Livestock Research for Rural Development 22 (12) 2010 Notes to Authors LRRD Newsletter

Citation of this paper

Distribution pattern and management practices of cross bred dairy cows in cooperative dairy production system in Bangladesh

K M A Islam, M M Uddin*, M N Sultana**, M Assaduzzaman and M N Islam***

Baghabarighat Dairy Plant, Milk Vita, Shahjadpur, Sirajgong, Bangladesh
* Department of Animal Breeding in the Tropics and Sub-tropics, Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany
muddin_bau@yahoo.com
** IFCN Dairy Research Center at the Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kiel, Schauenburger Str. 116, 24118 Kiel, Germany
*** Department of Dairy Science, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh-2202, Bangladesh

Abstract

The objective of this study is to analyse the distribution pattern of cross bred dairy cattle and their management practices in cooperative dairy production systems in Bangladesh in order to design a standard management and breeding programme suitable for the dairy farmers in different areas under the cooperative for increasing animal productivity. The Bangladesh Milk Producers’ Cooperatives Union Ltd (or ‘Milk Vita’ as its brand name) is the only cooperative operating in all over the country. This study was conducted in the Baghabarighat Milk Shed Area (BMSA) situated in Sirajgonj and Pabna district under Milk Vita. Five sub-districts, namely Shahjadpur, Faridpur, Ullahpara, Sathia and Bera and 30 villages under those sub-districts were selected. The selection of different sub-districts were based on in order of the distance from the Milk Vita centre (Shahjadpur is the closest and Bera is the most far). Three hundred sample dairy farmers were selected randomly. The data were collected by using pre-tested and pre-designed structured questionnaire by face-to-face interview.

 

The results showed that about 98% of the dairy cattle are cross bred (Pabna Milking Cows with Holstein Friesian, Shahiwal, and Jersey). It has also been observed that the highest number of both total and milk cattle are available in Shahjadpur. Concerning the management practices such as use of concentrates, water use, and use of artificial insemination are better-off in Shahjadpur. This is due to the fact that this area is situated very close to the Milk Vita Centre and accordingly has better access to the centre and has more knowledge about the management and also gets higher services which are beneficial to them.

 

This study suggests to adopt a strategic planning by the Milk Vita management board to implement a harmonised and standard management and breeding programme for all the farmers independent of the distance from the centre.

Key words: Cross-bred cows, distribution pattern, management, milk shed area


Introduction

It is estimated that through out the world, almost 150 million farm households are engaged in milk production, the majority of them in developing countries where annual growth rates in milk consumption averaged 3.5 to 4.0 per cent in the decade of 1995-2005 (FAO 2010). Looking at the Bangladesh dairy sector, a growth rate of 4.1 and 5.8% was observed from 2000-2005 and 2005-2009, respectively (Hemme 2010). At the same time the milk consumption growth increases at the rate of 5.1 and 4.2%, respectively. This consumption growth rate combined with population growth rate of 1.9%, means that the production is lower than the requirement.

 

Dairying, as a part of crop-livestock mixed farming system, plays a significant role in nutrition, income, jobs and rural livelihoods. More than 75% of the rural population rear livestock. The contribution of livestock to the national GDP (Gross Domestic Products) is 2.79% while dairy sector alone contributes 1.8% (Uddin et al 2010c) which helps to develop the village micro economy (Shamsuddin et al 2007). Dairy development is seen as a very powerful tool because devising a viable dairy development strategy for the dairy farmers can greatly reduce the rural poverty. In this sense, dairying is very important tool to fight against the poverty.

 

To response to the need of the rural dairy farmers, the Bangladesh Milk Producers’ Co-operative Union Ltd (Milk Vita) was established in 1973 as a part of sustainable cooperative dairy development programme with the financial and technical help from Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and  Danish International Development Agency (DAINDA) (Dugdill et al 2001). This paved the way to ensure fair price and ensured market for the producers and provision of high quality milk with affordable prices for the urban consumers.

