| Livestock Research for Rural Development 18 (8) 2006 | Guidelines to authors | LRRD News | Citation of this paper |
Urea treatment is a scientifically proven technology for improving the nutritive value of cereal straws. Though the technology has been tried at farm level in several countries, so far, farmer adoption of the technology on a larger scale has been limited. However, there has been a significant increase in farmer adoption of urea treatment of wheat and paddy straws in the milkshed of Mithila Cooperative Milk Union in Bihar state of India.
A study was undertaken to probe and analyse the factors that contributed to the successful adoption of urea treatment of straw technology by the dairy farmers. The paper delineates that the main factors for adoption of the technology were appropriate support from the organisation implementing the programme, availability of straw in adequate quantity with the farmers, appropriateness and adaptability of the technology to the farmers' conditions and benefit of the technology as perceived by the farmers themselves. Moreover, farmer-to-farmer extension helped easy and quick dissemination of the technology.
Key words: Adoption of technology, cereal straw, dairy farmers, urea treatment
Milk production is growing at a much faster pace compared to many other agricultural commodities and is being increasingly viewed as a source of food and an effective instrument for improving livelihood. Major share of milk produced in India is by small and marginal farmers with mixed crop-livestock production system as the dominant system. Increasing demand for milk offers possibility of scope to improve their income. Dairy production is mainly based on use of agricultural by-products and crop residues as feed resource with cereal straws contributing 45 - 66 % of the feed consumed by the dairy animals (Kelley and Parthasarathy Rao 1996; Ranjhan 1999, Parthasarathy Rao and Hall 2003). There is regional variation in the type of cereal straw commonly used for feeding animals. In Northern India, wheat straw is commonly used, while feeding paddy straw is common in Eastern, Southern and most parts of Western region (Badve 1991; Ranjhan 1999; Kristjanson and Zerbini 1999).
However, there are technical, economic and social constraints that should be overcome before the small farmers can get the benefit of rising demand for milk and milk products (Thomas and Rangnekar 2004). Availability of feed of desired quality is a major constraint in sustaining growth in milk production, since crop residues like cereal straws cannot support higher levels of milk production and availability of good quality green fodder is rather limited in India (Birthal and Parthasarathy Rao 2002). While attempting to generate indices of research priorities for the livestock sector, Birthal et al (2002) drew attention to the fact that growth seen in livestock sector is largely due to increase in population and may not sustain long. Birthal et al (2002), in their report on research priorities in livestock sector, point out that many factors like large livestock population, feed and fodder scarcity, health problems, poor infrastructure, lack of appropriate technologies are likely to act as impediments to growth.
The value of cereal straws to bovines is limited by low voluntary intake, slow rate of digestion and low content of available energy, protein, minerals and vitamins. Extensive research has been carried out, for several decades, on improving nutritive value of cereal straws for livestock using physical, chemical and biological treatments and varying degree of success has been reported from technical aspect; however, economic benefit and social acceptance of these technologies have been very limited (Singh and Schiere 1995; Rangnekar 2005). Urea treatment of cereal straws is one of the technologies that has been strongly recommended for field application and tried extensively. Urea treatment is reported to improve the nutritive value of cereal straws by increasing digestibility, palatability and crude protein content (Sharma et al 1995; Chenost and Sansoucy 1991; Badve 1991; Ranjhan 1999; Israel and Pearson 2000).
Large numbers of farmer trials on straw treatment with urea have been conducted throughout the world including India, but very few farmers have adopted the technology on a continuous basis (Dolberg 1992; O'Donovan et al 1997; Birthal and Parthasarathy Rao 2002; Rabbani et al 2004; Nguyen Xuan Trach 2004). Urea treatment is not used on a wide scale by the farmers because of inadequate extension efforts to popularise the technology, non-availability of sufficient straw and the limited availability of liquid cash with farmers for purchase of urea (Walli et al 1995; Badve 1991; Nguyen Xuan Trach 2004).
However, the same technology has been well adopted by the smallholder dairy farmers in Mithila milkshed in the state of Bihar, and the farmers seemed to be satisfied. Considering the fact that this is one of the very few areas where urea treatment of crop residues is used on a continuous basis by a sizeable number of farmers, attempts were made to probe and analyse the factors responsible for it. A good understanding of the reasons for adoption of the technology by farmers, in a sustained manner, may help in framing effective strategies for other areas.
The paper is based on a short-term study. Focus group discussions with Cooperative Milk Union officers, Technical Input Promoters and dairy farmers were conducted separately to collect information.
