poultry farmers belonged to middle age (>38 years), followed by young age (26.67%, 32-38 years) and very young (25-31 years, 16.67%). The pooled data analysis revealed that 42.50 percent of the broiler poultry farmers belonged to middle age group (42.50%), followed by young age (32.5%) and very young age (25%). The average age of broiler poultry farmers in temperate and sub-tropical area were 34.27 and 41.12 years respectively. The overall average age was 37.69 years. This finding is in complete disagreement with the findings of Kumari (2019) [4] , who reported that majority of the poultry farmers belonged to the old age group (51.86%). In both the areas involvement of young farmers younger in poultry farming was less, they might have several other options besides choosing poultry as a business opportunity.

Gender

The data given in table 2 reveals that cent percent of the broiler poultry farmers in temperate area were male. While in sub-tropical area, huge majority (91.67%) of broiler poultry farmers were males and remaining 8.33 percent were females. The pooled data reveals that overwhelming majority (95.83%) of the farmers were males while 4.17 percent were females. Parveen (2021) found similar findings that overwhelming majority of the poultry farmers were male. The result of the study clearly showed that women's involvement in poultry farming is minimal in sub-tropical area while nil in temperate area. It may be because of the reason that the responsibility of providing family members' livelihoods is usually shouldered on male may be the most significant factor and only few women come forward to run poultry farm. Counterpart, which for more involvement of males in income generating activities, as the family's head, the men oversaw carrying out this responsibility. Women were thought to be competent at managing household tasks, but they lacked the ability to manage outdoor activities. As a result, they do not volunteer themselves to carry out such actions.

Education

Table 3 reveals that in temperate area huge majority (93.33%) of the broiler poultry farmers were literates and remaining 6.67 percent were illiterate. While in sub-tropical area also overwhelming majority (95%) of the broiler poultry farmers were literate and remaining 5 percent were illiterate. Among the literates in temperate area, highest (41.67%) percentage of broiler poultry had middle school level of education, followed by high school (20%), higher secondary (16.67%), graduate and above (10%), functional literates (3.33%) and primary education (1.67%). Whereas in sub-tropical area among literates, 26.67 percent of the broiler poultry farmers had high school level of education, followed by higher secondary (20%), middle school (16.67%), graduate and above (15%), primary school (10%) and functional literate (6.67%). The pooled data reveals that overwhelming majority of the broiler poultry farmers (94.17%) were literate and remaining 5.83 percent were illiterate. Among the literate maximum percentage of broiler poultry farmers (29.17%) had middle school level of education, followed by high school (23.33%), higher secondary (18.33%), graduate and above (12.5%), primary school (5.83%) and functional literate (5%). The data further indicates that well educated persons have opted for poultry farming in both the areas. Pratap (2014) [5] found the similar findings that overwhelming majority (96%) of the broiler poultry farmers were literate, and 4 percent were illiterate.

Religion

The data from table 4 depicts that cent percent of the broiler poultry farmers in temperate area were Muslim. While as in case of sub-tropical area majority (78.33%) of the broiler poultry farmers were belonged to Hindu, followed by Sikh (15%) and Muslim (6.67%). The pooled data depicts that more than half of the broiler poultry farmers (53.33%) belonged to Muslim, followed by Hindu (39.16%) and Sikh (7.5%). Dumrya et al. (2015) [3] found the similar findings that majority of the poultry farmers (72%) were Hindus and 25 percent were Muslim. All the broiler poultry farmers in temperate area were Muslim and majority of farmers in subtropical area were Hindu, this might be due to distribution of population in both the regions. The population census (2011) shows that in Budgam district, population of Muslim, Hindu, Sikh were 97.65, 1.34, and 0.74 percent respectively. Whereas in Jammu district, 84.27 percent were Hindu, 7.47 Sikh and 7.03 Muslim.

Caste category

Table 5 reveals that majority (65%) of the broiler poultry farmers in temperate area were belonged to general caste, followed by other backward caste (35%) and none of the broiler poultry farmers were belonged to scheduled caste and scheduled tribe caste categories. While as in case of sub-tropical area, 55 percent of the broiler poultry farmers belonged to general caste, followed by other backward caste (23.33%), scheduled caste (15%) and scheduled tribe (6.67%). The pooled data depicts that majority (60%) of the broiler poultry farmers belonged to general caste, followed by other backward caste (29.16%), scheduled caste (7.5%) and scheduled tribe (3.33%). It is further evident from table that in temperate area broiler poultry farming is being practiced by two caste categories i.e., general, and other backward caste without any representation of scheduled caste and scheduled tribe. This might be because of negligible amount of population of scheduled caste and scheduled tribes in the temperate area. While as in case of sub-tropical area, general and other backward caste categories people were found to practice broiler poultry farming, but scheduled caste and scheduled tribe representation was negligible. This might be because of their poor financial conditions of scheduled tribes and scheduled castes, however they worked in commercial poultry farms as wage workers.