 

Dairying is growing faster in Bangladesh but facing the problems of inefficient management practices and health care, lack of high quality breeds, lack of proper breeding programme to improve the existing dairy cattle resource, high input and low output prices leading to lower productivity (Uddin et al 2010b) as well as lack of good breeding services (Uddin et al 2010d). It has been seen that the per cent of cross bred cattle is increasing at a rate lower than the farmer’s expectation (Uddin et al 2010c). Holstein crossbred (Holstein local zebu) and Sahiwal crossbred cattle (Sahiwal local zebu) are two major crossbred dairy cattle in Bangladesh. These two genetic groups of cattle are very popular and contribute major portion of milk in a profitable way (Saadullah 2001). Supplementation of straw-based diet increases significantly the digestibility and nutritive value and thus improves the animal productivity (Rahman et al 2009; Akter et al 2004) which is the driving force to develop and practice a cost-effective supplementary feeding system for poor quality roughage based cattle production in the tropics, like Bangladesh. Regarding other management strategies, such as, housing, watering, feeding concentrates etc. should also be addressed while devising an efficient management strategy for the cross bred cows.

 

It is also alleged that farmers of BMSA located near the centre of the Milk Vita are often gain more benefit and have access to more support services than the peripheral. Hossain (1999) reported that the main problems faced by the farmers of Milk Vita include scarcity of feeds and fodders, lack of improved breed, problems of AI (Artificial Insemination), lack of veterinary health care services, insufficient of livestock training facilities, lack of institutional credit facilities and high price of concentrate feed. FMD (Foot and Mouth Diseases) is endemic in Bangladesh. FMD causes serious economic losses to the farmers than any other epidemic disease

 

Although milk production of BMSA is increasing, we do not have enough information about the composition of crossbred cows, their distribution pattern, management practices and related institutional framework. Similarly information about the impacts of various management factors on milk production and quality traits are very limited. Jabbar (1984) reported that the available data on livestock in this country are insufficient compared to crop statistics. Some research works have been done in sporadic form, but they are not enough to generate any conclusive suggestion. A systematic research work in this line is urgently needed.  Therefore, the objectives of this study were to analyse the existing management practices with the distribution of crossbred cattle within milk BMSA and evaluate how feeding programme is affected by the cross breeding in order to devise a harmonised management strategy for all of the dairy farmers irrespective of the distance from the Milk Vita centre. 

 

Materials and methods 

Study areas

 

This study was conducted at the “Baghabarighat Milk Shed Area (BMSA)” under Bangladesh Milk Producers’ Co-operative Union Limited (BMPCUL). The BMSA cover two administrative districts such as Pabna and Sirajgonj and a radius of 35 km2 from the Milk Vita Centre. Three sub-districts such as Bera, Sathia and Faridpur  from Pabna district and two sub-districts such as Shahjadpur and Ullahpara were selected from Sirajgonj districts. The selection of sub-districts was based on the order of distance from Milk Vita centre by using a radius of 35 km2, the orders are (from lowest to the highest) Shahjadpur, Faridpur, Ullahpara, Sathia and Bera. The selection of those areas are due to the following reasons:

i)                                Literatures show that all of the possible combinations of different crossbred dairy cows were available in this area and contributes proportionately higher milk yield to the country’s supply chain.

ii)                               The areas were representative of BAMS and well linked with Milk Vita Centre which helped movement and data collection was easier for the researcher.

iii)                             It was expected that co-operation from the farmers in this area would be high so that reliable data could be obtained.

iv)                             The management practices of farmers are significantly different than the other areas.

