Feeding coping strategies adopted for dairy animals during the 2018 floods in Kerala, India

Introduction

Livestock serves as a cornerstone of rural India's socioeconomic structure, offering a secure investment avenue, steady income, social prestige, and nutritional security for smallholder families (Birthal et al., 2015) [4] . India hosts the world's largest livestock population, totalling 535.78 million heads as per the 20th Livestock Census (2019), including 192.49 million cattle, with significant contributions to GDP (approximately 4.5%) and employment for over 20 million rural households (Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, 2019) [5] . In Kerala, the livestock sector comprises about 17.5 million animals-cattle (3.4 million), buffaloes (0.4 million), goats (2.8 million), pigs (0.3 million), and poultry (10+ million)-supporting livelihoods amid the state's high human development index but vulnerability to climate hazards (Government of Kerala, 2020) [6] . www.extensionjournal.com this transactional stress model, strategies were classified as problem-focused (e.g., direct interventions to alter the stressor, such as structural protections) or emotion-focused (e.g., efforts to regulate distress through resource sharing or psychological adjustment). The present investigation specifically examined feeding-related coping mechanisms, which aimed to safeguard dairy animals from starvation while preserving productivity amid annual monsoon risks.

Measurement of Feeding Coping Strategies

Potential feeding coping strategies were identified via an exhaustive literature review and consultations with domain experts from Kerala's veterinary and dairy extension services. Farmer adoption was assessed using a threecategory response scale: continuously adopted (AC), adopted but discontinued (AD), or never adopted (NA). This continuum scoring system (2, 1, 0 points, respectively) captured the dynamic nature of practices under recurrent flooding, enabling computation of adoption indices and rankings for comparative analysis across districts (Saravanan et al., 2022) [16] .

Results

The perusal of Table 1 indicated that in Thrissur district, stoppage of grazing and stall feeding them in shed during flood disaster was followed by 98.33 per cent of respondents. This was followed by creation of facilities for storage of excess fodder in higher grounds (93.33%), sharing of feed and water with fellow farmers (83.33%), adoption of mixed farming (73.33%), cultivation of fodder for making hay to be used in event of flood (66.67%), feeding the crop residues and tree leaves damaged by the flood (66.67%), practice of planting flood resistant fodder trees like Bamboo(Mula), Garuga (Kattunelli), Erytherina (Indian coral tree, Mullumurukku) (66.67%), cultivation of flood resistant fodder (Guinea grass and Gamba grass) (63.33%), ascertaining the source of water before watering the animals during the flood disaster (63.33%), reducing the frequency of feeding to the non-productive animals during flood disaster (58.33%), adjusting the cropping pattern to tackle flood (50%) and feeding feed additives like mineral mixture to cope up with stress (35%). In Idukki district, stoppage of grazing and stall feeding during flood disaster was followed by all of the respondents. This was followed by creation of facilities for storage of excess fodder in higher grounds (98.33%), sharing of feed and water with fellow farmers (95%), reducing the frequency of feeding to the non-productive animals during flood disaster (93%), adoption of mixed farming (83.33%), practice of planting flood resistant fodder trees like Bamboo(Mula), Garuga (Kattunelli), Erytherina (Indian coral tree, Mullumurukku) (83.33%), cultivation of flood resistant fodder (Guinea grass and Gamba grass) (75%) cultivation of fodder for making hay to be used in event of flood (68.33%), ascertaining the source of water before watering the animals during the flood disaster (61.67%). Adoption of mixed farming 73.33 6.67 20 100 83.33 6.67 10 100 81.67 8.33 10 100 AC: Adoption Continued; AD: Adoption Discontinued; NA: Never Adopted feeding the crop residues and tree leaves damaged by the flood (56.67%), feeding feed additives like mineral mixture to cope up with stress (23.33%), and adjusting the cropping pattern to overcome flood (15%). In Ernakulam district, stoppage of grazing stall feeding during flood disaster was followed by 100 per cent of respondents. This was followed by creation of facilities for storage of excess in higher grounds (96.67%), sharing of feed and water with fellow farmers (88.33%), reducing the frequency of feeding to the non-productive animals during flood disaster (88%), adoption of mixed farming (81.67%), cultivation of fodder for making hay to be used in event of flood (80%), feeding the crop residues and tree leaves damaged by the flood (75%), practice of planting flood resistant fodder trees like Bamboo(Mula), Garuga (Kattunelli), Erytherina (Indian coral tree, Mullumurukku) (63%), ascertaining the source of water before watering the animals during the flood disaster (61.67%), cultivation of flood resistant fodder (Guinea grass and Gamba grass) (53.33%), feeding feed additives like mineral mixture to cope up with stress (31.67%) and adjusting the cropping pattern to tackle flooding season (25%). www.extensionjournal.com The perusal of Table 2 indicate that in Thrissur district, stoppage of grazing and stall feeding them in shed during flood disaster with an index score of 0.99 ranked first among feeding coping mechanism. This was followed by creation of facilities for storage of excess fodder in higher grounds(0.93), sharing of feed and water with fellow farmers(0.91), cultivation of fodder for making hay to be used in event of flood(0.82), feeding the crop residues and tree leaves damaged by the flood(0.80), cultivation of flood resistant fodder (Guinea grass and Gamba grass) (0.78), adoption of mixed farming(0.77), reducing the frequency of feeding to the non-productive animals during flood disaster(0.71), practice of planting flood resistant fodder trees like Bamboo(Mula), Garuga (Kattunelli), Erytherina (Indian coral tree, Mullumurukku)(0.68), ascertaining the source of water before watering the animals during the flood disaster(0.64), adjusting the cropping pattern to tackle flood (0.57) and feeding feed additives like mineral mixture to cope up with stress (0.38).