The milkshed of Mithila Cooperative Milk Union in Bihar state of India comprises three districts, namely Samastipur, Darbhanga and Madhubani. The Mithila Milk Union covers 854 villages, through dairy cooperative societies of which 135 societies are managed by women. There are 43,605 farmer producer members of which 18% are women members. The area lies in the Indo-Gangetic tract with temperatures ranging from 190C to 400C and rainfall of 5 to 10 cm. The average land holding among the farmers in the area is around one acre and average animal holding is around two. The main crops grown in the area are paddy, maize and sorghum in Kharif season, wheat and tobacco in Rabi season, and mung and paddy crops in summer. Major fodder crops grown are sorghum-sudan hybrid grass (SSG), cowpea, oats and berseem. Dairy animals kept in the area are local non-descript cows, Holstein-Friesian (HF) and Jersey crossbreds.
There has been a significant increase in farmer adoption of wheat and paddy straws treatment in the milkshed area. Table 1 presents the figures of adoption of straw treatment with urea by farmers in a sample of around 180 villages.
Table 1. Village-wise progress of urea treatment of straw in Mithila milkshed |
||||||
|
Items |
Unit |
1999-2000 |
2000-01 |
2001-02 |
2002-03 |
2003-04 |
|
First time Adopter farmers |
No. of farmers per village |
3 |
3 |
3 |
8 |
6 |
|
Repeater farmers |
No. of farmers per village |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
|
Amount of straw treated |
Tonnes per village |
15.3 |
11.7 |
11.9 |
24.4 |
31.2 |
The table shows that farmer adoption of the technology is moving up in terms of "first time adopters" and "repeater farmers." Apparently, farmers per village who had adopted the technology may look small in numbers, however, the size of villages in the milkshed is small and quite large number of farmers had adopted the technology in the area. The "total amount of straw treated" per village of the milkshed has also increased substantially from 15.3 tonnes per village in 1999-2000 to 31.2 tonnes per village in 2003-04. Further, in villages covered by the Input Promoters, on an average 20% of the farmers were using the technology. It is also important to indicate that in no other milkshed so many farmers had taken up adoption of urea treatment of straw technology.
Since beginning, there has been a strong administrative support and Cooperative Milk Union's will to introduction of urea treatment of straw technology in the milkshed. The Milk Union visualized the potential of the technology in improving the nutritional status of the dairy animals in the area and took up introduction of technology in a programme mode. Several on-farm demonstrations on urea treatment of straws were arranged throughout the milkshed by the officers and supervisors of the Milk Union. Besides, in the beginning, the Milk Union provided incentives to the farmers, who agreed for demonstration of the technology in their fields, in the form of materials for urea treatment of straw and cash.
The major boost to introduction of urea treatment of straw programme in Mithila was experienced with the development of the team of Input Promoters in the year 1999. The Input Promoters are self-employed para-extension workers based in their villages and are engaged in promotion of dairy inputs and delivery of extension services to the farmers. The Input Promoters are from farmer families and are chosen by the community and trained by the Milk Union for providing services to the farmers.
The Milk Union provides incentive to the Input Promoters for popularisation of urea treatment of straw among farmers. Initially, the Input Promoter was given INR Rs.150/- per 1000 kg of straw treated by a farmer. Over the years, the incentives has been reduced and currently INR Rs.30/- is given for 1000 kg of straw treated by a farmer, who is adopting the technology for the first time and INR Rs.15/- for a repeater farmer. The incentive may be withdrawn after some time. Importantly, although incentives were provided to the para-extension workers in many other milksheds, the number of farmers who adopted the technology was much low.
Focused group discussions with 17 Input Promoters were organised to find out the reasons as perceived by them for successful adoption of the technology by the farmers. The outcome of discussions is summarized in Box-1.
|
Box 1. Reasons for successful adoption of urea treatment of straws as perceived by Input Promoters |
|
i. All Input Promoters are farmers and command high credibility due to effective services they provide to fellow farmers. ii. Input Promoters tried urea treatment of straws on their own farms, were convinced of benefit of feeding treated straw and this served as good demonstration for other farmers. iii.They arranged series of farmer meetings to discuss the treatment process and benefits of using treated straw for animal feeding to persuade iv.Input Promoters help farmers to treat straws and maintain close follow-up through regular visits to farmers. |
This continuous support by the milk union and involvement of Input Promoters at the village level has given the impetus for wide spread adoption of the technology by the farmers in the milkshed. Sustained organizational support is needed to promote farmer adoption of technologies like treatment of straw with urea as is experienced in China (Dolberg 1992). Maarse et al (1998) reported, in their process document based on experience in Kenya, that convergence of development and research organizations and adoption of gender sensitive and participatory approach by them enabled to bring in desired improvement in dairy production by smallholder farmers. The approach made it possible to provide relevant technologies and facilitated adoption.