 

Data collection

 

A sample of 300 dairy farmers was selected by using purposive random sampling technique from 30 different villages (6 villages under each sub-district). A pre-tested, pre-designed and structured questionnaire was used to collect the required data to fulfill the objective of this study. The questionnaire contains both open and close-ended questions on two broad areas: Pattern of crossbred cows and their distribution among the dairy farmers’ households and magnitude of management practices especially on bathan and non-bathan systems. The bathan production means the feeding of dairy cattle on special type of grazing land in a certain time period of a year especially from the end of December to end of May. As soon as the Monsoon disappears, a plenty of land is cultivated for green fodder (Maize, Para, German grass and some leguminous fodder) in the embankment of the rivers and farmers are allowed to graze their cattle in those areas.  The bathan system of management of dairy farmers is a special type of production system in Bangladesh which is only practised by majority of the dairy farmers (who are the members of the cooperative and who produce a certain volume of milk production) (Uddin et al 2010a).The non-bathan system is defined as the system where dairy cattle are reared in stanchion barn usually from June to December in a year when the pasture lands are sub-merged under flood water. A stall feeding system is followed during this time. Data were collected for a period of six months by a face-to-face interview with prior arrangement with the farmers. A list of the farmers was taken from the Milk Vita operation centre situated in the BMSA.

 

Data analysis

 

It is intended to test the null hypothesis that there are no differences in terms of distribution pattern of cross bred dairy cattle and management systems among the farmers of different distances from the Milk Vita Centre and among different genetic groups. Data collected from the survey were inserted into the computer and was analyzed. Descriptive statistics was done to understand the magnitude of the distribution and management practices and the least squares analysis of variance and least squares means were calculated for all the variables to test for Least Significant Difference (LSD). The model statement in ANOVA specifies the response variables and independent variables. In this study, the response variables are specified as bathan and non-bathan production system and genetic groups were specified as independent variables in order to identify the differences of means for concentrate, green fodder and straw supply among different genetic groups. The LSD is valid to use in ANOVA to compare multiple means i.e. mean separation techniques under assumption of equal variances of parameter to be studied. The software used in this study was SPSS 11.5 version, MSTAT-C version and MS Excel 2003.

 

Results and discussions 

Distribution of cattle population (total cattle versus milk cows) according to areas and genetic groups

 

The survey identified eight genetic groups that were available in the study areas, seven of them are cross-bred cattle and only one group which is called non-descriptive local. The genetic groups were G1= Sahiwal Pabna Milking; G2 = Sahiwal Pabna Milking; G3 = Friesian Pabna Milking; G4 = Friesian Pabna Milking; G5 = Sahiwal Friesian Pabna Milking; G6= Jersey Sahiwal Pabna Milking; G7=, Pabna Milk Cow (100 % pure local), and G8= Non-descript local. The total number of cattle composed of both milk and non-milk cows according to different genetic groups found in the study areas is reported in Table 1.


Table 1.  Distribution of total number of dairy cattle (milk and non-milk cows) in different study areas

Sub-districts

No. of farmers

G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7

G8

Total

Shahjadpur

60

3076

1013

1470

720

1510

919

203

162

9073

Faridpur

60

2724

890

1314

648

1316

777

178

143

7990

Ullapara

60

2595

849

1230

603

1201

758

155

136

7527

Sathia

60

2114

686

1020

498

1007

610

114

115

6164

Bera

60

1785

578

908

427

836

493

123

104

5254

Total

300

12294

4016

5942

2896

5870

3557

773

660

36008

G1= Sahiwal Pabna Milking; G2 = Sahiwal Pabna Milking; G3 = Friesian Pabna Milking;
G4 = Friesian Pabna Milking; G5 =, Sahiwal Friesian Pabna Milking; G6= Jersey Sahiwal Pabna Milking; G7=, Pabna Milk Cow (100 % pure local); and G8= Non-descript local

Source: Field survey 2007


The highest number of sampled total cattle was found in Sahajadpur which corresponds to about 25.2% and the lowest in Bera (14.6%). Looking at the genetic group wise distribution pattern, Sahahjadpur posses the highest number of all the genetic groups compared to other areas. While comparing among the genetic groups, G1 represents the highest number of cross bred cattle (34.1%) and the lowest number of G8 (1.8%) in the study areas (Figure 1)



Figure 1.  The distribution of total cattle population among different genetic groups


Regarding the number of milking cows, out of total number of 36,008, 11,298 were identified as milking cows which represent 31.38%. The distribution pattern of milking cows among the study areas according to genetic groups is reported in Table 2.