In Idukki district, stoppage of grazing and stall feeding them during flood disaster with an index score of one ranked first among the feeding coping mechanism. This was followed by creation of facilities for storage of excess fodder in higher grounds(0.98), sharing of feed and water with fellow farmers(0.95), reducing the frequency of feeding to the nonproductive animals during flood disaster(0.93), adoption of mixed farming(0.87), practice of planting flood resistant fodder trees like Bamboo(Mula), Garuga (Kattunelli), Erytherina (Indian coral tree, Mullumurukku)(0.85), cultivation of flood resistant fodder (Guinea grass and Gamba grass)(0.75), cultivation of fodder for making hay to be used in event of flood(0.72), feeding the crop residues and tree leaves damaged by the flood(0.67), ascertaining the source water before watering the animals during the flood disaster(0.62), feeding feed additives like mineral mixture to cope up with stress(0.33) and adjusting the cropping pattern to tackle flood (0.27).

In Ernakulam district, stoppage of grazing and stall feeding them in shed during flood disaster with an index score of one ranked first among feeding coping mechanism. This was followed by creation of facilities for storage of excess fodder in higher grounds(0.97), sharing of feed and water with fellow farmers(0.88), reducing the frequency of feeding to the non-productive animals during flood disaster(0.88), adoption of mixed farming(0.86), cultivation of fodder for making hay to be used in event of flood(0.83), feeding the crop residues and tree leaves damaged by the flood(0.80), practice of planting flood resistant fodder trees like Bamboo(Mula), Garuga (Kattunelli), Erytherina (Indian coral tree, Mullumurukku) (0.68), ascertaining the source of water before watering the animals during the flood disaster(0.62), cultivation of flood resistant fodder (Guinea grass and Gamba grass)(0.58), feeding feed additives like mineral mixture to cope up with stress(0.42) and adjusting the cropping pattern to tackle flood (0.37).

Discussion

The result of the study indicated that the stoppage of grazing for the herd animals and feeding them in a shed during flood disasters was followed by all the farmers invariably in all the three districts as the animals are at high risk when they are allowed to graze during floods (Patil et al. 2022) [14] (Pashudhan Praharee 2023) [13] . Sharing of feed and water with fellow flood affected dairy farmers was adopted by almost all the farmers in all the districts. (The Hindu BusinessLine 2018) [18] This was followed by practice of creating facilities for storage of excess and dry fodder in higher grounds by almost all the farmers in all the districts, aligning with recommended feed banks for emergencies (Anitha et al. 2023) [1] . Reducing the frequency of feeding to the non-productive animals during flood disaster was followed by majority of dairy farmers in Idukki and Ernakulam district. (Arun and Senthilkumar 2020) [2] This coping mechanism was followed by only half of dairy farmers in Thrissur district. Adoption of mixed farming was followed by almost two thirds of dairy farmers in all the three districts The following four coping mechanisms of feeding the crop residues and tree leaves damaged by the flood, cultivation of fodder for making hay to be used in event of flood, planting flood resistant fodder trees like bamboo (Mula), Garuga (Kattunelli), Erytherina (Indian coral tree, Mullumurukku) and cultivation of flood resistant fodder (Guinea grass, Gamba grass) was adopted by two third of dairy farmers in all the districts. The coping mechanism of ascertaining the source of water before watering the animals during the flood disaster was followed by three fourths of dairy farmers in Ernakulam and Thrissur district. Feeding feed additive like mineral mixture to cope up with stress was followed by only one third of the dairy farmers in all districts. Adjusting the cropping pattern to tackle flooding season was followed by half of dairy www.extensionjournal.com farmers in Thrissur district one fifth of the dairy farmers in Idukki and Ernakulam district. The findings of the result was in accordance with findings of Meena et al. (2016) [12] who attributed that flood destroys livestock feed and fodder and revealed that all the farmers preferred to store crop residuals and forage from forest area to fulfil the fodder demand during the anticipated flood season. The finding was further supported by Jahan et al.

(2014) [7] who reported that in Bangladesh, dairy farmers followed the practice of drying the rice straw and using it as for cattle feed during flood and Maiti (2013) [11] who reported that drought affected dairy farmers followed feeding extra concentrate, supplementation of minerals and feed additives and usage of crop residue and hay as fodder as coping strategies.