Wheat and paddy are the major cereal crops grown in the region and residues of these crops form the bulk of dry fodder fed to their dairy animals especially during summer months.
Straw treatment is generally done soon after harvest of the cereal crops and while the straw is brought in for storage. Almost 80% of the urea treatment of straw is done between April and May and is of wheat, while paddy straw is treated between October and February. Treating the straw at convenient time (avoiding double handling) is crucial for ease of adoption.
Straw is treated and stored on the farm, close to animal housing. Majority of the farmers treat and store crop residues in a cylindrical shaped bamboo structure traditionally used for storing grains and straw (called Bhuskar). Some farmers treat straw in some corner of farm sheds, using three sides of walls and covering the fourth side and the top with plastic sheet or gunny bags. Separate structures for treatment of straw are not prescribed.
The amount of straw treated at a time varies from 1000 kg to 3000 kg as per the type and economic status of the farmer. For the purpose of treating 100 kg of straw, urea solution is made in a locally available earthen pot or plastic bucket by dissolving four kg of urea in 50 - 60 litres of water for wheat straw and 40 litres of water for paddy straw. Urea solution is sprinkled on each layer of straw while it is put in the bhuskar or in the farm sheds, using agricultural sprayers, for ensuring uniform mixing (the quantity of solution needed for each layer is roughly calculated). Two to three farmers press the layers of straw with their feet for compacting the stack. The bhuskars and the sidewalls of sheds are lined with a plastic sheet to make the structure airtight. Three weeks of treatment is allowed before using straw for feeding the animals.
Locally and easily available equipment and materials are used for straw treatment with urea. Urea and water, the two main materials are easily available in the area (cost of urea is INR Rs.5.50 per kg). Locally available earthen pots or plastic buckets are used to make urea solution and agricultural sprayers are used for spraying of the urea solution. Used plastic or gunny bags (the latter are plastered by mud) are used for covering treated straw. Three persons are required for treating 1000 kg of straw in a day (six to eight hours). Labour wage in Mithila area is INR Rs.60 per man-day.
Focus group discussions were conducted in three villages with groups of 12 - 14 producer farmers to assess their perception regarding feeding urea treated straw to dairy animals. The farmers informed that urea treated straw is mainly fed during the dry season from May to July, when green grass/ fodder is scarce. The farmers reported increase in milk production with a range of 0.5 - 2 litres per animal. They indicated increase of milk production and fat percentage and decrease in wastage of fodder by feeding urea treated straw. Some farmers informed improvement in breeding efficiency and that animals developed shining coat. They feel that feeding of urea treated straw to their animals resulted in decrease in cost of milk production as they reduce feeding of concentrates. Total cost for treating 1000 kg of straw was estimated to be around INR Rs.460.
Another benefit reported by many farmers is regarding storage of straws of different cereal crops by treating it with urea. They reported that the area gets untimely rains and straw gets spoiled and wasted, however, they experience that wet straw can be treated with urea and stores well.
This case is a good example of spread of the technology from farmer-to-farmer. In the beginning, the Milk Union officers and Input Promoters had to persuade farmers individually to adopt urea treatment of crop residues while after it was adopted by a few and benefits could be seen, other farmers started applying the technology. Thus, this case confirms the observation that farmers get fully convinced about a technology after they observe other farmers using it and benefiting from it (benefit and adoption both aspects are important).
The study provides indications that technology of urea treatment of cereal straws is likely to be adopted by dairy farmers provided that:
Badve V C 1991 Feeding systems and problems in the Indo-Ganges plain: case study. In Speedy A and Sansoucy R (Editors) Feeding dairy cows in the tropics. Proceedings of the FAO Expert Consultation held in Bangkok, Thailand, 7-11 July 1989. http://www.fao.org/ag/AGa/AGAP/FRG/AHPP86/Badve.pdf
Birthal P S and Parthasarathy Rao P 2002 Technology options for sustainable livestock production in India. Proceedings of workshop on documentation, adoption and impacts of livestock technologies in mixed crop-livestock farming systems in India, International Crops Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Hyderabad, India and National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research (NCAP), Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi. http://www.icrisat.org/text/pubs/digital_pubs/J144_2002.pdf
Birthal P S, Joshi P K and Kumar A 2002 Assessment of research priorities for livestock sector in India. Policy paper no. 15 of National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research (NCAP), Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi.