Table 2.  The distribution of total number of milk cows in the study areas

Sub-districts

No. of farmers

G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7

G8

Total milking cows

Shahjadpur

60

953

311

440

220

469

287

89

70

2839 (25.1)

Faridpur

60

844

274

398

199

409

245

76

62

2507 (22.2)

Ullapara

60

801

261

368

184

372

239

68

60

2353 (20.8)

Sathia

60

654

215

308

154

313

196

51

51

1942 (17.2)

Bera

60

553

181

266

133

258

161

57

48

1657 (14.7)

Total

300

3805

1242

1780

890

1821

1128

341

291

11298 (100)

Figure in the parentheses indicate per cent of milk cows over total milk cows

Source: Field survey 2007


The genetic group wise distribution also reveal almost the same trend like total cattle population distribution such that G1 genetic group consists of the highest number of milk cows (Figure 2).



Figure 2.  The distribution of milk cows among different genetic groups


This also implies that Sahiwal breed is popular because the study areas have the similar climate and production environment from where the breed is originated.

 

This means that as the distance increases the number of both cross bred cattle decreases which implies that areas like Shahjadpur being near the Milk Vita collection and processing centre is motivated to keep the more cross bred dairy cattle. The reasons might be that farmers from Shahjadpur have easy and higher access to all the necessary logistic supports related to the improvement of their cross breeds such as Artificial Insemination (AI), veterinary services etc. which result to higher milk yield and lower milk production costs. Being near to the centre, the transportation cost and time is also decreased dramatically which are driving forces to keep more cross bred cows. Comparing the genetic groups of the dairy cross breeds, the G1 group dominates over the other groups due to the existence of Pabna Milking Cows (PMC) in the study areas. This breed is considered as superior local that is easy to crossbred with Shahiwal. The non-descript breeds were replace by cross bred due to their low productivity causing high production cost and less profitability. The results on the per cent of cross bred in the dairy farms are somehow higher (98%) than the results obtained by Hossain (1999) who found 85% of the cross breed cows. The higher results from the present study might be explained by the facts that the study areas (BMSA) are considered the major dairy zone in the country where dairying is highly competitive and has much more priority than other areas. Due to this, farmers in this study area keep high yielding cows more than any other areas.

 

Management systems in the study areas

 

Dairy production systems

 

Two types of dairy production systems are revealed in the study areas which are known as ‘bahtan’ and ‘non-bathan’. From the field survey it was found that 68.3% animals are reared in Bathan system and 31.7% reared in non-bathan system (Table 3).


Table 3.  The Bathan and Non-bathan production system in the study areas

Sub-districts

No. of farmers

Bathan raising system

Non-bathan raising system

No. of farmers

No. of Cattle

No. of farmers

No. of Cattle

Shahjadpur

60

42 (70.5)

6393

18 (29.5)

2680

Faridpur

60

37 (65.1)

5203

23 (34.9)

2787

Ullapara

60

38 (62.6)

4711

22 (37.4)

2816

Sathia

60

45 (77.8)

4798

15 (22.2)

1366

Bera

60

39 (66.5)

3496

21 (33.5)

1758

 Total

300

201 (68.3)

24601

99 (31.7)

11407

Figure in the parentheses indicate the per cent


While comparing among the different areas, it is seen that Shahajadpur has the highest access to bathan production systems in terms of number of cattle compared to other areas while Sathia has the highest per cent of farmers (77.8%) who practice the bathan production systems.

 

The bathan management system is one of the important characteristics of the cooperative dairy production systems in Bangladesh. The bathan system allows the dairy cows to graze freely six months of the year (End of November to end of May). The official record of Milk Vita (2009) shows that the milk production cost and the milk yield is higher in the bathan system than non-bathan system. Due to limitation of the bathan land, only selected members of the cooperatives have access to bathan production system. Therefore, the farmers from Shahjadpur are taking the advantage of utilizing the bathan system more than other areas as they have more lobbies being near the centre of the Milk Vita than the farmers from far distance (e.g. Bera).