The practice of adjusting the cropping pattern to tackle the flooding season was more easily followed in Thrissur district as it is plains, unlike Idukki district, which is mountainous, where mostly plantations such as spices and tea were cultivated.

Conclusion

The research clearly establishes that dairy farmers' immediate, problem-focused coping mechanisms were paramount during the 2018 Kerala floods. The universal adoption and top ranking of "stoppage of grazing and stall feeding the animals" highlights the critical importance of immediate animal safety during a disaster. The high index scores for both "storage of excess fodder in higher grounds" and "sharing of feed and water" affirm the effectiveness of community solidarity and proactive, structural measures. However, the study also revealed significant gaps in the adoption of long-term and preparatory measures, particularly in "adjusting cropping pattern" and "feeding feed additives." The lower adoption of cropping changes in mountainous Idukki, compared to the plains of Thrissur, demonstrates how local geography dictates the feasibility of specific strategies. To enhance long-term resilience against recurrent floods, extension agencies should focus on promoting and supporting these less-adopted strategies, ensuring that dairy farmers are equipped with a diverse and effective portfolio of coping mechanisms that are tailored to their regional context.

References

1. Anitha M, Jagadeeswary V, Shree JS. Flood: mitigation measures adopted by livestock farmers and strategies developed for livestock management. 2023;299-305.
2. Arun L, Senthilkumar R. A scale to measure knowledge level of dairy farmers affected by Kerala flood 2018 on disaster. Int J Agric Extension Soc Dev. 2025;8(1S):102-107. doi:10.33545/26180723.2025.v8.i1Sb.1578.
3. Arun L, Senthilkumar R. An Indian perspective of flood and livestock. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2020;9(6):2495-2502. doi:10.20546/ijcmas.2020.906.303.
4. Birthal PS, Negi DS, Kumar S, Gaur AK, Joshi PK, Delgado CL. How sensitive is the Indian livestock sector to market cycles? Glob Food Secur. 2015;4:4855.
5. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. 20th livestock census 2019: all India report. New Delhi: Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India; 2019. https://dahd.nic.gov.in
6. Government of Kerala. District-wise livestock population: Kerala -20th livestock census. Kerala: Government of Kerala; 2020. https://www.data.gov.in/resource/district-wise-detailslivestock-population-kerala-20th-livestock-census-2019
7. Jahan A, Mahdi A, Muhammad G, Chakma S. Vulnerability and coping strategies of floods in Bangladesh agriculture. ASA Univ Rev. 2014;8:49-69.
8. Jayawardhana DTA, Pitawala HMTGA, Hanif A. The Kerala floods of 2018: exploring the socio-economic characteristics of flood-affected dairy farmers in Ernakulam and Thrissur districts. J Vet Anim Sci. 2022;20(1):1-10.
9. Kerala State Disaster Management Authority. Post disaster needs assessment (PDNA) report: floods and landslides -August 2018. Kerala: Government of Kerala; 2019. https://sdma.kerala.gov.in
10. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 1984.
11. Maiti S, Jha SK, Garai S, Nag A, Chakravarty R, Kadian KS, et al. Adaptation strategies followed by the livestock rearers of coastal Odisha and West Bengal to cope with climate change. Indian J Anim Sci. 2014;84:652-659.
12. Meena HR, Meena BS, Sankhala G. Disaster preparedness in Himalayan region: flood disaster victim perspective. Indian J Agric Res. 2016;50:594-598.
13. Pashudhan Praharee. Management of livestock during flood. 2023 Nov 13. https://www.pashudhanpraharee.com/management-oflivestock-during-flood-2/
14. Patil SB, Joseph BA, George PR, Harikumar S, Gleeja VL, Mathew J. The Kerala floods of 2018: exploring the socio-economic characteristics of flood-affected dairy farmers in Ernakulam and Thrissur districts. J Vet Anim Sci. 2022;53(1):7-12.
15. Patil SB, Joseph BA, George PR, Harikumar S, Joy G. Analysing dairy farmers' perceptions of constraints in the Ernakulam and Thrissur districts of Kerala during the 2018 floods. J Anim Res. 2022;12(4):569-573.
16. Saravanan M, Prasad A, Mathew J, Davis J, Gleeja VL. The impact of flood in 2018 on the socioeconomic conditions of the dairy farmers in Pariyaram Panchayat of Thrissur district of Kerala. 2021;272-276.
17. Sasi NN, Satheesh KG. Flood impacts on Kerala dairy sector. New Indian Express. 2018. https://www.newindianexpress.com
18. The Hindu Business Line. Floods swamp Kerala's dairy sector, leading to ₹400-cr loss. 2018 Sep 3. https://www.thehindubusinessline.com
19. United Nations. Kerala post disaster needs assessment: floods and landslides - August 2018. Thiruvananthapuram: Government of Kerala; 2018. p. 1-13.