Chenost M and Sansoucy R 1991 Nutritional characteristics of tropical feed resources: natural and improved grasslands, crop residues and agro-industrial by-products. In Speedy, A and Sansoucy, R. (Editors) Feeding dairy cows in the tropics. Proceedings of the FAO Expert Consultation held in Bangkok, Thailand, 7-11 July 1989. http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/t0413e/T0413E07.htm
Dolberg F 1992 Progress in the utilization of urea-ammonia treated crop residues: biological and socio-economic aspects of animal production and application of the technology on small farms. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 4(2) http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd4/2/dolberg.htm
Israel S H and Pearson R A 2000 Strategies to improve the effectiveness of supplementary feeding of working cattle in semi arid crop/livestock systems. Kaumbutho P G, Pearson R A and Simalenga T E (Eds) Empowering farmers with animal traction. Proceedings of the workshop of the Animal Traction Network for Eastern and Southern Africa (ATNESA) held 20-24 September 1999, Mpumalanga, South Africa. http://www.atnesa.org/Empowering99/Empowering99-IsraelPearson-ZA.pdf
Kelley T G and Parthasarathy Rao P 1996 Availability and requirement of different sources of livestock feed in India with special reference to sorghum and millet straw. In Devendra C and Gardiner P (Editors) Global agenda for livestock research: Proceedings for the South Asia Region, 6 - 8 June 1995. International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi, Kenya and International Crops Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Hyderabad, India. Pp. 53-65. http://www.ilri.cgiar.org/InfoServ/Webpub/Fulldocs/ga_sasia/GA_SASIA.pdf
Kristjanson P M and Zerbini E 1999 Genetic enhancement of Sorghum and Millet residues fed to ruminants. An ex ante assessment of returns to research. International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) Impact Assessment Series 3, ILRI, Nairobi, Kenya. Pp.: 52. http://www.ilri.cgiar.org/InfoServ/Webpub/Fulldocs/Impact3/impact3.htm
Maarse L, Wentholt W and Chibudu A 1998 Making changes strategies work. Gender sensitive, client oriented livestock extension in Coastal province, Kenya. Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nguyen Xuan Trach 2004 An evaluation of adoptability of alkali treatment of rice straw as feed for growing beef cattle under smallholders' circumstances. Livestock Research for Rural Development 16 (7) http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd16/7/trac16052.htm
O'Donovan P B, Soomro F M, Wagenaar J P, Rehman S and Bukhari F A 1997 Urea treatment of straw: a farmer - friendly system improved upon in Balochistan. Livestock Research for Rural Development 9(5) http://www.cipav.org.co/lrrd/lrrd9/5/pak951.htm
Parthasarathy Rao P and Hall A 2003 Importance of crop residues in crop-livestock systems in India and farmers' perceptions of fodder quality in coarse cereals. Field Crops Research 84: 189-198.
Rabbani M S, Alam M M, Ali M Y, Rahman S M R and Saha B K 2004 Participation of rural people in dairy enterprise in a selected area of Bangladesh. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition 3(1) 29-34.
Rajhan S K 1999 Dairy feeding systems. In Falvey L and Chantalakhana C (Editors) . ILRI (International Livestock Research Institute), Nairobi, Kenya. 462pp.
Rangnekar D V 2005 Change in paradigm of animal nutrition research needed to benefit resource poor livestock producers. Proceedings of XIIth Animal Nutrition conference at Anand Agriculture University, Anand, Gujarat, 7 -9 January 2006.
Sharma D D, Joshi A L, Schiere J B and Ibrahim M N M 1995 Treatment of crop residues: a review. In Singh K and Schiere J B (Editors) Handbook for straw feeding systems: Principles and applications with emphasis on Indian livestock production. Handbook by Indo-Dutch Project on bioconversion of crop residues. Indian Council of Agricultural Research (Animal Sciences), New Delhi and Department of Animal Production Systems, Agriculture University, AH Wageningen.
Singh K and Schiere J B 1995 Handbook for straw feeding systems: Principles and applications with emphasis on Indian livestock production. Handbook by Indo-Dutch Project on bioconversion of crop residues. Indian Council of Agricultural Research (Animal Sciences), New Delhi and Department of Animal Production Systems, Agriculture University, AH Wageningen.
Thomas D and Rangnekar D V 2004 Responding to increasing global demand for animal products: Implications for the livelihoods of livestock producers in developing countries. In Owen E Eta (Eds.) Responding to the livestock revolution: The role of globalisation and implications for poverty alleviation. British Society of Animal Science, Midlothian, UK. Pp. 1-36.
Walli T K, Rao A S, Singh M, Rangnekar D V, Pradhan P K, Singh R B, Rai S N and Ibrahim M N M 1995 Urea treatment of straw. In Singh K and Schiere J B (Editors) Handbook for straw feeding systems: principles and applications with emphasis on Indian livestock production. Handbook by Indo-Dutch Project on bioconversion of crop residues. Indian Council of Agricultural Research (Animal Sciences), New Delhi and Department of Animal Production Systems, Agriculture University, AH Wageningen.
Received 12 May 2006; Accepted 6 June 2006; Published 6 September 2006