 

Feeding system

 

The feeding system differs depending on the type of feeds used for the dairy cattle. The majority of the farmers use concentrate feeds to feed their dairy animals supplemented with green fodder. The concentrate feeds used by the farmers in the study areas are: rice polish, wheat bran, khesari bran(Lathyrus sativa), sessame oil cake, coconut oil cake and molasses whereas the green fodder used by the farmers are: Nnapier spp., Jambo, Gama, Mati kalia (Vigna sinensis), khesari kalai (Lathyrus sativa), natural durba grass (local), and rice straw etc. In addition, some farmers were found who use minerals, vitamins and additives. Common salt was found to be used by all the farmers in all study areas. The major difference found in the type of feed was in the use of concentrate feeds. Therefore, this study dig deeper to look what differences might be observed among the farmers located in different areas as well as how the genetic groups affect the concentrate used in the study areas. It is observed that 81% farmers supplied concentrates along with green grass and rice straw whereas 19% of the farmers do not supply any concentrate feeds to their dairy cows (Table 4).


Table 4.  The use of concentrate feeds (supply versus not-supplied)

Sub-districts

No. of farmers

Concentrate feeds Supplied

Concentrate feeds Not supplied

No. of Farmers

No. of Cows

No. of Farmers

No. of Cows

Shahjadpur

60

55 (91.7)

3325

5 (8.3)

333

Faridpur

60

49 (81.7)

2645

11(18.3)

577

Ullapara

60

50 (83.3)

2516

10 (16.7)

519

Sathia

60

48 (80.0)

2029

12 (20.0)

466

Bera

60

41 (68.3)

1446

19 (31.7)

683

Total

300

243 (81.0)

11961

57 (19.0)

2578

Figure in the parentheses indicate the per cent


The highest number of farmers from Shahjadpur use the concentrates which corresponds to about 91.7% and the lowest in Bera (68.3%) and vice versa while comparing the farmers who do not supply the concentrate feeds.  Since the concentrate uses plays a significant role in costs of milk production it is of highly interest to look at how the concentrate use differ among genetic groups in the study areas. The mean value of concentrate feed (kg/day/cow) is reported in Table 5.


Table 5.  Concentrate feed supplied in kg per day (Mean)

Genetic groups

Bathan

Non-bathan

Overall mean

G1

4.35f

4.13e

4.24f

G2

4.80e

4.62d

4.71e

G3

5.02d

4.65d

4.83d

G4

5.90a

5.55a

5.73a

G5

5.15c

4.90c

5.02c

G6

5.38b

5.13b

5.26b

G7

4.13g

3.87f

4.00g

LSD (0.05, 84)

0.09025

0.06382

a,b,c,d,e,f,g indicate significant differences among each other.


The higher mean value for concentrate feeds used in bathan system was observed than non-bathan system but is not significantly different at 5% level (P<0.05). A significant difference is also observed for concentrate feeds used among the different genetic groups ranging from 4.13 kg/day to 4.35 kg/day.  The G4 receives significantly higher concentrates feeds than any other groups.

 

The use of concentrates feeds supply by the farmers in Shahjadpur is higher than other areas because of the facts that they rear more crossbred cows and produce more milk. The farmers who do not supply concentrate at all can be explained by the facts that they are mainly based on green grasses and rice straw and their economy of scale is low which also does not permit to use concentrates.  The higher use of concentrate feeds for the G4 groups is due to the facts that the intake and milk production is higher for Friesian cows. This will be helpful for making decisions on keeping type of crossbreds to be kept in the farms. The price of concentrates is so high that it is really helpful to keep the cross cows that needs less concentrates while not compromising with milk yield.

 

The feeds used other than concentrates are green grass and rice straw which are reported in Table 6 and 7. From the table 6, it is seen that there is no significant differences of uses of green fodder between bathan and non-bathan production systems.