Occupation Primary occupation

Table 6 reveals that in temperate area, majority (75%) of the broiler poultry farmers were having poultry farming as primary occupation, followed by business (10%), agriculture (8.33%) and horticulture (6.67%). Whereas 55 percent of the broiler poultry farmers in sub-tropical area were practicing poultry farming as primary occupation, followed by agriculture (33.33%), government service (6.67%) and business (5.5%). The pooled data depicts that majority (65%) of the broiler poultry farmers had taken up poultry farming as primary occupation, followed by agriculture (20.83%), business (7.5%), horticulture and government service (3.33% each). Shahnaz (2010) [7] found similar findings that majority of broiler poultry farmers had poultry farming as primary occupation. The table also depicts that in temperate area horticulture was primary occupation of some broiler poultry farmers because of conginal environmental conditions in temperate area and also none of the poultry farmer was in government service while as in sub-tropical area none of the broiler poultry farmers had horticulture but they were in govt. service. The comparative analysis indicates more dependency of poultry farmers of temperate area on poultry farming while in sub-tropical area, poultry farmers are mainly dependent on both poultry farming as well as agriculture. It might be due to agricultural land limitation. The poultry farmers in temperate area may possess less agricultural land while in sub-tropical area, poultry farmers may owned sufficient land to profess agriculture.

Secondary occupation

Table 7 shows that in temperate area, majority (61.67%) of the broiler poultry farmers had professed agriculture as secondary occupation, followed by poultry farming (25%), horticulture (11.67%) and business (1.67%). Whereas in case of sub-tropical area, 45 percent of the poultry broiler poultry farmers had poultry farming as secondary occupation, followed by agriculture (33.33%) and business (21.67%). The pooled data reveals that maximum (47.5%) of the broiler poultry farmers had agriculture as secondary occupation, followed by poultry farming (35%), business (11.67%) and horticulture (5.83%). Sharma (2018) [6] found similar findings that majority of broiler poultry farmers had agriculture as secondary occupation.

Family education status

Table 8 reveals that in temperate area, slightly (51.67) of the broiler poultry farmers had low education status, followed by medium (41.67%) and high education status (6.66%). Whereas in sub-tropical area, 53.33 percent of the broiler poultry farmers had medium education status, followed by low (35%) and high education status (11.67%). The pooled data reveals that 47.50 percent of the broiler poultry farmers had medium education status, followed by low (43.33%) and high (9.17%) education status. The average family education status in temperate area and sub-tropical area was 2.774 and 3.653 respectively. The pooled data reveals that average education status was 3.21. Kumari (2019) [4] and Bharti (2021) [2] reported the similar findings that majority of the broiler poultry farmers had medium family education status. It was evident form the independent sample 't' test that there was significant difference (p<0.05) in family education status of the broiler poultry farmers between two areas. The broiler poultry farmers of sub-tropical area had higher family education status than temperate area. It might be due to the reason that sub-tropical area is having good education facilities. Family structure Family type Table 9 reveals that in temperate area, the majority (61.67%) of the broiler poultry farmers had nuclear family structure and remaining 38.33 percent had joint family. While as in case of sub-tropical area, majority (73.33%) of broiler poultry farmers had nuclear family structure and remaining 26.67 percent had joint family. The pooled data reveals that the majority (67.5%) of the poultry broiler poultry farmers had nuclear family and remaining 32.5 percent had joint nuclear structure of family. Sharma (2018) [6] found similar findings that majority of broiler poultry farmers had nuclear types of family in Jammu.

Family size

Table 10 depicts that in temperate area, 40 percent of the broiler poultry farmers had medium family size (6-8 members), followed by small size family (26.67%, up to 5 members) and large family size (33.33%, > 8 members). In case of sub-tropical area, broiler poultry farmers in equal percentage (41.67%) had small and medium size family, followed by large family size (16.67%). The pooled data depicts that maximum (40.83%) of the broiler poultry farmers had medium size family, followed by small size family (34.16%) and large size family (25%). The average family size in temperate area and sub-tropical area was 6.92 and 6.05 members respectively. The pooled average was 6.48 members. Sharma (2018) [6] found similar findings that majority of broiler poultry farmers had medium size of family in Jammu.

Conclusion

The involvement of youth poultry farmers in both areas of Jammu and Kashmir was less. So, it is necessary to encourage youths to receive training at government institutions and the state department of animal husbandry (SDAH). Govt. institutions should organize training programme on poultry farming frequently to provide them training.

References

1. Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. Basic Animal Husbandry Statistics. New Delhi: GOI; 2022.
2. Bharti R, Sagar MP. Socio-economic profile of trainees and non-trainees broiler farmers. The Pharma Innovation. 2021;10(7):654-657.
3. Dumrya S, Ghosh S, Goswami R. Characterization of backyard poultry farming in Indian Sundarban region. Indian Journal of Poultry Science. 2015;50(1):90-95.
4. Kumari. Impact assessment of training programmes on layer farmers of Uttar Pradesh [MVSc thesis]. Izatnagar (India): Indian Veterinary Research Institute; 2019.
5. Pratap. Assessment of training needs of broiler poultry farmers in Barabanki district of Uttar Pradesh [MVSc thesis]. Izatnagar (India): Indian Veterinary Research Institute; 2014.
6. Sharma A. Understanding color management. John Wiley & Sons; 2018 Sep 4.
7. Beers AN, Shahnaz N, Westerberg BD, Kozak FK. Wideband reflectance in normal Caucasian and Chinese school-aged children and in children with otitis media with effusion. Ear and hearing. 2010 Apr 1;31(2):221233.