Table 6.  Green fodder supplied in kg per day (Mean)

Genetic group wise

Bathan

Non-bathan

Overall mean

G1

10.0c

9.27b

9.64c

G2

10.0c

9.07b

9.55cd

G3

9.90c

9.40b

9.65c

G4

11.6a

10.9a

11.3a

G5

10.9b

10.3a

10.6b

G6

11.1ab

10.6a

10.8ab

G7

9.37c

8.95b

9.16d

LSD (.05, 42)

0.636

0.450

a,b,c,d,e,f,g indicate significant differences among each other



Table 7.  Mean value for straw supplied in kg per day

Genetic group

Bathan

Non-bathan

Overall mean

G1

2.93bcd

5.32c

4.13c

G2

2.92bcd

5.18c

4.05c

G3

2.87cd

5.40c

4.13c

G4

3.40a

6.22a

4.81a

G5

3.17abc

5.85b

4.51b

G6

3.25ab

6.03ab

4.64ab

G7

2.73d

5.12c

3.93c

LSD (.05, 42)

0.334

0.236

a,b,c,d,e,f,g indicate significant differences among each other


A substantially higher mean value for rice straw is observed for non-bathan system (Table 8).


Table 8.  The use of Tubewell water and Pond/River water supply system

Sub-district

No. of farmers

Tubewell water supply

Pond/River water supply

No. of farmers

No. of Cattle

No. of farmers

No. of Cattle

Shahjadpur

60

48 (80.8)

7331

12 (19.2)

1742

Faridpur

60

41(65.8)

5258

19 (34.2)

2732

Ullapara

60

44 (72.8)

5452

16 (27.6)

2075

Sathia

60

3 6(60.6)

3733

24 (39.4)

2431

Bera

60

3 9(65.7)

3451

21 (34.3)

1803

 Total

300

208 (70.1)

25225

92 (29.9)

10783

Figures in the parentheses indicate the per cent


This implies that non-bathan production rely mostly on straw (a poor quality feeds) which indicate lower feeding standard. This will have subsequently effect on milk yield. Both green fodder and rice straw show a significant difference among the genetic group. The highest use is observed for G4.

 

Breeding system

 

Breeding system is one of the very important management practices that influence degree of cross breeding and the dairy development in the study areas. The gradual shifting from natural breeding service to the artificial insemination service is observed in the study areas and as a consequence farmers use more artificial insemination (75.3%) than natural breeding (24.70%). The higher use of the artificial insemination service is observed because the cooperative provides this service free of cost in one hand and on the other hand the farmers want to upgrade their dairy cattle via introduction of exotic blood. 

 

While comparing the breeding services among the study areas, it is found that the farmers from Shahajadpur use the highest artificial insemination service (79.2%) while the farmers from Bera Upazilla use the highest natural service (33.7%) which is depicted in Figure 3.



Figure 3.  The use of Artificial insemination over the natural services in the study areas


The per cent of AI service users of this study is somehow lower than the average AI user found in other study done by Hossain et al (2005) who found 87% farmers use AI. Again the Shahjadpur has the advantages of using higher AI because of closure to the Milk Vita Centre.

 

Water supply system

 

Provision of water to the dairy animals plays vital role for profitable dairying. From the survey, it is found that for raising animals water was supplied from two sources, tubewell and pond/river. The Table 6 shows the pattern of water use in different study areas. The majority of the farmers (70.1%) use water from Tube well while only 29.9% use water either from pond or river depending on the distance between river and pond from the farmer’s home. The highest percentage of tube well water is used by the farmer in Shahajadpur (80.8%) compared to the lowest user in Sathia (60.6%) while the opposite is observed for use of pond/river water. The reasons might be that farmers in Shahjadpur were more conscious about the use of pure and uncontaminated water than Sathia because they have more management skill and knowledge over other areas. 

 

Type of housing (floor) used among the farmers

 

In the study areas, it is observed that two floor types of the cattle housing are commonly used depending on the ability of the farmers and their farming activities. The Table 9 reports the number of farmers used brick floor and mud floor among the various study areas in BMSA.


Table 9.  The use of  brick floor versus normal mud floor in cattle shed

Sub-district

No. of Farmers

Brick floor

Mud floor*

No. of Farmers

No. of Cattle

No. of Farmers

No. of Cattle

Shahjadpur

60

41 (68.3)

6327

19 (31.67)

2746

Faridpur

60

33 (55.0)

4596

27 (45.0)

3394

Ullahpara

60

39 (65.0)

4753

21 (35.0)

2774

Sathia

60

38 (63.3)

4051

22 (36.67)

2113

Bera

60

29 (48.3)

2734

31(51.67)

2520

Total

300

180 (60.0)

22461

120 (40.0)

13547

Source: Field survey 2007

*Mud floor: The floor that is made from clay soil by mixing with cow dung

Figures in parentheses indicate the per cent


It is seen from the Table 8 that more than half (60%) of the farmers use brick floor. While comparing the farmers in different areas, it is seen that the farmers from Shahajadpur uses the highest brick floor (68.3%) followed by 65, 63.3, 55, and 48.3% for Ullahpara, Sathia, Faridpur, and Bera, respectively. Due to strong Monsoon and higher climatic variations, the brick floor is preferable over the mud floor. It is difficult to clean the mud floor. The economic ability of the farmers plays a key role whether they use brick or mud floor. This means, the farmers from the Sahajdpur is in better-off. The other important finding from the table 7 is that decision on the type floor used does not depend on the distance of the farmers from the Milk Vita Centre.

 

Vaccination used by the farmers in different study areas

 

It is found that three types of vaccines are commonly used in the study areas: anthrax, Foot and Mouth Diseases (FMD) and Black Quarter (BQ) which is reported in Table 10.


Table 10.  The use of different vaccines in the study areas

Sub-districts

No. of Farmers

Vaccination

Anthrax

FMD

BQ

No. of Cattle

No. of Cattle

No. of Cattle

Shahjadpur

60

6920 (27.6)

7009 (25.2)

2663 (23.0)

Faridpur

60

5333 (21.3)

6218 (22.4)

2575 (22.3)

Ullapara

60

5466 (21.8)

5807 (20.9)

2507 (21.7)

Sathia

60

3949 (15.8)

4768 (17.1)

2271 (19.6)

Bera

60

3378 (13.5)

4015 (14.4)

1544 (13.4)

 Total

300

25046 (100)

27817 (100)

11560 (100)

Figures in the parentheses indicate the per cent


The majority of the dairy cattle receive the vaccines against FMD because this disease has a very prevalence and also more frequent. Looking at the study area wise use of vaccines, A substantially higher number of cattle receive antrax, FMD and BQ vaccines compared to the cattle from other areas. The use of anthrax vaccines in Shahjadpur is the highest (27.6%).

 

Milk delivery systems

 

Milk delivery system in the study areas is reported in Table 11.


Table 11.  The milk delivery system in the study areas

Sub-districts

No. of Farmers

Milk delivery

Milk Vita

Others

Milk Vita and Others

No. of Farmers

No. of Farmers

No. of Farmers

Shahjadpur

60

28 (46.7)

24 (40.0)

8 (13.3)

Faridpur

60

29 (48.3)

28 (46.7)

3 (5.0)

Ullapara

60

27 (45.0)

25 (41.7)

8 (13.3)

Sathia

60

29 (48.3)

26 (43.3)

5 (8.3)

Bera

60

28 (46.7)

26 (43.3)

6 (10.0)

 Total

300

141 (47.0)

129 (43.0)

30 (10.0)

Figures in the parentheses indicate the per cent


It is expected that all the farmers using the utility provided by the Milk Vita centre should deliver their milk to the Milk Vita processing plant but the this study shows that only 47% of the milk produced in the BMSA is delivered to the Milk Vita processing plant.

 

The other important results from the Table 11 indicate that the farmers from Shahjadpur who are located the closest to the Milk vita centre deliver the lower amount of milk (46.7%) compared to Sathia (48.3%). This issue might be interesting for the Milk Vita management board while they consider the delivery of support services to the farmers. The other reasons might be that farmers once get little higher price provided by other processing company deliver their milk to them although there is a mandatory for the milk vita farmers to deliver the milk to the Milk Vita.

 

Conclusions 


References 

Akter Y, Akbar M A, Shahjalal M and Ahmed TU 2004 Effect of Urea-Molasses Multi-nutrient Blocks Supplementation of Dairy Cows Fed Rice Straw and Grasses on Milk Yield, Consumption, Live Weight Gain of cows and calves and Feed Intake. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences 7(9): 1523-1525. http://scialert.net/qredirect.php?doi=pjbs.2004.1523.1525&linkid=pdf

 

Dugdill B T, Bennett A, Saha G C and Das S C 2001 Milk Vita in Bangladesh-A case study. Food and Agricultural Organisations of the United Nations (FAO), Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/themes/documents/LPS/DAIRY/DAP/milkvita/milkvitaindex.htm

 

FAO 2010 Status and prospects of smallholder milk production-A global perspective, by T  Hemme and J Otte. Rome, Italy http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1522e/i1522e00.pdf

 

Hemme T 2010 Dairy Report 2010. International Farm Comparison Network. IFCN Dairy Research Center, Kiel, Germany.

 

Hossain M M, Alam M M, Rashid, M M Assaduzzaman M and Rahman M M 2005 Small Scale Dairy Farming Practice in a selective Area of Bangladesh. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition 4(4): 215-221. http://www.pjbs.org/pjnonline/fin226.pdf

 

Hossain Z M A 1999 Study on performance under present management condition of private dairy farms Rangpur Sadar Thana, M. S. Thesis, Department of Dairy Science, BAU, Mymensingh

 

Jabbar M A 1984 The limitations of crossbreeding for improvement of cattle in Bangladesh Oxford Agrarian Studies. Volume 19.

 

Milk Vita (Bangladesh Milk Producers’ Cooperatives Union Ltd. ) 2009 Official records on milk production and management data (unpublished), Baghabarighat, Sirajgonj, Bangladesh.

 

Rahman M A, Alam A M M N and Shahjalal M 2009 Supplementation of Urea-molasses straw based diet with different levels of concentrate for fattening of emaciated bulls. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences 12(13): 970-975. http://scialert.net/qredirect.php?doi=pjbs.2009.970.975&linkid=pdf

 

Saadullah M 2001 Smallholder Dairy Production and Marketing in Bangladesh, paper presented at South-South Workshop on Smallholder Dairy Production and Marketing. NDDB-ILRI, 13-16 March 2001. Ahmedabad, India. http://www.ilri.org/InfoServ/Webpub/fulldocs/South_South/ch06.htm

 

Shamsuddin M, Alam M M, Hossein M S, Goodger W J, Bari F Y, Ahmed T U, Hossain M M and  Khan A H M S I 2007 Participatory rural appraisal to identify needs and prospects of market-oriented dairy industries in Bangladesh. Tropical Animal Health and Production 39: 567-581.

 

Uddin M M, Sultana M N, Ndambi O A, Alqaisi O, Hemme T and Peters K J 2010a Milk production trends and dairy development in Bangladesh. Outlook on Agriculture (Accepted)

 

Uddin M M, Sultana M N, Ndambi O A, Hemme T and Peters K J 2010b A farm economic analysis in different dairy production systems in Bangladesh. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 22, Article #122. Retrieved July 6, 2010, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd22/7/uddi22122.htm

 

Uddin M M, Sultana M N and Peters K J 2010c Characterisation of dairy production systems with special focus on institutional arrangement in Bangladesh. Tropical Animal Health and Production (Submitted).

 

Uddin M M, Van Huylenbroeck G, Hagedorn K, Sultana M N and Peters K J 2010d Institutional and organizational issues in livestock service delivery in Bangladesh. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 49 (2): 111-125.



Received 7 July 2010; Accepted 4 November 2010; Published 9 December 2010

Go to top